Learning by Analogical Bootstrapping

Analogies are typically drawn from a well-understood situation to a situation that is poorly understood. In this research, we investigate a different route to analogical insight. We suggest that mutual alignment-that is, comparison between 2 partially understood situations--can act to promote comprehension and abstraction. We presented participants with 2 analogous scenarios depicting heat flow. They were given processing tasks that varied in the degree to which comparison was required. We then measured insight into the common structure in 3 ways. Participants were asked to (a) specify differences between the 2 pictured scenarios, (b) write scenario descriptions, and (c) rate the similarity of the 2 scenarios. The results show that carrying out comparison promotes greater insight into the common causal structure, but only when the comparison is intensive. The best results were obtained when participants were asked to jointly interpret the scenarios and to list specific correspondences. In a second experiment designed to further pinpoint the source of the comparison advantage, participants were asked to make correspondences between the elements of the 2 scenarios. These results suggest that mutual alignment is an effective means of promoting insight. The ability to think analogically is central to human cognition. Progress in scientific and technological domains often arises from the discovery of a profound analogy such as the planetary model of atomic structure, the water flow analogy of heat transfer, and the computer metaphor of the human mind (Gentner et al.,