On the Concrete Nature of Human Thinking: content and context in analogical transfer |
| |
| Authors: | Lauretta M Reeves Robert W Weisberg |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Rowan College , Glassboro, New Jersey, USA;2. Temple University , Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Although the development of abstract knowledge and critical thinking skills has often been extolled as an ideal and as the goal of education (Nisbett et al., 1987), much research in problem solving and other cognitive endeavours points to the role that concrete information and examples play in thinking (Medin & Ross, 1989; Reeves & Weisberg, in press). We discuss the concrete vs abstract knowledge debate in terms of the use of analogies in problem solving and conclude that exemplar‐specific details of problems and the context in which problems are learned guide the transfer of a solution principle from one base problem to a target. The content of problems—what they are about—is often more important than the more abstract, schematic solution principle in influencing retrieval of base analogues (Holyoak & Koh, 1987; Keane, 1987; Ross, 1987) and mapping of the solution principle from base to target (Gentner & Toupin, 1986; Ross, 1987, 1989; Fong & Nisbett, 1991). It is suggested that learning abstract solution principles in a domain (e.g. algebra, physics) benefits greatly when instruction is accompanied by examples illustrating those principles (Cheng et al., 1986; Fong et al., 1986) and that analogical transfer itself serves as a useful means to greater comprehension of a domain (Ross & Kennedy, 1990). |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
