ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025
Identifying similarity- and rule-based processes in quantitative judgments: A multi-method approach combining cognitive modeling and eye tracking.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Food, mammals, & countries: Stimuli, their pairwise similarities, and MDS dimension values for modeling judgment, categorization, and memory in three real-world domains.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Intuitive and deliberate decisions can be accounted for by the same cognitive process model.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Disentangling Perceptual and Process-Related Sources of Behavioral Variability in Categorization.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Quantitative judgments have been suggested to result from a mixture of similarity- and rule-based processing. People can judge an object's criterion value based on the object's similarity to previously experienced exemplars and based on a rule that integrates the object's cues like a linear regression. In order to better understand these processes, the present work combines cognitive modeling and eye tracking and tests whether people who rely more on the similarity to exemplars also look more at the exemplar locations on the screen. In two eye-tracking studies, participants learned to assign each of four exemplars to a different screen corner and criterion value and then judged the criterion value of briefly presented test stimuli. Eye tracking measured participants' gazes to the now empty exemplar locations (a phenomenon called looking-at-nothing); cognitive modeling of the test phase judgments quantified participants' reliance on a similarity- over a rule-based process. Participants showed more similarity use and more looking-at-nothing in the study in which the cues were linked to the criterion by a multiplicative function than in the study with an additive cue-criterion link. Focusing on the study with a multiplicative environment, participants relying more on the similarity to exemplars also showed more looking-at-nothing (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.