Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Counterfactual Thinking

Counterfactual Thinking

Counterfactual thinking is a cognitive process wherein individuals mentally reconstruct alternative versions of past events, often beginning with “what if” or “if only.” This reflective mechanism plays a significant role in shaping emotional experiences and guiding future behavior. Though typically triggered by unfavorable or unexpected outcomes, counterfactual thinking can also emerge in mundane, everyday decisions and experiences, revealing its deep entrenchment in human cognition.Types of...

Null and Alternative Hypotheses

Null and Alternative Hypotheses

The actual hypothesis testing begins by considering two hypotheses. They are termed the null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis. These hypotheses contain opposing viewpoints.
The null hypothesis, denoted by H0 is a statement of no difference between the variables—they are not related. This can often be considered the status quo. As a result if you cannot accept the null, it requires some action.
The alternative hypothesis, denoted by H1 or Ha, is a claim about the population that is...

Hindsight Biases

Hindsight Biases

Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Can you relate this to the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" now?

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II

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:

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I

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:

Fundamental Attribution Error

Fundamental Attribution Error

According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is called the fundamental attribution...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

The meaning of "harm" in personalized medicine-an alternative perspective.

American journal of epidemiology·2025

Same author

Generalizing experimental results by leveraging knowledge of mechanisms.

European journal of epidemiology·2020

Same author

Note on ''Generalizability of Study Results''.

Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)·2019

Same author

Challenging the hegemony of randomized controlled trials: A commentary on Deaton and Cartwright.

Social science & medicine (1982)·2018

Same author

Comments on: The tale wagged by the DAG.

International journal of epidemiology·2018

Same author

Causal inference and the data-fusion problem.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2016

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 9, 2026

Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies

Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: May 9, 2019

Structural counterfactuals: a brief introduction.

¹Computer Science Department, University of California, Los Angeles 90095-1596, USA. judea@cs.ucla.edu

Cognitive Science

|August 10, 2013

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

A new structural model for counterfactual reasoning computationally emulates human thought, offering advantages over possible worlds accounts. This causal reasoning approach benefits empirical sciences.

Keywords:

Causal reasoning Counterfactuals Structural models

More Related Videos

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Published on: April 18, 2017

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language

Published on: October 13, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 9, 2026

Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies

Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: May 9, 2019

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Published on: April 18, 2017

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language

Published on: October 13, 2018

Area of Science:

Cognitive Science
Computational Linguistics
Philosophy of Science

Background:

Counterfactual sentences describe hypothetical situations.
Traditional "possible worlds" models face limitations in representational economy and clarity.
Causal reasoning offers a new framework for understanding counterfactuals.

Purpose of the Study:

Introduce a novel computational model for counterfactual sentence generation and evaluation.
Contrast the proposed "structural" model with existing "possible worlds" accounts.
Provide an overview of the structural model's applications in empirical sciences.

Main Methods:

Development of a computational model based on causal reasoning principles.
Algorithmic design focusing on representational economy and conceptual clarity.
Comparative analysis against "possible worlds" frameworks.

Main Results:

The structural model effectively emulates human generation, evaluation, and distinction of counterfactuals.
Demonstrated advantages in representational economy, algorithmic simplicity, and conceptual clarity.
Successful application in diverse empirical science problem areas.

Conclusions:

The structural model represents a significant advancement in computational counterfactual reasoning.
This causal reasoning approach offers a more parsimonious and clear alternative to possible worlds semantics.
The model's utility is validated through its beneficial impact on empirical scientific research.