Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies
- Autores
- Minervino, Ricardo Adrian; Oberholzer, Nicolás; Trench, Juan Maximo
- Año de publicación
- 2013
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- Dominant computational models of analogical reasoning (e.g., SME, ACME 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 global 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 on an analogy, and discuss their implications for future theories of analogical thinking.
Fil: Minervino, Ricardo Adrian. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Facultad de Cs.de la Educacion; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Patagonia Norte; Argentina
Fil: Oberholzer, Nicolás. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Psicologia; Argentina
Fil: Trench, Juan Maximo. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universitario Bariloche; Argentina - Materia
-
Analogy
Similarity
Relational Categories - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/8900
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
CONICETDig_31cf4cf62cd2a3ec8ee205259bfb445f |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/8900 |
network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
repository_id_str |
3498 |
network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
spelling |
Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of AnalogiesMinervino, Ricardo AdrianOberholzer, NicolásTrench, Juan MaximoAnalogySimilarityRelational Categorieshttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.1https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5Dominant computational models of analogical reasoning (e.g., SME, ACME 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 global 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 on an analogy, and discuss their implications for future theories of analogical thinking.Fil: Minervino, Ricardo Adrian. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Facultad de Cs.de la Educacion; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Patagonia Norte; ArgentinaFil: Oberholzer, Nicolás. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Psicologia; ArgentinaFil: Trench, Juan Maximo. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universitario Bariloche; ArgentinaSeoul National University. Institute for Cognitive Science2013-09info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/8900Minervino, Ricardo Adrian; Oberholzer, Nicolás; Trench, Juan Maximo; Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies; Seoul National University. Institute for Cognitive Science; Journal of Cognitive Science; 14; 3; 9-2013; 287-3171598-2327enginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://cogsci.kr/gnuboard/bbs/board.php?bo_table=__vol014i3&wr_id=3info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-17T11:41:47Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/8900instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-17 11:41:47.417CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies |
title |
Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies |
spellingShingle |
Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies Minervino, Ricardo Adrian Analogy Similarity Relational Categories |
title_short |
Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies |
title_full |
Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies |
title_fullStr |
Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies |
title_full_unstemmed |
Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies |
title_sort |
Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Minervino, Ricardo Adrian Oberholzer, Nicolás Trench, Juan Maximo |
author |
Minervino, Ricardo Adrian |
author_facet |
Minervino, Ricardo Adrian Oberholzer, Nicolás Trench, Juan Maximo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Oberholzer, Nicolás Trench, Juan Maximo |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
Analogy Similarity Relational Categories |
topic |
Analogy Similarity Relational Categories |
purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.1 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5 |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
Dominant computational models of analogical reasoning (e.g., SME, ACME 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 global 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 on an analogy, and discuss their implications for future theories of analogical thinking. Fil: Minervino, Ricardo Adrian. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Facultad de Cs.de la Educacion; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Patagonia Norte; Argentina Fil: Oberholzer, Nicolás. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Psicologia; Argentina Fil: Trench, Juan Maximo. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universitario Bariloche; Argentina |
description |
Dominant computational models of analogical reasoning (e.g., SME, ACME 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 global 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 on an analogy, and discuss their implications for future theories of analogical thinking. |
publishDate |
2013 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2013-09 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/8900 Minervino, Ricardo Adrian; Oberholzer, Nicolás; Trench, Juan Maximo; Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies; Seoul National University. Institute for Cognitive Science; Journal of Cognitive Science; 14; 3; 9-2013; 287-317 1598-2327 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/8900 |
identifier_str_mv |
Minervino, Ricardo Adrian; Oberholzer, Nicolás; Trench, Juan Maximo; Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies; Seoul National University. Institute for Cognitive Science; Journal of Cognitive Science; 14; 3; 9-2013; 287-317 1598-2327 |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://cogsci.kr/gnuboard/bbs/board.php?bo_table=__vol014i3&wr_id=3 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Seoul National University. Institute for Cognitive Science |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Seoul National University. Institute for Cognitive Science |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
_version_ |
1843606770661982208 |
score |
13.001348 |