Mapping Myths - How many arrows make a cause?

In this part in the series of Causal Cognitive Mapping Myths I write about the meaning of many statements that connect into another one.

So statements no. 1, 2 and 3 must happen, or must be true, in order to cause 4? No, actually not. Links in Causal Cognitive Mapping are generally of a logical OR nature. That means it is not 1 and 2 and 3 cause 4 but rather 1 or 2 or 3 cause 4. One of them suffices but it could be all (it is not an exclusive or).


You can also consider this from a semantic standpoint. It would not make much sense to have AND connections because it would not be options anymore if you had to choose them.


Furthermore, for the same reason you should avoid using prescriptive words in statements such as "must", I would say, you should avoid AND relationships. If there is a need for them, put them in a statement so that a new statement 1, for instance, may become "Option A and Option B" thereby making the required options optional again.


Finally, the theoretical roots of Causal Cognitive Mapping strongly advocate OR relationships because our construction of the surrounding world is, according to personal construct theory, optional (so to speak) in nature. It is always open for redefinition. There is no path dependence. See also [1] for a brief summary.


(C) CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), Jo. Richter, http://causal-cognitive-mapping.blogspot.com/2017/03/mapping-myths-how-many-arrows-make-cause.html


[1] http://www.brint.com/PCT.htm