Back

Correlation Detection with and without the Theories of Conditionals: A model update of Hattori & Oaksford (2007)

Takahashi, T.; Oyo, K.; Tamatsukuri, A.; Higuchi, K.

2019-11-19 animal behavior and cognition
10.1101/247742 bioRxiv
Show abstract

We view observational causal induction as a statistical independence test under rarity assumption. This paper complements the two-stage theory of causal induction proposed by Hattori and Oaksford (2007) with a computational analysis. We show that their dual-factor heuristic (DFH) model has a rational account as the square root of the index of (non-)independence under extreme rarity assumption, contrary to the criticism that the DFH model is non-normative (e.g., Lu et al., 2008). We introduce a model that considers the proportion of assumed-to-be rare instances (pARIs), which is the probability of biconditionals (according to several theories of compound conditionals) and can be seen as a simplified version of the DFH model. While being a single conditional probability, pARIs approximates the non-independence measure, the square of DFH. In reproducing the meta-analysis in Hattori and Oaksford (2007), we confirm that pARIs and DFH have the same level of descriptive adequacy, and that the two models have the highest fit among more than 40 models. Then, we critically examine the computer simulations which were central to the rational analysis in Hattori and Oaksford (2007). We point out two problems in their simluations: samples in some of the simulations being restricted to generative ones, and in-definite values of models because of the small samples. In the light of especially the latter problem of definability, pARIs shows higher applicability.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Psychological Review
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.7%
2
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 18%
9.9%
3
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.0%
4
Biosystems
31 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.0%
5
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.5%
6
Cognition
47 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.4%
50% of probability mass above
7
Frontiers in Psychology
56 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.4%
8
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.1%
9
Royal Society Open Science
214 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
10
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 50%
2.0%
11
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 46%
1.9%
12
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
23 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
13
Neural Networks
35 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
14
Neural Computation
39 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
15
Neuropsychologia
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
16
Frontiers in Neuroscience
256 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
17
Consciousness and Cognition
19 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
18
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
176 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
19
Heliyon
152 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.9%
20
Peer Community Journal
281 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
21
Journal of Mathematical Biology
40 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
22
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
69 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
23
Journal of Theoretical Biology
162 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
24
European Journal of Neuroscience
189 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%