On the Causal Information Conveyed by Different Interpersonal Verbs: The Role of Implicit Sentence Context

The study reported here addresses the issue of why two different verb categories in sentences regularly elicit causal attributions to either the subject or the object of the sentence. State verbs (e.g., "hate," "love") predominantly evoke object attributions, whereas interpretive action verbs (e.g., "cheat," "help") evoke subject attributions. Different attempts to explain the phenomenon of implicit causality are critically discussed, and an argument is advanced for an alternative approach that focuses on the differential information these verb categories provide about the antecedent and consequent conditions of a sentence. An empirical study examining the inferences subjects draw concerning sentence contexts provides support for this contention. In the context of sentences with state verbs, inferences about the objects of the sentences appeared as antecedent conditions, while inferences about the subjects appeared as consequences, thus implying object causation. The reverse pattern was observed for sentences with interpretative action verbs. The implications of these results for the issue of implicit causality are discussed.