The importance of being nonalignable: A critical test of the structural alignment theory of similarity

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 30, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 1082-1092

  Estes, Zachary ^a,c   Hasson, Uri ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b PRINCETON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c University of Georgia   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY;

EID: 4444269749     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.30.5.1082     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Costello, F. J., & Keane, M. T. (2001). Testing two theories of conceptual combination: Alignment versus diagnosticity in the comprehension and production of combined concepts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 255-271.
2. Davenport, J., & Keane, M. T. (1999). Similarity and structural alignment: You can have one without the other. In M. Hahn & S. C. Stoness (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty First Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 132-137). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Gati, I., & Tversky, A. (1984). Weighting common and distinctive features in perceptual and conceptual judgments. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 341-370.
4. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
5. Gentner, D., & Gunn, V. (2001). Structural alignment facilitates the noticing of differences. Memory & Cognition, 29, 565-577.
6. Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1994). Structural alignment in comparison: No difference without similarity. Psychological Science, 5, 152-158.
7. Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52, 45-56.
8. Gentner, D., & Wolff, P. (1997). Alignment in the processing of metaphor. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 331-355.
9. Goldstone, R. L. (1994). The role of similarity in categorization: Providing a groundwork. Cognition, 52, 125-157.
10. Goldstone, R. L., Medin, D. L., & Gentner, D. (1991). Relational similarity and the non-independence of features in similarity judgments. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 222-264.
11. Goodman, N. (1972). Seven strictures on similarity. In Problems and projects (pp. 437-446). New York: Bobbs-Merrill.
12. Lassaline, M. E., & Murphy, G. L. (1998). Alignment and category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 144-160.
13. Markman, A. B. (1996). Structural alignment in similarity and difference judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 227-230.
14. Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (1996). Commonalities and differences in similarity comparisons. Memory & Cognition, 24, 235-249.
15. Markman, A. B., & Gentner D. (1997). The effects of alignability on memory. Psychological Science, 8, 363-367.
16. Markman, A. B., & Medin, D. L. (1995). Similarity and alignment in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 117-130.
17. Markman, A. B., & Wisniewski, E. J. (1997). Similar and different: The differentiation of basic level categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 54-70.
18. Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., & Gentner, D. (1990). Similarity involving attributes and relations: Judgments of similarity and difference are not inverses. Psychological Science, 1, 64-69.
19. Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., & Gentner, D. (1993). Respects for similarity. Psychological Review, 100, 254-278.
20. Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., & Markman, A. B. (1995). Comparison and choice: Relations between similarity processing and decision processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 1-19.
21. Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327-352.
22. Wisniewski, E. J. (1997). When concepts combine. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 167-183.
23. Wisniewski, E. J., & Middleton, E. L. (2002). Of bucket bowls and coffee cup bowls: Spatial alignment in conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 1-23.