Relational and lexical similarity in analogical reasoning and recognition memory: Behavioral evidence and computational evaluation

IF 3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Cognitive Psychology Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2023.101550
Nicholas Ichien , Katherine L. Alfred , Sophia Baia , David J.M. Kraemer , Keith J. Holyoak , Silvia A. Bunge , Hongjing Lu
{"title":"Relational and lexical similarity in analogical reasoning and recognition memory: Behavioral evidence and computational evaluation","authors":"Nicholas Ichien ,&nbsp;Katherine L. Alfred ,&nbsp;Sophia Baia ,&nbsp;David J.M. Kraemer ,&nbsp;Keith J. Holyoak ,&nbsp;Silvia A. Bunge ,&nbsp;Hongjing Lu","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2023.101550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We examined the role of different types of similarity in both analogical reasoning and recognition memory. On recognition tasks, people more often falsely report having seen a recombined word pair (e.g., <em>flower: garden</em>) if it instantiates the same semantic relation (e.g., <em>is a part of</em>) as a studied word pair (e.g., <em>house: town</em>). This phenomenon, termed <em>relational luring</em>, has been interpreted as evidence that explicit relation representations—known to play a central role in analogical reasoning—also impact episodic memory. We replicate and extend previous studies, showing that relation-based false alarms in recognition memory occur after participants encode word pairs either by making relatedness judgments about individual words presented sequentially, or by evaluating analogies between pairs of word pairs. To test alternative explanations of relational luring, we implemented an established model of recognition memory, the Generalized Context Model (GCM). Within this basic framework, we compared representations of word pairs based on similarities derived either from explicit relations or from lexical semantics (i.e., individual word meanings). In two experiments on recognition memory, best-fitting values of GCM parameters enabled <em>both</em> similarity models (even the model based solely on lexical semantics) to predict relational luring with comparable accuracy. However, the model based on explicit relations proved more robust to parameter variations than that based on lexical similarity. We found this same pattern of modeling results when applying GCM to an independent set of data reported by <span>Popov, Hristova, and Anders (2017)</span>. In accord with previous work, we also found that explicit relation representations are necessary for modeling analogical reasoning. Our findings support the possibility that explicit relations, which are central to analogical reasoning, also play an important role in episodic memory.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"141 ","pages":"Article 101550"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010028523000087","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We examined the role of different types of similarity in both analogical reasoning and recognition memory. On recognition tasks, people more often falsely report having seen a recombined word pair (e.g., flower: garden) if it instantiates the same semantic relation (e.g., is a part of) as a studied word pair (e.g., house: town). This phenomenon, termed relational luring, has been interpreted as evidence that explicit relation representations—known to play a central role in analogical reasoning—also impact episodic memory. We replicate and extend previous studies, showing that relation-based false alarms in recognition memory occur after participants encode word pairs either by making relatedness judgments about individual words presented sequentially, or by evaluating analogies between pairs of word pairs. To test alternative explanations of relational luring, we implemented an established model of recognition memory, the Generalized Context Model (GCM). Within this basic framework, we compared representations of word pairs based on similarities derived either from explicit relations or from lexical semantics (i.e., individual word meanings). In two experiments on recognition memory, best-fitting values of GCM parameters enabled both similarity models (even the model based solely on lexical semantics) to predict relational luring with comparable accuracy. However, the model based on explicit relations proved more robust to parameter variations than that based on lexical similarity. We found this same pattern of modeling results when applying GCM to an independent set of data reported by Popov, Hristova, and Anders (2017). In accord with previous work, we also found that explicit relation representations are necessary for modeling analogical reasoning. Our findings support the possibility that explicit relations, which are central to analogical reasoning, also play an important role in episodic memory.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
类比推理和识别记忆中的关系和词汇相似性:行为证据和计算评价
我们研究了不同类型的相似性在类比推理和识别记忆中的作用。在识别任务中,如果一个重新组合的词对(例如,花:花园)与一个被研究词对(如,房子:城镇)实例化了相同的语义关系(例如,是的一部分),人们更经常谎报看到了这个词对。这种现象被称为关系引诱,被解释为显式关系表征——已知在类比推理中起着核心作用——也会影响情景记忆的证据。我们复制和扩展了以前的研究,表明在参与者通过对顺序呈现的单个单词进行相关判断或通过评估成对单词之间的类比来对单词对进行编码后,识别记忆中基于关系的假警报就会发生。为了测试关系引诱的替代解释,我们实现了一个已建立的识别记忆模型,即广义上下文模型(GCM)。在这个基本框架内,我们比较了基于相似性的词对表示,这些相似性要么来自显式关系,要么来自词汇语义(即单个词义)。在两个关于识别记忆的实验中,GCM参数的最佳拟合值使两个相似性模型(甚至是仅基于词汇语义的模型)都能够以相当的精度预测关系引诱。然而,基于显式关系的模型比基于词汇相似性的模型对参数变化更具鲁棒性。当将GCM应用于Popov、Hristova和Anders(2017)报告的一组独立数据时,我们发现了同样的建模结果模式。与之前的工作一致,我们还发现显式关系表示对于模拟推理的建模是必要的。我们的研究结果支持这样一种可能性,即作为类比推理核心的外显关系在情景记忆中也发挥着重要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive Psychology 医学-心理学
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.80%
发文量
29
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: Cognitive Psychology is concerned with advances in the study of attention, memory, language processing, perception, problem solving, and thinking. Cognitive Psychology specializes in extensive articles that have a major impact on cognitive theory and provide new theoretical advances. Research Areas include: • Artificial intelligence • Developmental psychology • Linguistics • Neurophysiology • Social psychology.
期刊最新文献
Free time, sharper mind: A computational dive into working memory improvement. Editorial Board Building compressed causal models of the world Doing things efficiently: Testing an account of why simple explanations are satisfying Perceptual inference corrects function word errors in reading: Errors that are not noticed do not disrupt eye movements
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1