The Effect of Stories and Diagrams on Solution of an Analogous Problem.

摘要: The hypothesis for this study assumed that subjects who received a diagram representing the structural relationships of story would be more likely to solve new and analogous problem than two analogs without diagram. 151 graduate students acted as were randomly assigned one four treatments: oae or analogs, with Learners receiving asked copy it, think about it while reading story, rate its usefulness. learners' solutions then judged correct incorrect. No significant differences found between groups although significantly higher percentage able problem. It was concluded interaction diagrammatic representation greatly facilitated transfer an that, multiple similar problem-solving experiences may help learners problems analogically, key variable is not number experiences, but manner in which they are presented processed. A list 26 references provided. (MES) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS best can made from original document. Effect Stories Diagrams on Solution Analogous Problem Carla Mathison Brockenbrough S. Allen Department Educational Technology San Diego State University Diego, CA 92182-0311 Departmer t Reasoning analogy pervades everyday living learning. We draw past us understand situations. Counseling friend, we how felt situation. Deciding dishwasher buy, consider criteria used other household appliance purchases. our knowledge particular geometry setting involving architectural design. examine industrial revolution clues :bout future own communications. As Oppenheimer notf.d, "analogy inevitable human thought" (1956, p. 129). Background Analogical reasoning necessarily spontaneous. Recognizing applying experience situations involves complex set cognitive processes ?hat include abstraction, subsumption, domain integration. There strong support effectiveness formal training deeper levels analogical processing (Dreistadt, 1969; Gabel & Sherwood, 1980; Jorgenson, Reigeluth, 1983; Royer Cable, 1976; Schustack Anderson, 1979; Winn, 1982). Interest activity goes far back Esher, Raven Earl (1942). More recent work includes Hayes Simon (1977); Reed, Ernst Banerji, (1971); Rumelhart Abrahamson (1973); Sternberg (1977a, 1977b). Gentner (1983) proposes "structure-mapping" technique understanding analogies. She distinguishes analogies types comparisons, defining " . .a comparison relational predicates, few no object attributes mapped base [the familiar] target new]" (p. 159). strength specific relationship determined degree smaller, interconnecting subsumes. also uses structure mapping describe fundamental elements simple reasoning. process depends three basic "rules": 1.) Discard objects; 2.) Try preserve relations objects. 3.) Decide preserved; choose system (Systematicity Principle). Prior Knowledge New, Problems Gick Holyoak investigated factors underlie spontaneous recognition prior knowledge/experience They particularly concerned what term semantically disparate problemssituations has surface similarities have recognize relevant if acquired schema abstract general several individual each assumption exposure induces e "convergent" encouraging