From Reaction Times to Model Testing

Frank E. Ritter


Pennsylvania State University

Lecture 1. Reaction Time Logging for Model Testing


1.      Kukreja, U., Stevenson, W. E., & Ritter, F. E. (2006). RUI-Recording User Input from interfaces  under Windows and Mac OS X. Behavior Research Methods, 38(4), 656-659.

2.      Morgan, J. H., Cheng, C.-Y., Pike, C., & Ritter,  F. E. (2013). A design, tests, and considerations  for improving keystroke and mouse loggers. Interacting with Computers, 25(3), 242-258.

Lecture 2. How to Run Experiments, a Guide for Non-psychologists


1.      Ritter, F. E., Kim, J. W., Morgan, J. H., & Carlson, R. A. (2013). Running behavioral studies with human participants: A practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

2.      Ritter, F. E., Kim, J. W., & Morgan, J. H. (2010). Running behavioral experiments with human participants: A practical guide (Tech. Report No. ACS 2005-2). Applied Cognitive Science Lab,School of Information Sciences and Technology, Penn State.


Lecture 3. An Overview of Cognitive Architecture Components and Example Architectures


1.      Ritter, F. E., Baxter, G. D., & Churchill, E. F. (2014, in press). Foundations for designing user-centered systems: What system designers need to know about people. London, UK: Springer. Currently available through

2.      Ritter, F. E., Shadbolt, N. R., Elliman, D., Young, R. M., Gobet, F., & Baxter, G. D. (2003).Techniques for modeling human performance in  synthetic environments: A supplementary review.

3.      Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH: Human  Systems Information Analysis Center (HSIAC).OUP readings  act-r web site.


Lecture 4. Soar, an Example Cognitive Architecture


1.      Laird, J. E. (2012). The Soar cognitive architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.  Soar web site

2.      Ritter, F. E. (2003). Soar. In Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. London: Macmillan.

Lecture 5. A Model of Multiple Strategies and Fitting them and Considerations about how to Fit and Test Models in General


1.      Ritter, F. E., & Bibby, P. A. (2008). Modeling how, when, and what learning happens in a diagrammatic reasoning task. Cognitive Science, 32, 862-892.

2.      Friedrich, M. B., & Ritter, F. E. (submitted). Understanding strategy differences in a reasoning task. Cognitive Science. Friedrich, M. B. (2008). Implementierung von schematischen Denkstrategien in einer h–heren Programmiersprache: Erweitern und Testen der  vorhandenen Resultate durch Erfassen von zus”tzlichen Daten und das Erstellen von weiteren  Strategien (Implementing diagrammatic reasoning strategies in a high level language: Extending and testing the existing model results by gathering additional data and creating additional  strategies). Faculty of Information Systems and Applied Computer Science, University of Bamberg, Germany.

3.      Grant, D. A. (1962). Testing the null hypothesis and the strategy and tactics of investigating  theoretical models. Psychological Review, 69(1), 54-61.


Other links:

Applied Cognitive Science Lab: RUI-Recorder User Input

ACT-R web site

Soar web site