University of California, BerkeleyUniversity of California, Los Angeles.
Cogn Sci. 2005 Sep 10;29(5):797-806. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_27.
Theories of analogical reasoning have assumed that a 1-to-1 constraint discourages reasoners from mapping a single element in 1 analog to multiple elements in another. Empirical evidence suggests that reasoners sometimes appear to violate the one-to-one constraint when asked to generate mappings, yet virtually never violate it when asked to generate analogical inferences. However, few studies have examined analogical inferences based on nonisomorphic analogs, and their conclusions are suspect due to methodological problems. We sought to elicit mixed inferences that could result from combining information from 2 possible mappings. Participants generated 2-to-1 correspondences when asked for explicit mappings, but did not produce mixed inferences. Multiple correspondences appear to arise from multiple isomorphic mappings, rather than from a single homomorphic mapping.
类比推理理论假设，一对一的约束条件会阻止推理者将一个类比中的单个元素映射到另一个类比中的多个元素上。实证证据表明，当被要求生成映射时，推理者有时似乎违反了一对一的约束条件，但当被要求生成类比推理时，他们实际上几乎从不违反。然而，很少有研究检查基于非同构类比的类比推理，而且由于方法上的问题，他们的结论值得怀疑。我们试图引出混合推理，这种推理可能是通过结合来自两个可能映射的信息而产生的。当被要求进行明确的映射时，参与者生成了 2-1 对应关系，但没有产生混合推理。多个对应关系似乎是由多个同构映射产生的，而不是由单个同态映射产生的。
