A Formal Comparison of Model Variants for Performance Prediction

Proceedings of ICCM 2009 - 9th International Conference on Cognitive Modeling

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 288-293

  Jastrzembski, Tiffany S ^a   Gluck, Kevin A ^a  

^a AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive Plausibility; Mathematical Model; Model Comparison; Model Selection; Performance Prediction

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE PLAUSIBILITY; COGNITIVE SCIENCE; COMPARISON OF MODELS; EMPIRICAL DATA; GOODNESS OF FIT; MODEL SELECTION; MODELING COMPLEXITY; MODELS COMPARISONS; PERFORMANCE PREDICTION; PREDICTIVE CAPABILITIES;

EID: 81855207210     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (13)

1. Anderson, J. R. & Schunn, C. D. (2000). Implications of the ACT-R learning theory: No magic bullets. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology: Educational design and cognitive science, Vol. 5. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Bahrick, H. P., Bahrick, L. E., Bahrick, A. S., & Bahrick, P. O. (1993). Maintenance of foreign language vocabulary and the spacing effect. Psychological Science, 4, 316-321.
3. Bean, C. H. (1912). The curve of forgetting. Archives of Psychology, 2, 1-47.
4. Browne, M. W. (2000). Cross-validation methods. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 108-132.
5. Cutting, J. E. (2000). Accuracy, scope, and flexibility of models. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 3-19.
6. Dudek, S. M., & Bear, M. F. (1992). Homosynaptic long-term depression in area CA1 of hippocampus and effects of N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor blockade. Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences, 89, 4363-4367.
7. Glenberg, A. M. (1976). Monotonic and nonmonotonic lag effects in paired-associate and recognition memory paradigms. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 15, 1-16.
8. Grünwald, P. (2000). Model selection based on minimum description length. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 133-152.
9. Jastrzembski, T. S. (2008). Cognitive model comparisons of the spacing effect: Criteria that account for complexity, generalization, and prediction capabilities. Society for Mathematical Psychology annual meeting, Washington, D. C.
10. Jastrzembski, T. S., Gluck, K. A., & Gunzelmann, G. (2006). Knowledge tracing and prediction of future trainee performance. I/ITSEC annual meetings, Orlando, December 4-7.
11. Myung, J. (2000). The importance of complexity in model selection. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 190-204.
12. Pavlik, P. I., & Anderson, J. R. (2005). Practice and forgetting effects on vocabulary memory: An activation-based model of the spacing effect. Cognitive Science, 29, 559-586.
13. Roberts, S., & Pashler, H. (2000). How persuasive is a good fit? A comment on theory testing. Psychological Review, 107, 358-367.