Plausible models of alphabetic search: Reply to Scharroo, Leeuwenberg, Stalmeier, and Vos (1994).

Abstract

D. Klahr, W. C. Chase, and E. Lovelace (1983) proposed a model of the cognitive processes involved in alphabetic retrieval in terms of a 2-level hierarchy of forward-linked associations. J. Seharroo, E. Leeuwenberg, P. F. M. Stalmeier, and P. G. Vos (1994) attempt to demonstrate that a simple associative model is more plausible, more parsimonious, and a better fit to the data than is Klahr et al.'s model. In this commentary I argue that Seharroo et al. misrepresent the way in which Klahr et al. evaluated their model and that they fail to demonstrate the superiority of a simple associative model. In addition, I suggest that a composite model that integrates the distinctive features of both models would advance our understanding of the process of alphabetic retrieval.