Research
Causal Reasoning
To increase our understanding of complex questions that lack simple or evident answers, we engage in casual reasoning. How do we reason causally? Much research has been conducted on this question and two main types of answers have been given. First, we use statistical information gathered from the environment and use certain types of calculations to determine whether a causal relationship exists. The second type of answer is that we assume that a causal link exists if we can think of a plausible causal mechanism that will relate a cause to an effect.In our research, we see people using both types of causal reasoning strategies. In the past, we have also investigated how scientists reason casually while conducting their own research, how people reason causally about complex events, and also sought to uncover the brain-based mechanisms underlying causal reasoning.
Recently, we have been investigating the ways that the brain deals with information that is either consistent, or inconsistent with prior theories and the mechanisms underlying confirmation bias. This has important implications for the teaching and learning of scientific concepts and theories. The sites that we see active when participants encounter information they do not like, suggests an active inhibition process at wok, Conversely for plausible theorizers we see learning networks activated. We are investigating key ways of presenting information that switches on the learning networks and could be of great benefit in the classroom. See also our work on conceptual change and on analogy.