<p>This is called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc" rel="nofollow noreferrer">post hoc ergo propter hoc</a> fallacy.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin: 'after this, therefore because of this') is an informal fallacy that states: &quot;Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-11-14T12:50:15.823Z
2020-11-14T12:50:15.823Z
stackzebra
<p>This is informally referred to as the <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00888" rel="nofollow noreferrer">illusion of causality</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Illusions of causality occur when people develop the belief that there
is a causal connection between two events that are actually unrelated.
Such illusions have been proposed to underlie pseudoscience and
superstitious thinking, sometimes leading to disastrous consequences
in relation to critical life areas, such as health, finances, and
wellbeing.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is a cognitive error in the way humans <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_reasoning#Inferring_cause_and_effect" rel="nofollow noreferrer">infer cause and effect</a>.</p>
<p>The example that I'm most familiar with is in medical quackery.  Suppose someone is experiencing constipation.  They try some advice from friends: Go for a long walk, eat some prunes, massage their stomach, use magnesium supplements.  Then they try more questionable solutions: Probiotics, colon hydrotherapy, acupuncture, herbal medicines.  At some point during the process, the constipation is relieved, and the patient naturally concludes that whatever treatment immediately preceded this event must have been the cure.  They &quot;swear by this treatment&quot; from then on, failing to consider that prior treatments may have needed more time to take effect, that other activities not considered treatments may have affected the results (eg, regular exercise, dietary changes), or simply the mere passage of time.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-11-14T11:26:56.017Z
How about "causality bias"? The human brain seems to have a strong bias towards discovering causality, because causality can be used to manipulate the environment, which is an evolutionary advantage.
user1934212
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-11-14T17:41:30.917Z
Yes, I believe that is a synonym (see here the terms are used interchangeably: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1747021818755326).
Arnon Weinberg
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-25T06:37:11.597Z
A related term worth mentioning is [magical thinking](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking).  And another well-known example of the illusion of causality is Skinner's [superstitious pigeons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superstition#Behaviorism_perspective).
Arnon Weinberg
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-11-13T18:31:20.147Z
2020-11-13T18:31:20.147Z
Arnon Weinberg
<p>What is the correct scientific term for the tendency to wrongfully relate arbitrary observations to a significant event, just because they occurred in temporal or spatial proximity?</p>
<p>Most recently I have observed this error in a discussion about an unsolved killing, where a participant was quite sure that her observation of a black van in a far away town was related to the killing, for the single reason that it occurred around the same time.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-11-10T21:45:41.860Z
Similar to: [Perfect events in a random world?](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/q/21282/7001)
Arnon Weinberg
<perception><terminology><bias><human-error><causal-inference>
Term for the tendency to relate events that occurred in proximity?
user1934212
# Term for the tendency to relate events that occurred in proximity?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-11-09)

What is the correct scientific term for the tendency to wrongfully relate arbitrary observations to a significant event, just because they occurred in temporal or spatial proximity?

Most recently I have observed this error in a discussion about an unsolved killing, where a participant was quite sure that her observation of a black van in a far away town was related to the killing, for the single reason that it occurred around the same time.

**Tags:** perception, terminology, bias, human-error, causal-inference

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Similar to: [Perfect events in a random world?](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/q/21282/7001)  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2020-11-13. Score: 3 | Accepted answer

This is informally referred to as the [illusion of causality](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00888):

> Illusions of causality occur when people develop the belief that there
> is a causal connection between two events that are actually unrelated.
> Such illusions have been proposed to underlie pseudoscience and
> superstitious thinking, sometimes leading to disastrous consequences
> in relation to critical life areas, such as health, finances, and
> wellbeing.

This is a cognitive error in the way humans [infer cause and effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_reasoning#Inferring_cause_and_effect).

The example that I'm most familiar with is in medical quackery. Suppose someone is experiencing constipation. They try some advice from friends: Go for a long walk, eat some prunes, massage their stomach, use magnesium supplements. Then they try more questionable solutions: Probiotics, colon hydrotherapy, acupuncture, herbal medicines. At some point during the process, the constipation is relieved, and the patient naturally concludes that whatever treatment immediately preceded this event must have been the cure. They "swear by this treatment" from then on, failing to consider that prior treatments may have needed more time to take effect, that other activities not considered treatments may have affected the results (eg, regular exercise, dietary changes), or simply the mere passage of time.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: How about "causality bias"? The human brain seems to have a strong bias towards discovering causality, because causality can be used to manipulate the environment, which is an evolutionary advantage.  
> **username_1**: Yes, I believe that is a synonym (see here the terms are used interchangeably: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1747021818755326).  
> **username_1**: A related term worth mentioning is [magical thinking](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking).  And another well-known example of the illusion of causality is Skinner's [superstitious pigeons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superstition#Behaviorism_perspective).  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2020-11-14. Score: 1

This is called [post hoc ergo propter hoc](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc) fallacy.

> Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin: 'after this, therefore because of this') is an informal fallacy that states: "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X."


---

