This article describes an integrated theory of analogical access and mapping, instantiated in a

Distinctions have been proposed between systems of reasoning for centuries. This article distills properties shared by many of these distinctions and characterizes the resulting systems in light of recent findings and theoretical developments. One system is associative because its computations reflect similarity structure and relations of temporal contiguity. The other is "rule based " because it operates on symbolic structures that have logical content and variables and because its computations have the properties that are normally assigned to rules. The systems serve complementary functions and can simultaneously generate different solutions to a reasoning problem. The rule-based system can suppress the associative system but not completely inhibit it. The article reviews evidence in favor of the distinction and its characterization. One of the oldest conundrums in psychology is whether people are best conceived as parallel processors of information who operate along diffuse associative links or as analysts who operate by deliberate and sequential manipulation of internal representations. Are inferences drawn through a network of learned associative pathways or through application of a kind of "psychologic"

Abstract not found

Analogy and similarity are often assumed to be distinct psychological processes. In contrast to this position, the authors suggest that both similarity and analogy involve a process of structural alignment and mapping, that is, that similarity is like analogy. In this article, the authors first describe the structure-mapping process as it has been worked out for analogy. Then, this view is extended to similarity, where it is used to generate new predictions. Finally, the authors explore broader implications of structural alignment for psychological processing.

Advanced perceptual systems are faced with the problem of securing a principled relationship between the world and its internal representation. I propose a unified approach to visual representation, based on Shepard's (1968) notion of second-order isomorphism. According to the proposed theory, a shape is represented internally by the responses of a few tuned modules, each of which is broadly selective for some reference shape, whose similarity to the stimulus it measures. The result is a philosophically appealing, computationally feasible, biologically credible, and formally veridical representation of a distal shape space. This approach supports representation of and discrimination among shapes radically different from the reference ones, while bypassing the need for the computationally problematic decomposition into parts; it also addresses the needs of shape categorization, and can be used to derive a range of models of perceived similarity. Representation is Representation of Sim...

Work in philosophy and psychology has argued for a dissociation between perceptuallybased similarity and higher-level rules in conceptual thought. Although such a dissociation may be justified at times, our goal is to illustrate ways in which conceptual processing is grounded in perception, both for perceptual similarity and abstract rules. We discuss the advantages, power and influences of perceptually-based representations. First, many of the properties associated with amodal symbol systems can be achieved with perceptually-based systems as well (e.g. productivity). Second, relatively raw perceptual representations are powerful because they can implicitly represent properties in an analog fashion. Third, perception naturally provides impressions of overall similarity, exactly the type of similarity useful for establishing many common categories. Fourth, perceptual similarity is not static but becomes tuned over time to conceptual demands. Fifth, the original motivation or basis for sophisticated cognition is often less sophisticated perceptual similarity. Sixth, perceptual simulation occurs even in conceptual tasks that have no explicit perceptual demands. Parallels between perceptual and conceptual processes suggest that many mechanisms typically associated

The nature of categories and their acquisition is one of the central open questions in Cognitive Science. We suggest that categories are represented via structured descriptions and formed by a process of progressive abstraction, through successive comparison with incoming exemplars. This paper describes how SEQL (Skorstad, Gentner, & Medin, 1988), a computer model for category learning, which is based on SME (Falkenhainer et al 1986, 1989; Forbus et al 1994) can be used to simulate a recent categorization experiment (Ramscar & Pain, 1996), using a new algorithm, Generalization and Exemplar Learning (GEL). We demonstrate that SEQL produces behavior consistent with human subjects. Introduction Similarity is often viewed as central to categorization. For instance, prototype theories of categorization posit that categorization decisions are made on the basis of the similarity of an entity to the prototypical member of that category (Rosch 1975). However, similarity-based accou...

this article, we present a model of similarity comparison that makes specific time course predictions, which were tested in three experiments. Before turning to that model, we first outline the need for a consideration of similarity processes

Similarity-based and rule-based accounts of cognition are often portrayed as opposing accounts. In this paper we suggest that in learning and development, the process of comparison can act as a bridge between similarity-based and rule-based processing. We suggest that comparison involves a process of structural alignment and mapping between two representations. This kind

This paper begins with a brief review of SME and MAC/FAC, our simulations of matching and retrieval. Next I lay out several arguments for exploring analogy in the large, including why it is now very feasible and what we can learn by such explorations. A new constraint on cognitive simulations, the Integration Constraint, is proposed: A cognitive simulation of some aspect of analogical processing should be usable as a component in larger-scale cognitive simulations. I believe that the implications of this new constraint for cognitive simulation of analogy are far-reaching. After that, two explorations of larger-scale phenomena are described. First, I describe a theoretical framework in which we model common sense reasoning as an interplay of analogical and first-principles reasoning. Second, I describe how SME and MAC/FAC have been used in a case-based coach that is accessible to engineering thermodynamics students worldwide via electronic mail. These examples show that exploring analogy in the large can provide new insights and new challenges to our simulations. Finally, the broader implications of this approach are discussed.