Fighting the Illusion of Control: How to Make Use of Cue Competition And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Fighting the Illusion of Control: How to Make Use of Cue Competition and Alternative Explanations* Combatiendo la ilusión de control: cómo hacer uso de la competición de claves y las explicaciones alternativas Recibido: noviembre 10 de 2011 | Revisado: enero 15 de 2012 | Aceptado: mayo 21 de 2013 MIGUEL A. VADILLO ** University College London, United Kindom HELENA MATUTE FERNANDO BLANCO Universidad de Deusto, Bilbao, España A B STRA C T Misperceptions of causality are at the heart of superstitious thinking and pseudoscience. The main goal of the present work is to show how our knowledge about the mechanisms involved in causal induction can be used to hinder the development of these beliefs. Available evidence shows that people sometimes perceive causal relationships that do not really exist. We suggest that this might be partly due to their failing to take into account alternative factors that might be playing an important causal role. The present experiment shows that providing accurate and difficult-to-ignore information about other candidate causes can be a good strategy for reducing misattributions of causality, such as illusions of control. Key words authors SICI: 1657-9267(201303)12:1<261:FICUCC>2.0.TX;2-A Illusion Of Control, Superstition, Pseudoscience, Discounting, Cue Competition. Key words plus Epistemology of Psychology, Experimental Psychology, Science, Causality Para citar este artículo: Vadillo, M. A., Matute, H. & Blanco, F. (2013). Fighting the illusion of control: R ESU M EN How to make use of cue competition and alterna- Los errores en la percepción de la causalidad constituyen la base del pensa- tive explanations. Universitas Psychologica, 12(1), miento supersticioso y la pseudociencia. El principal objetivo del presente 261-270. trabajo fue demostrar cómo puede utilizarse nuestro conocimiento sobre los mecanismos involucrados en la inducción causal para impedir o reducir el * Support for this research was provided by Grant desarrollo de este tipo de creencias. La evidencia disponible mostró que a PSI2011-26965 from Ministerio de Ciencia e In- veces las personas perciben relaciones causales que en realidad no existen. La novación and Grant IT363-10 from Departamento propuesta es que esto podría deberse, al menos en parte, a que las personas de Educación, Universidades e Investigación of the Basque Government. no suelen tener en cuenta factores alternativos que puedan estar jugando un papel causalmente relevante. El presente experimento demuestra que ** Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to either Miguel A. Vadillo, Division efectivamente se pueden reducir los errores en la atribución causal, tales of Psychology and Language Sciences, University como las ilusiones de control, proporcionando a los participantes informa- College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WC1H ción precisa y difícil de ignorar sobre otras causas posibles. 0AH, UK, or Helena Matute, Departamento de Palabras clave autores Fundamentos y Métodos de la Psicología, Univer- Ilusión de control, superstición, pseudociencia, descarte de hipótesis, competición sidad de Deusto, Apartado 1, 48080 Bilbao, Spain. de claves. Fax: (34) (94) 4139089. E-mails: m.vadillo@ucl. Palabras clave descriptores ac.uk or [email protected] Epistemología de la Psicología, Psicología Experimental, ciencia, causalidad. UNIV. PSYCHOL. BOGOTÁ, COLOMBIA V. 12 No. 1 PP. 261-270 ENE-MAR 2013 ISSN 1657-9267 261 MIGUEL A. VADILLO, HELENA MATUTE, FERNANDO BLANCO Introduction impair the development of these beliefs and reduce their impact. Most articles on causal induction begin with a remark One of the most prominent and best-studied on our outstanding abilities to detect causal relations characteristics of causal induction is that the in- and the importance of these abilities for our survival. ferences regarding the causal status of one event Human beings, and probably other animals as well, are usually influenced by previous or subsequent are indeed superb causality detection machines. But knowledge about the causal relation that other our highly evolved capacities are not without their events hold with the same outcome. Imagine, for failures. The cognitive abilities responsible for our example, that you read a text in which a celebrity otherwise precise causal inferences do not prevent us advocates for a given political party. No doubt, you from often perceiving causal patterns where only mere will probably attribute his writing to his political chance and luck exist. Not surprisingly, the study of preferences (Jones & Davis, 1965). However, if you causal misattribution and related issues is becoming a are later told that the author was paid in exchange major topic in