REPLY TO LOFTUS-HILLS

Postevent Information and Memory: Reply to Loftus, Schooler, and Wagenaar

In a recent article (McCloskey & Zaragoza, 1985) we presented arguments and evidence in support of the contention that misleading postevent information does not impair memory for the original event. In their comment on our article, Loftus, Schooler, & Wagenaar (1985) raise several objections to our conclusions. In this reply we consider these objections, suggesting that they present no serious ...

The Authors’ Reply

Reply to Gibb and Hills: Divergence times, generation lengths and mutation rates in great apes and humans.

In their comment on our recent publication (1), Gibb and Hills (2) raise several issues that we would like to address point by point. First, Gibb and Hills (2) doubt that intergenerational mutation rates can be applied to date events in the past. This argument is mainly based on the idea that some intergenerational mutations are slightly deleterious and will eventually disappear from the popula...

Refuting data aggregation arguments and how the IBL model stands criticism: A reply to Hills and Hertwig (2012)

Hills and Hertwig (2012) challenge the proposed similarity of the exploration-exploitation transitions found in Gonzalez and Dutt (2011) between the two experimental paradigms of decisions from experience (sampling and repeated-choice), which was predicted by an Instance-Based Learning (IBL) model. The heart of their argument is that in the sampling paradigm, an impression of reduced exploratio...

The Authors’ Reply