The Role of Analogies and Abstract Reasoning in Decision-Making: Evidence from the Debate over Truman's Proposal for Development Assistance

Abstract

Analogical, or case-based reasoning has received quite a bit of attention in the literature on foreign policy decision-making. There has been little attention paid to whether analogical reasoning does indeed predominate or to what degree abstract reasoning plays a role in the decisionmaking process. If decision-makers do not primarily reason by analogy (an empirical question), then the focus on such reasoning runs the risk of ignoring important aspects of problem formulation and the scope of possible solutions considered. Hence, this article investigates the degree to which decision-makers employ analogical and abstract reasoning.The empirical data are from the Senate hearing regarding the first American program for development aid. This case permits an empirical assessment of the consensus in the foreign aid literature that the Marshall Plan was the central analogy for this aid. In addition, it has been argued that in public discourse, decision-makers should be expected to use analogies as justifications for their preferences. The study finds a preference for explanation-based reasoning and discusses some of the implications of these findings.Analogical, or case-based reasoning plays an important role in explanations of decision-making processes in foreign policy (Jervis). However, in cognitive psychology researchers are not convinced that analogical reasoning can account for the entire scope of human reasoning. They recognize that both analogical and abstract reasoning play a role (Nosofsky, Clark, and Shin, 1989;Ahn, Brewer, and Mooney, 1992; Smith, Langston, and Nisbett, 1992;Wattenmaker, McQuaid, and Schwertz, 1995). The assumption that decisionmakers reason by analogy (and to investigate only which analogies are chosen) runs the risk of ignoring important aspects of how problems are framed and how solutions emerge. Hence, this article asks to what degree decision-makers do

No, prime minister: explaining the House of Commons’ vote on intervention in Syria

“…The 'ghosts' of Iraq and Blair affected both public and MP opinion. But this history was not determinate -the UK was willing to intervene in Libya (2011) Research on individual-level information processing suggests that historical analogies and case-based reasoning can serve as a prism through which a current policy choice is perceived, evaluated, and acted upon (Khong 1992;Bruening 2003).…”

Diversity by Design: Analogizing and Formative Investigation across Disciplines and Cultures

“…Spatial analogies are accurate mental representations of spatial layouts, allowing perspective taking, reorientation and spatial inferences (Tversky, 1993). Formative investigation therefore leverages analogies to look critically at reality, investigate unconventional alternatives and analyze situations from unique perspectives (Breuning, 2003). This critical look at reality involves analyzing ideas and separating the bad ones from the good ones (Khurana and Rosenthal, 1998).…”

El «NO» de Ricardo Lagos a la invasión de Irak en 2003: el proceso de toma de decisiones de politica exterior en Chile

“…No obstante, mientras que en los estudios de psicología cognitiva hay acuerdo en que el razonamiento no solo se basa en modelos analógicos, los escritos sobre política exterior han tendido a partir de la base de que los encargados de tomar decisiones razonan primariamente por analogía, sin poner atención al uso de razonamiento abstracto (Breuning, 2003). Los decisores recurren a las analogías cuando «describen un evento como similar a un evento previo, a menudo atando a esa analogía un curso de acción específico que debería ser seguido para lograr un resultado esperado, o evitado para prevenir un resultado indeseado» (Breuning, 2003: 230).…”