Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T09:16:57.416Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does the inherence heuristic take us to psychological essentialism?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2014

Anna Marmodoro ,
Robin A. Murphy  and
A. G. Baker
Anna Marmodoro
Affiliation:
Faculty of Philosophy, Corpus Christi College, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 4JF, United Kingdom. anna.marmodoro@philosophy.ox.ac.ukhttp://www.power-structuralism.ox.ac.uk/home
Robin A. Murphy
Affiliation:
Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3UD, United Kingdom. robin.murphy@psy.ox.ac.ukhttp://psy.medsci.ox.ac.uk/research/associative-learning-laboratory
A. G. Baker
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 1B1, Canada. andy.baker@mcgill.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We argue that the claim that essence-based causal explanations emerge, hydra-like, from an inherence heuristic is incomplete. No plausible mechanism for the transition from concrete properties, or cues, to essences is provided. Moreover, the fundamental shotgun and storytelling mechanisms of the inherence heuristic are not clearly enough specified to distinguish them, developmentally, from associative or causal networks.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 37 , Issue 5 , October 2014 , pp. 494 - 495
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baetu, I. & Baker, A. G. (2009) Human judgments of positive and negative causal chains. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 35(2):153–68.Google ScholarPubMed
Baker, A. G., Murphy, R. A. & Vallée-Tourangeau, F. (1996) Associative and normative models of causal induction: Reacting to versus understanding cause. In: The psychology of learning and motivation, vol. 34, ed. Shanks, D. R., Holyoak, K. J. & Medin, D. L., pp. 1–45. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Garcia, J. & Koelling, R. A. (1966) Relation of cue to consequence in avoidance learning. Psychonomic Science 4:123–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Pelley, M. E., Reimers, S. J., Calvini, G., Spears, R., Beesley, T. & Murphy, R. A. (2010) Stereotype formation: Biased by association. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 139:138–61.Google Scholar
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975) A theory of attention: Variations in associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review 82(4):276–98.Google Scholar
Murphy, R. A., Mondragón, E. & Murphy, V. A. (2009) Contingency, temporal order and generalization: Building blocks of causal cognition. International Journal of Comparative Psychology 22:61–74.Google Scholar
Oderberg, D. (2007) Real essentialism. Routledge.Google Scholar
Öhman, A. & Mineka, S. (2001) Fears, phobias, and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear learning. Psychological Review 108:483–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185:1124–31.Google Scholar