Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T03:50:29.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can developmental psychology provide a blueprint for the study of adult cognition?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2011

Arthur B. Markman
Arthur B. Markman
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712. markman@psy.utexas.eduhttp://www.psy.utexas.edu/psy/FACULTY/Markman/index.html
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In order to develop sophisticated models of the core domains of knowledge that support complex cognitive processing in infants and children, developmental psychologists have mapped out the content of these knowledge domains. This research strategy may provide a blueprint for advancing research on adult cognitive processing. I illustrate this suggestion with examples from analogical reasoning and decision making.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 34 , Issue 3 , June 2011 , pp. 140 - 141
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Carey, S. (2009) The origin of concepts. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, B. T. & Schunn, C. D. (2007) The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and pre-inventive structure: The case of engineering design. Memory and Cognition 35(1):29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clement, C. A. & Gentner, D. (1991) Systematicity as a selection constraint inanalogical mapping. Cognitive Science 15:89–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunbar, K. (1997) How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In: Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes, ed. Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M. & Vaid, J., pp. 461–93. American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D. (1983) Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science 7:155–70.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., Brem, S., Ferguson, R. W., Markman, A. B., Levidow, B. B., Wolff, P. & Forbus, K. D. (1997) Conceptual change via analogical reasoning: A case study of Johannes Kepler. Journal of the Learning Sciences 6(1):3–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D. & Markman, A. B. (1997) Structural alignment in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist 52:45–56.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., Rattermann, M. J. & Forbus, K. D. (1993) The roles of similarity in transfer: Separating retrievability from inferential soundness. Cognitive Psychology 25(4):524–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gentner, D. & Toupin, C. (1986) Systematicity and surface similarity in the development of analogy. Cognitive Science 10:277–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gick, M. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1980) Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology 12:306–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, W. M. & Weber, E. U. (1995) Content and discontent: Indications and implications of domain specificity in preferential decision making. In: Decision making from a cognitive perspective, vol. 32, ed. Busemeyer, J., Hastie, R. & Medin, D. L., pp. 83–136. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Holyoak, K. J., Novick, L. R. & Melz, E. R. (1994) Component processes in analogical transfer: Mapping, pattern completion and adaptation. In: Advances in connectionist and neural computation theory, vol. 2, Analogical connections, ed. Holyoak, K. J. & Barnden, J. A., pp. 113–80. Ablex.Google Scholar
Holyoak, K. J. & Thagard, P. (1989) Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science 13(3):295–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hummel, J. E. & Holyoak, K. J. (1997) Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping. Psychological Review 104:427–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linsey, J. S., Wood, K. L. & Markman, A. B. (2008) Modality and representation in analogy. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis, and Manufacturing 22(2):85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, A. B. (1997) Constraints on analogical inference. Cognitive Science 21(4):373–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, A. B. & Gentner, D. (1993) Splitting the differences: A structural alignment view of similarity. Journal of Memory and Language 32(4):517–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nersessian, N. J. (1987) A cognitive-historical approach to meaning in scientific theories. In: The process of science, pp. 161–179. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar