Modern cognitive psychology has strictly adhered to the experimental method
ology of the natural sciences. Often, contributions in Theory & Psychology
have addressed shortcomings and possible remedies of this predominant appro
ach and its emphasis on 'effects'. My comment contrasts this approach with
the generative theories (cognitive simulation models) developed in cognitiv
e science about 30 years ago and still not widely accepted in psychology. I
characterize these generative theories, and discuss their weaknesses and t
heir advantages over the usual way of theorizing in cognitive psychology. I
hope to convince at least some readers that (a) in order to proceed in thi
s manner, you need not buy a ready-made 'cognitive architecture', and (b) t
hat this approach results in a much more rigorous theorizing (although stil
l well controllable as a scientific endeavor).