Abstract
In van der Helm and Leeuwenberg (1991, 1996, 1999; henceforth vdHL91, vdHL96, and vdHL99, respectively), we developed the holographic approach (HA) to goodness. Goodness refers to the detectability of single regularities and combinations of nested regularities, whether or not perturbed by noise. Olivers, Chater, and Watson (2004; henceforth OCW) argued that HA is inadequate on both theoretical and empirical grounds. In this reply to OCW, however, we not only show that HA is much more adequate than they suggested but also rebut their underlying complaint that HA is an ideal-observer theory that does not take implementational peculiarities of the human system into account. We first sketch the basics of HA’s goodness model to give a framework for addressing the latter issue. We then give an overview of HA’s theoretical and modeling ingredients to set the stage for our evaluation of OCW’s theoretical and empirical arguments.
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.
