Strategies to intervene on causal systems are adaptively selected

Anna Coenen, Bob Rehder, Todd M. Gureckis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

How do people choose interventions to learn about causal systems? Here, we considered two possibilities. First, we test an information sampling model, information gain, which values interventions that can discriminate between a learner's hypotheses (i.e. possible causal structures). We compare this discriminatory model to a positive testing strategy that instead aims to confirm individual hypotheses. Experiment 1 shows that individual behavior is described best by a mixture of these two alternatives. In Experiment 2 we find that people are able to adaptively alter their behavior and adopt the discriminatory model more often after experiencing that the confirmatory strategy leads to a subjective performance decrement. In Experiment 3, time pressure leads to the opposite effect of inducing a change towards the simpler positive testing strategy. These findings suggest that there is no single strategy that describes how intervention decisions are made. Instead, people select strategies in an adaptive fashion that trades off their expected performance and cognitive effort.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)102-133
Number of pages32
JournalCognitive Psychology
Volume79
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2015

Fingerprint

Experiments
Testing
experiment
Sampling
performance
Values
time

Keywords

  • Causal learning
  • Hypothesis testing
  • Information gain
  • Interventions
  • Self-directed learning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

Strategies to intervene on causal systems are adaptively selected. / Coenen, Anna; Rehder, Bob; Gureckis, Todd M.

In: Cognitive Psychology, Vol. 79, 01.06.2015, p. 102-133.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Coenen, Anna ; Rehder, Bob ; Gureckis, Todd M. / Strategies to intervene on causal systems are adaptively selected. In: Cognitive Psychology. 2015 ; Vol. 79. pp. 102-133.
@article{c8f110579887411a866650f82f75c6dc,
title = "Strategies to intervene on causal systems are adaptively selected",
abstract = "How do people choose interventions to learn about causal systems? Here, we considered two possibilities. First, we test an information sampling model, information gain, which values interventions that can discriminate between a learner's hypotheses (i.e. possible causal structures). We compare this discriminatory model to a positive testing strategy that instead aims to confirm individual hypotheses. Experiment 1 shows that individual behavior is described best by a mixture of these two alternatives. In Experiment 2 we find that people are able to adaptively alter their behavior and adopt the discriminatory model more often after experiencing that the confirmatory strategy leads to a subjective performance decrement. In Experiment 3, time pressure leads to the opposite effect of inducing a change towards the simpler positive testing strategy. These findings suggest that there is no single strategy that describes how intervention decisions are made. Instead, people select strategies in an adaptive fashion that trades off their expected performance and cognitive effort.",
keywords = "Causal learning, Hypothesis testing, Information gain, Interventions, Self-directed learning",
author = "Anna Coenen and Bob Rehder and Gureckis, {Todd M.}",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.02.004",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "79",
pages = "102--133",
journal = "Cognitive Psychology",
issn = "0010-0285",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Strategies to intervene on causal systems are adaptively selected

AU - Coenen, Anna

AU - Rehder, Bob

AU - Gureckis, Todd M.

PY - 2015/6/1

Y1 - 2015/6/1

N2 - How do people choose interventions to learn about causal systems? Here, we considered two possibilities. First, we test an information sampling model, information gain, which values interventions that can discriminate between a learner's hypotheses (i.e. possible causal structures). We compare this discriminatory model to a positive testing strategy that instead aims to confirm individual hypotheses. Experiment 1 shows that individual behavior is described best by a mixture of these two alternatives. In Experiment 2 we find that people are able to adaptively alter their behavior and adopt the discriminatory model more often after experiencing that the confirmatory strategy leads to a subjective performance decrement. In Experiment 3, time pressure leads to the opposite effect of inducing a change towards the simpler positive testing strategy. These findings suggest that there is no single strategy that describes how intervention decisions are made. Instead, people select strategies in an adaptive fashion that trades off their expected performance and cognitive effort.

AB - How do people choose interventions to learn about causal systems? Here, we considered two possibilities. First, we test an information sampling model, information gain, which values interventions that can discriminate between a learner's hypotheses (i.e. possible causal structures). We compare this discriminatory model to a positive testing strategy that instead aims to confirm individual hypotheses. Experiment 1 shows that individual behavior is described best by a mixture of these two alternatives. In Experiment 2 we find that people are able to adaptively alter their behavior and adopt the discriminatory model more often after experiencing that the confirmatory strategy leads to a subjective performance decrement. In Experiment 3, time pressure leads to the opposite effect of inducing a change towards the simpler positive testing strategy. These findings suggest that there is no single strategy that describes how intervention decisions are made. Instead, people select strategies in an adaptive fashion that trades off their expected performance and cognitive effort.

KW - Causal learning

KW - Hypothesis testing

KW - Information gain

KW - Interventions

KW - Self-directed learning

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84928653986&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84928653986&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.02.004

DO - 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.02.004

M3 - Article

C2 - 25935867

AN - SCOPUS:84928653986

VL - 79

SP - 102

EP - 133

JO - Cognitive Psychology

JF - Cognitive Psychology

SN - 0010-0285

ER -