Assessing the distinguishability of models and the informativeness of data

• Published in: Cognitive psychology Vol. 49; no. 1; pp. 47 - 84
• Main Authors: Navarro, Daniel J., Pitt, Mark A., Myung, In Jae
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Amsterdam Elsevier Inc 01.08.2004; Elsevier; Academic Press
• Subjects: Biological and medical sciences; Cognition; Data; Data informativeness; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Human; Humans; Landscaping; Learning. Memory; Memory; Model distinguishability; Models, Psychological; Psychology; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; Retention (Psychology); Retention models; Data informativeness; Retention models; Model distinguishability; Landscaping; Human; Statistical method; Statistical analysis; Theoretical model; Memory; Cognition; Retention; Comparative study
• ISSN: 0010-0285; 1095-5623
• DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2003.11.001

A difficulty in the development and testing of psychological models is that they are typically evaluated solely on their ability to fit experimental data, with little consideration given to their ability to fit other possible data patterns. By examining how well model A fits data generated by model B, and vice versa (a technique that we call landscaping), much safer inferences can be made about the meaning of a model’s fit to data. We demonstrate the landscaping technique using four models of retention and 77 historical data sets, and show how the method can be used to: (1) evaluate the distinguishability of models, (2) evaluate the informativeness of data in distinguishing between models, and (3) suggest new ways to distinguish between models. The generality of the method is demonstrated in two other research areas (information integration and categorization), and its relationship to the important notion of model complexity is discussed.