Address for correspondence:

This investigation brings together response-time, system identification methodology (e.g., Townsend & Wenger, 2004a) along with accuracy methodology intended to assess models of integration across stimulus dimensions (features, modalities, etc.) proposed by Shaw and colleagues (e.g., Mulligan & Shaw, 1980). The goal was to theoretically examine these separate strategies and to apply them conjointly to the same set of participants. The empirical phases were carried out within an extension of an established experimental design called the double factorial paradigm (e.g., Townsend & Nozawa, 1995). That paradigm, based on response times, permits assessment of architecture (parallel vs. serial processing), stopping rule (exhaustive vs. minimum time) and workload capacity, all within the same blocks of trials. The paradigm introduced by Shaw and colleagues uses a statistic formally analogous to that of the double factorial paradigm but on accuracy rather than response times. We demonstrate that the accuracy measure cannot discriminate between parallel and serial processing. Nonetheless, the class of models supported by the accuracy data possess a suitable interpretation within the same set of models supported by the response time data. The supported model, consistent across individuals, is parallel, limited capacity, with the participants employing the appropriate stopping rule for the experimental setting. [200 words