Date of Original Version



Conference Proceeding

Rights Management

All Rights Reserved

Abstract or Description

A successful theory of causal reasoning should be able to account for inferences about counterfactual scenarios. Pearl (2000) has developed a formal account of causal reasoning that has been highly influential but that suffers from at least two limitations as an account of counterfactual reasoning: it does not distinguish between counterfactual observations and counterfactual interventions, and it does not accommodate back- tracking counterfactuals. We present an extension of Pearl’s account that overcomes both limitations. Our model provides a unified treatment of counterfactual interventions and back- tracking counterfactuals, and we show that it accounts for data collected by Sloman and Lagnado (2005) and Rips (2010).

Included in

Psychology Commons



Published In

Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.