Capacity Limitations and the Detection of Correlations: Comment on Kareev (2000).
- 1 January 2005
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by American Psychological Association (APA) in Psychological Review
- Vol. 112 (1) , 256-267
- https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.112.1.256
Abstract
Y. Kareev (2000) argued that the limited capacity of working memory may be an adaptive advantage for the early detection of useful correlations. His analysis indeed suggests that the optimal sample size is close to G. A. Miller's (1956) "magical number 7 +/- 2." The authors point out logical and statistical limitations of Y. Kareev's (2000) analysis, including that it neglects that the adaptive value is not determined by the hit rate but by the posterior probability of hit and that only signal trials are considered. The authors' analysis demonstrates that when these limitations are corrected for, the alleged benefit for small samples does not occur, and larger samples imply considerable improvement in the detection of correlations.Keywords
This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit:
- Seven (indeed, plus or minus two) and the detection of correlations.Psychological Review, 2000
- Through a narrow window: Sample size and the perception of correlation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1997
- Through a narrow window: working memory capacity and the detection of covariationCognition, 1995
- Long-term working memory.Psychological Review, 1995
- Implicit learning.Psychological Bulletin, 1994
- Doing the impossible: A note on induction and the experience of randomness.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1982
- The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.Psychological Review, 1956