Reasoning About Curvilinear Motion: Using Principles or Analogy

A possible role of naïve impetus in Michotte's "launching effect": Evidence from representational momentum

“…The results of some studies suggest observers may be sensitive to or directly perceive effects of causal dynamics (e.g., Bingham, 1987;Runeson & Frykholm, 1983;Valenti & Costall, 1997). However, the results of other studies suggest observers may appeal to heuristics instead of directly perceiving causal dynamics (e.g., , and these latter findings are more consistent with post-Humean notions that causality must be inferred from contiguity and with findings in so-called naïve physics (Catrambone, Jones, Jonides, & Seifert, 1995;Cooke & Breedin, 1994). In a series of landmark studies on the perception of mechanical causality, Michotte (1946Michotte ( /1963see also Thinès, Costall, & Butterworth, 1991) demonstrated that observers made causal attributions when they viewed various types of interacting stimuli.…”

Learning by Analogical Bootstrapping

“…However, even when these examples are potentially useful, students may not be able to make use of the analogy between a new problem and the example if they are hindered by a superficial distinction (Lancaster & Kolodner, 1987;Novick, 1988;Ross, 1989). According to Catrambone, Jones, Jonides, and Seifert (1995), when solving a problem that reminds them of a familiar example, people often reason by analogy to the instance. However, as noted earlier, instances are often retrieved on the basis of superficial similarity (Gentner, Rattermann, & Forbus, 1993;Holyoak & Koh, 1987;Ross, 1989).…”

“…For example, in our study, the unusual situation of a coffee cup with an ice cube in it was described by participants as a scientific experiment, whereas the familiar situation of cooking pancakes was understood as a real-world example. From this viewpoint, people may be unaware that seemingly distant situations have matching underlying structures (Catrambone et al, 1995;Kaiser, Jonides, & Alexander, 1986). It can be hard to help students comprehend the general principles underlying both a science experiment and everyday life experiences given the variation in context and surface details.…”