Abstract

at it has sometimes been difficult to demonstrate its effects on human problem solving in the laboratory. Analogy is a structure-preserving map from a base or source to a target (Gentner, 1983) but unless participants are given extensive training on the base analog, they tend to focus on superficial attributes rather than recognising relations that form the deeper basis for the analogy (Gick & Holyoak, 1983). This is by contrast with real-life analogies where structural correspondences between situations tends to be more readily recognised. The chapter by Dunbar (this volume) is very timely in indicating possible reasons for the paradox that effective analogical reasoning occurs so readily in naturalistic settings yet is so difficult to demonstrate in laboratories. Analogies in real life tend to be idiosyncratic and ephemeral, often lasting only as long as necessary to solve a problem, and then being forgotten. Most importantly, people are more likely to focus on structural aspects whe

Citations