Implicit Causality Data for Psych Verbs #
@cite{solstad-bott-2022} @cite{solstad-bott-2024}
Theory-neutral experimental data on implicit causality (I-Caus) and implicit consequentiality (I-Cons) for psych verbs. The experimental data comes from @cite{solstad-bott-2022}, which tests stimulus-experiencer (STIM-EXP) and experiencer-stimulus (EXP-STIM) verb classes in German.
The theoretical framework connecting occasion verbs, projectivity, and IC bias comes from @cite{solstad-bott-2024}.
Verb classes #
- StimExp (Stimulus-Experiencer): frighten, annoy, amuse — NP1 bias
- ExpStim (Experiencer-Stimulus): admire, like, fear — NP2 bias
- AgentEvocator (Agent-Evocator): criticise, congratulate — NP2 bias
- AgentPatient (Agent-Patient): kick, chase, hit — NP1 bias
Key empirical findings #
- Exp 1 (sentence continuation): I-Caus and I-Cons biases mirror each other for psych verbs. STIM-EXP: 87.4% NP1 with weil; EXP-STIM: 96% NP2 with weil.
- Exp 2 (coherence relations): Explanations dominate over consequences for both classes; consequence rate differs by class.
- Exp 3 (forced coreference): Asymmetry Hypothesis confirmed — even bias-incongruent continuations produce explanations.
- Exp 4 (explanation types): Explanations and consequences are of the types predicted by the Two-Mechanism Account.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
Instances For
Implicit causality bias direction.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
Instances For
Predicted IC bias direction for each verb class.
The IC bias tracks the STIMULUS argument, not the subject per se:
- StimExp (stimulus = subject) → NP1 (explanation about subject)
- ExpStim (stimulus = object) → NP2 (explanation about object)
- AgentEvocator (evocator = object) → NP2
- AgPat (agent = subject) → NP1 (default)
Equations
- Phenomena.ImplicitCausality.Studies.SolstadBott2024.VerbClass.stimExp.predictedBias = Phenomena.ImplicitCausality.Studies.SolstadBott2024.ICBias.np1
- Phenomena.ImplicitCausality.Studies.SolstadBott2024.VerbClass.expStim.predictedBias = Phenomena.ImplicitCausality.Studies.SolstadBott2024.ICBias.np2
- Phenomena.ImplicitCausality.Studies.SolstadBott2024.VerbClass.agentEvocator.predictedBias = Phenomena.ImplicitCausality.Studies.SolstadBott2024.ICBias.np2
- Phenomena.ImplicitCausality.Studies.SolstadBott2024.VerbClass.agentPat.predictedBias = Phenomena.ImplicitCausality.Studies.SolstadBott2024.ICBias.np1
Instances For
Connective conditions in @cite{solstad-bott-2022}. German connectives weil (because) and sodass (and so).
- weil : ExpConnective
- sodass : ExpConnective
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
Instances For
Subject coreference proportion from Exp 1, Table 1 of @cite{solstad-bott-2022}. These are real data from 52 German participants with 20 STIM-EXP and 20 EXP-STIM verbs (gefallen excluded).
- verbClass : VerbClass
- connective : ExpConnective
- subjectCorefPct : ℚ
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
StimExp and ExpStim have opposite predicted IC bias.
I-Caus (weil): StimExp has strong NP1 bias (87.4% > 50%).
I-Caus (weil): ExpStim has strong NP2 bias (4.0% < 50%).
I-Cons (sodass): Biases mirror I-Caus — StimExp → NP2, ExpStim → NP1. (@cite{solstad-bott-2022}, §2.3: "almost perfect negative correlation" r = −0.94)
The Asymmetry Hypothesis: I-Caus and I-Cons derive from different mechanisms:
- I-Caus: verb-semantic (Empty Slot Theory)
- I-Cons: discourse-structural (Contiguity Principle)