Thinking and Reasoning 13 (3):273 – 294 (2007)
|Abstract||Laboratory-based studies of problem solving suggest that transfer of solution principles from an analogue to a target arises only minimally without the presence of directive hints. Recently, however, real-world studies indicate that experts frequently and spontaneously use analogies in domain-based problem solving. There is also some evidence that in certain circumstances domain novices can draw analogies designed to illustrate arguments. It is less clear, however, whether domain novices can invoke analogies in the sophisticated manner of experts to enable them to progress problem solving. In the current study groups of novices and experts tackled large-scale management problems. Spontaneous analogising was observed in both conditions, with no marked differences between expertise levels in the frequency, structure, or function of analogising. On average four analogies were generated by groups per hour, with significantly more relational mappings between analogue and target being produced than superficial object-and-attribute mappings. Analogising served two different purposes: problem solving (dominated by relational mappings), and illustration (which for novices was dominated by object-and-attribute mappings). Overall, our novices showed a sophistication in domain-based analogical reasoning that is usually only observed with experts, in addition to a sensitivity to the pragmatics of analogy use.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Raanan Lipshitz, Daphna Leshem Levy & Keren Orchen (2006). Is This Problem Likely to Be Solved? A Cognitive Schema of Effective Problem Solving. Thinking and Reasoning 12 (4):413 – 430.
Bipin Indurkhya (1986). Constrained Semantic Transference: A Formal Theory of Metaphors. Synthese 68 (3):515 - 551.
Dirk Schlimm (2008). Two Ways of Analogy: Extending the Study of Analogies to Mathematical Domains. Philosophy of Science 75 (2):178-200.
Fernand Gobet, Peter McLeod & Merim Bilalić (2011). Expert and “Novice” Problem Solving Strategies in Chess: Sixty Years of Citing de Groot (1946). Thinking and Reasoning 14 (4):395-408.
Merim Bilali (2008). Expert and “Novice” Problem Solving Strategies in Chess: Sixty Years of Citing de Groot (1946). Thinking and Reasoning 14 (4):395 – 408.
Timothy J. Nokes-Malach, Michelle L. Meade & Daniel G. Morrow (2012). The Effect of Expertise on Collaborative Problem Solving. Thinking and Reasoning 18 (1):32 - 58.
Vanessa J. Clarke Koen Lamberts (1997). Strategy Shifts and Expertise in Solving Transformation Rule Problems. Thinking and Reasoning 3 (4):271 – 290.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #180,404 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?