Effect of Counterfactual and Factual Thinking on Causal Judgments

By David R. Mandel. 2003

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. Shane T. Mueller
2. Robert R. Hoffman
3. Gary Klein
4. Ruth M. J. Byrne
5. William J. Clancey
6. Alice McEleney
7. Abigail Emrey
8. David R. Mandel

Citations in the corpus

• Explanation in Human-AI Systems: A Literature Meta-Review, Synopsis of Key Ideas and Publications, and Bibliography for Explainable AI (2019, background): “a,b), Hilton, McClure and Slugoski (2005); Hitchcock (2003); Hitchcock and Woodward (2003); Hoffman, et al., (2014); Khemlani and Johnson-Laird (2010); Kim, Khanna, and Koyejo (2016); Lipton, (1990); Mandel (2003a,b), McCloy and Byrne (2000); and Thompson and Byrne (2002). Mandel et al (2011) and Ma”
• Spontaneous counterfactual thoughts and causal explanations (2006, background): “Counterfactual and causal thoughts can even seem indistinguishable (eg, Mandel, 2003 ; Roese, 1997 ).”
• Judgment dissociation theory: an analysis of differences in causal, counterfactual, and covariational reasoning. (2003, background): “More recently, Mandel (2003b) directly compared the effects of counterfactual thinking and factual thinking on causal judgment.”