What meaning means for same and different: Analogical reasoning in humans (Homo sapiens), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta)

Thus far, language- and token-trained apes (e.g., D. Premack, 1976; R. K. R. Thompson, D. L. Oden, & S. T. Boysen, 1997) have provided the best evidence that nonhuman animals can solve, complete, and construct analogies, thus implicating symbolic representation as the mechanism enabling the phenomenon. In this study, the authors examined the role of stimulus meaning in the analogical reasoning abilities of three different primate species. Humans (Homo sapiens), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) completed the same relational matching-to-sample (RMTS) tasks with both meaningful and nonmeaningful stimuli. This discrimination of relations-between-relations serves as the basis for analogical reasoning. Meaningfulness facilitated the acquisition of analogical matching for human participants, whereas individual differences among the chimpanzees suggest that meaning can either enable or hinder their ability to complete analogies. Rhesus monkeys did not succeed in the RMTS task regardless of stimulus meaning, suggesting that their ability to reason analogically, if present at all, may be dependent on a dimension other than the representational value of stimuli.     

Analogical reasoning and the differential outcome effect: transitory bridging of the conceptual gap for rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta)

Monkeys, unlike chimpanzees and humans, have a marked difficulty acquiring relational matching-to-sample (RMTS) tasks that likely reflect the cognitive foundation upon which analogical reasoning rests. In the present study, rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) completed a categorical (identity and nonidentity) RMTS task with differential reward (pellet ratio) and/or punishment (timeout ratio) outcomes for correct and incorrect choices. Monkeys in either differential reward-only or punishment-only conditions performed at chance levels. However, the RMTS performance of monkeys experiencing both differential reward and punishment conditions was significantly better than chance. Subsequently when all animals experienced nondifferential outcomes tests, their RMTS performance levels were at chance. These results indicate that combining differential reward and punishment contingencies provide an effective, albeit transitory, scaffolding for monkeys to judge analogical relations-between-relations.     

Analogical reasoning in a capuchin monkey (Cebus apella)

Previous evidence has suggested that analogical reasoning (recognizing similarities among object relations when the objects themselves are dissimilar) is limited to humans and apes. This study investigated whether capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) can use analogical reasoning to solve a 3-dimensional search task. The task involved hiding a food item under 1 of 2 or 3 plastic cups of different sizes and then allowing subjects to search for food hidden under the cup of analogous size in their own set of cups. Four monkeys were exposed to a series of relational matching tasks. If subjects reached criterion on these tasks, they were exposed to relational transfer tasks involving novel stimuli. Three of the monkeys failed to reach criterion on the basic relational matching tasks and therefore were not tested further. One monkey, however, revealed above-chance performance on a series of transfer tasks with 3 novel stimuli. This evidence suggests that contrary to previous arguments, a member of a New World monkey species can solve an analogical problem.     

Generalized relational matching by guinea baboons (Papio papio) in two-by-two-item analogy problems

Analogical reasoning is considered the hallmark of human reasoning, but some studies have demonstrated that language- and symbol-trained chimpanzees can also reason analogically. Despite the potential adaptive value of this ability, evidence from other studies strongly suggests that other nonhuman primates do not have this capacity for analogical reasoning. In our three experiments, 6 of 29 baboons acquired the ability to perform a relational matching-to-sample (RMTS) task in which pairs of shapes composed relational displays. Five of these 6 monkeys then transferred this ability to RMTS tasks using novel exemplars of identity (elements in a pair are the same) and nonidentity (elements in a pair are different) relations. This transfer occurred even on trials in which the incorrect pair shared an element with the sample pair with which it was being compared. The baboons retained this ability 12 months later. The findings from our study of symbol-naive monkeys indicate that although language and symbol training facilitate conceptual thinking in nonhuman primates, such training is not a prerequisite for analogical reasoning.     

Using dual-process theory and analogical transfer to explain facilitation on a hypothetico-deductive reasoning task

