A process approach to inferences of causation: empirical research from vaccine cases in the USA.

In law, inferences of causation are sometimes made through a structured process in which multiple participants play various roles, and make decisions concerning various logical components of the overall inference (such as legal rules, policy objectives, presumptions, evidence, burdens of proof and findings of fact). This article illustrates such a process using empirical research into compensation decisions in the USA for injuries allegedly caused by vaccinations. Empirical research into actual legal processes is essential, in order to discover how various players approach their sub-tasks of decisionmaking. It also provides insights for areas outside of law, such as non-monotonic logic, cognitive science, sociology and artificial intelligence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]