Inferential Pluralism in Causal Reasoning from Randomized Experiments.

Area of Science:

• Philosophy of Science
• Causal Inference
• Research Methodology

Background:

• Causal pluralism, the idea that multiple distinct causal concepts and methods exist, is explored.
• The debate often focuses on concepts and guidelines, but extends to evidence-based causal inference.

Purpose of the Study:

• To defend causal pluralism at the level of inferring causation from specific evidence.
• To analyze causal inference from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as a case study.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of causal inference derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
• Examination of the reasoning paths used to establish causal interpretation of statistically significant associations.

Main Results:

• Statistically significant associations in RCTs can be causally interpreted through various reasoning pathways.
• Each pathway relies on distinct assumptions and offers unique evidence supporting a causal claim.

Conclusions:

• Causal pluralism is supported at the level of evidence-based causal inference.
• Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) exemplify how multiple, distinct lines of reasoning can establish causation.