Using the analogical transfer paradigm, the present study investigated the competing explanations of Girotto and Legrenzi (Psychological Research 51: 129–135, 1993) and Griggs, Platt, Newstead, and Jackson (Thinking and Reasoning 4: 1–14, 1998) for facilitation on the SARS version of the THOG problem, a hypothetico-deductive reasoning task. Girotto and Legrenzi argue that facilitation is based on logical analysis of the task [System 2 reasoning in Evans’s (Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7: 454–459, 2003) dual-process account of reasoning] while Griggs et al. maintain that facilitation is due to an attentional heuristic produced by the wording of the problem (System 1 reasoning). If Girotto and Legrenzi are correct, then System 2 reasoning, which is volitional and responsible for deductive reasoning, should be elicited, and participants should comprehend the solution principle of the THOG task and exhibit analogical transfer. However, if Griggs et al. are correct, then System 1 reasoning, which is responsible for heuristic problem solving strategies such as an attentional heuristic, should occur, and participants should not abstract the solution principle and transfer should not occur. Significant facilitation (68 and 82% correct) was only observed for the two SARS source problems, but significant analogical transfer did not occur. This lack of transfer suggests that System 1 reasoning was responsible for the facilitation observed in the SARS problem, supporting Griggs et al.’s attentional heuristic explanation. The present results also underscore the explanatory value of using analogical transfer rather than facilitation as the criterion for problem understanding.     

类比推理的眼动研究:揭示个体类比推理策略发展的有效手段

近年来,研究者利用眼动技术具有高时间精度的优势,探明不同年龄群体完成类比推理过程的眼动模式特点并得出其在进行类比推理时所使用的策略。基于类比推理的眼动研究发现了三种典型的类比推理策略——项目优先策略、结构匹配策略和语义限制策略。成人更多表现为项目优先策略,儿童更多表现为语义限制策略。未来研究可以优化类比推理眼动指标,尤其是全局扫视路径的计算方法,并重点关注特殊群体的类比推理眼动模式以及关注类比推理策略与其他认知能力的交互作用。     

Categorical Perception and Conceptual Judgments by Nonhuman Primates: The Paleological Monkey and the Analogical Ape

Studies of the conceptual abilities of nonhuman primates demonstrate the substantial range of these abilities as well as their limitations. Such abilities range from categorization on the basis of shared physical attributes, associative relations and functions to abstract concepts as reflected in analogical reasoning about relations between relations. The pattern of results from these studies point to a fundamental distinction between monkeys and apes in both their implicit and explicit conceptual capacities. Monkeys, but not apes, might be best regarded as “paleo‐logicans” in the sense that they form common class concepts of identity on the basis of identical predicates (i.e., shared features). The discrimination of presumably more abstract relations commonly involves relatively simple procedural strategies mediated by associative processes likely shared by all mammals. There is no evidence that monkeys can perceive, let alone judge, relations‐between‐relations. This analogical conceptual capacity is found only in chimpanzees and humans. Interestingly, the “analogical ape,” like the child, can make its analogical knowledge explicit only if it is first provided with a symbol system by which propositional representations can be encoded and manipulated.     

How do investors make predictions? Insights from analogical reasoning research

Previous work on investor decision making has focused almost exclusively on information specific to the company being judged. Consequently, every decision is viewed as a novel event, disconnected from the investor's existing knowledge. In this study, the analogical reasoning literature provides the theoretical support for arguing that investors frequently utilize existing knowledge as a basis for generating predictions about a company's future. The specific proposal is that investors transfer their existing knowledge via two different forms of analogical reasoning. The first, relational reasoning, is based primarily on structural correspondence between a novel company and an existing schema. The second, literal similarity reasoning, is based primarily on surface correspondence of a novel company and a previously encountered company. Our theoretical framework is tested in a study in which experienced investors predict the outcome of a novel company's strategy after reading about the experiences of other companies who implemented a similar strategy. The results are consistent with the occurrence of both relational and literal similarity reasoning, with relational reasoning emerging as the dominant approach to generating investors' predictions. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

3～5岁幼儿在主题-规则冲突条件下的类比推理

本研究采用经典类比任务,考察了3～5岁幼儿在主题-规则冲突条件下类比推理发展的水平与特点.结果表明:(1)在无主题联想条件下,幼儿的单维类比推理在3～4岁迅速发展,4～5岁发展较为平缓,而双维类比推理在3～5岁仍处于较低水平.(2)在主题—规则冲突条件下,幼儿在单维类比推理中表现出一定的主题联想优势反应;幼儿在双维类比推理中表现出较强的主题联想优势反应,年龄特点为:3岁幼儿有较强的主题联想优势反应,4岁幼儿的主题联想优势反应明显下降,而5岁幼儿又表现出较强的主题联想优势反应.     

