Journal article
D. Gentner, K. Kurtz
Cognitive Sciences, 2006
Cognitive Sciences, 2006
Semantic Scholar
DBLP
DOI
PubMed
Cite
Cite
APA
Click to copy
Gentner, D., & Kurtz, K. (2006). Relations, Objects, and the Composition of Analogies. Cognitive Sciences.
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
Gentner, D., and K. Kurtz. “Relations, Objects, and the Composition of Analogies.” Cognitive Sciences (2006).
MLA
Click to copy
Gentner, D., and K. Kurtz. “Relations, Objects, and the Composition of Analogies.” Cognitive Sciences, 2006.
BibTeX Click to copy
@article{d2006a,
title = {Relations, Objects, and the Composition of Analogies},
year = {2006},
journal = {Cognitive Sciences},
author = {Gentner, D. and Kurtz, K.}
}
Abstract
This research addresses the kinds of matching elements that determine analogical relatedness and literal similarity. Despite theoretical agreement on the importance of relational match, the empirical evidence is neither systematic nor definitive. In 3 studies, participants performed online evaluations of relatedness of sentence pairs that varied in either the object or relational match. Results show a consistent focus on relational matches as the main determinant of analogical acceptance. In addition, analogy does not require strict overall identity of relational concepts. Semantically overlapping but nonsynonymous relations were commonly accepted, but required more processing time. Finally, performance in a similarity rating task partly paralleled analogical acceptance; however, relatively more weight was given to object matches. Implications for psychological theories of analogy and similarity are addressed.
