A computational account of children’s analogical reasoning: balancing inhibitory control in working memory and relational representation

Abstract

Theories accounting for the development of analogical reasoning tend to emphasize either the centrality of relational knowledge accretion or changes in information processing capability. Simulations in LISA (Hummel & Holyoak, 1997, 2003), a neurally inspired computer model of analogical reasoning, allow us to explore how these factors may collaboratively contribute to the development of analogy in young children. Simulations explain systematic variations in United States and Hong Kong children's performance on analogies between familiar scenes (Richland, Morrison & Holyoak, 2006; Richland, Chang, Morrison & Au, 2010). Specifically, changes in inhibition levels in the model's working-memory system explain the developmental progression in US children's ability to handle increases in relational complexity and distraction from object similarity during analogical reasoning. In contrast, changes in how relations are represented in the model best capture cross-cultural differences in performance between children of the same ages (3-4 years) in the United States and Hong Kong. We use these results and simulations to argue that the development of analogical reasoning in children may best be conceptualized as an equilibrium between knowledge accretion and the maturation of information processing capability.

Development of inductive generalization with familiar categories

“…Age-related improvements in working memory and inhibitory control have been implicated in developmental accounts of category learning (Sloutsky, 2010) and analogical reasoning (Krawczyk, Morrison, Viskontas, Holyoak, Chow, Mendez, Miller, & Knowlton, 2008;Morrison, Doumas, & Richland, 2011;Richland, Morrison & Holyoak, 2006); however, the relationship between individual differences in these processes and the emergence of category-consistent inferences has remained unexplored. In what follows, we discuss what role inhibitory control and representation maintenance-processes that are subserved by the areas within the pre-frontal cortex (Diamond, 2002;Miller & Cohen, 2001)-may play in children's performance on inductive generalization tasks.…”

Bayesian analogy with relational transformations.

“…The empirical phenomenon of a relational shift is well established, but there has been some debate regarding the developmental mechanisms that may underlie it. Considerable evidence indicates that some changes are maturational, involving increases in working memory capacity (Halford et al, 1998) and inhibitory control (Morrison, Doumas, & Richland, 2011;Richland, Morrison & Holyoak, 2006). However, it is universally accepted that learning new relations is a prerequisite for solving analogy problems based on these relations (Goswami, 1992(Goswami, , 2001.…”

Progression paths in children’s problem solving: The influence of dynamic testing, initial variability, and working memory

“…Children with smaller spatial working-memory capacity were expected to make limited progress as a result of repeated practice as their workspace for constructing relational representations is assumed to be more limited (Halford et al, 2010). Those who had received training, however, were expected to subsequently demonstrate a higher rate of progress (Carr & Schneider, 1991;Halford et al, 2010;Morrison, Doumas, & Richland, 2011). The rationale behind this hypothesis was that dynamic testing was expected to alleviate any working-memory limitation by breaking down the analogical reasoning process into small steps that can be processed serially and by providing relational knowledge (Halford et al, 2010;Morrison et al, 2011).…”

“…Those who had received training, however, were expected to subsequently demonstrate a higher rate of progress (Carr & Schneider, 1991;Halford et al, 2010;Morrison, Doumas, & Richland, 2011). The rationale behind this hypothesis was that dynamic testing was expected to alleviate any working-memory limitation by breaking down the analogical reasoning process into small steps that can be processed serially and by providing relational knowledge (Halford et al, 2010;Morrison et al, 2011). This might help these children to catch up with peers with superior working-memory capacity.…”