儿童类比推理的影响因素及干预促进

类比推理这一重要认知能力能够帮助儿童在未经历过的复杂情况下进行推断和学习。近年来研究者主要从行为研究、计算机模型和眼动技术的角度探究了儿童抑制控制和工作记忆在类比推理中的交互作用模式及类比推理策略对类比推理的影响。在此基础上,研究者围绕语言标签和物理表征两方面对儿童类比推理进行了干预研究。儿童类比推理的未来研究应着眼于改进研究方法、关注类比推理各加工阶段影响因素及加强儿童类比推理策略的干预应用研究。     

分心抑制和关系整合对学前儿童类比推理的影响

为探究分心抑制和关系整合对学前儿童类比推理的影响,实验一先初步探究分心抑制和关系整合对25名3~4岁和26名5~6岁儿童完成含有知觉分心的类比情景任务的影响。其次,揭示知觉分心与关系整合在类比推理中的具体作用模式。实验二先初步探究分心抑制和关系整合对30名3~4岁和28名5~6岁儿童完成含有语义分心的类比情景任务的影响。其次,揭示语义分心与关系整合在类比推理中的具体作用模式。结果表明,抑制控制能显著预测儿童完成各种类型类比推理成绩,工作记忆能显著预测儿童完成含有语义分心的类比推理成绩而不能显著预测含有知觉分心的类比推理成绩。儿童完成类比情景中的分心抑制是在关系整合中完成的,当类比情景中的关系整合没有超过儿童的工作记忆容量时,知觉或语义分心才能造成对儿童类比推理的影响。     

Relative numerosity discrimination by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): evidence for approximate numerical representations

Two adult chimpanzees were trained on a relative “numerosity” discrimination task. In each trial, two arrays containing different numbers of red dots were presented on a CRT monitor. The subjects were required to choose the array containing the larger number of dots. In Experiment 1, using numerosities between 1 and 8, 28 different pairs were presented repeatedly, and accuracy scores were analyzed to explore which cues the chimpanzee subjects utilized to perform the task. Multiple regression analyses revealed that the subjects’ performance was (1) not simply controlled by the “numerical” difference between arrays, but that it was (2) best described by Fechner’s Law–that is accuracy increased linearly with the logarithmic value of the numerical difference between arrays divided by the number in the larger of the two arrays. This relationship was maintained when using much larger numerosities (Experiment 3). In Experiment 2, the chimpanzees were tested on the effects of total area and density by manipulating dot size and presentation area. The results revealed that these factors clearly affected the subjects’ performance but that they could not alone explain the results, suggesting that the chimpanzees did use relative numerosity difference as a discriminative cue.     

从知觉分心任务看儿童类比推理能力的发展

采用四类图片类比映射任务,考察了知觉分心对90名4岁、5岁、6岁儿童类比推理能力发展的影响,并进一步阐释影响儿童类比推理能力发展的可能机制。四类图片类比映射任务分别为一种关系无分心任务、一种关系有分心任务、两种关系无分心任务和两种关系有分心任务。结果表明：（1）在具备相应知识经验的前提下,知觉分心对儿童类比推理成绩有显著影响,儿童在无分心任务中的表现明显好于知觉分心任务的表现。在无分心条件下,4岁儿童已经开始能够选择关系匹配来正确完成类比推理。错误分析发现知觉分心任务中儿童所犯错误主要是分心错误,而且分心错误随年龄增长呈下降趋势。这表明对知觉分心的抑制控制可能是儿童类比推理能力发展的一个重要影响因素。（2）随着年龄增长,儿童类比推理能力逐渐提高。总体表现为6岁组的成绩显著优于4岁、5岁组的成绩,而4岁组的成绩与5岁组的成绩没有显著差异。5岁可能是儿童能够抑制知觉分心进行类比推理的快速发展期     

Facilitation and analogical transfer in the THOG task

This study was concerned with Wason's THOG task, a hypothetico-deductive reasoning problem for which performance is typically very poor (<20% correct). Recently, however, Needham and Amado (1995) and Koenig and Griggs (2004) have observed both facilitation and spontaneous analogical transfer effects for the Pythagoras version of this task. Based on their findings, Koenig and Griggs concluded that in addition to the separation of the data (the properties of the designated THOG) from the hypotheses that need to be generated (the possible combinations of properties written down), an explicit request to generate these hypotheses is necessary to obtain significant analogical transfer. In the present study we extended the generalisability of this conclusion in three experiments with 214 undergraduate participants using O'Brien et al.'s (1990) Blackboard version of the task. We discuss the relationship of the results to dual process theories of reasoning and propose that analogical transfer may be a better criterion than task facilitation for judging participants' task understanding.     

