On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models
Identifieur interne : 001088 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001087; suivant : 001089On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models
Auteurs : Axel Buchner ; Edgar ErdfelderSource :
- Consciousness and Cognition [ 1053-8100 ] ; 1996.
Abstract
In this article, we analyze both M. J. Wainwright and E. M. Reingold's (1996) view of the process dissociation measurement models presented by A. Buchner, E. Erdfelder, and B. Vaterrodt-Plunnecke (1995) and their suggestions on that topic. This analysis reveals a number of problems in Wainwright and Reingold's approach. Some of these problems are more subtle than others, but they are nevertheless consequential. Thus, researchers working with the process dissociation procedure should be aware of these problems.
Url:
DOI: 10.1006/ccog.1996.0034
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352BLe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models</title><author><name sortKey="Buchner, Axel" sort="Buchner, Axel" uniqKey="Buchner A" first="Axel" last="Buchner">Axel Buchner</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Psychology, University of Trier, Trier, Germany</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Erdfelder, Edgar" sort="Erdfelder, Edgar" uniqKey="Erdfelder E" first="Edgar" last="Erdfelder">Edgar Erdfelder</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Psychology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B</idno><date when="1996" year="1996">1996</date><idno type="doi">10.1006/ccog.1996.0034</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001088</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001088</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models</title><author><name sortKey="Buchner, Axel" sort="Buchner, Axel" uniqKey="Buchner A" first="Axel" last="Buchner">Axel Buchner</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Psychology, University of Trier, Trier, Germany</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Erdfelder, Edgar" sort="Erdfelder, Edgar" uniqKey="Erdfelder E" first="Edgar" last="Erdfelder">Edgar Erdfelder</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Psychology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Consciousness and Cognition</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">YCCOG</title><idno type="ISSN">1053-8100</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1996">1996</date><biblScope unit="volume">5</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="581">581</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="594">594</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">1053-8100</idno></series><idno type="istex">016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1006/ccog.1996.0034</idno><idno type="PII">S1053-8100(96)90034-3</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1053-8100</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">In this article, we analyze both M. J. Wainwright and E. M. Reingold's (1996) view of the process dissociation measurement models presented by A. Buchner, E. Erdfelder, and B. Vaterrodt-Plunnecke (1995) and their suggestions on that topic. This analysis reveals a number of problems in Wainwright and Reingold's approach. Some of these problems are more subtle than others, but they are nevertheless consequential. Thus, researchers working with the process dissociation procedure should be aware of these problems.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>elsevier</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Axel Buchner</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Psychology, University of Trier, Trier, Germany</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Edgar Erdfelder</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Psychology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>Full-length article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>In this article, we analyze both M. J. Wainwright and E. M. Reingold's (1996) view of the process dissociation measurement models presented by A. Buchner, E. Erdfelder, and B. Vaterrodt-Plunnecke (1995) and their suggestions on that topic. This analysis reveals a number of problems in Wainwright and Reingold's approach. Some of these problems are more subtle than others, but they are nevertheless consequential. Thus, researchers working with the process dissociation procedure should be aware of these problems.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>5.924</score><pdfVersion>1.1</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>399 x 633 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>false</refBibsNative><keywordCount>0</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>515</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>5861</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>33873</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>14</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>77</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models</title><pii><json:string>S1053-8100(96)90034-3</json:string></pii><refBibs><json:item><author><json:item><name>A Buchner</name></json:item><json:item><name>E Erdfelder</name></json:item><json:item><name>M Steffens</name></json:item><json:item><name>H Martensen</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Memory and Cognition</title></host><title>The nature of memory processes underlying recognition judgments in the process dissociation procedure</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A Buchner</name></json:item><json:item><name>E Erdfelder</name></json:item><json:item><name>B Vaterrodt-Plü Nnecke</name></json:item></author><host><volume>124</volume><pages><last>160</last><first>137</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Experimental Psychology: General</title><publicationDate>1995</publicationDate></host><title>Toward unbiased measurement of conscious and unconscious memory processes within the process dissociation framework</title><publicationDate>1995</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A Buchner</name></json:item><json:item><name>W Wippich</name></json:item></author><host><volume>5</volume><pages><last>220</last><first>197</first></pages><author></author><title>Consciousness and Cognition</title><publicationDate>1996</publicationDate></host><title>Unconscious gender bias in fame judgments?