This research addresses the kinds of matching elements that determine analogical relatedness and literal similarity. Despite theoretical agreement on the importance of relational match, the empirical evidence is neither systematic nor definitive. In 3 studies, participants performed online evaluations of relatedness of sentence pairs that varied in either the object or relational match. Results show a consistent focus on relational matches as the main determinant of analogical acceptance. In addition, analogy does not require strict overall identity of relational concepts. Semantically (...) overlapping but nonsynonymous relations were commonly accepted, but required more processing time. Finally, performance in a similarity rating task partly paralleled analogical acceptance; however, relatively more weight was given to object matches. Implications for psychological theories of analogy and similarity are addressed. (shrink)

It has become widely accepted that standard connectionist models are unable to show identity‐based relational reasoning that requires universal generalization. The purpose of this brief report is to show how one of the simplest forms of such models, feed‐forward auto‐associative networks, satisfies two of the most well‐known challenges: universal generalization of the identity function and the reduplication rule. Given the simplicity of the modeling account provided, along with the clarity of the evidence, these demonstrations invite a shift in this high‐profile (...) debate over the nature of cognitive architecture and point to a way to bridge some of the presumed gulf between characteristically symbolic forms of reasoning and connectionist mechanisms. (shrink)

A fundamental question in the study of human cognition is how people learn to predict the category membership of an example from its properties. Leading approaches account for a wide range of data in terms of comparison to stored examples, abstractions capturing statistical regularities, or logical rules. Across three experiments, participants learned a category structure in a low‐dimension, continuous‐valued space consisting of regularly alternating regions of class membership (A B A B). The dependent measure was generalization performance for novel items (...) outside the range of the training space. Human learners often extended the alternation pattern––a finding of critical interest given that leading theories of categorization based on similarity or dimensional rules fail to predict this behavior. In addition, we provide novel theoretical interpretations of the observed phenomenon. (shrink)