| Abstract: | In D. Klahr's (see record 1994-24197-001) reply to J. Scharroo et al (see record 1994-24216-001), he ignored the basic critique on the hierarchy in the Klahr et al (see record 1984-05777-001) model of alphabetic retrieval. In this rejoinder, the modeling of alphabetic retrieval and the shape of response time curves with respect to the strong and weak tests and the alphabetic position effect is discussed. From discussion of these 2 points, it should be clear why Klahr did not deal with the main objections raised in Scharroo et al: (1) Klahr et al's (1983) response time curves did not show the predicted sawtooth shape and (2) there was no reason to assume an additional level (Level 1) in modeling alphabetic retrieval. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
