Counterfactual Thought.

By Ruth M. J. Byrne. 2016

385 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Social Psychology

How researchers see this paper

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

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. Shane Timmons
2. Orlando Espino
3. Ruth M. J. Byrne
4. Mary Parkinson
5. Isabel Orenes
6. David R. Mandel

In Social Psychology

1. Shane Timmons
2. Ruth M. J. Byrne
3. Orlando Espino
4. Mary Parkinson
5. Juan Antonio Garcia-Madruga
6. Isabel Gómez-Veiga
7. Isabel Orenes
8. Maarten de Rijke

Citations in the corpus

• Counterfactuals in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Evidence from Human Reasoning (2019, background): “…look in a visual display when they hear a counterfactual, or brain imaging techniques such as event related potentials (ERP) or functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine areas of the brain activated during counterfactual comprehension and reasoning [for a review, see Byrne, 2016].”
• Counterfactual and semi-factual thoughts in moral judgements about failed attempts to harm (2017, background): “People often create counterfactual alternatives to reality and imagine how an outcome could have turned out better or worse (see Byrne, 2016, for a review).”
• FOCUS: Flexible Optimizable Counterfactual Explanations for Tree Ensembles (2019, background): “Finally, while existing research from the cognitive sciences has shown that humans are able to interpret counterfactual explanations, the notion of what constitutes aminimal perturbation is currently not clear [7].”
• Counterfactual Thinking: From Logic to Morality (2017, background): “There are remarkable regularities in what the mind computes when it creates counterfactual alternatives to reality (e.g., Byrne, 2016).”
• Thinking About the Opposite of What Is Said: Counterfactual Conditionals and Symbolic or Alternate Simulations of Negation (2018, background): “E-mail: rmbyrne@tcd.ie and the trees were not orange trees,” and they keep track of its epistemic status too, as corresponding to the facts (see Byrne, 2016, for a review).”
• Moral hindsight for good actions and the effects of imagined alternatives to reality. (2018, background): “…it denies the causal relation between the action and its outcome, that throwing a brick over the bridge will result in a car being hit (e.g., Byrne, 2016; Lagnado, Gerstenberg, & Zultan, 2013; McEleney & Byrne, 2006; Rasga, Quelhas, & Byrne, 2016; Roese & Epstude, 2017; Walsh & Byrne, 2007).”
• A Survey of Contrastive and Counterfactual Explanation Generation Methods for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (2021, background): “Thus, Byrne states that ‘‘not all counterfactuals are about causes, and counterfactuals that imply a causal relation differ in systematic ways from counterfactuals that identify other sorts of relations, such as intentions’’ [22].”
• The Comprehension of Counterfactual Conditionals: Evidence From Eye-Tracking in the Visual World Paradigm (2019, background): “…they appear to envisage two possibilities, the imagined alternative to reality that corresponds to the counterfactual’s conjecture, “there were oranges and pears” and the known or presumed facts that correspond to actual reality, “there were no oranges and no pears” (for a review see Byrne, 2016).”