Exemplar models are often used in research on multiple-cue judgments to describe the underlying process of participants’ responses. In these experiments, participants are repeatedly presented with the same exemplars (e.g., poisonous bugs) and instructed to memorize these exemplars and their corresponding criterion values (e.g., the toxicity of a bug). We propose that there are two possible outcomes when participants judge one of the already learned exemplars in some later block of the experiment. They either have memorized the exemplar and their respective criterion value and are thus able to recall the exact value, or they have not learned the exemplar and thus have to judge its criterion value, as if it was a new stimulus. We argue that psychologically, the judgments of participants in a multiple-cue judgment experiment are a mixture of these two qualitatively distinct cognitive processes: judgment and recall. However, the cognitive modeling procedure usually applied does not make any distinction between these processes and the data generated by them. We investigated potential effects of disregarding the distinction between these two processes on the parameter recovery and the model fit of one exemplar model. We present results of a simulation as well as the reanalysis of five experimental data sets showing that the current combination of experimental design and modeling procedure can bias parameter estimates, impair their validity, and negatively affect the fit and predictive performance of the model. We also present a latent-mixture extension of the original model as a possible solution to these issues.

示例模型通常用于多线索判断的研究，以描述参与者反应的基本过程。在这些实验中，参与者被反复呈现相同的样本（例如，有毒的虫子），并被要求记住这些样本及其相应的标准值（例如，虫子的毒性）。我们建议，当参与者在实验的某个后期块中判断一个已经学过的示例时，有两种可能的结果。他们要么已经记住了样本及其各自的标准值，因此能够回忆起确切的值，或者他们没有学习过样本，因此不得不判断它的标准值，就好像它是一个新的刺激一样。我们认为，在心理上，多线索判断实验中参与者的判断是这两种性质不同的认知过程的混合：判断和回忆。然而，通常应用的认知建模程序不会对这些过程和它们生成的数据进行任何区分。我们研究了忽略这两个过程之间的区别对参数恢复和一个示例模型的模型拟合的潜在影响。我们展示了模拟的结果以及对五个实验数据集的重新分析，表明当前的实验设计和建模程序的组合可能会使参数估计产生偏差，削弱其有效性，并对模型的拟合和预测性能产生负面影响。