{"title":"随机实验因果推理中的多元推理","authors":"Tudor M. Baetu","doi":"10.1007/s10441-022-09446-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Causal pluralism can be defended not only in respect to causal concepts and methodological guidelines, but also at the finer-grained level of causal inference from a particular source of evidence for causation. An argument for this last variety of pluralism is made based on an analysis of causal inference from randomized experiments (RCTs). Here, the causal interpretation of a statistically significant association can be established via multiple paths of reasoning, each relying on different assumptions and providing distinct elements of information in favour of a causal interpretation.\n</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7057,"journal":{"name":"Acta Biotheoretica","volume":"70 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inferential Pluralism in Causal Reasoning from Randomized Experiments\",\"authors\":\"Tudor M. Baetu\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10441-022-09446-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Causal pluralism can be defended not only in respect to causal concepts and methodological guidelines, but also at the finer-grained level of causal inference from a particular source of evidence for causation. An argument for this last variety of pluralism is made based on an analysis of causal inference from randomized experiments (RCTs). Here, the causal interpretation of a statistically significant association can be established via multiple paths of reasoning, each relying on different assumptions and providing distinct elements of information in favour of a causal interpretation.\\n</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Biotheoretica\",\"volume\":\"70 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Biotheoretica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10441-022-09446-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Biotheoretica","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10441-022-09446-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Inferential Pluralism in Causal Reasoning from Randomized Experiments
Causal pluralism can be defended not only in respect to causal concepts and methodological guidelines, but also at the finer-grained level of causal inference from a particular source of evidence for causation. An argument for this last variety of pluralism is made based on an analysis of causal inference from randomized experiments (RCTs). Here, the causal interpretation of a statistically significant association can be established via multiple paths of reasoning, each relying on different assumptions and providing distinct elements of information in favour of a causal interpretation.
期刊介绍:
Acta Biotheoretica is devoted to the promotion of theoretical biology, encompassing mathematical biology and the philosophy of biology, paying special attention to the methodology of formation of biological theory.
Papers on all kind of biological theories are welcome. Interesting subjects include philosophy of biology, biomathematics, computational biology, genetics, ecology and morphology. The process of theory formation can be presented in verbal or mathematical form. Moreover, purely methodological papers can be devoted to the historical origins of the philosophy underlying biological theories and concepts.
Papers should contain clear statements of biological assumptions, and where applicable, a justification of their translation into mathematical form and a detailed discussion of the mathematical treatment. The connection to empirical data should be clarified.
Acta Biotheoretica also welcomes critical book reviews, short comments on previous papers and short notes directing attention to interesting new theoretical ideas.