the current psychological research and for writing the paper, will this not cast doubt on theory (McKay & Dennett, 2009; Wegner, 2002). his true political inclinations? Even when we have These shortcomings are interesting not only good reasons to believe that there is a causal rela- tion between a given candidate cause and an event because of the information they provide about the to be explained, our belief is usually revised, or even psychological processes underlying the perception dramatically altered, if we later get to know about of causality, but also because our systematic fail- other potential causes that might account for the ures to correctly explain some events are a major effect. This phenomenon, known as discounting source of suffering and superstition. Whenever we (Einhorn & Hogarth, 1986; Kelley, 1973; Morris & feel inclined to think that certain ethnic groups are Larrick, 1995) or cue competition (Baker, Mercier, more prone to crime than others, or that the gods Vallée-Tourangeau, Frank & Pan, 1993; Dickinson, will respond to our dancing around the fire with Shanks & Evenden, 1984; Wasserman, 1990) in the long awaited rain, we are betrayed by the limi- different research areas, addresses the competitive tations of our causal reasoning abilities. No matter nature of causal induction. Although discount- how much science and education have progressed, ing and cue competition have received extensive pseudoscience and superstition still wander at will attention in current research on causal induction through our developed societies (Davis, 2009; (e.g., Goedert & Spellman, 2005; Laux, Goedert Dawkins, 2006; Goldacre, 2008; Lilienfeld, Am- & Markman, 2010; Van Overwalle & Van Rooy, mirati & Landfield, 2009; Shermer, 1997). Fortu- 2001), to our best knowledge, no serious attempt nately, the abundant literature on causal learning has been made to relate these effects to the devel- and reasoning provides critical information about opment of superstitions and to the perception of the mechanisms underlying these processes, and illusory causal relations. However, as will be shown contains, either explicit or implicitly, many hints for below, the available evidence suggests that a failure reducing causal illusions (for reviews, see Gopnik to take into account the role of alternative causes & Schulz, 2007; Matute, Yarritu & Vadillo, 2011; of an event is one of the many factors that can give Mitchell, De Houwer & Lovibond, 2009; Shanks, rise to superstitions and causal misattributions. 2010; Sloman, 2005). However, to the present, re- The illusion of control is one of the most re- searchers have dedicated little time and effort to markable and puzzling instances of causal misat- exploring how their theories and empirical knowl- tributions: People often tend to attribute actually edge can be used to reduce superstitious beliefs. uncontrollable events to their own behavior rather One of the main goals of the present work is to than to their real causes or to mere chance (Langer, show how some of the most consistently replicated 1975; Matute, 1995; Ono, 1987; Wright, 1962). effects in causal induction studies can be used to Sometimes, the reason why people believe that 262 U NIVERSITAS P SYCHOLOGICA V. 12 No. 1 ENERO - MARZO 2013 FIGHTING THE ILLUSION OF CONTROL they can control some random event is just that from responding in some trials, their illusion is they are more prone to expose themselves to the reduced (Hannah & Beneteau, 2009). This might kind of evidence that would confirm these beliefs, explain why depressed people, who are usually more than to alternative evidence that would prove the passive and less motivated to control life events, opposite (Nickerson, 1998; Wason, 1960). In other usually tend to show few or no illusions of control words, they are underexposed to the information (Blanco, Matute & Vadillo, 2009). In fact, the role that could be used to discount the role of their own of activity in the development of illusions of con- behavior in producing these events. For example, trol is a straight-forward prediction of some formal students who carry lucky charms to their exams and models of causal learning (e.g., Rescorla & Wagner, obtain high grades usually fail to notice that they 1972; see Matute, Vadillo, Blanco & Musca, 2007 would have passed the exams anyway, even without for a computer simulation): The participants who the use of the amulet. In order to get that informa- are highly involved in trying to obtain an outcome tion, these students should keep their lucky charms experience more coincidences between their own at home at least in some exams, so that they could actions and the outcome. Therefore, they have less make the comparison between the grades they get opportunities to experience what would happen in when they use the charm and the ones they get