Hidden Structure: Indirect Measurement of Relational Representation

Structured mental representations underlie much of human cognitive ability. However, research has repeatedly found that people are generally quite poor at spontaneously applying structure acquired from one kind of situation to a dissimilar domain. This would seem to present a serious impediment to learning abstract structures experientially. The current study employs a novel approach designed to be more sensitive to the relational learning that is taking place. By using implicit measures of processing fluency, we demonstrate that relational commonalities—even between dissimilar domains—can indeed exert a measurable, if subtle, influence on subsequent processing. Despite having no explicit awareness of the structural commonalities, participants in our study rated a scientific passage to be better understood, better written, and more interesting when it was preceded by an (overtly dissimilar) analogous passage. This finding has important implications for the acquisition of complex knowledge structures.

[1]  Christina L. Gagné,et al.  Re-examining evidence for the use of independent relational representations during conceptual combination☆ , 2005 .

[2]  Zenon W. Pylyshyn,et al.  Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis , 1988, Cognition.

[3]  The discrepancy-attribution hypothesis: I. The heuristic basis of feelings of familiarity. , 2001 .

[4]  Lara L. Jones,et al.  Priming via relational similarity: A COPPER HORSE is faster when seen through a GLASS EYE , 2006 .

[5]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Implicit Learning and Generalization of the "Mere Exposure" Effect , 1983 .

[6]  B. Ross.  This is like that: The use of earlier problems and the separation of similarity effects. , 1987 .

[7]  N. Schwarz.  Metacognitive Experiences in Consumer Judgment and Decision Making , 2004 .

[8]  B. W. Whittlesea,et al.  The discrepancy-attribution hypothesis: II. Expectation, uncertainty, surprise, and feelings of familiarity. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[9]  Jeremy K. Miller,et al.  The attribution of perceptual fluency in recognition memory: the role of expectation , 2002 .

[10]  J. K. Bock.  Syntactic persistence in language production , 1986, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  Barbara A. Spellman,et al.  Analogical priming via semantic relations , 2001, Memory & cognition.

[12]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Analogical problem solving , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[13]  Arthur B. Markman,et al.  Knowledge Representation , 1998 .

[14]  Larry L. Jacoby,et al.  Illusions of immediate memory: evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality , 1990 .

[15]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Conceptual combinations and relational contexts in free association and in priming in lexical decision and naming , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

[17]  A. Reber.  Implicit learning of artificial grammars , 1967 .

[18]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Schema induction and analogical transfer , 1983, Cognitive Psychology.

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

[20]  Christian Unkelbach,et al.  The Learned Interpretation of Cognitive Fluency , 2006, Psychological science.

[21]  D. Witherspoon,et al.  The effect of a prior presentation on temporal judgments in a perceptual identification task , 1985, Memory & cognition.

[22]  George Mandler,et al.  Nonspecific Effects of Exposure on Stimuli That Cannot Be Recognized , 1987 .

[23]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  The latent semantic analysis theory of knowledge , 1997 .