Kurtrz Kenneth J, Loewenstein Jeffrey
Department of Psychology, Binghamton University, Binghamton, New York 13902, USA.
Mem Cognit. 2007 Mar;35(2):334-41. doi: 10.3758/bf03193454.
People often fail to retrieve examples analogous to a current problem or situation. There is good evidence that comparing structurally matching cases facilitates subsequent analogical access. However, current approaches offer little at the time of memory search to promote retrieval of a routinely encoded analogous source. We adapted Gick and Holyoak's (1980, 1983) classic paradigm to investigate whether comparing two unsolved problems at test promotes retrieval of a single previously studied analogue. In Experiment 1, comparison of test problems facilitated analogical problem solving. Experiment 2 showed that comparison is the critical factor since solving two test problems separately proved ineffective. In Experiment 3, comparing two problems led to greater success for participants who read a prior analogous story than those who did not, demonstrating specifically that comparison facilitates retrieval. The three studies show that analogical access is powerfully determined by problem encoding. Implications for psychological theory and real-world applications are discussed.
人们常常无法检索到与当前问题或情境类似的例子。有充分的证据表明，比较结构匹配的案例有助于后续的类比检索。然而，当前的方法在记忆搜索时几乎无法促进对常规编码的类似来源的检索。我们采用了吉克和霍利约克（1980年、1983年）的经典范式，来研究在测试时比较两个未解决的问题是否能促进对单个先前研究的类比的检索。在实验1中，测试问题的比较促进了类比问题的解决。实验2表明比较是关键因素，因为分别解决两个测试问题被证明是无效的。在实验3中，比较两个问题使得阅读过先前类似故事的参与者比未阅读过的参与者取得了更大的成功，具体表明比较有助于检索。这三项研究表明，类比检索很大程度上由问题编码决定。文中还讨论了对心理学理论和实际应用的启示。
