Comparison promotes learning and transfer of relational categories.

Abstract

We investigated the effect of co-presenting training items during supervised classification learning of novel relational categories. Strong evidence exists that comparison induces a structural alignment process that renders common relational structure more salient. We hypothesized that comparisons between exemplars would facilitate learning and transfer of categories that cohere around a common relational property. The effect of comparison was investigated using learning trials that elicited a separate classification response for each item in presentation pairs that could be drawn from the same or different categories. This methodology ensures consideration of both items and invites comparison through an implicit same-different judgment inherent in making the two responses. In a test phase measuring learning and transfer, the comparison group significantly outperformed a control group receiving an equivalent training session of single-item classification learning. Comparison-based learners also outperformed the control group on a test of far transfer, that is, the ability to accurately classify items from a novel domain that was relationally alike, but surface-dissimilar, to the training materials. Theoretical and applied implications of this comparison advantage are discussed.

On the acquisition of abstract knowledge: Structural alignment and explication in learning causal system categories

“…Our finding that analogical comparison can support the abstraction of such causal structures is consistent with past work showing that comparing examples supports forming relational categories (Christie & Gentner, 2010;Gentner et al, 2011;Jung & Hummel, 2011;Kotovsky & Gentner, 1996;Kurtz et al, 2013;Tomlinson & Love, 2010). Further, our finding that alignment was most beneficial when exemplar relational representations were accurately represented accords with those of Doumas and Hummel (2013) who found that alignment aids learning category-defining higher-order relations (i.e., relations among relations) only when the lower-order relations are properly represented.…”

“…There is considerable prior evidence consistent with the idea that analogical comparison highlights common relations through a process of structural alignment (Falkenhainer, Forbus, & Gentner, 1989;Gentner & Markman, 1997), and that such an alignment permits learners to notice the common structure, which can then be applied more broadly. The idea that analogical comparison promotes transfer from specific learning contexts has received support from research with adults (Gick & Holyoak, 1983;Kurtz, Boukrina, & Gentner, 2013) and children (Christie & Gentner, 2010;Gentner, Anggoro, & Klibanoff, 2011) and by studies in educational contexts (Gentner, Loewenstein, & Thompson, 2003;Klahr & Chen, 2011;Rittle-Johnson & Star, 2009). …”

Detecting anomalous features in complex stimuli: The role of structured comparison.

“…Kurtz, Boukrina, & Gentner, 2013). In this case, common relational structure is defined by spatial relations, and an alignable difference is one that occupies the same role in the spatial structure of the two items compared.…”

Two Approaches to the Concept of Knowledge Application: Transfer and Modeling Overview and Criticism

“…Only instances compared to one another to derive a general schema for a class of instances facilitated forward transfer, compared to situations where instances were offered but no comparison was provided [Gick, Holyoak, 1980;Kurtz, Boukrina, Gentner, 2013]. It also turned out that a simple instruction to solving method is not enough, and neither are simple example-based illustrations.…”