Merge pull request #8 from HeningWang/main

add an overall readme

README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+# magpie3-causal-implicature
+
+This repository contains several [Magpie](https://magpie-experiments.org/) experiments design to investigate "clausal implicatures", i.e., cases where interpreters infer causal information where none was explicitly conveyed.
+
+There are several kinds of (pilot) experiments here (see `experiments` folder).
+Most interesting / interpretable: 1a/b & 4.
+Pilot 3 is actually interesting but has a "null result" feel to it, as all different formulations were treated the exact same.
+Pilot 2 attempted iterated narration chains but failed (technical reasons, participants didn't understand what to do).
+
+- *Pilot 1*: forced choice + justification of that forced-choice decision
+  + pilots 1a and 1b differ only in the formulation of the background scenario (pilot 1b contains information that 'ralocrop' is costly to cultivate)
+- *Pilot 2*: forced choice + justification + reproduction (2a only reproduction; 2b/c with actual iteration)
+  + pilot 2a: similar to 1b, but with slightly rephrased instructions; also includes additional reproduction task
+    - N=33, more reproduction with 'causal language' when participants chose to cultivate both crops
+  + pilot 2b & c: similar to 2a, but with actual iterated narration chains; unfortunately, flawed by insufficient understanding of participants regarding what to reproduce
+- *Pilot 3*: background description, choice and justification like in Pilot 1b; N = 161
+  + presented three different prompts:
+    1. [association]  "a high yield of xeliherb is associated with the presence of another plant called ralocrop"
+    2. [intervention] "a high yield of xeliherb was observed whenever another plant called ralocrop has been cultivated as well"
+    3. [observation]  "a high yield of xeliherb was observed whenever another plant called ralocrop was observed as well"
+  + adds two more trials:
+    - forced-choice select true statement about ralocrop
+    - forced-choice select what the science team said
+  + choice rates (single crop vs both) for all three prompts are indistinguishable (!?)
+- *Pilot 4*: instructions like 1b, but with free reproduction of /all/ information from the background vignette
+  + similar to 2a in structure, but different instructions for reproductions
+  + used only the "association" vignette
+  + N=50
+  + hand-coded reproduction -> shows a abundance of "causal language" especially for "causal responders"
+- *Pilot-indirectSource*: Method: slider rating
+
+We manipulate two factors relevant to interpreting causal information: **listener type**, which includes *"colonists"* and *"scientists"*, and **information source**, which includes *"indirect"* and *"direct"*. Participants are then asked whether they perform an intervention after hearing the information, as this signals a strong causal interpretation​⬤
+
+Live version of the experiment [here](https://magpie-ea.github.io/magpie3-causal-implicature/).