In the CCR Lab, we investigate how people's beliefs influence the way they reason and make decisions. We have investigated this question in relation to causal reasoning and categorization, and have expanded this work to explore how experts and laypeople make health decisions. Below is a sampling of recent research projects in the lab.
Beliefs about category essences
What makes something a member of a category? People act as if categories in the world possess something referred to as an essence, a special causal trait that creates the features of the category and must be possessed for something to be a member of that category (e.g., Ahn, Taylor, Kato, Marsh, & Bloom, 2013). We have explored people's beliefs in essences in a series of studies that look to define the boundaries of essentialism. For example:
Thinking about real-world causal interventions
Understanding the causal relationship between events gives us the story of how outcomes come to happen. Knowing what event causes another gives us the power to intervene on that causal relationship to bring about or prevent an outcome. Previous research has shown that people prefer causal interventions that work on the root causes of a causal system. In recent work we are exploring whether people believe real world interventions actually work on root causes in the domain of health. We have shown that people do not think medications work on root causes, while lifestyle modifications do. This finding leaves many open questions we are pursuing, like:
Decision making in context
Mental health symptoms present in the rich context of a person's life. We have explored how experts and laypeople are influenced by this contextual information when determining if someone is experiencing a mental illness. Both experts (De Los Reyes & Marsh, 2011) and laypeople (Marsh, De Los Reyes, & Wallerstein, 2014; Marsh, Burke, & De Los Reyes, 2016) are greatly influenced by such information. We are interested in further exploring:
Beliefs about category essences
What makes something a member of a category? People act as if categories in the world possess something referred to as an essence, a special causal trait that creates the features of the category and must be possessed for something to be a member of that category (e.g., Ahn, Taylor, Kato, Marsh, & Bloom, 2013). We have explored people's beliefs in essences in a series of studies that look to define the boundaries of essentialism. For example:
- Does becoming an expert in categorizing members of a given category change beliefs related to essences in that category? For example, while laypeople believe medical disorder categories have essences, do physicians also believe in such defining essences? (Collaborator: Jessica Cooper)
- Does being a member of a category reduce your beliefs that the category has an essence?(Collaborator: Diana Hooten)
- Do beliefs about whether a category has an essence predict willingness to interact with members of that category? (Collaborator: Lindzi Shanks)
- Does learning about multiple ways to become a member of a category change essence beliefs? (Collaborator: Andrew Zeveney)
Thinking about real-world causal interventions
Understanding the causal relationship between events gives us the story of how outcomes come to happen. Knowing what event causes another gives us the power to intervene on that causal relationship to bring about or prevent an outcome. Previous research has shown that people prefer causal interventions that work on the root causes of a causal system. In recent work we are exploring whether people believe real world interventions actually work on root causes in the domain of health. We have shown that people do not think medications work on root causes, while lifestyle modifications do. This finding leaves many open questions we are pursuing, like:
- What is special about lifestyle modifications that they can target root causes of disease? (Collaborator: Andrew Zeveney)
- Can we convince people that medications could work on root causes?
Decision making in context
Mental health symptoms present in the rich context of a person's life. We have explored how experts and laypeople are influenced by this contextual information when determining if someone is experiencing a mental illness. Both experts (De Los Reyes & Marsh, 2011) and laypeople (Marsh, De Los Reyes, & Wallerstein, 2014; Marsh, Burke, & De Los Reyes, 2016) are greatly influenced by such information. We are interested in further exploring:
- How can the influence of context be minimized in order to provide more accurate diagnoses?(Collaborator: Andres De Los Reyes)
- How does the context surrounding diagnosis influence other reasoning elements, such as memory for information relevant to categorization?