Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Dominant computational models of analogical reasoning (e.g., SME and LISA) consider that two facts or situations are more analogous as the similarity between corresponding propositional elements increases. We report the results of two experiments demonstrating that when people judge the quality of an analogy, the similarity between matched elements is overridden by another type of similarity that implies comparing the meaning of whole propositions. In Experiment 1, participants received a base fact followed by two structurally identical target facts. Whereas in one of them propositional elements resembled their counterparts in the base, in the other they did not, but the meaning of the whole proposition resembled that of the base. Participants chose as more analogous the targets maintaining this second type of similarity. In Experiment 2, participants received a base cause followed by an effect, and were told that such effect reoccurred later as a consequence of an analogous cause. Participants had to decide which of two structurally identical facts was the cause of the target effect. Again, participants based their choices on overall similarities, passing over similarities between propositional elements, but in a more ecologically valid task that involves comparing systems of relations. We conclude with some intuitions about the mechanisms underlying how people assess the quality of an analogy, and discuss their implications for future theories of analogical thinking.
Abstract
Dominant computational models of analogical reasoning (e.g., SME and LISA) consider that two facts or situations are more analogous as the similarity between corresponding propositional elements increases. We report the results of two experiments demonstrating that when people judge the quality of an analogy, the similarity between matched elements is overridden by another type of similarity that implies comparing the meaning of whole propositions. In Experiment 1, participants received a base fact followed by two structurally identical target facts. Whereas in one of them propositional elements resembled their counterparts in the base, in the other they did not, but the meaning of the whole proposition resembled that of the base. Participants chose as more analogous the targets maintaining this second type of similarity. In Experiment 2, participants received a base cause followed by an effect, and were told that such effect reoccurred later as a consequence of an analogous cause. Participants had to decide which of two structurally identical facts was the cause of the target effect. Again, participants based their choices on overall similarities, passing over similarities between propositional elements, but in a more ecologically valid task that involves comparing systems of relations. We conclude with some intuitions about the mechanisms underlying how people assess the quality of an analogy, and discuss their implications for future theories of analogical thinking.
참고문헌 (31)
- Bassok, M., "Birds of a feather flock together : Similarity judgments with semantically rich stimuli", Journal of Memory and Language, 36, pp.311~336 (1997)
- Dietrich, E., "Analogy and conceptual change, or you can’t step into the same mind twice, In Cognitive Dynamics: Conceptual Change In Humans And Machines", pp.265~294 (2000), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- Falkenhainer, B., "Analogical interpretation in context", Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.69~76 (1990)
- Falkenhainer, B., "The structure-mapping engine : Algorithm and examples", Artificial Intelligence, 41, pp.1~63 (1989)
- Forbus, K. D., "Incremental structure-mapping", Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.313~318 (1994)
- French, R. M., "The Computational Modeling of Analogy-Making", Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, pp.200~205 (2002)
- Gentner, D., "Structure-mapping : A theoretical framework for analogy", Cognitive Science, 7, pp.155~170 (1983)
- Gentner, D., "The verb mutability effect: Studies of the combinatorial semantics of nouns and verbs, In Lexical Ambiguity Resolution: Perspectives From Psycholinguistics, Neuropsychology, And Artificial Intelligence", pp.343~382 (1988)
- Gentner, D., "Computational models of analogy", WIREs Cognitive Science, 2, pp.266~276 (2011)
- Gentner, D., "Learning and using relational categories, In Categorization Inside and Outside the Laboratory, Vol. 43" (2005), APA
- Gentner, D., "Relations, objects, and the composition of analogies", Cognitive Science, 30, pp.609~642 (2006)
- Gentner, D., "The Analogical Mind: Perspectives from Cognitive Science" (2001), MIT Press
- Gentner, D., "Structural alignment in comparison : No difference without similarity", Psychological Science, 5, pp.152~158 (1994)
- Gentner, D., "Structure mapping in analogy and similarity", American Psychologist, 52, pp.45~56 (1997)
- Gentner, D., "Defining structural similarity", Journal of Cognitive Science, 1, pp.1~20 (2005)
- Gentner, D., "The roles of similarity in transfer : Separating retrievability from inferential soundness", Cognitive Psychology, 25, pp.431~467 (1993)
- Goldwater, M. B., "The empirical case for role-governed categories", Cognition, 118, pp.359~376 (2011)
- Hofstadter, D., "Fluid Concepts And Creative Analogies" (1995), Basic Books
- Holyoak, K. J., "Analogical thinking and human intelligence, In Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, Vol. 2", pp.199~230 (1984), Erlbaum
- Holyoak, K. J., "Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction", Cognitive Science, 13, pp.295~355 (1989)
- Holyoak, K. J., "Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought" (1995), MIT Press
- Hummel, J. E., "Distributed representations of structure : A theory of analogical access and mapping", Psychological Review, 104, pp.427~466 (1997)
- Hummel, J. E., "A symbolic-connectionist theory of relational inference and generalization", Psychological Review, 110, pp.220~264 (2003)
- Keane, M., "Similarity processing depends on the similarities present", Proceedings of Twenty-Third Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.477~482 (2001)
- Kersten, A. W., "Semantic context influences memory for verbs more than memory for nouns", Memory and Cognition, 32, pp.198~211 (2004)
- Kokinov, B., "How Analogy Could Force Rerepresentation of the Target and Inhibition of the Alternative Interpretation, In New Frontiers in Analogy Research", pp.269~278 (2009), NBU Press
- Larkey, L. B., "CAB : Connectionist analogy builder", Cognitive Science, 27, pp.781~794 (2003)
- Markman, A., "Role-governed categories", Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 4, pp.329~358 (2001)
- Minervino, R. A., "Similarity between propositional elements does not always determine judgments of analogical relatedness", Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.91~96 (2008), Cognitive Science Society
- Oberholzer, N., "When lighting a candle becomes a superstition: Analogical recategorization through the application of relational categories", 33rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.568~573 (2011)
- Yan, J., "A theory of rerepresentation in analogical matching", Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.1265~1270 (2003)