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

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:

Causality in Epidemiology

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...

Cause and Effect

Cause and Effect

While variables are sometimes correlated because one does cause the other, it could also be that some other factor, a confounding variable, is actually causing the systematic movement in our variables of interest. For instance, as sales in ice cream increase, so does the overall rate of crime. Is it possible that indulging in your favorite flavor of ice cream could send you on a crime spree? Or, after committing crime do you think you might decide to treat yourself to a cone?

Correlation and Causation

Correlation and Causation

Statistical tests can calculate whether there is a relationship, or correlation, between independent and dependent variables. An indirect relationship of the variables signifies a correlation, while a direct relationship shows causation. If it is determined that no connection exists between the variables, then the correlation is a coincidence.
Correlation versus Causation
If the dependent variable increases or decreases when the independent variable increases, there is a positive or negative...

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...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

Concept(s) of Health: Lifestyle at the Heart of Modern Health.

Erkenntnis·2026

Same author

Moral language and Moore's Paradox: Challenging moral expressivism.

Cognition·2025

Same author

Tracing truth through conceptual scaling.

Cognition·2025

Same author

Generics and Quantified Generalizations: Asymmetry Effects and Strategic Communicators.

Cognition·2024

Same author

Authenticity or Risk?

AJOB neuroscience·2024

Same author

Salient semantics.

Synthese·2024

Same journal

A plea for multilateralism.

Philosophical studies·2026

Same journal

The Pragmatics and the Normativity of Ignorance Attributions.

Philosophical studies·2026

Same journal

The form of <i>good</i>.

Philosophical studies·2026

Same journal

Being social, being socially constructed, and being fundamental relative to social reality.

Philosophical studies·2026

Same journal

Epistemic innocence and the production of false memory beliefs.

Philosophical studies·2026

Same journal

Moral encroachment and group-to-individual inferences.

Philosophical studies·2025

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 9, 2025

Virtual Hand with Ambiguous Movement between the Self and Other Origin: Sense of Ownership and 'Other-Produced' Agency

Virtual Hand with Ambiguous Movement between the Self and Other Origin: Sense of Ownership and 'Other-Produced' Agency

Published on: October 28, 2020

Mutual entailment between causation and responsibility.

Justin Sytsma¹, Pascale Willemsen², Kevin Reuter²

¹Philosophy Programme, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, 5036 Aotearoa New Zealand.

Philosophical Studies

|December 4, 2023

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Philosophical views often separate responsibility and causation. However, empirical studies reveal that ordinary language suggests causation and responsibility are mutually entailed, challenging traditional philosophical assumptions.

Keywords:

Causal cognition Causation Entailment claim Experimental philosophy Responsibility

More Related Videos

State-Dependency Effects on TMS: A Look at Motive Phosphene Behavior

State-Dependency Effects on TMS: A Look at Motive Phosphene Behavior

Published on: December 28, 2010

Characterization of the Sense of Agency over the Actions of Neural-machine Interface-operated Prostheses

Characterization of the Sense of Agency over the Actions of Neural-machine Interface-operated Prostheses

Published on: January 7, 2019

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 9, 2025

Virtual Hand with Ambiguous Movement between the Self and Other Origin: Sense of Ownership and 'Other-Produced' Agency

Virtual Hand with Ambiguous Movement between the Self and Other Origin: Sense of Ownership and 'Other-Produced' Agency

Published on: October 28, 2020

State-Dependency Effects on TMS: A Look at Motive Phosphene Behavior

State-Dependency Effects on TMS: A Look at Motive Phosphene Behavior

Published on: December 28, 2010

Characterization of the Sense of Agency over the Actions of Neural-machine Interface-operated Prostheses

Characterization of the Sense of Agency over the Actions of Neural-machine Interface-operated Prostheses

Published on: January 7, 2019

Area of Science:

Cognitive Science
Philosophy of Mind
Linguistics

Background:

The traditional philosophical stance posits that responsibility entails causation, but not vice versa.
This view is often considered self-evident within ordinary language and philosophical discourse.
Recent research challenges this unidirectional relationship, suggesting potential mutual entailment.

Purpose of the Study:

To empirically investigate the relationship between ordinary concepts of causation and responsibility.
To test the hypothesis that causation and responsibility are mutually entailed, as proposed by Sytsma and Livengood.
To provide evidence for or against the traditional philosophical view on the entailment between causation and responsibility.

Main Methods:

Utilized the cancellability test, a linguistic method to probe conceptual entailment.
Conducted three pre-registered experimental studies.
Analyzed ordinary causal and responsibility attributions in natural language contexts.

Main Results:

Empirical evidence supports the mutual entailment of causation and responsibility in ordinary language.
Findings indicate that causal attributions are often used interchangeably with responsibility attributions.
The results challenge the standard philosophical view of a unidirectional entailment.

Conclusions:

Ordinary language use suggests a bidirectional relationship between causation and responsibility.
The study provides empirical grounding for the mutual entailment of causation and responsibility.
This research has implications for understanding moral responsibility, legal judgments, and cognitive science.