Surface and structural similarity in analogical transfer

Two experiments investigated factors that influence the retrieval and use of analogies in problem solving, Experiment 1 demonstrated substantial spontaneous analogical transfer with a delay of several days between presentation of the source and target analogues. Experiment 2 examined the influence of different types of similarity between the analogues. A mechanism for retrieval of source analogues is proposed, based on summation of activation from features shared with a target problem. The results of Experiment 2 indicated that both structural features, which play a causal role in determining possible problem solutions, and salient surface features, which do not have a causal role, influence spontaneous selection of an analogue. Structural features, however, have a greater impact than do surface features on a problem solver’s ability to use an analogue once its relevance has been pointed out.

[1]  Carla H. Lagorio,et al.  Psychology , 1929, Nature.

[2]  K. Duncker,et al.  On problem-solving , 1945 .

[3]  G. Koch,et al.  Analysis of categorical data by linear models. , 1969, Biometrics.

[4]  Stephen K. Reed,et al.  The role of analogy in transfer between similar problem states , 1974 .

[5]  P. Thorndyke.  Cognitive structures in comprehension and memory of narrative discourse , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.

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

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

[8]  Patrick Henry Winston,et al.  Learning and reasoning by analogy , 1980, CACM.

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

[10]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. , 1981 .

[11]  T. Gilovich,et al.  Seeing the past in the present: The effect of associations to familiar events on judgments and decisions. , 1981 .

[12]  Marcel Adam Just,et al.  A Model of the Time Course and Content of Reading , 1982, Cogn. Sci..

[13]  D. Gentner,et al.  Flowing waters or teeming crowds: Mental models of electricity , 1982 .

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

[15]  Mark H. Burstein.  A Model of Learning by Incremental Analogical Reasoning and Debugging , 1983, AAAI.

[16]  John R. Anderson.  The Architecture of Cognition , 1983 .

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

[18]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Development of analogical problem-solving skill. , 1984, Child development.

[19]  B. Ross.  Remindings and their effects in learning a cognitive skill , 1984, Cognitive Psychology.

[20]  Keith J. Holyoak,et al.  The Pragmatics of Analogical Transfer , 1985 .

[21]  R. Weisberg,et al.  Context-dependent effects on analogical transfer , 1986, Memory & cognition.

[22]  D. Gentner,et al.  Analogical access-a good match is hard to find. 2 , 1986 .

[23]  John H. Holland,et al.  Induction: Processes of Inference, Learning, and Discovery , 1987, IEEE Expert.

[24]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: part 1.: an account of basic findings , 1988 .

[25]  Yves Kodratoff,et al.  Learning by Analogy , 1989 .