Publications

Working Papers

  1. Edmunds, C. E. R., Bose, D., Camerer, C. F., Mullett, T. L., & Stewart, N. (2020). Accumulation is late and brief in preferential choice. Manuscript submitted for publication. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/sa4zr
    PDF   PDF   OSF  
  2. Gathergood, J., Hirshleifer, D. A., Leake, D., Sakaguchi, H., & Stewart, N. (2018). Naïve buying diversification and narrow framing among individual investors. SSRN Working Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3056254
    PDF   URL   PDF  
  3. Gathergood, J., Loewenstein, G., Quispe-Torreblanca, E., & Stewart, N. (2020). Investor attention, reference points and the disposition effect. SSRN Working Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3422790
    PDF   URL   PDF  
  4. Muggleton, N., Quispe-Torreblanca, E., Gathergood, J., Leake, D., & Stewart, N. (2020). Evidence from mass-transactional data that chaotic spending behaviour precedes consumer financial distress. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/qabgm
    PDF   PDF  
  5. Sakaguchi, H., Gathergood, J., & Stewart, N. (2020). How preferences for round numbers affect choices: Stickiness and jumpiness in credit card payments.
    PDF  
  6. Sakaguchi, H., Stewart, N., & Gathergood, J. (2020). When setting a default payment harms credit card holders. SSRN Working Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3221299
    PDF   URL   PDF  
  7. Sakaguchi, H., Stewart, N., & Walasek, L. (2019). The disposition effect varies with portfolio composition because people take gain-loss-domain-level sell decisions. SSRN Working Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3053331
    PDF   URL   PDF   OSF  
  8. Skatova, A., Stewart, N., Flavahan, E., & Goulding, J. (2019). Those whose calorie comsumption varies the most eat the most. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ah8jp
    PDF   URL   PDF  
  9. Stewart, N., Canic, E., & Mullett, T. L. (2020). On the futility of estimating utility functions: Why the parameter we measure are wrong, and why they do not generalize. Manuscript submitted for publication. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/qt69m
    PDF   URL   PDF   Code on github  
  10. Stewart, N., Scheibehenne, B., & Pachur, T. (2018). Psychological parameters have units: A bug fix for stochastic prospect theory and other decision models. Manuscript submitted for publication. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/qvgcd
    PDF   URL   PDF   OSF  
  11. Trendl, A., Stewart, N., & Mullett, T. L. (2018). A zero attraction effect in naturalistic choice. SSRN Working Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3299524
    PDF   URL   PDF  
  12. Vomfell, L., & Stewart, N. (2020). Officer bias in stop and search is exacerbated by deployment decisions. https://laravomfell.github.io/publication/ethnic_bias/
    URL   Code on github  
  13. Walasek, L., Mullett, T. L., & Stewart, N. (2018). A meta-analysis of loss aversion in risky contexts. SSRN Working Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3189088
    PDF   URL   PDF  

Published

2020

  1. Gathergood, J., Sakaguchi, H., Stewart, N., & Weber, J. (2020). How do consumers avoid penalty fees? Evidence from credit cards. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3568
    PDF   PDF   Preprint  
  2. Sanborn, A. N., Noguchi, T., Tripp, J., & Stewart, N. (2020). A dilution effect without dilution: When missing evidence, not non-diagnostic evidence, is judged inaccurately. Cognition, 196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104110
    PDF   OSF   Preprint  
  3. Vincent, B. T., & Stewart, N. (2020). The case of muddled units in temporal discounting. Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104203
    PDF   OSF   Preprint  

2019

  1. Alempaki, D., Canic, E., Mullett, T. L., Skylark, W. J., Starmer, C., Stewart, N., & Tufano, F. (2019). Re-examining how utility and weighting functions get their shapes: A quasi-adversarial collaboration providing a new interpretation. Management Science, 65, 4841–4862. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3170
    PDF   Preprint  
  2. Gathergood, J., Mahoney, N., Stewart, N., & Weber, J. (2019). How do individuals repay their debt? The balance-matching heuristic. American Economic Review, 109, 844–875. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20180288
    PDF   Preprint  
  3. Gathergood, J., Mahoney, N., Stewart, N., & Weber, J. (2019). How do Americans repay their debt? The balance-matching heuristic. Economics Bulletin, 39, 1458–1466. http://www.accessecon.com/Pubs/EB/2019/Volume39/EB-19-V39-I2-P138.pdf
    URL   Preprint  
  4. Quispe-Torreblanca, E. G., & Stewart, N. (2019). Causal peer effects in police misconduct. Nature Human Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0612-8
    PDF   URL   Preprint  
  5. Quispe-Torreblanca, E. G., Stewart, N., Gathergood, J., & Loewenstein, G. (2019). The red, the black, and the plastic: Paying down credit card debt for hotels not sofas. Management Science, 65, 5392–5410. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3195
    PDF   Preprint  
  6. Scholten, M., Read, D., & Stewart, N. (2019). The framing of nothing and the psychology of choice. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-019-09313-5
    PDF   Preprint  
  7. Walasek, L., & Stewart, N. (2019). Context-dependent sensitivity to losses: Range and skew manipulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45, 957–968. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000629
    PDF   Preprint  

2018

  1. Adams, P., Guttman-Kenney, B., Hayes, L., Hunt, S., Laibson, D., & Stewart, N. (2018). The conflict between consumer intentions, beliefs and actions to pay down credit card debt. FCA Occasional Paper. http://www.fca.org.uk/your-fca/documents/occasional-papers/occasional-paper-44
    URL  
  2. Adams, P., Guttman-Kenney, B., Hayes, L., Hunt, S., Laibson, D., & Stewart, N. (2018). The semblance of success in nudging consumers to pay down credit card debt. FCA Occasional Paper. http://www.fca.org.uk/your-fca/documents/occasional-papers/occasional-paper-45
    URL  
  3. Adams, P., Guttman-Kenney, B., Hayes, L., Hunt, S., & Stewart, N. (2018). Increasing credit card payments using choice architecture: The case of anchors and prompts. FCA Occasional Paper. http://www.fca.org.uk/your-fca/documents/occasional-papers/occasional-paper-42
    URL  
  4. Bhatia, S., & Stewart, N. (2018). Naturalistic multiattribute choice. Cognition, 179, 71–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.05.025
    PDF   Preprint  
  5. Guttman-Kenney, B., Leary, J., & Stewart, N. (2018). Weighing anchor on credit card debt. FCA Occasional Paper. http://www.fca.org.uk/your-fca/documents/occasional-papers/occasional-paper-43
    URL  
  6. Hodgson, J., Wade, K. A., Stewart, N., Hearty, K., Kyneswood, N., Quispe-Torreblanca, E., & Mullett, T. L. (2018). Public confidence and crime reduction: The impact of forensic property marking. Centre for Operational Police Research, University of Warwick.
    Preprint  
  7. Mullett, T. L., Smart, L., & Stewart, N. (2018). The effect of risk warning content for contract for difference products. SSRN Working Paper. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3231616
    URL  
  8. Mullett, T. L., Smart, L., & Stewart, N. (2018). Blackbird’s alarm call or nightingale’s lullaby? The effect of tweet risk warnings on attractiveness, search, and understanding. FCA Occasional Paper. https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/occasional-papers/occasional-paper-47.pdf
    URL   Preprint  
  9. Noguchi, T., & Stewart, N. (2018). Multialternative decision by sampling: A model of decision making constrained by process data. Psychological Review, 125, 512–544. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000102
    PDF   Code on github   Preprint  

2017

  1. Kutzner, F. L., Read, D., Stewart, N., & Brown, G. D. A. (2017). Choosing the devil you don’t know: Evidence for limited sensitivity to sample size-based uncertainty when it offers an advantage. Management Science, 63, 1519–1528. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2394
    PDF   Preprint  
  2. Stewart, N., Chandler, J., & Paolacci, G. (2017). Crowdsourcing Samples in Cognitive Science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21, 736–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.06.007
    PDF   Preprint  

2016

  1. Birnbaum, M. H., Navarro-Martinez, D., Ungemach, C., Stewart, N., & Quispe-Torreblanca, E. G. (2016). Risky decision making: Testing for violations of transitivity predicted by an editing mechanism. Judgment and Decision Making, 11, 75–91. http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15615a/jdm15615a.html
    URL   Data and code   Preprint  
  2. Mullett, T. L., & Stewart, N. (2016). Implications of visual attention phenomena for models of preferential choice. Decision, 3, 231–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/dec0000049
    PDF   Preprint  
  3. Reimers, S., & Stewart, N. (2016). Auditory presentation and synchronization in Adobe Flash and HTML5/JavaScript Web experiments. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 897–908. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0758-5
    PDF   Preprint  
  4. Stewart, N., Gächter, S., Noguchi, T., & Mullett, T. L. (2016). Eye movements in strategic choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 29, 137–156. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1901
    PDF   Preprint  
  5. Stewart, N., Hermens, F., & Matthews, W. J. (2016). Eye movements in risky choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 29, 116–136. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1854
    PDF   Preprint  

2015

  1. Hunt, S., Stewart, N., & Zaliauskas, R. (2015). Two plus two makes five? Survey evidence that investors overvalue structured deposits. FCA Occasional Paper. http://www.fca.org.uk/your-fca/documents/occasional-papers/occasional-paper-9
    URL  
  2. Reimers, S., & Stewart, N. (2015). Presentation and response timing accuracy in Adobe Flash and HTML5/JavaScript Web experiments. Behavior Research Methods, 47, 309–327. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0471-1
    PDF   Preprint  
  3. Stewart, N., Ungemach, C., Harris, A. J. L., Bartels, D. M., Newell, B., Paolacci, G., & Chandler, J. (2015). The average laboratory samples a population of 7,300 Amazon Mechanical Turk workers. Judgment and Decision Making, 10, 479–491. http://journal.sjdm.org/14/14725/jdm14725.pdf
    URL   Preprint  
  4. Stewart, N., Reimers, S., & Harris, A. J. L. (2015). On the origin of utility, weighting, and discounting functions: How they get their shapes and how to change their shapes. Management Science, 61, 687–705. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1853
    PDF   Preprint  
  5. Walasek, L., & Stewart, N. (2015). How to make loss aversion disappear and reverse: Tests of the decision by sampling origin of loss aversion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 7–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000039
    PDF   Preprint  

2014

  1. Gherzi, S., Egan, D., Stewart, N., Haisley, E., & Ayton, P. (2014). The meerkat effect: Personality and market returns affect investors’ portfolio monitoring behavior. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 107, 512–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2014.07.013
    PDF   Preprint  
  2. Noguchi, T., & Stewart, N. (2014). In the attraction, compromise, and similarity effects, alternatives are repeatedly compared in pairs on single dimensions. Cognition, 132, 44–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.006
    PDF   Preprint  
  3. Noguchi, T., Stewart, N., Olivola, C. Y., Moat, H. S., & Preis, T. (2014). Characterizing the time-perspective of nations with search engine query data. PLoS ONE, 9, e95209. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0095209
    PDF   Preprint  

2013

  1. Noguchi, T., Sanborn, A., & Stewart, N. (2013). Non-parametric estimation of the individual’s utility map. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the thirty-fifth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 3145–3150). Cognitive Science Society. http://mindmodeling.org/cogsci2013/papers/0561/paper0561.pdf
    URL   Preprint  

2012

  1. Oaksford, M., Chater, N., & Stewart, N. (2012). Reasoning and decision making. In K. Frankish & W. Ramsey (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of cognitive science. Cambridge University.
    Preprint  

2011

  1. Kusev, P., Ayton, P., van Schaik, P., Tsaneva-Atanasova, K., Stewart, N., & Chater, N. (2011). Judgments relative to patterns: how temporal sequence patterns affect judgments and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1874–1886. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025589
    PDF   Preprint  
  2. Matthews, W. J., Stewart, N., & Wearden, J. H. (2011). Stimulus intensity and the perception of duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 303–313. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019961
    PDF  
  3. Navarro-Martinez, D., Salisbury, L. C., Lemon, K. N., Stewart, N., Matthews, W. J., & Harris, A. J. L. (2011). Minimum required payment and supplemental information disclosure effects on consumer debt repayment decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, S60–S77. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.48.SPL.S60
    PDF  
  4. Stewart, N. (2011). Information integration in risky choice: Identification and stability. Frontiers in Cognition, 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00301
    PDF   Preprint  
  5. Ungemach, C., Stewart, N., & Reimers, S. (2011). How incidental values from our environment affect decisions about money, risk, and delay. Psychological Science, 22, 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610396225
    PDF   Preprint  
  6. Vlaev, I., Chater, N., Stewart, N., & Brown, G. D. A. (2011). Does the brain calculate value? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 546–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.09.008
    PDF   Preprint  

