In commenting on Dawid, Faigman, and Fienberg, the author contrasts the proposed parameter, the probability of causation, to other parameters in the causal inference literature, specifically the probability of necessity discussed by Pearl, and Robins and Greenland, and Pearl’s probability of sufficiency. This article closes with a few comments about the difficulties of estimation of parameters related to individual causation.
CaiZhihongKurokiManabu. 2006. “Variance Estimators for Three ‘Probabilities of Causation’.”Risk Analysis25:1611–20.
2.
DawidPhilip A.Stephen E.FienbergFaigmanDavid L.. 2014. “Fitting Science into Legal Contexts: Assessing Effects of Causes or Causes of Effects.”Sociological Methods & Research43:359–390. doi:10.1177/0049124113515188
3.
HubbardAlanJewellNicholas P.van der LaanMark J. . 2011. “Direct Effects and Effects among the Treated.” Pp. 133–43 in Targeted Learning: Causal Inference for Observational and Experimental Data. New York: Springer.
4.
PearlJudea. 1999. “Probabilities of Causation: Three Counterfactual Interpretations and Their Identification.”Synthese121:93–149.
5.
PearlJudea. 2009a. Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference. 2nd ed., p. 296. New York: Cambridge University Press.
6.
PearlJudea. 2009b. “Casual Inference in Statistics: An Overview.”Statistics Surveys3:96–146; Section 5.2.
7.
RobinsJamesGreenlandSander. 1989a. “The Probability of Causation under a Stochastic Model for Individual Risk.”Biometrics45:1125–38.
8.
RobinsJamesGreenlandSander. 1989b. “Estimability and Estimation of Excess and Etiologic Fractions.”Statistics in Medicine8:845–59.
9.
TianJinPearlJudea. 2000. “Probabilities of Causation: Bounds and Identification.”Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence28:287–313.
