Safeguarding against bad luck when attempting to discredit a state-trace model

DOI10.1016/J.JMP.2018.12.003MaRDI QIDQ2332827zbMATH OpenOpenAlexWikidataFDO

Authors D. Bamber

Publication date 5 November 2019

Published in Journal of Mathematical Psychology (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2018.12.003

zbMATH Keywords

state-trace analysisadaptive methodpsychometric functionluckmonotonicity assumption

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Measurement and performance in psychology (91E45) Memory and learning in psychology (91E40)

Recommendations

• State-trace analysis -- misrepresented and misunderstood: reply to Ashby (2019)
• State-trace analysis misinterpreted and misapplied: reply to Stephens, Matzke, and Hayes (2019)
• State trace analysis: what it can and cannot do
• Length of the state trace: a method for partitioning model complexity
• Dial \(\hat{M}\) for monotonic: a kernel-based Bayesian approach to state-trace analysis

Cites work

• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3390139 (Why is no real title available?)
• A Bayesian approach to non-parametric monotone function estimation
• A statistical test of the equality of latent orders
• Bayes factors for state-trace analysis
• How many parameters can a model have and still be testable?
• Signed difference analysis: testing for structure under monotonicity

Cited in

(3)

• State-trace analysis misinterpreted and misapplied: reply to Stephens, Matzke, and Hayes (2019)
• Comparison of type I error and statistical power between state trace analysis and analysis of variance
• State trace analysis: what it can and cannot do

This page was built for publication: Safeguarding against bad luck when attempting to discredit a state-trace model

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q2332827)