| Abstract: | Goddard and Allan (1988) suggest that the Alloy and Tabachnik (1984) covariation assessment model is too vague to make specific predictions concerning subjects' covariation assessments and, thus, that it is not useful in integrating the animal and human literature. In this reply, I address the general issue of the model's testability and predictive power and discuss specific examples of experimental findings that Goddard and Allan claim are inconsistent with the model. I show that two themes characterize their examples of "inconsistent" empirical findings and that both of these themes are based on an inadequate understanding of our framework. I also illustrate that their claims that we misinterpreted literature are unjustified. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
