How%20analogical%20processing%20(and%20spatial%20language)%20fosters%20spatial%20learning%20%20Dedre%20Gentner%20Northwestern%20University

1
How analogical processing (and spatial language)
fosters spatial learning Dedre Gentner
Northwestern University
Benjamin Jee, Northwestern University David
Uttal, Northwestern University Cathy Manduca,
Carleton College Thomas Shipley, Temple
University Brad Sageman, Northwestern
University Carol Ormand, Carleton College Basil
Tikoff, UW-Madison
2
Two lines of research

• Analogical processes support spatial learning and
  cognition
• Spatial language supports spatial learning and
  cognition

Overarching question How do we come to be
fluent relational thinkers
3
Analogy as Structure-mapping
An analogy conveys that partly identical
relational structures hold between objects
in different domains Corresponding objects
need not resemble each other (though its easier
if they do)
Gentner (1983, 1989) Falkenhainer, Forbus
Gentner (1989) Gentner Markman (1997)
4
Analogy highlights common relational structure
and fosters relational abstractions
e.g., A small force at a long distance from the
fulcrum can Balance a large force at a small
distance from the fulcrum
Gentner, 1983 Gentner Markman, 1997 Gentner
Namy, 199 Gick Holyoak, 1983
5
Progressive alignment from easily aligned to
hard-to-alignis a good way to start early
learning
Once understood, the relational abstraction
can often be extended to more dissimilar
pairs via Progressive alignment (Kotovsky
Gentner, 1986 Gentner, Anggoro Klibanoff, in
press Jee et al, in prep)
6
How analogy leads to spatial learningDetecting
differences
Alignable difference

Alignable difference different elements that
each occupy the same role in the aligned
structure e.g., Motorcycles have two wheels,
cars have four
Gentner, 1983, 1989, 2003 Gentner Markman,
1997 Gick Holyoak, 1983
7
Task Name a difference between these two images
Gentner Sagi, 2006
8
Task Name a difference between these two images
Nonalignable Difference
Alignable Difference
Gentner Sagi, 2006
9
Finding Fault Using alignment to supporting
spatial learning
Alignable difference
10
Progressive alignment of pairs

• 64 Psych 110 students
• 10 similar 10 dissimilar pairs (No feedback on
  responses)

Similar first
Dissimilar first
11
Comparison and learning

• Structural abstraction Receiving multiple
  structurally-alignable comparisons helps
  generalize the concept
• Progressive alignment Transitioning from close
  (easy to align) pairs to less similar pairs
  helps novice learners abstract a common relation
  (Gentner, Loewenstein, Hung, 2007)
• Teaching students to recognize faults
• Alignable pairs showing fault/no-fault gt same
  examples separately
• Order of pairs matters Progressive alignment
• High-similar (easy to align) pairs ?
  low-similarity (hard to align) pairs is better
  than the reverse order

12
Spatial Language helps children perform a spatial
mapping task (Loewenstein Gentner, 2005)

• For 6 trials (twice per location)
• Baseline Im putting it here
• (Noninformative Language)
• Spatial Language Im putting it on/in/under the
  box
• (Informative Language)

Children are shown the correct answer on each
trial
Loewenstein Gentner, 2005
13
Spatial Mapping Task Neutral Version

• Results
• Young (3 ½) children benefit strongly from
  relational language
• Older (4 year-olds) perform well with or
  without spatial language

14
Cross-mapped Task

• Results
• Pattern repeats at older age
• 4-year-olds fail entirely
• 4 ½ 5-year-olds benefit strongly from overt
  spatial language

15

• Thank you

16
Ongoing Study in Chicago Childrens Museumwith
Susan Levine, Sonica Dhillon, Jessica Saunders,
Ashley Poltermann Tsivia Cohen

• Does alignment foster acquisition of principles
  of stable construction?
• with Susan Levine, Sonica Dhillon, Jessica
  Saunders, Tsivia Cohen
• Participants Children 3-8 with families in
  Build-a-skyscraper activity
• Key principle in engineering and architecture
  Diagonal braces confer stability

17
High Alignability
Low Alignability

• Which one do you think is stronger?
• OK, now see if you can wiggle them
• The building with the vertical piece bends.
• The building with the diagonal brace does not
  bend.
• So which one was stronger? Right! The one with
  the brace was stronger

18
Ongoing Study in Chicago Childrens Museumwith
Susan Levine, Sonica Dhillon, Jessica Saunders,
Ashley Poltermann Tsivia Cohen

• Post-test Show me where you would put this to
  make this building strong
• Results
• High-alignment gt Low-alignment

19
Recognizing Faults
Fault a fracture in a rock along which movement
has occurred
20
Learning through examples

• Most introductory geology courses include
  instruction about faults other geological
  structures
• Students see multiple examples of faults
• Students vary in rate of learning

Sources Wikipedia.org, USGS.gov
21
Method Transfer task post-tests

• 14 single images, 7 fault and 7 no-fault

Is there a fault? If so, place 2 Xs on its
location
X
X
X
X

• Spatial ability tests Mental rotation and water
  levels
• Background experience questionnaire (10
  questions)
• Key question How many previous course in
  geology?

