Exploring…

  1. “A root cause is an initiating cause of either a condition or a causal chain that leads to an outcome or effect of interest.” Wikipedia  

  2. “A causal chain is a sequence of conditions or events that results in a particular effect.” APA Dictionary of Psychology

  3. What does it mean that “X caused Y”? Some possibilities: 1). X is a necessary and/or sufficient condition of Y; 2) If X had not occurred, Y would not have occurred; 3) There is a causal mechanism leading from the occurrence of X to the occurrence of Y. (Paraphrase from Understanding Society/University of Michigan-Dearborn.)  

  4. “Causal processes, causal interactions, and causal laws provide the mechanisms by which the world works; to understand why certain things happen, we need to see how they are produced by these mechanisms. Causal relations cannot be directly inferred from facts about association among variables.” Understanding Society/University of Michigan-Dearborn  

  5. There are three broad approaches to causal mechanisms: individual-level choice, social influence, and structural or institutional effects. An example of the latter would be how a country’s tax system influences tax compliance. (Paraphrase from Understanding Society/University of Michigan-Dearborn.)  

  6. “A deterministic interpretation of causation means that if A causes B, then A must always be followed by B… On the other hand, a probabilistic interpretation simply means that causes raise the probability of their effects.” Wikipedia  

  7. But X may increase the probability of Y without being a cause of Y, just as a falling barometer increases the probability of a storm coming without causing the storm.  To establish causation you need an external intervention to change X If Y still happens, then X does not cause Y.  

  8. “…the crucial piece missing from both mechanism and covariation accounts of causal reasoning is the notion of intervention.  Specifically, researchers have suggested that knowing that X directly causes Y means knowing that, all else being equal, intervening to change X can change Y.” Schulz, Gopnik, & Glymour/Preschool children learn about causal structure from conditional interventions  

  9. “As long as not all relevant factors involved in an investigated causal structure are controlled for in the set-up of a pertinent study, corresponding data tends to be confounded by hidden variables and is, hence, likely not to unambiguously reflect underlying causal structures.” Baumgartner/The Causal Chain Problem

  10. Effects alter the causal chain through feedback and feedforward mechanisms. Outputs generate data that become inputs for further causal processes and interactions. Causal links may be neutralized, reinforced or weakened by ongoing inputs and outputs.

  11. Structures and systems undermine and reinforce each other. Nothing lasts forever but some things can be propped up for a while.

  12. X may feed Y more than other sources of influence, but that doesn’t mean that getting rid of X is the only or best way to get rid of Y. Y may be overdetermined, the product of multiple causal pathways, some independent of the others.

  13. Sometimes small interventions have large ripple effects, as causal links across connected pathways are recalibrated.

  14. A proximate cause may be the effect of multiple causes, each in turn the effect of multiple causes, each cause contributing its bit.

  15. The cause may not be a thing but a quantity of a thing - a dose. The dose effect depends, in part, on the characteristics of its recipient. Moderators can bump up a dose to the point of generating an effect. Fixing, or at least managing, a problem may be a matter of changing the dose of its cause. Or it may be a matter of building resilience in recipients so they’re protected from ill-effects. Often the best interventions go after both the dose and resilience. (Think climate change mitigation and adaptation).

  16. The root cause of a bad thing may be the same root cause of a good thing. Trees put out more than one root.

  17. A root cause is not fixed: its effects are not fixed. What gets the ball rolling may not keep it going. What keeps it going may change. What keeps the ball rolling may lose potency with repetition, or be worn down by contrary forces. In other words, causal pathways are subject to decay.

A Theory of Behavior

(This section is from a previous post, Why We Do What We Do: A Theory of Behavior)

First the chart, followed by a brief explanation.

Behavioral Beliefs

Beliefs that the Behavior Leads to Certain Outcomes: A person's subjective probability that performing a certain behavior will lead to a particular outcome or experience, for example, that exercising more will improve one’s health or be boring.

Evaluation of Outcomes: Positive evaluations refer to the beliefs about the effectiveness of the proposed behavior in achieve a desired outcome. Negative evaluations refers to beliefs about the behavior’s adverse consequences.

Normative Beliefs

Beliefs of Important Referents: Whether a given individual or group (e.g., friends, family, spouse, coworkers, one's physician or supervisor) approves or disapproves of a certain behavior and whether they would perform the behavior themselves.

Motivation to Comply with Referents: The extent to which one is motivated to comply with the opinions and behaviors of important others.

Control Beliefs

Perceived Capacity: The belief that one is capable of performing the behavior.

Perceived Autonomy: The belief that the decision to perform the behavior is under one’s control.

Attitude toward the Behavior: Positive or negative, based on beliefs regarding the likely consequences of the behavior

Subjective Norms: Based on accessible Normative Beliefs, which contribute to the overall perceived social pressure to engage in the behavior of interest.

Perceived Behavioral Control: The perceived degree of control over the behavior of interest. Same as self-efficacy. Often used as a proxy for Actual Behavioral Control, which can be hard to measure.

Intention: Attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control produce a disposition to perform the behavior of interest.

Actual Behavioral Control: Unanticipated events, insufficient time, lack of requisite skills and a multitude of other factors may prevent one from acting as intended. Actual control over a behavior depends on the ability to overcome barriers of this kind and on the presence of facilitating factors, such as assistance provided by others. Actual behavioral control feeds back to perceived control.

Background Factors: Factors that influence intention and behavior indirectly through their effect on behavioral, normative, and/or control beliefs. Examples include health, temperament, education, and culture.

Dotted arrow from Behavior back to Beliefs: Performance of a behavior provides real-world information (e.g., actual outcomes and barriers) that will likely “change some of the behavioral, normative, and control beliefs and thus influence future intentions regarding the behavior in question.” (Ajzen, 2020)

Note: The theory of planned behavior requires beliefs to be accessible for them to influence intention and behavior. However, this does not mean that behavior is necessarily a highly deliberative act, with each step mulled over, articulated, and endorsed before proceeding to the next step. The brain can plan things rather quickly.

Causal Chains and Behavioral Outcomes

Human behavior is the outcome of multicausal pathways. For example, in the theory of planned behavior, beliefs, intentions and perceived behavioral control are all parts of a causal chain that lead to a behavior, whether it’s cramming for an exam or stealing a car. The outcomes of behavior provide information relevant to beliefs, intentions and perceived behavioral control and so are part of the causal chain. Intervening at any point in the chain may change the behavior. I could go into more details and examples, but this post is already way too long, so further explorations along this line will have to wait.

References:

Ajzen, I. (2015). Consumer attitudes and behavior: The theory of planned behavior applied to food consumption decisions. Rivista di Economia Agraria 70: 121-138.  

Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions. Hum Behav & Emerg Tech. 2020; 2: 314– 324. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.195 

Baumgartner, M. The Causal Chain Problem. Erkenn 69, 201–226 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-008-9113-2

Kan M.P.H., Fabrigar L.R. (2017) Theory of Planned Behavior. In: Zeigler-Hill V., Shackelford T. (eds) Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1191-1  

Reasoned action approach https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Reasoned_action_approach

Schulz, L.E., Gopnik, A. and Glymour, C. (2007), Preschool children learn about causal structure from conditional interventions. Developmental Science, 10: 322-332. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00587.x