cogpsych-rebuttal — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited cogpsych-rebuttal (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
A Cognitive Psychology revision typically asks for more modeling rigor — an additional experiment, a further model comparison, parameter/model recovery, alternative priors, or reproducible code — because the contribution is a model-driven theoretical claim. The response letter must convert every reviewer and reassure the editor that the model adjudication is now airtight, while keeping the integrative argument coherent.
among reviewers and decides the next round.
recovery, cross-validate, refit hierarchically, share code) make the adjudication stronger — do them and say where. A request that exposes overfitting must be addressed, not waved away.
General Discussion so the synthesis still holds (see cogpsych-writing-style).
with a reason (e.g., why a requested model is not identifiable) — don't add an analysis that quietly undercuts the claim without saying so.
code and regenerate in a fresh session (see cogpsych-open-science-and-transparency).
For each reviewer comment:
> [Quoted reviewer comment]
Response: [What we did / why we respectfully disagree].
Change: [Manuscript section, supplement/appendix section, table/figure, or
deposited-code file].Open with a short summary of the main changes to the editor; group by reviewer; end each entry with the location (note when added analyses or experiments went to the supplement/appendix).
For the recognition-memory program, a major revision asked for a further model and recovery.
> R2: You compare UVSD and DPSD, but a mixture model might fit better -
> have you ruled it out?
Response: We agree this rival should be tested. We added a finite-mixture
SDT model, fit under matched flexibility; it does not improve penalized fit
(dBIC = 9 favoring UVSD) and model recovery confirms the comparison is
diagnostic at our design's N/trials.
Change: Results (model comparison, Table 1 expanded); recovery → Appendix B;
fitting code updated (deposit, fit_mixture.R).
> R1: Can you recover the DPSD parameters at your trial counts?
Response: Yes - we now report parameter recovery for all three models
(recovered values within credible intervals). This is why the model
comparison is interpretable rather than an artifact of identifiability.
Change: Appendix B (recovery); deposited code recovery_sim.R; one sentence
in Results pointing to it.| Reviewer ask | Default home | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Fit a further rival model | Results + model-comparison table | refit all models under matched flexibility |
| Parameter / model recovery | appendix/supplement | summarize the result in one main-text sentence |
| Refit hierarchically / alternative priors | Results + diagnostics | report convergence; sensitivity in supplement |
| New experiment | Methods/Results (it is contribution) | integrate into the General Discussion synthesis |
| "Soften the theoretical claim" | General Discussion | scale wording to what the comparison licenses |
| Reproducibility / code | deposit + Open Practices statement | ensure fits regenerate in a fresh session |
penalized comparison and recovery; never argue from a single fit.
if the edge does not survive, adjust the claim.
reference it in the response.
concealment is the cardinal sin.
【Editor's decisive points】addressed first? [list]
【Coverage】every reviewer comment answered? [Y/N]
【Model inference strengthened】added comparison/recovery/hierarchy? [Y/N]
【Program coherent】new experiment/model integrated into the synthesis? [Y/N]
【Reproducible】deposited code updated + fits regenerate? [Y/N]
【Next】resubmit via Editorial Manager../../resources/official-source-map.md — review model, revision norms, reproducibility expectations~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.