Response Bias Correction in the Process Dissociation Procedure: Approaches, Assumptions, and Evaluation
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Consciousness and Cognition 5 (1-2):232-254 (1996)
Buchner, Erdfelder, and Vaterrodt-Plunnecke (1995) advocated an exposition of the process dissociation procedure within the framework of multinomial modeling. Among the misleading aspects of this exposition is its tendency to obscure the overlap between processes. In contrast, clarifying these crucial interactions leads to a general classification of response bias corrections to the process dissociation procedure. This scheme, in which corrective models are classified on the basis of process interactions, clarifies the assumptions underlying previously proposed corrections. As an illustration of the framework, three such corrections are derived. These corrective models are evaluated by applying them to the data reported by Buchner et al. (1995). © 1996 Academic Press, Inc.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
D. Lamy, L. Mudrik & L. DeoueLl (2008). Unconscious Auditory Information Can Prime Visual Word Processing: A Process-Dissociation Procedure Study☆. Consciousness and Cognition 17 (3):688-698.
Alan J. Lambert, B. Keith Payne & Larry L. Jacoby (2004). Accuracy and Error: Constraints on Process Models in Social Psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):350-351.
Troy A. W. Visser & Philip M. Merikle (1999). Conscious and Unconscious Processes: The Effects of Motivation. Consciousness and Cognition 8 (1):94-113.
A. Buchner (1997). Consciousness, Intention, and the Process Dissociation Procedure. Sprache and Kognition 16:176-182.
Jeffrey Toth, Eyal M. Reingold & Larry Jacoby (1995). A Response to Graf and Komatsu's (1994) Critique of the Process-Dissociation Procedure: When is Caution Necessary? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 7:113-130.
Axel Buchner & Edgar Erdfelder (1996). On Assumptions of, Relations Between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models. Consciousness and Cognition 5 (4):581-594.
A. Buchner, E. Erdfelder & B. Vaterrodt-Plunnecke (1995). Toward Unbiased Measurement of Conscious and Unconscious Memory Processes Within the Process Dissociation Framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology 124 (2):137-60.
Bianca Vaterrodt-Plünnecke, Thomas Krüger & Jürgen Bredenkamp (2002). Process-Dissociation Procedure: A Testable Model for Considering Assumptions About the Stochastic Relation Between Consciously Controlled and Automatic Processes. Experimental Psychology 49 (1):3-26.
Eyal Reingold (1996). Response Bias Correction in the Process Dissociation Procedure: A Reevaluation? Consciousness and Cognition 5 (4):595-603.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #199,203 of 1,793,156 )
Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #89,602 of 1,793,156 )
How can I increase my downloads?