Identifying expectations about the strength of causal relationships

When we try to identify causal relationships, how strong do we expect that relationship to be? Bayesian models of causal induction rely on assumptions regarding people’s a priori beliefs about causal systems, with recent research focusing on people’s expectations about the strength of causes. These expectations are expressed in terms of prior probability distributions. While proposals about the form of such prior distributions have been made previously, many different distributions are possible, making it difficult to test such proposals exhaustively. In Experiment 1 we used iterated learning—a method in which participants make inferences about data generated based on their own responses in previous trials—to estimate participants’ prior beliefs about the strengths of causes. This method produced estimated prior distributions that were quite different from those previously proposed in the literature. Experiment 2 collected a large set of human judgments on the strength of causal relationships to be used as a benchmark for evaluating different models, using stimuli that cover a wider and more systematic set of contingencies than previous research. Using these judgments, we evaluated the predictions of various Bayesian models. The Bayesian model with priors estimated via iterated learning compared favorably against the others. Experiment 3 estimated participants’ prior beliefs concerning different causal systems, revealing key similarities in their expectations across diverse scenarios.     

Fitting direct covariance structures by the MSTRUCT modeling language of the CALIS procedure

This paper demonstrates the usefulness and flexibility of the general structural equation modelling (SEM) approach to fitting direct covariance patterns or structures (as opposed to fitting implied covariance structures from functional relationships among variables). In particular, the MSTRUCT modelling language (or syntax) of the CALIS procedure (SAS/STAT version 9.22 or later: SAS Institute, 2010) is used to illustrate the SEM approach. The MSTRUCT modelling language supports a direct covariance pattern specification of each covariance element. It also supports the input of additional independent and dependent parameters. Model tests, fit statistics, estimates, and their standard errors are then produced under the general SEM framework. By using numerical and computational examples, the following tests of basic covariance patterns are illustrated: sphericity, compound symmetry, and multiple‐group covariance patterns. Specification and testing of two complex correlation structures, the circumplex pattern and the composite direct product models with or without composite errors and scales, are also illustrated by the MSTRUCT syntax. It is concluded that the SEM approach offers a general and flexible modelling of direct covariance and correlation patterns. In conjunction with the use of SAS macros, the MSTRUCT syntax provides an easy‐to‐use interface for specifying and fitting complex covariance and correlation structures, even when the number of variables or parameters becomes large.     

A general proof of consistency of heuristic classification for cognitive diagnosis models

The Asymptotic Classification Theory of Cognitive Diagnosis (Chiu et al., 2009, Psychometrika, 74, 633–665) determined the conditions that cognitive diagnosis models must satisfy so that the correct assignment of examinees to proficiency classes is guaranteed when non‐parametric classification methods are used. These conditions have only been proven for the Deterministic Input Noisy Output AND gate model. For other cognitive diagnosis models, no theoretical legitimization exists for using non‐parametric classification techniques for assigning examinees to proficiency classes. The specific statistical properties of different cognitive diagnosis models require tailored proofs of the conditions of the Asymptotic Classification Theory of Cognitive Diagnosis for each individual model – a tedious undertaking in light of the numerous models presented in the literature. In this paper a different way is presented to address this task. The unified mathematical framework of general cognitive diagnosis models is used as a theoretical basis for a general proof that under mild regularity conditions any cognitive diagnosis model is covered by the Asymptotic Classification Theory of Cognitive Diagnosis.     

The exponential learning equation as a function of successful trials results in sigmoid performance

While the exponential learning equation, indicating a gradually diminishing improvement, is one of the standard equations to describe learning, a sigmoid behavior with initially increasing then decreasing improvement has also been suggested. Here we show that the sigmoid behavior is mathematically derived from the standard exponential equation when the independent variable of the equation is restricted to the successful trials alone. It is suggested that for tasks promoting success-based learning, performance is better described by the derived sigmoid curve.     

Beta-MPT: Multinomial processing tree models for addressing individual differences

Traditionally, multinomial processing tree (MPT) models are applied to groups of homogeneous participants, where all participants within a group are assumed to have identical MPT model parameter values. This assumption is unreasonable when MPT models are used for clinical assessment, and it often may be suspect for applications to ordinary psychological experiments. One method for dealing with parameter variability is to incorporate random effects assumptions into a model. This is achieved by assuming that participants’ parameters are drawn independently from some specified multivariate hyperdistribution. In this paper we explore the assumption that the hyperdistribution consists of independent beta distributions, one for each MPT model parameter. These beta-MPT models are ‘hierarchical models’, and their statistical inference is different from the usual approaches based on data aggregated over participants. The paper provides both classical (frequentist) and hierarchical Bayesian approaches to statistical inference for beta-MPT models. In simple cases the likelihood function can be obtained analytically; however, for more complex cases, Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithms are constructed to assist both approaches to inference. Examples based on clinical assessment studies are provided to demonstrate the advantages of hierarchical MPT models over aggregate analysis in the presence of individual differences.     

A Signal Detection Model for Multiple-Choice Exams

A model for multiple-choice exams is developed from a signal-detection perspective. A correct alternative in a multiple-choice exam can be viewed as being a signal embedded in noise (incorrect alternatives). Examinees are assumed to have perceptions of the plausibility of each alternative, and the decision process is to choose the most plausible alternative. It is also assumed that each examinee either knows or does not know each item. These assumptions together lead to a signal detection choice model for multiple-choice exams. The model can be viewed, statistically, as a mixture extension, with random mixing, of the traditional choice model, or similarly, as a grade-of-membership extension. A version of the model with extreme value distributions is developed, in which case the model simplifies to a mixture multinomial logit model with random mixing. The approach is shown to offer measures of item discrimination and difficulty, along with information about the relative plausibility of each of the alternatives. The model, parameters, and measures derived from the parameters are compared to those obtained with several commonly used item response theory models. An application of the model to an educational data set is presented.     

Strategic grouping in the spatial span memory task

Spatial short-term memory performance was examined in relation to participants’ strategies. A total of 20 adult participants viewed and reproduced sequences of locations that varied in length (five, six, seven, or eight locations) and spatial separability (a manipulation of the configurations). In trial-by-trial self-reports, participants described five types of strategies. Chunking the spatial sequences into groups of three or four locations was the sole strategy associated with increased accuracy. Participants demonstrated considerable variability in the strategies that they selected, suggesting that cognitive resources are allocated to strategy selection, execution, and monitoring in the spatial span task. Spatially separable sequences were more accurately recalled than nonseparable sequences, independent of strategic grouping, suggesting two levels of grouping in the spatial span task.