Learning by Analogical Bootstrapping

Abstract

Analogies are typically drawn from a well-understood situation to a situation that is poorly understood. In this research, we investigate a different route to analogical in- sight. We suggest that mutual alignment-that is, comparison between 2 partially un- derstood situations--can act to promote comprehension and abstraction. We pre- sented participants with 2 analogous scenarios depicting heat flow. They were given processing tasks that varied in the degree to which comparison was required. We then measured insight into the common structure in 3 ways. Participants were asked to (a) specify differences between the 2 pictured scenarios, (b) write scenario descriptions, and (c) rate the similarity of the 2 scenarios. The results show that carrying out com- parison promotes greater insight into the common causal structure, but only when the comparison is intensive. The best results were obtained when participants were asked to jointly interpret the scenarios and to list specific correspondences. In a second ex- periment designed to further pinpoint the source of the comparison advantage, partici- pants were asked to make correspondences between the elements of the 2 scenarios. These results suggest that mutual alignment is an effective means of promoting in- sight.