Modeling alphabetic retrieval: Rejoinder to Klahr (1994).

Abstract

In D. Klahr's (1994) reply to J. Scharroo, E. Leeuwenberg, P. F. M. Stalmeier, and P. G. Vos (1994), he ignored the basic critique on the hierarchy in D. Klahr, W. G. Chase, and E. Lovelace's (1983) model of alphabetic retrieval. In this rejoinder, I discuss the modeling of alphabetic retrieval and the shape of response time (RT) curves with respect to the strong and weak tests and the alphabetic position effect. From discussion of these 2 points, it should be clear why D. Klahr (1994) did not deal with the main objections raised in J. Scharroo et al. (1994): (a) D. Klahr et al.'s (1983) RT curves did not show the predicted sawtooth shape and (b) there was no reason to assume an additional level (Level 1) in modeling alphabetic retrieval