Highs Are to Lows as Experts Are to Novices: Individual Differences in the Representation and Solution of Standardized Figural Analogies

Two experiments compared the strategies used by high and lower scorers on standardized figural analogy tests to represent and solve problems. In Experiment 1, subjects freely sorted completed analogy (A:a::B:b) problems into categories. High scorers categorized problems largely on the basis of well-constrained spatial transformations between problem terms; Low scorers sorted according to perceptual (i.e., shape) similarities among the figures constituting the problems. Experiment 2 compared the two groups' solution strategies in terms of specific patterns of eye movements used in viewing problem and answer terms. High scorers appeared to view problem terms in a more efficient fashion than did lower scorers. The lower scorers focused on noncritical figural relations (mapping figure A onto figure B), and they devoted more resources to processing the answer alternatives than did the high scorers. The pattern of results supports the view that high scorers tend to work in a more forward, or constructive, fashi...

[1]  H. Simon,et al.  A simulation of memory for chess positions. , 1973 .

[2]  Robert J. Sternberg,et al.  Component Processes in Analogical Reasoning. , 1977 .

[3]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Unities in inductive reasoning , 1983 .

[4]  D. Egan,et al.  Differences in mental representations spontaneously adopted for reasoning , 1982, Memory & cognition.

[5]  Earl Hunt,et al.  Individual Differences in the Verification of Sentence-Picture Relationships , 1978 .

[6]  Dennis E. Egan,et al.  Testing Based on Understanding: Implications from Studies of Spatial Ability. , 1979 .

[7]  Moonja P. Kim,et al.  The Method of Sorting as a Data-Gathering Procedure in Multivariate Research. , 1975, Multivariate behavioral research.

[8]  Robert J. Sternberg,et al.  Testing and cognitive psychology. , 1981 .

[9]  R. Oppenheimer.  Analogy in science. , 1956 .

[10]  Susan E. Whitely,et al.  Information Structure for Geometric Analogies: A Test Theory Approach , 1981 .

[11]  John H. Flavell,et al.  Developmental changes in memorization processes , 1970 .

[12]  R. Glaser,et al.  Components of geometric analogy solution , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[13]  S. C. Johnson.  Hierarchical clustering schemes , 1967, Psychometrika.

[14]  Herbert A Simon,et al.  The understanding process: Problem isomorphs , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[15]  R. Sternberg,et al.  An Aptitude-Strategy Interaction in Linear Syllogistic Reasoning. , 1980 .

[16]  H A Simon,et al.  Information-processing analysis of perceptual processes in problem solving. , 1969, Psychological review.

[17]  M. Just,et al.  Cognitive coordinate systems: accounts of mental rotation and individual differences in spatial ability. , 1985, Psychological review.

[18]  James W. Pellegrino,et al.  The locus of sex differences in spatial ability , 1979 .

[19]  Richard E. Snow,et al.  Eye Fixation and Strategy Analyses of Individual Differences in Cognitive Aptitudes , 1978 .

[20]  B. Tversky,et al.  Cognitive constraints on ordering operations: the case of geometric analogies. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[21]  D E Egan,et al.  Chunking in recall of symbolic drawings , 1979, Memory & cognition.

[22]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  Categorization and Representation of Physics Problems by Experts and Novices , 1981, Cogn. Sci..

[23]  James W. Pellegrino,et al.  Cognitive correlates and components in the analysis of individual differences , 1979 .

[24]  H. Simon,et al.  The mind's eye in chess. , 1973 .