Stacking of irregularly shaped blocks in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and young humans (Homo sapiens)

Stacking blocks provides a way to evaluate cognitive development in humans and other species using the same comparative measures. The present study used regular cubic blocks as well as cubic blocks with bumps on two sides. The bumps changed the physical properties of the blocks and increased the difficulty involved in stacking them. Subjects were required to choose the appropriate orientation for stacking the blocks. Three juvenile chimpanzees and 14 human children (aged 2–3 years) were tested under identical task settings in a face-to-face situation. The goal of a trial was to stack up four blocks (two cubic blocks and two cubic blocks with bumps). The results showed initial difficulty in stacking the blocks with bumps in both chimpanzees and humans. Experienced juvenile chimpanzees and humans older than 3 years became proficient at solving the task. Behavioral strategies adopted to succeed in the task were common to both species. The subjects spontaneously adopted a strategy of stacking as the last block of the tower a block with a bump facing upwards. The subjects also showed active change in the orientation of the blocks when necessary, although correct orientation changes were infrequent especially during the early phases of experiment. The results are discussed in the context of the underlying cognitive development in the domain of physical understanding in both species.     

Matching visual stimuli on the basis of global and local features by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta)

This study was designed to examine whether chimpanzees and monkeys exhibit a global-to-local precedence in the processing of hierarchically organized compound stimuli, as has been reported for humans. Subjects were tested using a sequential matching-to-sample paradigm using stimuli that differed on the basis of their global configuration or local elements, or on both perceptual attributes. Although both species were able to discriminate stimuli on the basis of their global configuration or local elements, the chimpanzees exhibited a global-to-local processing strategy, whereas the rhesus monkeys exhibited a local-to-global processing strategy. The results suggest that perceptual and attentional mechanisms underlying information-processing strategies may account for differences in learning by primates. Accepted after revision: 11 September 2001 Electronic Publication     

The role of inhibitory control in the development of analogical reasoning: From general to specific

This study examined the role of inhibitory control in the development of analogical reasoning using inter-task priming paradigms. In Experiment 1, 25 seven-year-olds, 27 nine-year-olds, and 27 adults completed Stroop tasks, which activated general inhibitory control ability, before analogical reasoning tasks. Children and adults performed faster on analogical reasoning tasks when they were primed by Stroop tasks. This priming effect was found to be stronger in children than in adults. In Experiment 2, 25 seven-year-olds, 28 nine-year-olds, and 28 adults completed relative number matching tasks, a more task-relevant inhibitory control task, before analogical reasoning tasks. The children and adults performed faster on analogical reasoning tasks when primed by relative number matching tasks. The priming effect was greater in seven-year-olds than in nine-year-olds and was greater in nine-year-olds than in adults. Thus, inhibitory control, whether assessed with general or specific tasks, played a priming role in analogical reasoning.     

Language Helps Children Succeed on a Classic Analogy Task

Adult humans show exceptional relational ability relative to other species. In this research, we trace the development of this ability in young children. We used a task widely used in comparative research—the relational match‐to‐sample task, which requires participants to notice and match the identity relation: for example, AA should match BB instead of CD. Despite the simplicity of this relation, children under 4 years of age failed to pass this test (Experiment 1), and their performance did not improve even with initial feedback (Experiment 2). In Experiments 3 and 4, we found that two kinds of symbolic‐linguistic experience can facilitate relational reasoning in young children. Our findings suggest that children learn to become adept analogical thinkers, and that language fosters this learning in at least two distinct ways.     

任务难度和反馈学习对儿童类比推理能力的影响

该研究采用情景类比任务,通过两个实验对180名小学生进行纸笔测验,探讨了任务难度对儿童类比推理能力的影响.结果发现:进行反馈学习以降低任务难度时,7～8岁儿童能完成更高年龄段儿童才能完成的任务;但增加任务难度,11岁以上儿童也表现出类比推理能力的弱化.结果提示,儿童是否能在类比推理任务中表现出相应的能力可能取决于任务难度,反馈学习可促进一定年龄段内儿童的类比推理能力发展.本结果为有机融合皮亚杰和Goswami等人的观点提供了有效的实验依据.     

The effect of response contingencies on scale model task performance by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

The effects of modified procedures on chimpanzees' (Pan troglodytes) performance in a scale model comprehension task were examined. Seven chimpanzees that previously participated in a task in which they searched an enclosure for a hidden item after watching an experimenter hide a miniature item in the analogous location in a scale model were retested under procedures incorporating response costs. In Experiment 1, chimpanzees were trained under procedures that rewarded only item retrievals occurring on the 1st search attempt. During test trials, 6 chimpanzees performed above chance, including 4 that were previously unsuccessful under the original procedures (V. A. Kuhlmeier, S. T. Boysen, & K. L. Mukobi, 1999). Experiment 2 compared performance under the new and original procedures. Results indicated that for some chimpanzees, performance depended on procedures that decreased the use of competing search strategies and encouraged strategies based on information from the scale model.