Binary and Ternary Analogy by Children: Testing the Role of Insufficiently Developed Working Memory Capacity (WMC) Executive Functions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17140/PCSOJ-3-123Keywords:
Analogical reasoning, Relational complexity, Error patternAbstract
Background: Ghanaian classroom teachers face consistent challenges asking children to relate classroom interactions with the development of connected thinking in areas such as mathematical proficiency and reading comprehension. Inculcating inference-making ability in children places a cognitive burden on the executive control of the working memory capacity (WMC). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between WMC and executive function, with specific reference to how inhibition as executive control influenced active retrieval and goal maintenance in the context of analogy distraction making. Method: Two hundred and eighty-nine kindergarten and primary school children aged between 3-11 years participated in this study. Subjects were tested on four variables on binary and ternary analogy making with distractions. Results: Even younger children were capable of attending to and making mapping relations. However, they were less likely to overcome misleading object surface similarity and to maintain relational structure especially when an additional level of complexity was imposed. Conclusion: This was attributed to insufficiently develop executive function constraints, especially inhibition, which was identified as the predicting cause of children’s difficulty in binary and ternary analogies.
References
National Research Council. Education for Life and Work: De-veloping Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Washington, DC, USA: The National Academies Press; 2012.
Gentner D. Bootstrapping the mind: Analogical process-es and symbol systems. Cogn Sci. 2010; 34(5): 752-775. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01114.x
Cattell RB. Abilities: Their Structure, Growth, and Action. Boston, USA: Houghton Mifflin; 1971.
Sternberg RJ. The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psy-chological Perspectives. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge Uni-versity Press; 1988.
Boysen ST, Berntson GG. Numerical competence in a chim-panzee (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol. 1989; 103(1): 23-31. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.103.1.23
Markman AB, Wood K. Tools for Innovation: The Science Behind the Practical Methods That Drive New Ideas. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press; 2009.
Penn DC, Holyoak KJ, Povinelli DJ. Darwin’s mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds. Behav Brain Sci. 2008; 31(2): 109-178. doi: 10.1017/ S0140525X08003543
Hofstadter DR. Metamagica Themas. New York, USA: Basic Books; 1985.
Gentner D. Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cogn Sci. 1983; 7(2): 155-170. doi: 10.1207/ s15516709cog0702_3
Holyoak KJ, Gentner D, Kokinov BN. Introduction: The place of analogy in. cognition. In: Gentner D, Holyoak KJ, Kokinov BN, eds, The Analogical Mind: Perspectives from Cognitive. Cambridge, MA, USA: 2001: 1-9
Kokinov B, French RM. Computational models of analogy-making. In: Nadel L. ed. Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. London. UK: Nature Publishing Group; 113-118.
Snow RE, Kyllonen CP, Marshalek B. The topography of ability and learning correlations. In: Sternberg RJ, ed., Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence Hillsdale. NJ: Erlbaum 1984: 47-103.
Piaget J, Montangero J, Billeter J. La formation des cor-relats. In: Piaget J, ed. RecherchessurL’ abstraction Reflechis-sante I. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; 1977: 115-129
Gentner D. Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cogn Sci. 1983; 7(2): 155-170. doi: 10.1207/ s15516709cog0702_3
Gentner D. The mechanisms of analogical learning. In: Vosniadou S, Ortony A, eds. Similarity and Analogical Reason-ing. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press; 1989: 199- 241.
Goswami U, Brown AL. Melting chocolate and melting snowmen: Analogical reasoning and causal relation. Cognition. 1989; 35(1): 69-95. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(90)90037-K
Rattermann MJ, Gentner D. More evidence for a relational shift in the development of analogy: Children’s performance on a causal-mapping task. Cogn Devel. 1998; 13(4): 453-478. doi: 10.1016/S0885-2014(98)90003-X
Halford GS, Wilson WH, Phillips S. Processing capacity defined by relational complexity: Implications for comparative, developmental, and cognitive psychology. Behav Brain Sci. 1998; 21(6): 803-864. Web site. https://www.cambridge.org/ core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/process-ing-capacity-defined-by-relational-complexity-implications-for-comparative-developmental-and-cognitive-psychology/ D2388E89B8614A0605D9EE55C6E47F18. Accessed March 4, 2017.
Goswami U, Leevers H, Pressley S, Wheelwright S. Causal reasoning about pairs of relations and analogical reasoning in young children. Br J Dev Psychol. 1998; 16(4): 553-569. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-835X.1998.tb00771.x
Rattermann MJ, Gentner, D. The effect of language on simi-larity: The use of relational labels improves young children’s performance in a mapping task. In: Holyoak K, Gentner D, Kokinov B, eds. Advances in Analogy Research: Integration of Theory and Data from the Cognitive, Computational, and Neu-ral sciences. Sophia, Bulgaria: New Bulgarian University; 1998: 274-282.
