How deep do we dig? Formal explanations as placeholders for inherent explanations

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Linguistics
• Philosophy of Science

Background:

• Formal explanations, such as 'whiskers are a feature of cats because cats are felines,' are frequently used in everyday language.
• Despite their prevalence, the cognitive function and psychological satisfaction derived from formal explanations remain poorly understood.
• Existing research on explanation primarily focuses on literal content, overlooking the inferential work explanations perform.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the implicit meaning and psychological function of formal explanations.
• To test the hypothesis that formal explanations serve as placeholders for appeals to inherent features.
• To explore how formal explanations are perceived in comparison to inherent and environmental explanations.

Main Methods:

• Eight experiments were conducted with 951 participants.
• Participants evaluated the satisfaction derived from different types of explanations (formal, inherent, environmental).
• Tasks assessed the perceived specificity and generality of formal explanations versus inherent ones.

Main Results:

• Formal explanations were generally less satisfying than inherent explanations, especially for natural kinds.
• Participants viewed formal explanations as general placeholders for more specific, essence-based inherent explanations.
• Formal explanations primarily served as placeholders for inherent feature-based accounts rather than external factors.

Conclusions:

• Formal explanations function implicitly by referencing inherent features rather than their explicit categorical content.
• The psychological work of explanations may stem from the inferences they prompt, not just their literal meaning.
• Formal explanations could play a heuristic role in childhood causal learning by guiding attention to essential properties.