Due process in dual process: Model-recovery simulations of decision-bound strategy analysis in category learning

Edmunds, C.E.R; Milton, F; Wills, A.J

Abstract

Behavioral evidence for the COVIS dual-process model of category learning has been widely reported in over a hundred publications (Ashby \& Valentin, 2016). It is generally accepted that the validity of such evidence depends on the accurate identification of individual participants' categorization strategies, a task that usually falls to Decision Bound analysis (Maddox \& Ashby, 1993). Here, we examine the accuracy of this analysis in a series of model-recovery simulations. In Simulation 1, over a third of simulated participants using an Explicit (conjunctive) strategy were misidentified as using a Procedural strategy. In Simulation 2, nearly all simulated participants using a Procedural strategy were misidentified as using an Explicit strategy. In Simulation 3, we re-examined a recently reported COVIS-supporting dissociation (Smith et al., 2014) and found that these misidentification errors permit an alternative, single-process, explanation of the results. Implications for due process in the future evaluation of dual-process theories, including recommendations for future practice, are discussed.

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Online Publication Date: Mar 23, 2018
• Publication Date: Jun 30, 2018
• Deposit Date: Feb 20, 2025
• Journal: Cognitive Science
• Print ISSN: 0364-0213
• Electronic ISSN: 1551-6709
• Publisher: Wiley
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 42
• Pages: 833-860
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12607
• Keywords: COVIS, decision-bound analysis, dual systems, categorization strategies
• Public URL: https://uwe-repository.worktribe.com/output/13780850
• Publisher URL: http://researchspace.bathspa.ac.uk/15019/