2010

  1. Brown, G. D. A., Stewart, N., & Wood, A. M. (2010). Cognitive science and behavioural economics. In K. Richards (Ed.), The new optimists (pp. 189–193). Linus.
  2. Vlaev, I., Kusev, P., Stewart, N., Aldrovandi, S., & Chater, N. (2010). Domain effects and financial risk attitudes. Risk Analysis, 30, 1374–1386. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01433.x
    PDF   Preprint  

2009

  1. Matthews, W. J., & Stewart, N. (2009). Psychophysics and the judgment of price: Judging complex objects on a non-physical dimension elicits sequential effects like those in perceptual tasks. Judgment and Decision Making. http://journal.sjdm.org/81104/jdm81104.pdf
    URL   Preprint  
  2. Matthews, W. J., & Stewart, N. (2009). The effect of inter-stimulus interval on sequential effects in absolute identification. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 2014–2029. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210802649285
    PDF   Preprint  
  3. Reimers, S., Maylor, E. A., Stewart, N., & Chater, N. (2009). Associations between a one-shot delay discounting measure and age, income, education and real-world impulsive behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 973–978. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.3.675
    PDF   Preprint  
  4. Reimers, S., & Stewart, N. (2009). Using SMS text messaging for teaching and data collection in the behavioral sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 675–681. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.3.675
    PDF   Preprint  
  5. Stewart, N. (2009). The cost of anchoring on credit card minimum payments. Psychological Science, 20, 39–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02255.x
    PDF   Preprint  
  6. Stewart, N., & Matthews, W. J. (2009). Relative judgment and knowledge of the category structure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 594–599. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.3.594
    PDF   Preprint  
  7. Stewart, N. (2009). Decision by sampling: The role of the decision environment in risky choice. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1041–1062. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210902747112
    PDF   Preprint  
  8. Ungemach, C., Chater, N., & Stewart, N. (2009). Are probabilities overweighted or underweighted, when rare outcomes are experienced (rarely)? Psychological Science, 20, 473–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02319.x
    PDF   Preprint  
  9. Vlaev, I., Chater, N., & Stewart, N. (2009). Dimensionality of risk perception: Factors affecting consumer understanding and evaluation of financial risk. Journal of Behavioral Finance, 158–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560903167720
    PDF   Preprint  
  10. Zarkadi, T., Wade, K. A., & Stewart, N. (2009). Creating fair lineups for suspects with distinctive features. Psychological Science, 20, 1448–1453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02463.x
    PDF   Preprint  

2008

  1. Matthews, W. J., & Stewart, N. (2008). The effect of stimulus range on two-interval frequency discrimination. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123, EL45–EL51. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2884084
    PDF   Preprint  
  2. Reimers, S., & Stewart, N. (2008). Using Adobe Flash Lite on mobile phones for psychological research: Reaction time measurement reliability and inter-device variability. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 1170–1176. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.4.1170
    PDF   Preprint  
  3. Stewart, N., & Ellis, A. W. (2008). Order of acquisition in learning perceptual categories: A laboratory analogue of the age of acquisition effect? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 70–74. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.1.70
    PDF   Preprint  
  4. Stewart, N., & Simpson, K. (2008). A decision-by-sampling account of decision under risk. In N. Chater & M. Oaksford (Eds.), The probabilistic mind: Prospects for Bayesian cognitive science (pp. 261–276). Oxford University Press.
    Preprint  
  5. Vlaev, I., Chater, N., & Stewart, N. (2008). Seeing is not enough: Manipulating choice options causes focusing and preference change in multiattribute risky decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 556–574. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.601
    PDF   Preprint  
  6. Vlaev, I., Stewart, N., & Chater, N. (2008). Risk preference discrepancy: A prospect relativity account of the discrepancy between risk preferences in laboratory gambles and real world investments. Journal of Behavioral Finance, 9, 132–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560802336673
    PDF   Preprint  
  7. Wood, A. M., Maltby, J., Stewart, N., & Joseph, S. (2008). Conceptualizing gratitude and appreciation as a unitary personality trait. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 619–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.09.028
    PDF   Preprint  
  8. Wood, A. M., Maltby, J., Stewart, N., Linley, P. A., & Joseph, S. (2008). A social-cognitive model of trait and state levels of gratitude. Emotion, 281–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.8.2.281
    PDF   Preprint  

