Abstract Stephens, Matzke, and Hayes (SMH; 2019) used state-trace analysis to re-analyze databases of studies of reasoning and category learning. They found that many behavioral dissociations that had been viewed as support for distinct cognitive processes (or systems) were consistent with the operation of only one latent psychological variable. Ashby (2019) discussed several concerns about the application and interpretation of state-trace analysis in relation to the COVIS dual-systems model of category learning. The current reply addresses these concerns, showing that Ashby’s arguments reflect a misunderstanding of some aspects of state-trace analysis and a misrepresentation of claims made by SMH. We do not claim that state-trace analysis is the final arbiter of competing theories about cognitive systems, and do not assert that it directly assesses model parsimony. Nevertheless, we argue that state-trace analysis is an important advance over existing methods for evaluating claims about unobservable psychological processes based on ordinal data patterns, and is a useful tool as part of theory testing.

中文翻译：

---

状态跟踪分析 — 误传和误解：回复 Ashby (2019)

摘要 Stephens、Matzke 和 Hayes (SMH；2019) 使用状态跟踪分析重新分析推理和类别学习研究的数据库。他们发现，许多被视为支持不同认知过程（或系统）的行为分离只与一个潜在心理变量的运作一致。Ashby (2019) 讨论了与类别学习的 COVIS 双系统模型相关的状态跟踪分析的应用和解释的几个问题。当前的答复解决了这些问题，表明阿什比的论点反映了对状态跟踪分析某些方面的误解以及对 SMH 声明的误传。我们并不声称状态跟踪分析是关于认知系统的竞争理论的最终仲裁者，并且不要断言它直接评估模型简约性。尽管如此，我们认为状态跟踪分析是对基于有序数据模式的不可观察心理过程的评估的现有方法的重要进步，并且是作为理论测试的一部分的有用工具。