Comparing Three Models In Causal Inference: How are Consensus,Distinctiveness, And Consistency Information Processed?

Abstract

一般人如何使用一致(consensus)、獨特(distinctiveness)、及持久(consistency)訊息來做歸因？本文比較分析了三個模式的看法，它們都脫胎於凱利(H. Kelley)的共變模式。第一個模式稱為模板模式(templates model)，認為在一致訊息、獨特訊息及持久訊息的各種可能組合中，有三個組型是基本的，人們即利用此三個組型做為認知基模(schemata)來解釋他人及自我的行為；第二個模式稱為邏輯模式(logical model)，認為一般人在歸因時，是從行為者、剌激物、及情境三者之中選出必要條件做為行為的起因；第三個模式稱為反常條件焦點模式(abnormal conditions focus model)，認為行為者、刺激物、及情境三者都是必要條件，訊息的功能在於指出當中何者是反常的，人們即將行為歸因於此一反常條件。本文也分析了三個模式的一些問題及突破的方向。

The present article is concerned with how laymen use consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency information to make attributions in terms of the person, the stimulus, and/or the circumstances. To attack this problem, three models in the literature emphasized causal schemata, necessary conditions and focused abnormal conditions, respectively. The template model argued that three typical information patterns which were found in the earlier literature to lead to person, stimulus, and circumstnce attribution respectively serve as causal schemata or templates. Other patterns with complete or incomplete information will be compared with or related to the three templates. Then the individual interprets the behavior in terms of the attributions implied by the matched templates. The logical model suggested that laymen use the principle of covariation to figure out which of the person, the stimulus, and/or the circumstance is the necessary (and sufficient in the complete information patterns) condition for the behavior to occur, then assign it as the cause of the behavior. The abnormal conditions focus model claimed that persons, stimuli, and circumstances are all necessary conditions for a behavior to occur. Information has the function to indicate whether the particular person, the particular stimulus, and/or the particular circumstance is abnormal or unusual. In addition, world knowledge interacts with the contrast criterion to define the abnormal conditions.