The Search for Invariance: Repeated Positive Testing Serves the Goals of Causal Learning

Positive testing is characteristic of exploratory behavior, yet it seems to be at odds with the aim of information seeking. After all, repeated demonstrations of one’s current hypothesis often produce the same evidence and fail to distinguish it from potential alternatives. Research on the development of scientific reasoning and adult rule learning have both documented and attempted to explain this behavior. The current chapter reviews this prior work and introduces a novel theoretical account—the Search for Invariance (SI) hypothesis—which suggests that producing multiple positive examples serves the goals of causal learning. This hypothesis draws on the interventionist framework of causal reasoning, which suggests that causal learners are concerned with the invariance of candidate hypotheses. In a probabilistic and interdependent causal world, our primary goal is to determine whether, and in what contexts, our causal hypotheses provide accurate foundations for inference and intervention—not to disconfirm their alternatives. By recognizing the central role of invariance in causal learning, the phenomenon of positive testing may be reinterpreted as a rational information-seeking strategy

A note on cancellation axioms for comparative probability

We prove that the generalized cancellation axiom for incomplete comparative probability relations introduced by Ríos Insua (Theory Decis 33:83–100, 1992) and Alon and Lehrer (J Econ Theory 151:476–492, 2014) is stronger than the standard cancellation axiom for complete comparative probability relations introduced by Scott (J Math Psychol 1:233–247, 1964), relative to their other axioms for comparative probability in both the finite and infinite cases. This result has been suggested but not proved in the previous literature

A note on cancellation axioms for comparative probability

We prove that the generalized cancellation axiom for incomplete comparative probability relations introduced by Ríos Insua (Theory Decis 33:83–100, 1992) and Alon and Lehrer (J Econ Theory 151:476–492, 2014) is stronger than the standard cancellation axiom for complete comparative probability relations introduced by Scott (J Math Psychol 1:233–247, 1964), relative to their other axioms for comparative probability in both the finite and infinite cases. This result has been suggested but not proved in the previous literature