Abstract
Causal directionality belongs to one of the most fundamental aspects of causality that cannot be reduced to mere covariation. This paper is part of a debate between proponents of associative theories, which claim that learners are insensitive to the causal status of cues and outcomes, and proponents of causal-model theory, which postulates an interaction of assumptions about causal directionality and learning. Some researchers endorsing the associationist view have argued that evidence for the interaction between cue competition and causal directionality may be restricted to two-phase blocking designs. Furthermore, from the viewpoint of causal-model theory, blocking designs carry the potential problem that the predicted asymmetries of cue competition are partly dependent on asymmetries of retrospective inferences. The present experiments use a one-phase overshadowing paradigm that does not allow for retrospective inferences and therefore represents a more unambiguous test of sensitivity to causal directionality. The results strengthen causal-model theory by clearly demonstrating the influence of causal directionality on learning. However, they also provide evidence for boundary conditions for this effect by highlighting the role of the semantics of the learning task.
Article PDF
References
Chapman, G. B., &Robbins, S. J. (1990). Cue interaction in human contingency judgment.Memory & Cognition,18, 537–545.
Cheng, P. W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory.Psychological Review,104, 367–405.
Dickinson, A., &Burke, J. (1996). Within-compound associations mediate the retrospective revaluation of causality judgements.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,49(B), 60–80.
Glymour, C. N., &Cooper, G. F. (Eds.) (1999).Computation, causation, and discovery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Matute, H., Arcediano, F., &Miller, R. R. (1996). Test question modulates cue competition between causes and between effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 182–196.
Pearce, J. M. (1987). A model for stimulus generalization in Pavlovian conditioning.Psychological Review,94, 61–73.
Pearl, J. (1988).Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: Networks of plausible inference. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Pearl, J. (2000).Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Price, P. C., &Yates, J. F. (1995). Associative and rule-based accounts of cue interaction in contingency judgment.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1639–1655.
Rescorla, R. A., &Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.),Classical conditioning II: Current research and theory (pp. 64–99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Shanks, D. R., &Dickinson, A. (1987). Associative accounts of causality judgment. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 21, pp. 229–261). New York: Academic Press.
Shanks, D. R., &Lopez, F. J. (1996). Causal order does not affect cue selection in human associative learning.Memory & Cognition,24, 511–522.
Van Hamme, L. J., Kao, S. F., &Wasserman, E. A. (1993). Judging interevent relations: From cause to effect and from effect to cause.Memory & Cognition,21, 802–808.
Van Hamme, L. J., &Wasserman, E. A. (1994). Cue competition in causality judgments: The role of nonpresentation of compound stimulus elements.Learning & Motivation,25, 127–151.
Waldmann, M. R. (1996). Knowledge-based causal induction. In D. R. Shanks, K. J. Holyoak, & D. L. Medin (Eds.),The psychology of learning and motivation: Vol 34. Causal learning (pp. 47–88). San Diego: Academic Press.
Waldmann, M. R. (2000). Competition among causes but not effects in predictive and diagnostic learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 53–76.
Waldmann, M. R., & Hagmayer, Y. (in press). Estimating causal strength: The role of structural knowledge and processing effort.Cognition.
Waldmann, M. R., &Holyoak, K. J. (1992). Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: Asymmetries in cue competition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,121, 222–236.
Waldmann, M. R., &Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Determining whether causal order affects cue selection in human contingency learning: Comments on Shanks and Lopez (1996).Memory & Cognition,25, 125–134.
Waldmann, M. R., Holyoak, K. J., &Fratianne, A. (1995). Causal models and the acquisition of category structure.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,124, 181–206.
Waldmann, M. R., &Martignon, L. (1998). A Bayesian network model of causal learning. In M. A. Gernsbacher & S. J. Derry (Eds.),Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1102–1107). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Williams, D. A., Sagness, K. E., &McPhee, J. E. (1994). Configural and elemental strategies in predictive learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 694–709.
Wu, M., &Cheng, P. W. (1999). Why causation need not follow from statistical association: Boundary conditions for the evaluation of generative and preventive causal powers.Psychological Science,10, 92–97.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The research was supported by DFG Grant Wa 621/5-4. I thank Y. Hagmayer, M. Hildebrandt, and A. Prasse for helpful discussions and for help with preparing and running the experiments.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Waldmann, M.R. Predictive versus diagnostic causal learning: Evidence from an overshadowing paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 8, 600–608 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196196
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196196