Persistence of Causal Illusions After Extensive Training

Itxaso Barberia,Miguel A Vadillo,Javier Rodríguez-Ferreiro

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00024

Itxaso Barberia, Miguel A Vadillo + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00024

Copy DOI

Abstract

We carried out an experiment using a conventional causal learning task but extending the number of learning trials participants were exposed to. Participants in the standard training group were exposed to 48 learning trials before being asked about the potential causal relationship under examination, whereas for participants in the long training group the length of training was extended to 288 trials. In both groups, the event acting as the potential cause had zero correlation with the occurrence of the outcome, but both the outcome density and the cause density were high, therefore providing a breeding ground for the emergence of a causal illusion. In contradiction to the predictions of associative models such the Rescorla-Wagner model, we found moderate evidence against the hypothesis that extending the learning phase alters the causal illusion. However, assessing causal impressions recurrently did weaken participants’ causal illusions.

Highlights

Several studies have found that, when certain conditions are met, people are led to develop erroneous causal beliefs
The main goal of the present study was to investigate the course of causal illusions after an extensive training with the candidate cause and its potential connection with the outcome
This result is at odds with associative models such as Rescorla-Wagner model, which predict that biased causal impressions at zero contingency conditions would be preasymptotic and should adjust to the normative absence of contingency as training moves forward

Summary

Introduction

Several studies have found that, when certain conditions are met, people are led to develop erroneous causal beliefs. Volunteers are initially informed that their aim is to explore the extent to which a causal relationship exists. They may be asked to find out the extent to which a fictitious drug (a candidate cause) is effective in producing recovery from a fictitious disease (the outcome). Participants observe several patients with the disease, presented sequentially on a trial-by-trial basis For each patient, they are told if the patient took the drug or not (i.e., if the candidate cause is present or not), and whether the patient recovered from the disease or not (if the outcome occurred or not). Under some circumstances, people tend to perceive that the drug is effective, showing what could be called a causal illusion or an illusion of causality (see Matute et al, 2015, for a review)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion