Structural alignment in similarity and difference judgments

Similarity is a central construct in models of cognitive processing, and as such has been the focus of psychological inquiry. This work has revealed that similarity and difference judgments are not always inverses. One explanation for this effect is that similarity judgments focus on matching relations between the items, while difference judgments focus on the mismatching attributes. A second explanation is that both similarity and difference judgments involve a process of structural alignment, and that they use the output of this process differently. These views are contrasted by using the one-shot mapping technique that places attribute similarity and relational similarity in competition. The results suggest that similarity and difference judgments both involve structural alignment.

[1]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  Structure-Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy , 1983, Cogn. Sci..

[2]  Stephen H. Baer.  Mental leaps: Keith J. Holyoak and Paul Thagard Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 265 pp., $24.95, hardcover , 1995 .

[3]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  Systematicity and Surface Similarity in the Development of Analogy , 1986, Cogn. Sci..

[4]  D. Gentner,et al.  Structural Alignment during Similarity Comparisons , 1993, Cognitive Psychology.

[5]  G. Logan.  Toward an instance theory of automatization. , 1988 .

[6]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  The Roles of Similarity in Transfer: Separating Retrievability From Inferential Soundness , 1993, Cognitive Psychology.

[7]  D. Gentner,et al.  Systematicity and Surface Similarity in the Development of Analogy. Technical Report No. 358. , 1985 .

[8]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Relational similarity and the nonindependence of features in similarity judgments , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  D. Gentner,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article STRUCTURAL ALIGNMENT IN COMPARISON: No Difference Without Similarity , 2022 .

[10]  D. Gentner,et al.  Commonalities and differences in similarity comparisons , 1996, Memory & cognition.

[11]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Similarity Involving Attributes and Relations: Judgments of Similarity and Difference Are Not Inverses , 1990 .

[12]  Robert L. Goldstone.  Similarity, interactive activation, and mapping , 1994 .

[13]  D. Gentner.  Structure‐Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy* , 1983 .

[14]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Transfer of Cognitive Skill , 1989 .

[15]  D. Gentner,et al.  Respects for similarity , 1993 .

[16]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  Category-Based Induction , 1990 .

[17]  D. Gentner,et al.  Splitting the Differences: A Structural Alignment View of Similarity , 1993 .

[18]  W. D. Gray,et al.  Transfer of Cognitive Skills , 1987 .

[19]  E. Thorndike,et al.  The influence of improvement in one mental function upon the efficiency of other functions. II. The estimation of magnitudes. , 1901 .

[20]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  Mechanisms of Analogical Learning. , 1987 .

[21]  A. Tversky.  Features of Similarity , 1977 .