Reviving inert knowledge: Analogical abstraction supports relational retrieval of past events

Cognitive Science

Volumn 33, Issue 8, 2009, Pages 1343-1382

  Gentner, Dedre ^a   Loewenstein, Jeffrey ^b   Thompson, Leigh ^c   Forbus, Kenneth D ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^c NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Analogical mapping; Inert knowledge; Memory retrieval; Relational structure; Schema abstraction

Indexed keywords

EID: 77953163561     PISSN: 03640213     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01070.x     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Agresti, A. (2007). An introduction to categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
2. Ahn, W. K., Brewer, W., & Mooney, R. (1992). Schema acquisition from a single example. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 391-412.
3. Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 612-637.
4. Bassok, M., Pedigo, S. F., & Oskarsson, A. T. (2008). Priming addition facts with semantic relations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 343-352.
5. Bazerman, M. H., & Gillespie, J. J. (1999). Betting on the future: The virtues of contingent contracts. Harvard Business Review, 77, 155-160.
6. Blanchette, I., & Dunbar, K. (2001). Analogy use in naturalistic settings: The influence of audience, emotion, and goals. Memory & Cognition, 29, 730-735.
7. Bransford, J. D. (1979). The role of prior knowledge. In J. D. Bransford (Ed.), Human cognition: Learning, understanding, and remembering (pp. 129-165). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
8. Brooks, L. R. (1987). Decentralized control of categorization: The role of prior processing episodes. In U. Neisser (Ed.), Concepts and conceptual development: The ecological and intellectual factors in categorization. (pp. 141-174). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
9. Brooks, L. R., Norman, G. R., & Allen, S. W. (1991). Role of specific similarity in a medical diagnostic task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 278-287.
10. Catrambone, R. (2002). The effects of surface and structural features matches on the access of story analogies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 318-334.
11. Catrambone, R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1989). Overcoming contextual limitations on problem-solving transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 1147-1156.
12. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovitch, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
13. Chi, M. T. H., & VanLehn, K. A. (1991). The content of physics self-explanations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 69-105.
14. Chipman S. F., J. W. Segal, & R. Glaser (Eds.) (1985). Thinking and learning skills: Current research and open questions, Vol. 2. (pp. 485-517). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Clement, C. A., Mawby, R., & Giles, D. E. (1994). The effects of manifest relational similarity on analog retrieval. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 396-420.
16. Colhoun, J., Gentner, D., & Loewenstein, J. (2008). Leaving abstract principles through principal-case comparison. In B. C. Love, K. McRae & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the cognitive Science Society (pp. 1659-1664). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
17. Day, S. B., & Gentner, D. (2007). Nonintentional analogical inference in text comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 35, 39-49.
18. Duncker, K. (1945). On problem-solving (L. S. Lees, Trans.). Psychological Monographs, 58, Whole No. 270. (Original work published 1935).
19. Eliasmith, C., & Thagard, P. (2001). Integrating structure and meaning: A distributed model of analogical mapping. Cognitive Science, 25, 245-286.
20. Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). The structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1-63.
21. Follett, M. P. (1940). Constructive conflict. In H. C. Metcalf & L. Urwick (Eds.), Dynamic administration: The collected papers of Mary Parker Follett (pp. 30-49). New York: Harper.
22. Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1986). Learning physical domains: Toward a theoretical framework. In R. S. Michalski, J. G. Carbonell, & T. M. Mitchell (Eds.), Machine learning: An artificial intelligence approach, Vol. 2 (pp. 311-348). Los Altos, CA: Kaufmann.
23. Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., & Law, K. (1995). MAC/FAC: A model of similarity-based retrieval. Cognitive Science, 19, 141-205.
24. Froman, L. A., & Cohen, M. D. (1970). Compromise and logroll: comparing the efficiency of two bargaining processes. Behavioral Science, 30, 180-183.
25. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
26. Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199-241). London: Cambridge University Press.
27. Gentner, D., & Christie, S. (2007). Learning new relations via structural alignment. In S. Vosniadou & D. Kayser (Eds.). Proceedings of the Second European Cognitive Science Conference. New York: Taylor & Francis.
28. Gentner, D., & Clement, C. (1988). Evidence for relational selectivity in the interpretation of analogy and metaphor. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory, Vol. 22 (pp. 307-358). New York: Academic Press.
29. Gentner, D., & Kurtz, K. (2006). Relations, objects, and the composition of analogies. Cognitive Science, 30, 609-642.
30. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and transfer: A general role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 393-408.
31. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2004). Analogical encoding: Facilitating Knowledge transfer and integration. In K. D. Forbus, D. Gentner & T. Reiger (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 452-457. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
32. Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52, 45-56.
33. Gentner, D., & Medina, J. (1998). Similarity and the development of rules. Cognition, 65, 263-297.
34. Gentner, D., & Namy, L. (1999). Comparison in the development of categories. Cognitive Development, 14, 487-513.
