Relational Reasoning and Its Manifestations in the Educational Context: a Systematic Review of the Literature

Dumas, Denis; Alexander, Patricia A.; Grossnickle, Emily M.

doi:10.1007/s10648-013-9224-4

Cited by 95 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 152 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding parallels the relational reasoning literature in general, in which analogical reasoning has received greater empirical attention than the other forms of the construct for decades (Dumas et al 2013). Based on this finding, in silico methods that specifically aim to increase knowledge of anomalous, antinomous, or antithetical reasoning may be important next steps for researchers in the field.…”

Section: In Silicosupporting

confidence: 72%

“…Instead, they represent a meaningful set of relational forms that may arise within the educational and professional context-forms that previous research has suggested may warrant further investigation (Dumas et al 2013). Moreover, this conceptualization of relational reasoning and its forms may provide a useful framework in which to bring investigations of reasoning processes that seem different on the surface (e.g., anomalies and analogies) together based on their underlying mechanisms (i.e., the discernment of higher-order patterns).…”

Section: Relational Reasoning and Its Formsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relational Reasoning in Science, Medicine, and Engineering

Dumas

2016

Educ Psychol Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review brings together the literature that pertains to the role of relational reasoning, or the ability to discern meaningful patterns within any stream of information, in the mental work of scientists, medical doctors, and engineers. Existing studies that measure four forms of relational reasoning-analogy, anomaly, antinomy, and antithesis-are included in this review. These studies are organized into four groups based on their general measurement paradigm: those that use naturalistic observation methods to study relational reasoning in vivo; those that take a historical perspective to describe the construct as it arises in recordo; those that manipulate relevant variables in an in vitro or laboratory setting; and those that formulate computer models and algorithms to simulate relational reasoning in silico. Principal findings from this literature are presented and discussed, as are enduring questions about the nature and consequences of relational reasoning.

show abstract

Section: In Silicosupporting

confidence: 72%

Section: Relational Reasoning and Its Formsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relational Reasoning in Science, Medicine, and Engineering

Dumas

2016

Educ Psychol Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regarding the forms of relational reasoning, four types of relations are identified by Alexander and colleagues (Alexander et al 2012;Dumas et al 2013) as worthy of exploration, and these include analogies, anomalies, antinomies, and antitheses. Analogies draw on the relational connections between two disparate ideas, anomalies are unexpected deviations from known patterns, antinomies present non-examples or paradoxes, and antitheses present opposing arguments.…”

Section: A Brief History Of Text-graphic Processing Through the Lens mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The final form of relational reasoning identified by Alexander and colleagues in their review is antithesis (Dumas et al 2013;Alexander and The Disciplined Reading and Learning Research Laboratory, 2012). Antithesis describes the situation when two representations are in oppositional relation to one another (Kreezer and Dallenbach 1929).…”

Section: Antithesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Relational Reasoning Approach to Text-Graphic Processing

Danielson

Sinatra

2016

Educ Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose that research on text-graphic processing could be strengthened by the inclusion of relational reasoning perspectives. We briefly outline four aspects of relational reasoning: analogies, anomalies, antinomies, and antitheses. Next, we illustrate how textgraphic researchers have been conducting research aligned with aspects of relational reasoning, although not deliberately. We call for future research on intentionally designed textgraphic pairings that should be empirically tested for their ability to support relational reasoning. Finally, we argue that relational reasoning may help explain some of the mixed results and unintended outcomes that often appear in the text-graphic research literature.Researchers have developed rich models to account for both text processing (Kintsch 1992;McNamara et al. 1996) and graphic processing (Ainsworth 2006; Ainsworth and Burcham 2007; Hegarty 2011) in isolation. Yet, when text and graphics are combined, learners tend to infer very different meanings than when these representations are presented independently (Hagan 2007). Often, the combination of a text with a graphic is more than just the sum of the two parts. This is because when combined, text and graphics can communicate relationships among or between the informational representations (Hegarty 2011;McCabe and Castel 2008). In other words, text and graphics, when presented together, are inherently relational.In this article, we briefly review the extant text-graphic research as it relates to four aspects of relational reasoning: analogies, anomalies, antinomies, and antitheses. Next, we present a number of examples that draw upon these four aspects of relational reasoning as they relate to learning with texts and graphics. We go on to suggest that viewing text-graphic processing as an exercise in relational reasoning may help explain a number of inconsistent results that have historically hampered research in this area. Finally, we conclude with Educ Psychol Rev

show abstract

“…Analogy has been examined in a variety of fields and is recognized as a key concept of relational reasoning, which holds an increasingly important place in educational practice [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%