Attributing Responsibility: Actual and Counterfactual Worlds
نویسندگان
چکیده
How do people attribute responsibility to individuals in a group? Several models in psychology predict that there is a close relationship between counterfactuals and responsibility: how responsible an individual’s contribution is seen depends on whether it made a difference to the outcome. We first review these models and then point out a major limitation: people sometimes hold individuals responsible even though their contribution made no relevant difference to the outcome. A richer conception of the relationship between counterfactuals and responsibility is necessary. People’s attributions of responsibility are not only influenced by whether a person’s contribution made a difference in the actual situation, but also by whether it would have made a difference in other possible situations. We propose a general framework that conceptualizes attributions of responsibility in terms of counterfactuals defined over structured causal models. Using this framework, we show that retrospective responsibility attributions are also affected by prospective responsibility. A person’s responsibility depends on how critical their contribution was perceived for the group’s success and on how close it was to making a difference to the outcome.
منابع مشابه
A Structural Model Interpretation of Wright’s NESS Test
Although understanding causation is an essential part of nearly every problem domain, it has resisted formal treatment in the languages of logic, probability, and even statistics. Autonomous artificially intelligent agents need to be able to reason about cause and effect. One approach is to provide the agent with formal, computational notions of causality that enable the agent to deduce cause a...
متن کاملThe structural model interpretation of the NESS test
Within the law, the traditional test for attributing causal responsibility is the counterfactual “but-for” test, which asks whether the injury complained of would have occurred but for the defendant’s wrongful act. This definition generally conforms to common intuitions regarding causation, but gives non-intuitive results in situations of overdetermination with two or more potential causes pres...
متن کاملComments on Many-Valued Semantics for Vague
As the title suggests, the authors propose a framework for analyzing vague counterfac-tuals in the framework of fuzzy logics. Although both subjects have been studied for quite a long time, Cerami and Pardo present one of the first attempts combining them (this topic is also independently studied by Běhounek and Majer). Many philosophers have attempted to provide logical analysis of counterfact...
متن کاملA principled approach to defining actual causation
In this paper we present a new proposal for defining actual causation, i.e., the problem of deciding if one event caused another. We do so within the popular counterfactual tradition initiated by Lewis, which is characterised by attributing a fundamental role to counterfactual dependence. Unlike the currently prominent definitions, our approach proceeds from the ground up: we start from basic p...
متن کاملCausal Responsibility and Counterfactuals
How do people attribute responsibility in situations where the contributions of multiple agents combine to produce a joint outcome? The prevalence of over-determination in such cases makes this a difficult problem for counterfactual theories of causal responsibility. In this article, we explore a general framework for assigning responsibility in multiple agent contexts. We draw on the structura...
متن کامل