Beyond candidate inferences: People treat analogies as probabilistic truths
نویسندگان
چکیده
People use analogies for many cognitive purposes such as building mental models, making inspired guesses, and extracting relational structure. Here we examine whether and how analogies may have more direct influence on knowledge: Do people treat analogies as probabilistically true explanations for uncertain propositions? We report an experiment that explores how a suggested analogy can influence people’s confidence in inferences. Participants made predictions while simultaneously evaluating a suggested analogy and observed evidence. In two conditions, the evidence is either consistent with or in conflict with propositions based on the suggested analogy. We analyze the responses statistically and in a psychologically plausible Bayesian network model. We find that analogies are used for more than just generating candidate inferences. They act as probabilistic truths that affect the integration of evidence and confidence in both the target and source domains. People readily treat analogies not as a one-way projection from source to target, but as a mutually informative connection.
منابع مشابه
Analogical Inferences in Causal Systems
Analogical and causal reasoning theories both seek to explain patterns of inductive inference. Researchers have claimed that reasoning scenarios incorporating aspects of both analogical comparison and causal thinking necessitate a new model of inductive inference (Holyoak, Lee, & Lu, 2010; Lee & Holyoak, 2008). This paper takes an opposing position, arguing that features of analogical models ma...
متن کاملConstraining Analogical Inference with Memory-based Verification
From, Analogies complete their primary task of generating new knowledge about a problem domain, based on a noted similarity between the problem and some other familiar domain. Analogical inferences are generated as a form of pattern completion occurring in the target domain, but not all comparisons between structurally similar domains generate valid inferences. We highlight the need for a domai...
متن کاملInference processes in causal analogies
In recent papers, Lee & Holyoak (2007, 2008a, 2008b) argue that extant models of analogy fail to explain how people draw inferences from causal analogies. In the current research, we argue that structure-mapping theory sufficiently explains the analogical inferences drawn from these causal analogies, and that, contrary to L&H‘s claims, the effect inference can indeed be evaluated by a post-anal...
متن کاملAnalogy as a mechanism of comparison
When we think of analogies, we often imagine cases where drawing on complex concepts from one domain helps to extend our comprehension of concepts from a different domain. As such, the use of analogies is often associated with creativity and problem-solving. However, there is evidence that the inferences derived through processes of analogical thinking are applicable in other contexts that migh...
متن کاملDecision factors that support preference learning
People routinely draw inferences about others’ preferences by observing their decisions. We study these inferences by characterizing a space of simple observed decisions. Previous work on attribution theory has identified several factors that predict whether a given decision provides strong evidence for an underlying preference. We identify one additional factor and show that a simple probabili...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2017