Modeling competitions are a promising method for advancing psychological science. In this commentary to Erev et al. (Psychological Review, 2017, 124, p. 369), we highlight how this promise could be enhanced through modifying competition structures to produce insights more directly in line with the goals of promoting psychological knowledge. We argue that a single criterion on which models is compared limits the diversity of models entered into competitions, restricting the number and type of insights that can be gained consequently. We propose an alternative competition structure with multiple evaluative criteria and outline a quantitative selection method for choosing a winner. Our proposed competition structure has the advantages of (a) increasing the diversity of models entered, (b) incentivizing desirable qualities of models, (c) disambiguating competition winners, and (d) enhancing the impact and possible insights gained from competitions, all these while allowing flexibility for competition organizers to emphasize specific qualities of models. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

如何使用多标准比较程序来改进建模竞赛：对 Erev 等人的评论。(2017)。

建模比赛是推进心理科学的一种很有前途的方法。在这篇对 Erev 等人的评论中。(Psychological Review, 2017, 124, p. 369)，我们强调了如何通过修改竞争结构以更直接地产生符合促进心理知识的目标的洞察力来增强这一承诺。我们认为，比较模型的单一标准限制了参加比赛的模型的多样性，从而限制了由此获得的见解的数量和类型。我们提出了一种具有多种评估标准的替代竞争结构，并概述了一种用于选择获胜者的定量选择方法。我们提议的竞争结构具有以下优点：（a）增加输入模型的多样性，（b）激励模型的理想品质，(c) 消除比赛获胜者的歧义，以及 (d) 增强从比赛中获得的影响和可能的见解，同时允许比赛组织者灵活地强调模型的特定质量。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA，保留所有权利）。