22
Results Effects of condition
Does similar-first sequence lead to higher
performance in the initial phase?
May depend on background experience
No geo courses n44
At least 1 geo course n20

ns
Initial Phase d-prime
Initial Phase d-prime
23
Results Effects of condition
Main effect of geo course experience in the
transfer task
No geo courses n44
At least 1 geo course n20
Transfer task d-prime
Transfer task d-prime
24
Results Geoscience experience and spatial ability

• Are geoscience experience effects due to spatial
  ability?
• No significant difference on spatial ability
  measures between those with geo experience and
  those without (no experience actually higher on
  each measure)

• What knowledge leads to higher performance?
• 17 participants asked to explain the information
  they used to find faults in images, and how they
  know when they have found a fault
• 2 main types of information present in responses
  use of cracks/fractures, and use of
  movement/displacement of layers

Crack/Fracture mentions Movement/Displacement mentions
Accuracy above mean 6 16
Accuracy below mean 14 7
25
Further directions

• More initial instruction that explicitly
  distinguishes faults from fractures may be
  especially beneficial for novices
• e.g., diagrams, photos, or simulations of faults
• Provide feedback during initial phase
• May enhance novices ability to profit from
  comparison
• Examine performance on new set of transfer items
• Examine eye movements to observe processing
  (search and comparison) in more detail

Fault
Fracture, No fault
26
How analogy leads to learning Detection of
differences   Analogical comparisons make
alignable differences more salient (Gentner
Markman, 1994 Markman Gentner, 1993, 1996)
Example task Find the wrongly placed bone
(Kurtz Gentner, in prep)
27
Ongoing Study in Chicago Childrens Museumwith
Susan Levine, Sonica Dhillon, Jessica Saunders,
Ashley Poltermann Tsivia Cohen

• Does alignment foster acquisition of principles
  of stable construction?
• with Susan Levine, Sonica Dhillon, Jessica
  Saunders, Tsivia Cohen
• Participants Children 3-8 with families in
  Build-a-skyscraper activity
• Key principle in engineering and architecture
  Diagonal braces confer stability

28
High Alignability
Low Alignability

• Which one do you think is stronger?
• OK, now see if you can wiggle them
• The building with the vertical piece bends.
• The building with the diagonal brace does not
  bend.
• So which one was stronger? Right! The one with
  the brace was stronger

29
Method

• -- Pre-training
• Comparison Diagonal brace vs. Horizontal/Vertical
  piece
• Conditions
• High-alignable
• Low-alignable
• Control (no pre-training)
• -- Task Child builds skyscraper
• w/ family
• -- Post-task Questions
• assessment tasks

30
High Alignability

• Which one do you think is stronger?
• OK, now see if you can wiggle them
• The building with the vertical piece bends.
• The building with the diagonal brace does not
  bend.
• So which one was stronger? Right! The one with
  the brace was stronger

31
Results Reaction time
Different Responses
RT (ms)
RT (ms)
Same-Diff (n24)
Name-a-diff (n20)
2. Name-a-Diff High Sim faster than Low Sim
(plt.01)
1. Same-Diff High Sim slower than Low Sim
(plt.01)
3. Same-Diff faster than Name-a-Diff
(plt.01)
32
Structure-Mapping Principles Gentner, 1983, 1989

• 1. Structural Consistency
• 1-1 Correspondences
• Parallel Connectivity
•  
• 2. Systematicity 
• Common Connected Systems of Relations 
• Higher-Order Constraining Relations
•  
• 3. Relational Focus
• Common Relations gt Common Object Descriptions
•   
• Embodied in SME (the Structure-mapping Engine)
• (Falkenhainer, Forbus Gentner, 1989 Forbus,
  Gentner Law, 1995)
• Many of these principles now used in other
  models
• ACME, IAM, AMBR, SIAM, LISA, EMMA

33
Structural alignment supports spatial learning
Structural abstraction
Candidate inference

• Highlights common spatial relational structure
• Supports abstraction of common spatial structure
• Invites new spatial inferences

Gentner, 1983, 1989, 2003 Gentner Markman,
1997 Gick Holyoak, 1983