2007

  1. Reimers, S., & Stewart, N. (2007). Adobe flash as a medium for online experimentation: A test of reaction time measurement capabilities. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 365–370. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193004
    PDF   Preprint  
  2. Stewart, N. (2007). Absolute identification is relative: A reply to Brown, Marley, and Lacouture (2007). Psychological Review, 114, 533–538. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.881
    PDF   Preprint  
  3. Stewart, N., & Morin, C. (2007). Dissimilarity is used as evidence of category membership in multidimensional perceptual categorisation: A test of the similarity-dissimilarity generalised context model. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 1337–1346. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210701480444
    PDF   Preprint  
  4. Vlaev, I., Chater, N., & Stewart, N. (2007). Financial prospect relativity: Context effects in financial decision-making under risk. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20, 273–304. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.555
    PDF   Preprint  
  5. Vlaev, I., Chater, N., & Stewart, N. (2007). Relativistic financial decisions: Context effects on retirement saving and investment risk preferences. Judgment and Decision Making, 2, 292–311. http://journal.sjdm.org/7809/jdm7809.pdf
    URL   Preprint  

2006

  1. Adelman, J. S., & Stewart, N. (2006). Absolute identification is surprisingly faster with more closely spaced stimuli. In R. Sun & N. Miyake (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-eighth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 943–948). Erlbaum. http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/Proceedings/2006/docs/p943.pdf
    URL   Preprint  
  2. Stewart, N. (2006). Millisecond accuracy video display using OpenGL under Linux. Behavior Research Methods, 38, 142–145. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192759
    PDF   Preprint  
  3. Stewart, N. (2006). A PC parallel port button box provides millisecond response time accuracy under Linux. Behavior Research Methods, 38, 170–173. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192764
    PDF   Preprint  
  4. Stewart, N., Chater, N., & Brown, G. D. A. (2006). Decision by sampling. Cognitive Psychology, 53, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.10.003
    PDF   Preprint  

2005

  1. Brown, G. D. A., McCormack, T., Smith, M., & Stewart, N. (2005). Identification and bisection of temporal durations and tone frequencies: Common models for temporal and non-temporal stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 919–938. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.31.5.919
    PDF   Preprint  
  2. Stewart, N., & Brown, G. D. A. (2005). Similarity and dissimilarity as evidence in perceptual categorization. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 49, 403–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2005.06.001
    PDF   Preprint  
  3. Stewart, N., Brown, G. D. A., & Chater, N. (2005). Absolute identification by relative judgment. Psychological Review, 112, 881–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.881
    PDF   Preprint  

2004

  1. Stewart, N., & Brown, G. D. A. (2004). Sequence effects in categorizing tones varying in frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 416–430. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.2.416
    PDF   Preprint  

2003

  1. Reimers, S., Stewart, N., & Chater, N. (2003). Choice set options affect the valuation of risky prospects. In R. Alterman & D. Kirsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-fifth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 988–993). Cognitive Science Society. http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/proceedings/2003/pdfs/190.pdf
    URL   Preprint  
  2. Stewart, N., & Chater, N. (2003). No unified scales for perceptual magnitudes: Evidence from loudness. In R. Alterman & D. Kirsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-fifth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1116–1121). Cognitive Science Society. http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/proceedings/2003/pdfs/212.pdf
    URL   Preprint  
  3. Stewart, N., Chater, N., Stott, H. P., & Reimers, S. (2003). Prospect relativity: How choice options influence decision under risk. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 23–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.132.1.23
    PDF   Preprint  

2002

  1. Stewart, N., Brown, G. D. A., & Chater, N. (2002). Sequence effects in categorization of simple perceptual stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.28.1.3
    PDF   Preprint  
  2. Stewart, N., & Chater, N. (2002). The effect of category variability in perceptual categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 893–907. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.28.5.893
    PDF   Preprint  

2001

  1. Chater, N., Vitanyi, P. M. B., & Stewart, N. (2001). Universal generalization and universal inter-item confusability. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 659–660. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01270083
    PDF   Preprint  
  2. Stewart, N. (2001). Perceptual categorization [PhD thesis]. University of Warwick.
    Preprint  
  3. Stewart, N., Chater, N., & Stott, H. P. (2001). Effect of choice set on valuation of risky prospects. In J. D. Moore & K. Stenning (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-third annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 982–987). Erlbaum. http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/Proceedings/2001/cogsci01.pdf
    URL   Preprint  

2000

  1. Wills, A. J., Reimers, S., Stewart, N., Suret, M., & McLaren, I. P. L. (2000). Tests of the ratio rule in categorization. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 53, 983–1011. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755935
    PDF   Preprint