skip to primary navigation skip to content

CBSU bibliography search

To request a reprint of a CBSU publication, please click here to send us an email (reprints may not be available for all publications)

So the "strong" theory loses. But are there any winners? Commentary on Humphreys & Evett (1985)
Norris, D.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8, 718-719.
Year of publication:
CBU number:
This paper is a comment on an article by Humphreys and Evett who criticise dual-route models of word naming and argue in favour of analogy theories. This comment on their paper points out that analogy theories suffer from the same deficiencies as dual-route theories. Given the imprecise formulation of analogy theories, it is not yet clear what they really do explain, nor whether they can be shown to be different from dual-route theories.