</title><publicationDate>1996</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N Cowan</name></json:item><json:item><name>M,A Stadler</name></json:item></author><host><volume>125</volume><pages><last>200</last><first>195</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Experimental Psychology: General</title><publicationDate>1996</publicationDate></host><title>Estimating unconscious processes: Implications of a general class of models</title><publicationDate>1996</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>E Erdfelder</name></json:item><json:item><name>A Buchner</name></json:item></author><title>Process dissociation measurement models: Good versus better</title><publicationDate>1995</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>X Hu</name></json:item><json:item><name>W,H Batchelder</name></json:item></author><host><volume>59</volume><pages><last>48</last><first>21</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychometrika</title><publicationDate>1994</publicationDate></host><title>The statistical analysis of general processing tree models with the EM algorithm</title><publicationDate>1994</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L,L Jacoby</name></json:item></author><host><volume>30</volume><pages><last>541</last><first>513</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Memory and Language</title><publicationDate>1991</publicationDate></host><title>A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory</title><publicationDate>1991</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S Joordens</name></json:item><json:item><name>P,M Merikle</name></json:item></author><host><volume>122</volume><pages><last>467</last><first>462</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Experimental Psychology: General</title><publicationDate>1993</publicationDate></host><title>Independence or redundancy? Two models of conscious and unconscious influences</title><publicationDate>1993</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S.-I Komatsu</name></json:item><json:item><name>P Graf</name></json:item><json:item><name>B Uttl</name></json:item></author><host><volume>7</volume><pages><last>40</last><first>19</first></pages><author></author><title>European Journal of Cognitive Psychology</title><publicationDate>1995</publicationDate></host><title>Process-dissociation procedure: Core assumptions fail, sometimes</title><publicationDate>1995</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D,M Riefer</name></json:item><json:item><name>W,H Batchelder</name></json:item></author><host><volume>95</volume><pages><last>339</last><first>318</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Review</title><publicationDate>1988</publicationDate></host><title>Multinomial modeling and the measurement of cognitive processes</title><publicationDate>1988</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M Verfaellie</name></json:item><json:item><name>J,R Treadwell</name></json:item></author><host><volume>7</volume><pages><last>13</last><first>5</first></pages><author></author><title>Neuropsychology</title><publicationDate>1993</publicationDate></host><title>Status of recognition memory in amnesia</title><publicationDate>1993</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M,J Wainwright</name></json:item><json:item><name>E,M Reingold</name></json:item></author><host><volume>5</volume><pages><last>254</last><first>232</first></pages><author></author><title>Consciousness and Cognition</title><publicationDate>1996</publicationDate></host><title>Response-bias correction in the process dissociation procedure: Approaches, assumptions, and evaluation</title><publicationDate>1996</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A,P Yonelinas</name></json:item><json:item><name>G Regehr</name></json:item><json:item><name>L,L Jacoby</name></json:item></author><host><volume>34</volume><pages><last>835</last><first>821</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Memory and Language</title><publicationDate>1995</publicationDate></host><title>Incorporating response bias in a dual-process theory of memory</title><publicationDate>1995</publicationDate></json:item></refBibs><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>5</volume><pii><json:string>S1053-8100(00)X0021-9</json:string></pii><pages><last>594</last><first>581</first></pages><issn><json:string>1053-8100</json:string></issn><issue>4</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><title>Consciousness and Cognition</title><publicationDate>1996</publicationDate></host><categories><wos><json:string>social science</json:string><json:string>psychology, experimental</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>health sciences</json:string><json:string>psychology & cognitive sciences</json:string><json:string>experimental psychology</json:string></scienceMetrix></categories><publicationDate>1996</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1996</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1006/ccog.1996.0034</json:string></doi><id>016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B</id><score>1.6693987</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models</title><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><availability><p>©1996 Academic Press</p></availability><date>1996</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="content">Section title: Regular Article</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Axel</forename><surname>Buchner</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Psychology, University of Trier, Trier, Germany</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">Edgar</forename><surname>Erdfelder</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Psychology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Consciousness and Cognition</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">YCCOG</title><idno type="pISSN">1053-8100</idno><idno