TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing the Belief Bias Effect With ROCs
T2 - Reply to Dube, Rotello, and Heit (2010)
AU - Klauer, Karl Christoph
AU - Kellen, David
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2011 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2011/1
Y1 - 2011/1
N2 - Dube, Rotello, and Heit (2010) argued (a) that the so-called receiver operating characteristic is nonlinear for data on belief bias in syllogistic reasoning; (b) that their data are inconsistent with Klauer, Musch, and Naumer's (2000) model of belief bias; (c) that their data are inconsistent with any of the existing accounts of belief bias and only consistent with a theory provided by signal detection theory; and (d) that in fact, belief bias is a response bias effect. In this reply, we present reanalyses of Dube et al.'s data and of old data suggesting (a) that the receiver operating characteristic is linear for binary " valid" versus " invalid" responses, as employed by the bulk of research in this field; (b) that Klauer et al.'s model describes the old data significantly better than does Dube et al.'s model and that it describes Dube et al.'s data somewhat better than does Dube et al.'s model; (c) that Dube et al.'s data are consistent with the account of belief bias by misinterpreted necessity, whereas Dube et al.'s signal detection model does not fit their data; and (d) that belief bias is more than a response bias effect.
AB - Dube, Rotello, and Heit (2010) argued (a) that the so-called receiver operating characteristic is nonlinear for data on belief bias in syllogistic reasoning; (b) that their data are inconsistent with Klauer, Musch, and Naumer's (2000) model of belief bias; (c) that their data are inconsistent with any of the existing accounts of belief bias and only consistent with a theory provided by signal detection theory; and (d) that in fact, belief bias is a response bias effect. In this reply, we present reanalyses of Dube et al.'s data and of old data suggesting (a) that the receiver operating characteristic is linear for binary " valid" versus " invalid" responses, as employed by the bulk of research in this field; (b) that Klauer et al.'s model describes the old data significantly better than does Dube et al.'s model and that it describes Dube et al.'s data somewhat better than does Dube et al.'s model; (c) that Dube et al.'s data are consistent with the account of belief bias by misinterpreted necessity, whereas Dube et al.'s signal detection model does not fit their data; and (d) that belief bias is more than a response bias effect.
KW - Belief bias
KW - Multinomial models
KW - Reasoning
KW - Signal detection models
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79251516094&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79251516094&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1037/a0020698
DO - 10.1037/a0020698
M3 - Comment/Debate/Erratum
C2 - 21244192
AN - SCOPUS:79251516094
SN - 0033-295X
VL - 118
SP - 164
EP - 173
JO - Psychological review
JF - Psychological review
IS - 1
ER -