Due process in dual process: Model-recovery simulations of decision-bound strategy analysis in category learning
Copyright © 2018 Cognitive Science Society, Inc. All rights reserved.
Reason for embargo
Under embargo until 23 March 2019 in compliance with publisher policy.
Behavioral evidence for the COVIS dual-process model of category learning has been widely reported in over a hundred publications (Ashby and 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 and 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.
This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Wiley via the DOI in this record.
Published online 23 March 2018.