State-trace analysis — Misrepresented and misunderstood: Reply to Ashby (2019)
Authors:
- Rachel G. StephensRSRachel G. Stephens
- Dora MatzkeDMDora Matzke
- Brett K. HayesBHBrett K. Hayes
- 1 June 2020
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Mathematical Psychology
- Vol. 96
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
Funding Information
- Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
- Australian Research Council
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- Disappearing dissociations in experimental psychology: Using state-trace analysis to test for multiple processesJournal of Mathematical Psychology, 2019
- When more data steer us wrong: replications with the wrong dependent measure perpetuate erroneous conclusionsPsychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2014
- State-trace analysis can be an appropriate tool for assessing the number of cognitive systems: A reply to Ashby (2014)Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2014
- Is state-trace analysis an appropriate tool for assessing the number of cognitive systems?Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2014
- On the interpretation of removable interactions: A survey of the field 33 years after LoftusMemory & Cognition, 2011
- Systems of Category Learning2011
- Two Is Not Always Better Than OnePerspectives on Psychological Science, 2009
- When a good fit can be badTrends in Cognitive Sciences, 2002
- Attention, similarity, and the identification–categorization relationship.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1986
- On interpretation of interactionsMemory & Cognition, 1978