Abstract
I will respond to three kinds of issues raised by the critique of Kaput, Sims-Knight, and Clement (1985): First, narrow issues restricted to my paper; second, broad issues related by the critique to my paper; and third, the polemical nature of the critique. I will argue that the narrow issues arose mostly, if not entirely, out of confusion over what I meant to say-confusion for which I accept some of the responsibility. Next, I will support the authors' positions on the broad issues (the relative value of behavioristic and cognitive modeling approaches) and argue that my paper is quite consistent with, rather than opposed to, their positions. Finally, I will argue for the value of spirited exchanges in scholarly journals, but I'll also suggest that critiques and responses can easily contain unproductive pitfalls, as this critique did, and that ca re must be taken lest one poison the atmosphere. Let me quickly add that this particular exchange has resulted in both a keener understanding of the research issues and the enjoyable prospect of future collaborative efforts.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
