Learning Through Case Comparisons: A Meta-Analytic Review

Educational Psychologist

Volumn 48, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 87-113

  Alfieri, Louis ^a   Nokes Malach, Timothy J ^a   Schunn, Christian D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84879001147     PISSN: 00461520     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2013.775712     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. Belenky, D. M., & Nokes-Malach, T. J. (2012). Motivation and transfer: The role of mastery-approach goals in preparation for future learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 399-432. doi:10.1080/ 10508406.2011.651232
2. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2005). Comprehensive meta-analysis Version 2. Englewood, NJ: Biostat.
3. Boroditsky, L. (2007). Comparison and the development of knowledge. Cognition, 102, 118-128.doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2002.08.001
4. Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61-100. doi:10.2307/1167267
5. Buehl, D. (2008). Classroom strategies for interactive learning (3rd ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
6. Catrambone, R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1989). Overcoming contextual limitations on problem-solving transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 1147-1156. doi:10.1037//0278-7393.15.6.1147
7. Chen, Z., & Daehler, M. W. (1989). Positive and negative transfer in analogical problem solving by 6-year-old children. Cognitive Development, 4, 327-344. doi:10.1016/S0885-2014(89)90031-2
8. Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 73-105. doi:10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x
9. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanation: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1302 1
10. Chi, M. T. H., & VanLehn, K. A. (2012). Seeing deep structure from the interactions of surface features. Educational Psychologist, 47, 177-188. doi:10.1080/00461520.2012.695709
11. Christie, S., & Gentner, D. (2010).Where hypotheses come from: Learning new relations by structural alignment. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11, 356-373. doi:10.1080/15248371003700015
12. Clement, C. A., & Gentner, D. (1991). Systematicity as a selection constraint in analogical comparison. Cognitive Science, 15, 89-132.
13. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Cummins, D. D. (1992). Role of analogical reasoning in the induction of problem categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 1103-1124. doi:10.1037// 0278-7393.18.5.1103
15. Druit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies andmetaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75, 649-672.
16. Ebbinghaus, H. (1913). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology (H. A. Ruger & C. E. Bussenius, Trans.). New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University. doi:10.1037/10011-000
17. Fong, G. T., Krantz, D. H., & Nisbett, R. E. (1986). The effects of statistical training on thinking about everyday problems. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 253-292. doi:0010-0285186
18. Fong, G. T., & Nisbett, R. E. (1991). Immediate and delayed transfer of training effects in statistical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120(1), 34-45.doi:10.1037/0096-3445.120.1.34
19. Gadgil, S., & Nokes, T. J. (2009, July). Analogical scaffolding in collaborative learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
20. Gee, B. (1978). Models as a pedagogical tool: Can we learn from Maxwell? Physics Education, 13, 287-291. doi:10.1088/0031-9120/13/5/004Retrieved from http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9120/13/5/004
21. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
22. Gentner, D. (2003). Whywe're so smart. InD. Gentner&S.Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 195-235). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Gentner, D. (2010). Bootstrapping the mind: Analogical processes and symbol systems. Cognitive Science, 34, 752-775. doi:10.1111/j.1551- 6709.2010.01114.x
24. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and transfer: A general role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 393-405. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.393
25. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2004, August). Analogical encoding: Facilitating knowledge transfer and integration. Paper presented at the twenty-sixth annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Chicago, IL.
26. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Forbus, K.D. (2009). Reviving inert knowledge: Analogical abstraction supports relational retrieval of past events. Cognitive Science, 33, 1343-1382. doi:10.1111/j.1551- 6709.2009.01070.x
27. Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52, 45-56. doi:10.1037// 0003-066X.52.1.45
28. Gentner, D., & Namy, L. L. (1999). Comparison in the development of categories. Cognitive Development, 14, 487-513. doi:10.1016/S0885- 2014(99)00016-7
29. Gentner, D., & Sagi, E. (2006). Does "different" imply a difference? A comparison of two tasks. In R. Sun & N. Miyake (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-eighth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 261-266). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. Gerjets, P., Scheiter, K., & Schuh, J. (2008). Information comparisons in example-based hypermedia environments: Supporting learners with processing prompts and an interactive comparison tool. Education Technology Research and Development, 56, 73-92. doi:10.1007/s11423-007-9068-z
31. Gick, M.L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980).Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306-355. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(80)90013-4
32. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1-38. doi:10.1016/ 0010-0285(83)90002-6
33. Goldstone, R. L., & Barsalou, L. W. (1998). Reuniting perception and conception. Cognition, 65, 231-262. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(97) 00047-4
34. Goldstone, R. L., Day, S., & Son, J. Y. (2010). Comparison. In B. Glatzeder, V. Goel, & A. von M̈uller (Eds.), On thinking: Towards a theory of thinking (Vol. II, pp. 103-122). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-03129-8 7
35. Graham, S. A., Namy, L. L., Gentner, D., & Meagher, K. (2010). The role of comparison in preschoolers' novel object categorization. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107, 280-290. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2010.04.017
36. Hofstadter, D. R. (2001). Epilogue: Analogy as the core of cognition. In D. G. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. K. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 449-538). Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.
37. Holyoak, K. J. (2012). Analogy and relational reasoning. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 234-259). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
38. Huedo-Medina, T. B., Sánchez-Meca, J., Marín-Martínez, F., & Botella, J. (2006). Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index? Psychological Methods, 11, 193-206. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.11.2.193
39. Hummel, J.E., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997).Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping. Psychological Review, 104, 427-466. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.104.3.427
40. Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (2003). A symbolic-connectionist theory of relational inference and generalization. Psychological Review, 110, 220-263. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.220
41. Iding, M. K. (1997). How analogies foster learning from science texts. Instructional Science, 25, 233-253.
42. James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology, volume 1. New York, NY: Holt.
43. Johnson, B. (1989). DSTAT: Software for the meta-analytic review of research literature. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
44. Johnson, B. (1993). DSTAT 1.10: Software for the meta-analytic review of research literature: Upgrade documentation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
45. Kotovsky, L., & Gentner, D. (1996). Comparison and categorization in the development of relational similarity. Child Development, 67, 2797-2822. doi:10.2307/1131753
46. Kurtz, K. J. (2005).Re-representation in comparison: Building an empirical case. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 17, 447-459. doi:10.1080/09528130500324255
47. 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. doi:10.3758/BF03193454
48. Kurtz, K. J., Miao, C., & Gentner, D. (2001). Learning by analogical bootstrapping. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10, 417-466. doi:10.1207/S15327809JLS1004new 2
49. Lewis, J. R. (1933). Analogies in teaching freshman chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 10, 627-630. doi:10.1021/ed010p627
50. Lipsey, M. W. (2003). Those confounded moderators in meta-analysis: Good, bad, and ugly. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 587, 69-81. doi:10.1177/0002716202250791
51. Loewenstein, J., & Gentner, D. (2001). Spatial mapping in preschoolers: Close comparisons facilitate far mappings. Journal of Cognition and Development, 2, 189-219. doi:10.1207/S15327647JCD0202 4
52. Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2000). The challenge of learning. Negotiation Journal, 16, 399-408. doi:10.1023/A:1026692922914
53. Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Gentner, D. (1999). Analogical encoding facilitates knowledge transfer in negotiation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 586-597.doi:10.3758/BF03212967
54. Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Gentner, D. (2003). Analogical learning in negotiation teams: Comparing cases promotes learning and transfer. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2, 119-127. doi:10.5465/AMLE.2003.9901663
55. Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (1993). Structural alignment during similarity comparisons. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 431-467. doi:10.1006/cogp.1993.1011
56. Mason, L. (2004). Fostering understanding by structural alignment as a route to analogical encoding. Instructional Science, 32, 293-318.
57. Michael, A. L., Klee, T., Bransford, J. D., & Warren, S. F. (1993). The transition from theory to therapy: Test of two instructional methods. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 7, 139-153. doi:10.1002/acp.2350070206
58. Ming, N. (2009). Analogies vs. contrasts: A comparison of their learning benefits. In B. Kokinov, K. Holyoak, & D. Gentner (Eds.), Proceedings of the second international conference on analogy (pp. 338-347). Sofia, Bulgaria: NBU Press.