Halford GS. Children’s Understanding: The Development of Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1993.
Linsey ER, Robert GM, Keith JH. Children’s development of analogical reasoning: Insights from scene analogy problem. J Exp Child Psychol. 2006; 94(3): 246-273. doi: 10.1016/j. jecp.2006.02.002
Halford GS, Baker R, McCredden JE, Bain JD. How many variables can humans process? Psychol Sci. 2005; 16: 70-76. Web site. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.0956- 7976.2005.00782.x. Accessed March 4, 2017.
Andrews G, Halford GS. A cognitive complexity metric applied to cognitive development. Cogn Psychol. 2002; 45(2): 153-219. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0285(02)00002-6
Andrews G, Halford GS, Bunch KM, Bowden DJ. Theory of mind and relational complexity. Child Development. 2003; 74(5): 1476-1499. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00618
Halford GS, Andrew G, Daltoin C, Boag C, Zielinski T. Young children’s performance on the balance scale: The influ-ence of relational complexity. J Exp Child Psychol. 2002; 81(4): 417-445. doi: 10.1006/jecp.2002.2665
Frye D, Zelazo PD, Brooks PJ, Samuels MC. Inference and action in early causal reasoning. Developmental Psychology. 1996; 32(1): 120-131. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.32.1.120
Zelazo PD, Frye D. Cognitive complexity and control: The development of executive function. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 1998; 7: 121-122. Web site. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/ abs/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10774761?journalCode=cdpa. Ac-cessed March 4, 2017.
Zelazo PD, Muller U. The balance beam in the balance: Reflections on rules, relational complexity, and developmen-tal processes. J Exp Child Psychol. 2002; 81(4): 458-465. doi: 10.1006/jecp.2002.2667
Holyoak KJ, Gentner D, Kokinov BN. Introduction: The place of analogy in. cognition. In: Gentner D, Holyoak KJ, Kokinov BN, eds. The Analogical Mind: Perspectives from Cog-nitive. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press; 2001: 1-19.
Kokinov B, French, RM. Computational models of analogy-making. In: Nadel L, ed. Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. London, UK: Nature Publishing Group; 2003: 113-118.
Snow RE, Kyllonen CP, Marshalek B. The topography of ability and learning correlations. In: Sternberg RJ, ed. Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Erlbaum; 1984: 47-103.
Oberauer K, Süß HM, Wilhelm N. Individual Differences in working memory capacity and reasoning ability. In: Jarrold C, ed. Variation in Working Memory. USA: Oxford University Press; 2007: 49-75.
Thibaut JP, French RM, Vezneva M. Cognitive load and analogy-making in children: Explaining an unexpected interac-tion. Proceedings of the Thirty-first Annual Cognitive Science Society Conference. 2009: 1048-1053.
Thibaut JP, French RM, Vezneva M. The development of analogy making in children: Cognitive load and executive func-tions. J Exp Child Psychol. 2010; 106(1): 1-19. doi: 10.1016/j. jecp.2010.01.001
Thibaut JP, French RM, Vezneva M. Cognitive load and se-mantic analogies: Searching semantic space. Psychon Bull Rev. 2010b; 17(4): 569-574. doi: 10.3758/PBR.17.4.569
Thibaut JP, French RM, Vezneva M, Gérard Y, Glady Y. Semantic analogies by young children: Testing the role of inhi-bition. In: Kokinov B, Karmiloff-Smith A, Nersessian NJ, eds. European Perspectives on Cognitive Science. Sofia, Bulgaria: New Bulgarian University Press; 2011.
Morrison RG, Thinking in working memory. In: Holyoak KJ, Morrison RG, eds. Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2005: 457-473.
Morrison RG, Holyoak KJ, Truong B. Working memory modularity in analogical reasoning. In: Gray WD, Schunn CD, eds. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erl-baum; 2001: 663-668.
Waltz JA, Lau A, Grewal SK, Holyoak KJ. The role of work-ing memory in analogical mapping. Mem Cognit. 2000; 28(7): 1205-1212. doi: 10.3758/BF03211821
Kroger JK, Sabb FW, Fales CL, Bookheimer SY, Cohen M, Holyoak KJ. Recruitment of anterior dorsolateral prefrontal cor-tex in human reasoning: A parametric study of relational com-plexity. Cerebral Cortex. 2002; 12(5): 477-485. doi: 10.1093/ cercor/12.5.477
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All content published in Psychology and Cognitive Sciences (PCS) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.
