Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II01:28

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II

The Bradford Hill criteria serve as guidelines for establishing causative links in epidemiological research. Beyond Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality, key criteria also include Biological Gradient, Plausibility, Coherence, Experiment, and Analogy. These principles assist scientists in assessing the likelihood of causation in complex biological contexts. Below is a summary of these concepts:
Causality in Epidemiology01:21

Causality in Epidemiology

Causality or causation is a fundamental concept in epidemiology, vital for understanding the relationships between various factors and health outcomes. Despite its importance, there's no single, universally accepted definition of causality within the discipline. Drawing from a systematic review, causality in epidemiology encompasses several definitions, including production, necessary and sufficient, sufficient-component, counterfactual, and probabilistic models. Each has its strengths and...
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I01:30

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I

The Bradford Hill criteria are a group of principles that provide a framework to determine a causal relationship between a specific factor and a disease. There are nine criteria that are pivotal in assessing causality in epidemiological studies. Here's a closer look at Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality criteria with definitions and examples:
The Quantum-Mechanical Model of an Atom02:45

The Quantum-Mechanical Model of an Atom

Shortly after de Broglie published his ideas that the electron in a hydrogen atom could be better thought of as being a circular standing wave instead of a particle moving in quantized circular orbits, Erwin Schrödinger extended de Broglie’s work by deriving what is now known as the Schrödinger equation. When Schrödinger applied his equation to hydrogen-like atoms, he was able to reproduce Bohr’s expression for the energy and, thus, the Rydberg formula governing hydrogen spectra. Schrödinger...
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the brain can only use...
Inductive Reasoning00:59

Inductive Reasoning

Inductive reasoning is a form of logical thinking that uses related observations to arrive at a general conclusion. It is uncertain and operates in degrees to which the conclusions are credible. As such, inductive arguments can be weak or strong, rather than valid or invalid, and conclusions can be used to formulate testable, falsifiable hypotheses.
Inductive reasoning is common in descriptive science. A life scientist makes observations and records them. This data can be qualitative or...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Attentional dynamics explain the elusive nature of context effects.

Psychological review·2026
Same author

Incorporating episodic memory into quantum models of judgement and decision.

Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences·2025
Same author

Preface (Part I): quantum theory and topology in models of decision making.

Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences·2025
Same author

An overview of the quantum cognition research program.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2025
Same author

Effects of prevalence and feedback in the identification of blast cells in peripheral blood: expert and novice observers.

Cognitive research: principles and implications·2025
Same author

Dialogues about the practice of science.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2025

Related Experiment Videos

A quantum probability model of causal reasoning.

Jennifer S Trueblood1, Jerome R Busemeyer

  • 1Cognitive Science Program, Indiana University Bloomington, IN, USA. jstruebl@indiana.edu

Frontiers in Psychology
|May 18, 2012
PubMed
Summary

Human causal reasoning can be surprisingly accurate but sometimes deviates from predictions. A new quantum inference model explains these unexpected judgment patterns by considering how people view different causes.

Keywords:
causal reasoningorder effectsquantum theory

Related Experiment Videos

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Science
  • Psychology
  • Quantum Probability Theory

Background:

  • Human causal reasoning often surpasses statistical and machine learning models.
  • However, systematic deviations from expected judgments occur in specific causal inference scenarios.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To examine three situations yielding unexpected causal inference judgments.
  • To introduce and validate a quantum inference model explaining these phenomena.

Main Methods:

  • Investigated predictive (cause-to-effect) and diagnostic (effect-to-cause) judgments.
  • Analyzed order effects in predictive causal judgments.
  • Developed a quantum inference model based on quantum probability axioms.

Main Results:

  • The quantum inference model successfully explained all three observed causal reasoning phenomena.
  • The model accounts for discrepancies between predictive and diagnostic judgments.
  • It also explains novel order effects in predictive judgments.

Conclusions:

  • The quantum inference model provides a coherent framework for understanding human causal reasoning deviations.
  • It posits that individuals adopt different perspectives when considering various causes.
  • This model presents a viable alternative for human judgment research.