35. Gentner, D., Rattermann, M. J., & Forbus, K. D. (1993). The roles of similarity in transfer: Separating retrievability and inferential soundness. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 524-575.
36. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306-355.
37. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1-38.
38. Gillund, G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. Psychological Review, 91, 1-67.
39. Goldstone, R. L., & Wilensky, U. (2008). Promoting transfer through complex systems principles. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26(1), 465-516.
40. Hintzmann, D. L. (1986). Schema abstraction in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 93, 411-428.
41. Holyoak, K. J., Gentner, D., & Kokinov, B. N. (2001). Introduction: The place of analogy in cognition. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 1-19). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42. Holyoak, K. J., & Koh, K. (1987). Surface and structural similarity in analogical transfer. Memory & Cognition, 15, 332-340.
43. Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping. Psychological Review, 104(3), 427-466.
44. Johnson, H. M., & Seifert, C. M. (1992). The role of predictive features in retrieving analogical cases. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 648-667.
45. Keane, M. T. (1988). Analogical Problem solving. Chichester, England: E. Horword.
46. King, J., & Bareiss, R. (1989). Similarity assessment and case-based reasoning. In Proceedings: Case-Based Reasoning Workshop (pp. 67-71). San Mateo, CA: Kautmann.
47. Kokinov, B., & Petrov, A. (2001). Integrating memory and reasoning in analogy-making: The AMBR model. In D. Gentner, K. Holyoak, & B. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science. (pp. 59-124). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Kurtz, K. J., & Loewenstein, J. (2007). Converging on a new role for analogy in problem solving and retrieval: When two problems are better than one. Memory & Cognition, 35, 334-341.
49. Larkey, L. B., & Love, B. C. (2003). CAB: Connectionist analogy builder. Cognitive Science, 27, 781-794.
50. Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. Science, 208, 1335-1342.
51. Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Gentner, D. (1999). Analogical encoding facilitates knowledge transfer in negotiation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 586-597.
52. Markman, A. B. (1999). Knowledge representation. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
53. Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (1993). Structural alignment during similarity comparisons. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 431-467.
54. Medin, D. L., & Ross, B. H. (1989). The specific character of abstract thought: Categorization, problem-solving, and induction. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence, Vol. 5 (pp. 189-223). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
55. Novick, L. (1988). Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 510-520.
56. Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2000). The knowing-doing gap. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
57. Pirolli, P. L., & Anderson, J. R. (1985). The role of learning from examples in the acquisition of recursive programming skills. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 39, 240-272.
58. Ramscar, M., & Pain, H. (1996). Can a real distinction be made between cognitive theories of analogy and categorisation? In G. W. Cottrell (Ed.), Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 346-351). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
59. Ramscar, M., & Yarlett, D. (2003). Semantic grounding in models of analogy: an environmental approach. Cognitive Science, 27, 41-71.
60. Reed, S. K. (1987). A structure-mapping model for word problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 124-139.
61. Reeves, L. M., & Weisberg, R. W. (1994). The role of content and abstract information in analogical transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 381-400.
62. Ross, B. H. (1984). Remindings and their effects in learning a cognitive skill. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 371-416.
63. Ross, B. H. (1987). This is like that: The use of earlier problems and the separation of similarity effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 629-639.
64. Ross, B. H. (1989). Distinguishing types of superficial similarities: Different effects on the access and use of earlier problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 456-468.
65. Ross, B. H., & Kennedy, P. T. (1990). Generalizing from the use of earlier examples in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 42-55.
66. Ross, B. H., & Kilbane, M. C. (1997). Analogical mapping views and the effects of principle explanations. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory and Cognition, 23 (2), 427-440.
67. Salvucci, D. D., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Integrating analogical mapping and general problem solving: The path-mapping theory. Cognitive Science, 25, 67-110.
68. Seifert, C. M., McKoon, G., Abelson, R. P., & Ratcliff, R. (1986). Memory connections between thematically similar episodes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 220-231.
69. Spellman, B. A., Holyoak, K. J., & Morrison, R. G. (2001). Analogical priming via semantic relations. Memory & Cognition, 29, 383-393.
70. Thagard, P., Holyoak, K. J., Nelson, G., & Gochfeld, D. (1990). Analog retrieval by constraint satisfaction. Artificial Intelligence, 46, 259-310.
71. Thompson, L., Gentner, D., & Loewenstein, J. (2000). Avoiding missed opportunities in managerial life: Analogical learning improves case-based transfer. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 60-75.
72. Waltz, D. (1989). Is indexing used for retrieval? In R. Bareiss (Ed.), Proceedings: Case-Based Reasoning Workshop (pp. 41-45). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
73. Weisberg, R. W. (1995). Prolegomena to theories of insight in problem solving: A taxonomy of problems. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 157-196). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
74. 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.