Results 1 - 10
of
84
Learning and Transfer: A General Role for Analogical Encoding
- JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
, 2003
"... ..."
Rapid word learning under uncertainty via cross-situational statistics
- Psychological Science
, 2007
"... ABSTRACT—There are an infinite number of possible wordto-word pairings in naturalistic learning environments. Previous proposals to solve this mapping problem have focused on linguistic, social, representational, and attentional constraints at a single moment. This article discusses a cross-situatio ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 96 (36 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
ABSTRACT—There are an infinite number of possible wordto-word pairings in naturalistic learning environments. Previous proposals to solve this mapping problem have focused on linguistic, social, representational, and attentional constraints at a single moment. This article discusses a cross-situational learning strategy based on computing distributional statistics across words, across referents, and, most important, across the co-occurrences of words and referents at multiple moments. We briefly exposed adults to a set of trials that each contained multiple spoken words and multiple pictures of individual objects; no information about word-picture correspondences was given within a trial. Nonetheless, over trials, subjects learned the word-picture mappings through cross-trial statistical relations. Different learning conditions
Induction and categorization in young children: A similarity-based model
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
, 2004
"... The authors present a similarity-based model of induction and categorization in young children (SINC). The model suggests that (a) linguistic labels contribute to the perceived similarity of compared entities and (b) categorization and induction are a function of similarity computed over perceptual ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 84 (24 self)
- Add to MetaCart
The authors present a similarity-based model of induction and categorization in young children (SINC). The model suggests that (a) linguistic labels contribute to the perceived similarity of compared entities and (b) categorization and induction are a function of similarity computed over perceptual information and linguistic labels. The model also predicts young children’s similarity judgment, induction, and categorization performance under different stimuli and task conditions. Predictions of the model were tested and confirmed in 6 experiments, in which 4- to 5-year-olds performed similarity judgment, induction, and categorization tasks using artificial and real labels (Experiments 1–4) and recognition memory tasks (Experiments 5A and 5B). Results corroborate the similarity-based account of young children’s induction and categorization, and they support both qualitative and quantitative predictions of the model. Inductive inference, or extending knowledge from known to novel instances, is ubiquitous in human cognition. For example, if one learned that a particular lion has a certain neurotransmitter in its brain, one would expect another lion also to have this neurotransmitter, even if one did not have factual knowledge of the brain
Comparison in the development of categories.
- Cognitive Development
, 2000
"... ..."
(Show Context)
Darwin's mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds
- Behavioral and Brain Sciences
, 2008
"... Abstract: Over the last quarter century, the dominant tendency in comparative cognitive psychology has been to emphasize the similarities between human and nonhuman minds and to downplay the differences as “one of degree and not of kind ” (Darwin 1871). In the present target article, we argue that D ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 80 (4 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract: Over the last quarter century, the dominant tendency in comparative cognitive psychology has been to emphasize the similarities between human and nonhuman minds and to downplay the differences as “one of degree and not of kind ” (Darwin 1871). In the present target article, we argue that Darwin was mistaken: the profound biological continuity between human and nonhuman animals masks an equally profound discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds. To wit, there is a significant discontinuity in the degree to which human and nonhuman animals are able to approximate the higher-order, systematic, relational capabilities of a physical symbol system (PSS) (Newell 1980). We show that this symbolic-relational discontinuity pervades nearly every domain of cognition and runs much deeper than even the spectacular scaffolding provided by language or culture alone can explain. We propose a representational-level specification as to where human and nonhuman animals’ abilities to approximate a PSS are similar and where they differ. We conclude by suggesting that recent symbolic-connectionist models of cognition shed new light on the mechanisms that underlie the gap between human and nonhuman minds.
Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations
- Journal of Educational Psychology
, 2007
"... Encouraging students to share and compare solution methods is a key component of reform efforts in mathematics, and comparison is emerging as a fundamental learning mechanism. To experimentally evaluate the effects of comparison for mathematics learning, the authors randomly assigned 70 seventh-grad ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 46 (6 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Encouraging students to share and compare solution methods is a key component of reform efforts in mathematics, and comparison is emerging as a fundamental learning mechanism. To experimentally evaluate the effects of comparison for mathematics learning, the authors randomly assigned 70 seventh-grade students to learn about algebra equation solving by either (a) comparing and contrasting alternative solution methods or (b) reflecting on the same solution methods one at a time. At posttest, students in the compare group had made greater gains in procedural knowledge and flexibility and comparable gains in conceptual knowledge. These findings suggest potential mechanisms behind the benefits of comparing contrasting solutions and ways to support effective comparison in the classroom.
Bootstrapping the mind: Analogical processes and symbol systems
- COGNITIVE SCIENCE
, 2010
"... Human cognition is striking in its brilliance and its adaptability. How do we get that way? How do we move from the nearly helpless state of infants to the cognitive proficiency that characterizes adults? In this paper I argue, first, that analogical ability is the key factor in our prodigious capac ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 33 (9 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Human cognition is striking in its brilliance and its adaptability. How do we get that way? How do we move from the nearly helpless state of infants to the cognitive proficiency that characterizes adults? In this paper I argue, first, that analogical ability is the key factor in our prodigious capacity, and, second, that possession of a symbol system is crucial to the full expression of analogical ability.