59. Mundy, M. E., Honey, R. C., & Dwyer, D. M. (2009). Superior discrimination between similar stimuli after simultaneous exposure. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 18-25. doi:10.1080/17470210802240614
60. Nagarajan, A., & Hmelo-Silver, C. (2006). Scaffolding learning from contrasting video cases. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Sciences, 495-501.
61. Namy, L. L., & Gentner, D. (2002). Making a silk purse out of two sow's ears: Young children's use of comparison in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 5-15. doi:10.1037//0096-3445.131.1.5
62. Namy, L. L., Gentner, D., & Clepper, L. E. (2007). How close is too close? Alignment and perceptual similarity in children's categorization. Cognition, Brain, Behavior, 11, 647-659.
63. National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
64. Nokes, T. J., VanLehn, K., & Belenky, D. M. (2008, July). Coordinating principles and examples through analogy and explanation. Poster presented at the Thirtieth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Washington, DC. doi:10.1007/s10212-012-0164-z
65. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38, 1-4.Retrieved from doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801 1
66. Richland, L. E., & McDonough, I. M. (2010). Learning by analogy: Discriminating between potential analogs. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 28-43. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.09.001
67. Richland, L. E., Zur, O., & Holyoak, K. J. (2007). Cognitive supports for analogies in the mathematics classroom. Science, 316, 1128-1129. doi:10.1126/science.1142103
68. Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J. R. (2007). Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 561-574. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.561
69. Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J. R. (2011). The power of comparison in learning and instruction: Learning outcomes supported by different types of comparisons. In J. P. Mestre & B. H. Ross (Eds.), Cognition in education (Vol. 55, pp. 199-226). Oxford, UK: Academic.
70. Rittle-Johnson, B., Star, J. R., & Durkin, K. (2009). The importance of prior knowledge when comparing examples: Influences on conceptual and procedural knowledge on equation solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 836-852. doi:10.1037/a0016026
71. Rothstein, H. R., & Bushman, B. J. (2012). Publication bias in psychological science: Comment on Ferguson and Brannick (2012). Psychological Methods, 17, 129-136. doi:10.1037/a0027128
72. Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Schuh, J. (2004, June). The impact of example comparisons on schema acquisition: Do learners really need multiple examples? Paper presented at the 6th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Santa Monica, CA.
73. Schuh, J., Gerjets, P., & Scheiter, K. (2005, July). Fostering the acquisition of transferable problem-solving knowledge with an interactive comparison tool and dynamic visualizations of solution procedures. Paper presented at the Twenty-seventh Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Stresa, Italy.
74. Schustack, M. W. & Anderson, J. R. (1979). Effects of analogy to prior knowledge on memory for new information. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 565-583. doi:10.1016/ S0022-5371(79)90314-1
75. Schwartz, D. L. & Bransford, J. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 475-522. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1604 4
76. Seifert, C. M., McKoon, G., Abelson, R. P., & Ratcliff, R. (1986). Memory connections between thematically similar episodes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 12, 220-231. doi:10.1037//0278-7393.12.2.220
77. Seufert, T. (2003). Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13, 227-237. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00022-1
78. Siegler, R., Carpenter, T., Fennell, F., Geary, D., Lewis, J., Okamoto, Y., Wray, J. (2010). Developing effective fractions instruction for kindergarten through 8th grade: A practice guide (NCEE #2010-4039). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://whatworks.ed.gov/publications/practiceguides
79. Spencer, R. M., & Weisberg, R. W. (1986). Context-dependent effects on analogical transfer. Memory & Cognition, 14, 442-449.
80. Star, J. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2009). It pays to compare: An experimental study on computational estimation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 102, 408-426. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2008.11.004
81. Thompson, L., Gentner, D., & Loewenstein, J. (2000). Avoiding missed opportunities in managerial life: Analogical training more powerful than individual case training. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 60-75. doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2887
82. Treagust, D. F., Druit, R., Joslin, P., & Lindauer, I. (1992). Science teachers' use of analogies: Observations from classroom practice. International Journal of Science Education, 14, 413-422. doi:10.1080/ 0950069920140404
83. Webb, M. J. (1985). Analogies and their limitations. School Science and Mathematics, 85, 645-650. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.1985. tb09677.x
84. Weller, C. M. (1970). The role of analogy in teaching science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 7, 113-119. doi:10.1111/j. 1949-8594.1985.tb09677.x