Abstract
Laboratory studies of analogical reasoning have shown that subjects are mostly influenced by superficial similarity in the retrieval of source analogs. However, real-world investigations have demonstrated that people generate analogies using deep structural features. We conducted three experiments to determine why laboratory and real-world studies have yielded different results. In the first two experiments, we used a “production paradigm” in which subjects were asked to generate sources for a given target. Results show that the majority of the analogies that were generated displayed low levels of superficial similarity with the target problem. Moreover, most of the analogies were based on complex underlying structures. The third experiment used a “reception paradigm” methodology. The subjects had to retrieve predetermined sources instead of generate their own. In this case, retrieval was largely constrained by surface similarity. We conclude that people can use structural relations when given an appropriate task and that this ability has been underestimated in previous research on analogy.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bassok, M., Chase, V. M., &Martin, S. A. (1998). Adding apples and oranges: Alignment of semantic and formal knowledge.Cognitive Psychology,35, 99–134.
Blanchette, I., &Dunbar, K. (1997). Constraints underlying analogy use in a real-world context: Politics. In M. G. Shafto & P. Langley (Eds.),Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 867). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., &Austin, G. A. (1956).A study of thinking. New York: Wiley.
Catrambone, R. (1997). Reinvestigating the effects of surface and structural features on analogical access. In M. G. Shafto & P. Langley (Eds.),Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 90–95). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Clement, C. A., &Gentner, D. (1991). Systematicity as a selection constraint in analogical mapping.Cognitive Science,15, 89–132.
Dunbar, K. (1993, March).In vivo cognition: Knowledge representation and change in real-world scientific laboratories. Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development, New Orleans.
Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.),The nature of insight (pp. 365–395). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, & S. Vaid (Eds.),Conceptual structures and processes: Emergence, discovery and change (pp. 461–493). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ericsson, A. K. (1994). Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition.American Psychologist,49, 725–747.
Faries, J. M., &Reiser, B. J. (1990, March). Terrorists and spoiled children: Retrieval of analogies for political arguments. InProceedings of the 1990 AAAI Spring Symposium on Case-Based Reasoning. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., &Law, K. (1994). MAC/FAC: A model of similarity-based retrieval.Cognitive Science,19, 141–205.
Gentner, D., &Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity.American Psychologist,52, 45–56.
Gentner, D., Ratterman, M. J., &Forbus, K. (1993). The roles of similarity in transfer: Separating retrievability from inferential soundness.Cognitive Psychology,25, 524–575.
Gick, M. L., &Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving.Cognitive Psychology,12, 306–355.
Holyoak, K. J., &Thagard, P. (1989). Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction.Cognitive Science,13, 295–355.
Holyoak, K. J., &Thagard, P. (1995).Mental leaps: Analogy in creative thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Holyoak, K. J., &Thagard, P. (1997). The analogical mind.American Psychologist,52, 35–44.
Keane, M. [T.] (1987). On retrieving analogues when solving problems.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,39A, 29–41.
Keane, M. T., Ledgeway, T., &Duff, S. (1994). Constraints on analogical mapping: A comparison of three models.Cognitive Science,18, 387–438.
Spellman, B. A., &Holyoak, K. J. (1992). If Saddam is Hitler then who is George Bush? Analogical mapping between systems of social roles.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,62, 913–933.
Spellman, B. A., &Holyoak, K. J. (1996). Pragmatics in analogical mapping.Cognitive Psychology,31, 307–346.
Ward, T. B. (1994). Structured imagination: The role of category structure in exemplar generation.Cognitive Psychology,27, 1–40.
Wharton, C. M., Holyoak, K. J., Downing, P. E., Lange, T. E., Wickens, T. D., &Melz, E. R. (1994). Below the surface: Analogical similarity and retrieval competition in reminding.Cognitive Psychology,26, 64–101.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
This research was supported by FCAR and SSHRC graduate fellowships to the first author and Grant OGP0037356 to the second author from the National Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Blanchette, I., Dunbar, K. How analogies are generated: The roles of structural and superficial similarity. Memory & Cognition 28, 108–124 (2000). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211580
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211580