Comparison facilitates children’s learning of names for parts
, 2007
"... Learning names for parts of objects can be challenging for children, as it requires overcoming their tendency to name whole objects. We test whether comparing items can facilitate learning names for their parts. Applying the structure-mapping theory of comparison leads to two predictions: (a) young ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 30 (11 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Learning names for parts of objects can be challenging for children, as it requires overcoming their tendency to name whole objects. We test whether comparing items can facilitate learning names for their parts. Applying the structure-mapping theory of comparison leads to two predictions: (a) young children will find it easier to identify a common part between two very similar items than between two dissimilar items (because the similar pair is easier to align); (b) close alignments potentiate far alignments: children will be better able to extend a novel part name to a dissimilar object after having extended it to a similar object. In three studies, 227 preschool children mapped novel part terms to new animals or objects. Both predictions were confirmed. Children more accurately extended novel part terms to objects that were similar to the standard than to objects that were dissimilar (Experiments 1 and 2), and children more accurately extended novel part names to dissimilar objects after having extended them to similar objects (Experiment 3). We conclude that structure-mapping processes can support part learning. An understanding of part structure is central to the understanding of objects and entities and the mechanisms they participate in (Rosch, Mervis, Gray, Johnson & Boyes-Braem, 1976; Tversky & Hemenway, 1984; Tversky, 1989). Yet learning part names might be expected to be quite challenging for children, as it requires them to abandon the whole object level in naming (Markman, 1989) and focus on Address correspondence to Dedre Gentner, Department of Psychology, 2029 Sheridan Road,
Analogical processes in language learning
- Current Directions in Psychological Science
, 2006
"... ABSTRACT—The acquisition of language has long stood as a challenge to general learning accounts, leading many theorists to propose domain-specific knowledge and pro-cesses to explain language acquisition. Here we review evidence that analogical comparison is instrumental in language learning, sugges ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 29 (7 self)
- Add to MetaCart
ABSTRACT—The acquisition of language has long stood as a challenge to general learning accounts, leading many theorists to propose domain-specific knowledge and pro-cesses to explain language acquisition. Here we review evidence that analogical comparison is instrumental in language learning, suggesting a larger role for general learning processes in the acquisition of language. KEYWORDS—language acquisition; structural alignment; analogical learning Language acquisition is one of humankind’s most impressive cognitive feats. A 6-month-old can do little more than babble, but by 2 or 3 years of age, children show generative knowledge of the patterns of their language—that is, they can extend thewords they hear to new situations, and they can use grammatical constructions in new contexts. This accomplishment—a hall-mark of human cognition—has seemed to defy explanation via general learning processes. In this paper we review findings suggesting that human language learning may be explained in part by another hallmark ability in human cognition—namely, analogical processing, a domain-general process of unusual power and generativity. We first highlight some challenges in early language learning. Then we describe analogical processing in humans and present evidence that analogical-comparison processes are instrumental in language learning. We begin with the acquisition of word meaning, including object names, part names, adjectives, and verbs. Then we turn to the role of analogy in grammar learning. THE PROBLEM OF LANGUAGE LEARNING Consider a young child who hears ‘‘This is a bicycle.’ ’ She has to realize that an object is being discussed, determine which object it is, and (if she is to successfully use the word herself in new contexts) ascertain which aspects of the object are important in making it a ‘‘bicycle.’ ’ She must also comprehend the gram-matical construction ‘‘This is a —.’ ’ How do children learn these patterns? We suggest that comparison across utterances plays a major role in this achievement.
Can Language Do the Driving? The Effect of Linguistic Input on Infants’ Categorization of Support Spatial Relations
"... categorical representation of support. Infants were habituated to 4 support events (i.e., one object placed on another) and were tested with a novel support and a novel containment event. Infants formed an abstract category of support (i.e., looked significantly longer at the novel than familiar rel ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 26 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
categorical representation of support. Infants were habituated to 4 support events (i.e., one object placed on another) and were tested with a novel support and a novel containment event. Infants formed an abstract category of support (i.e., looked significantly longer at the novel than familiar relation) when hearing the word “on ” during habituation but not when viewing the events in silence (Experiment 1) or when hearing general phrases or a novel word (Experiment 2). Results indicate that a familiar word can facilitate infants ’ formation of an abstract spatial category, leading them to form a category that they do not form in the absence of the word. On one side of the long-standing debate on the relation between thought and language has been the view that language can be a strong force in the development of particular concepts (Gopnik & Choi, 1995; Gopnik, Choi, & Baumberger, 1996; Vygotsky, 1962; Xu, 1999). This view has been particularly prominent in discussions of how children acquire the meanings expressed in relational terms, such as verbs and prepositions (Bowerman & Choi, 2001,
