@proceedings {2535,
	title = {Faulty Towers: A counterfactual simulation model of physical support},
	year = {2017},
	month = {07/2017},
	abstract = {<p>In this paper we extend the counterfactual simulation model (CSM)\&nbsp; {\textendash}\&nbsp; originally\&nbsp; developed\&nbsp; to\&nbsp; capture\&nbsp; causal\&nbsp; judgments about\&nbsp; dynamic\&nbsp; events\&nbsp; (Gerstenberg,\&nbsp; Goodman,\&nbsp; Lagnado,\&nbsp; \&amp; Tenenbaum, 2014) {\textendash} to explain judgments of physical support. The CSM predicts that people judge physical support by men- tally\&nbsp; simulating\&nbsp; what\&nbsp; would\&nbsp; happen\&nbsp; if\&nbsp; the\&nbsp; object\&nbsp; of\&nbsp; interest were removed. Two experiments test the model by asking par- ticipants to evaluate the extent to which one brick in a tower is responsible for the rest of the bricks staying on the table. The results of both experiments show a very close correspon- dence\&nbsp; between\&nbsp; counterfactual\&nbsp; simulations\&nbsp; and\&nbsp; responsibility judgments. We compare three versions of the CSM which dif- fer in how they model people{\textquoteright}s uncertainty about what would have happened. Participants{\textquoteright} selections of which bricks would fall are best explained by assuming that counterfactual inter- ventions only affect some aspects while leaving the rest of the scene unchanged.</p>
},
	keywords = {causality, counterfactual, intuitive physics, mental simulation, support},
	author = {Tobias Gerstenberg and Liang Zhou and Kevin A Smith and Joshua B. Tenenbaum}
}
