Process and dependency are better together: A reply to.

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Philosophy of Mind

Background:

• Causal judgments in double prevention scenarios are sensitive to temporal order (Thanawala & Erb, 2024).
• This challenges causal pluralism but supports the idea that reasoning involves both process and dependency.
• Re-analyses suggest dependency theories, specifically counterfactual accounts, can explain temporal order effects (Quillien et al., 2025).

Purpose of the Study:

• To question the ongoing debate framing causal reasoning solely as an opposition between process and dependency theories.
• To propose a more productive path forward for investigating causal reasoning.

Main Methods:

• The study critically examines existing findings and theoretical frameworks in causal reasoning research.
• It advocates for a shift in research methodology and theoretical integration.

Main Results:

• The dichotomy between process and dependency theories may not be the most productive framework for understanding causal reasoning.
• Empirical exploration and integrative accounts are suggested as beneficial avenues for future research.

Conclusions:

• Future investigations of causal reasoning should prioritize empirical richness over strict theoretical comparisons.
• Developing integrated accounts that combine factors from both process and dependency theories will advance our understanding of how people reason about causality.