Risks of drawing inferences about cognitive processes from model fits to individual versus average performance

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 403-408

  Estes, W K ^a   Maddox, W Todd ^b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 25644458401     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03193784     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. ASHBY, F. G., MADDOX, W. T., & LEE, W. W. (1994). On the dangers of averaging across subjects when using multidimensional scaling or the similarity-choice model. Psychological Science, 5, 144-151.
2. BROWN, S., & HEATHCOTE, A. (2003). Bias in exponential and power function fits due to noise: Comment on Myung, Kim, and Pitt. Memory & Cognition, 31, 656-661.
3. BRYK, A. S., & RAUDENBUSH, S. W. (1987). Application of hierarchical linear models to assessing change. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 147-158.
4. EBBINGHAUS, H. (1964). On memory: A contribution to experimental psychology (H. A. Ruger & C. E. Bussenius, Trans.). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1885)
5. ESTES, W. K. (1956). The problem of inference from curves based on group data. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 134-140.
6. ESTES, W. K. (1994). Classification and cognition. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. ESTES, W. K. (2002). Traps in the route to models of memory and decision. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 3-25.
8. ESTES, W. K., & MADDOX, W. T. (2002). On the processes underlying stimulus-familiarity effects in recognition of words and non-words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 28, 1003-1018.
9. JACOBY, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 30, 513-554.
10. MADDOX, W. T. (1999). On the dangers of averaging across observers when comparing decision bound models and generalized context models of categorization. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 354-374.
11. MADDOX, W. T., & ESTES, W. K. (2004). Predicting true patterns of cognitive performance from noisy data. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1129-1135.
12. MURDOCK, B. B., & KAHANA, M. J. (1993). Analysis of the list-strength effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 19, 689-697.
13. MYUNG, I. J. (2000). The importance of complexity in model selection. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 190-204.
14. MYUNG, I. J. (2003). Tutorial on maximum likelihood estimation. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 47, 90-100.
15. MYUNG, I. J., KIM, C., & PITT, M. A. (2000). Toward an explanation of the power law artifact: Insights from response surface analysis. Memory & Cognition, 28, 832-840.
16. PITT, M. A., MYUNG, I. J., & ZHANG, S. (2002). Toward a method of selecting among computational models of cognition. Psychological Review, 109, 412-491.
17. RATCLIFF, R., CLARK, S. E., & SHIFFRIN, R. M. (1990). List-strength effect: I. Data and discussion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 163-178.
18. SHIFFRIN, R. M., HUBER, D. E., & MARINELLI, K. (1995). Effects of category length and strength on familiarity in recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 267- 287.
19. SHIFFRIN, R. M., RATCLIFF, R., & CLARK, S. E. (1990). List-strength effect: II. Theoretical mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 179-195.
20. YONELINAS, A. P. (1994). Receiver-operating characteristics in recognition memory: Evidence for a dual-process model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 1341-1354.