type="PII">S1053-8100(00)X0021-9</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1996"></date><biblScope unit="volume">5</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="581">581</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="594">594</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1006/ccog.1996.0034</idno><idno type="PII">S1053-8100(96)90034-3</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1996</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>In this article, we analyze both M. J. Wainwright and E. M. Reingold's (1996) view of the process dissociation measurement models presented by A. Buchner, E. Erdfelder, and B. Vaterrodt-Plunnecke (1995) and their suggestions on that topic. This analysis reveals a number of problems in Wainwright and Reingold's approach. Some of these problems are more subtle than others, but they are nevertheless consequential. Thus, researchers working with the process dissociation procedure should be aware of these problems.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1996">Published</change><change xml:id="refBibs-istex" who="#ISTEX-API" when="2016-11-20">References added</change><change xml:id="refBibs-istex" who="#ISTEX-API" when="2017-01-13">References added</change><change xml:id="refBibs-istex" who="#ISTEX-API" when="2017-01-16">References added</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Elsevier converted-article found"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//ES//DTD journal article DTD version 4.5.2//EN//XML" URI="art452.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><converted-article version="4.5.2" docsubtype="fla" xml:lang="en"><item-info><jid>YCCOG</jid><aid>90034</aid><ce:pii>S1053-8100(96)90034-3</ce:pii><ce:doi>10.1006/ccog.1996.0034</ce:doi><ce:copyright type="full-transfer" year="1996">Academic Press</ce:copyright></item-info><head><ce:dochead><ce:textfn>Regular Article</ce:textfn></ce:dochead><ce:title>On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models</ce:title><ce:author-group><ce:author><ce:given-name>Axel</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Buchner</ce:surname><ce:cross-ref refid="A1"><ce:sup>a</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>Edgar</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Erdfelder</ce:surname><ce:cross-ref refid="A2"><ce:sup>b</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:affiliation id="A1"><ce:label>a</ce:label><ce:textfn>Department of Psychology, University of Trier, Trier, Germany</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation><ce:affiliation id="A2"><ce:label>b</ce:label><ce:textfn>Department of Psychology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation></ce:author-group><ce:date-received day="16" month="9" year="1996"></ce:date-received><ce:abstract><ce:section-title>Abstract</ce:section-title><ce:abstract-sec><ce:simple-para>In this article, we analyze both M. J. Wainwright and E. M. Reingold's (1996) view of the process dissociation measurement models presented by A. Buchner, E. Erdfelder, and B. Vaterrodt-Plunnecke (1995) and their suggestions on that topic. This analysis reveals a number of problems in Wainwright and Reingold's approach. Some of these problems are more subtle than others, but they are nevertheless consequential. Thus, researchers working with the process dissociation procedure should be aware of these problems.</ce:simple-para></ce:abstract-sec></ce:abstract></head></converted-article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Axel</namePart><namePart type="family">Buchner</namePart><affiliation>Department of Psychology, University of Trier, Trier, Germany</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Edgar</namePart><namePart type="family">Erdfelder</namePart><affiliation>Department of Psychology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="Full-length article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1996</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1996</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">In this article, we analyze both M. J. Wainwright and E. M. Reingold's (1996) view of the process dissociation measurement models presented by A. Buchner, E. Erdfelder, and B. Vaterrodt-Plunnecke (1995) and their suggestions on that topic. This analysis reveals a number of problems in Wainwright and Reingold's approach. Some of these problems are more subtle than others, but they are nevertheless consequential. Thus, researchers working with the process dissociation procedure should be aware of these problems.</abstract><note type="content">Section title: Regular Article</note><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Consciousness and Cognition</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>YCCOG</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><originInfo><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">199612</dateIssued></originInfo><identifier type="ISSN">1053-8100</identifier><identifier type="PII">S1053-8100(00)X0021-9</identifier><part><date>199612</date><detail type="volume"><number>5</number><caption>vol.</caption></detail><detail type="issue"><number>4</number><caption>no.</caption></detail><extent unit="issue pages"><start>395</start><end>606</end></extent><extent unit="pages"><start>581</start><end>594</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1006/ccog.1996.0034</identifier><identifier type="PII">S1053-8100(96)90034-3</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">©1996 Academic Press</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>ELSEVIER</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Academic Press, ©1996</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Rhénanie/explor/UnivTrevesV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001088 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001088 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Rhénanie
|area= UnivTrevesV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:016EEE6713386B277326C871C75484CA4E90352B
|texte= On Assumptions of, Relations between, and Evaluations of Some Process Dissociation Measurement Models
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |