| Abstract: | Reports an error in "Do We Need Algebraic-Like Computations? A Reply to Bonatti, Pena, Nespor, and Mehler (2004)" by Pierre Perruchet, Ronald Peereman, and Michael D. Tyler (Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2006May], 135(2), 322-326). The page numbers that Dr. Perruchet cited from Dr. Bonatti et al.'s article were printed incorrectly. These page numbers should appear as follows in the correction. (The following abstract of this article originally appeared in record 2006-06642-011.) L. L. Bonatti, M. Pena, M. Nespor, and J. Mehler (see record 2006-06642-010) argued that P. Perruchet, M. D. Tyler, N. Galland, and R. Peereman (see record 2004-21166-008) confused the notions of segmentation and generalization by ignoring the evidence for generalization in M. Pena, L. L. Bonatti, M. Nespor, and J. Mehler (see record 2002-06215-001). In this reply, the authors reformulate and complement their initial arguments, showing that their way of dealing with segmentation and generalization is not due to confusion or ignorance but rather to the fact that the tests used in Pena et al. make it likely that neither segmentation nor generalization were captured in their experiments. Finally, the authors address the challenge posed by Pena et al. of accounting for the whole pattern of their results without invoking rule-based, algebraic-like computations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
