Analogy events

How examples are used during problem solving

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

67 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In attempting to fit a model of analogical problem solving to protocol data of students solving physics problems, several unexpected observations were made. Analogies between examples and exercises (a form of case-based reasoning) consisted of two distinct types of events. During an initialization event, the solver retrieved an example, set up a mapping between it and the problem, and decided whether the example was useful. During a transfer event, the solver inferred something about the problem's solution. Many different types of initialization and transfer events were observed. Poor solvers tended to follow the example verbatim, copying each solution line over to the problem. Good solvers tried to solve the problem themselves, but referred to the example when they got stuck, or wanted to check a step, or wanted to avoid a detailed calculation. Rather than learn from analogies, both Good and Poor solvers tended to repeat analogies at subsequent similar situations. A revised version of the model is proposed (but not yet implemented) that appears to be consistent with all the findings observed in this and other studies of the same subjects.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)347-388
Number of pages42
JournalCognitive Science
Volume22
Issue number3
StatePublished - Jul 1998
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Copying
Case based reasoning
event
Physics
Exercise
Students
physics
Transfer (Psychology)
Problem Solving
student
Repeats
Case-based Reasoning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Human Factors and Ergonomics
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

Analogy events : How examples are used during problem solving. / VanLehn, Kurt.

In: Cognitive Science, Vol. 22, No. 3, 07.1998, p. 347-388.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4cbe6a7ca18140319f0699acdf972598,
title = "Analogy events: How examples are used during problem solving",
abstract = "In attempting to fit a model of analogical problem solving to protocol data of students solving physics problems, several unexpected observations were made. Analogies between examples and exercises (a form of case-based reasoning) consisted of two distinct types of events. During an initialization event, the solver retrieved an example, set up a mapping between it and the problem, and decided whether the example was useful. During a transfer event, the solver inferred something about the problem's solution. Many different types of initialization and transfer events were observed. Poor solvers tended to follow the example verbatim, copying each solution line over to the problem. Good solvers tried to solve the problem themselves, but referred to the example when they got stuck, or wanted to check a step, or wanted to avoid a detailed calculation. Rather than learn from analogies, both Good and Poor solvers tended to repeat analogies at subsequent similar situations. A revised version of the model is proposed (but not yet implemented) that appears to be consistent with all the findings observed in this and other studies of the same subjects.",
author = "Kurt VanLehn",
year = "1998",
month = "7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "347--388",
journal = "Cognitive Science",
issn = "0364-0213",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analogy events

T2 - How examples are used during problem solving

AU - VanLehn, Kurt

PY - 1998/7

Y1 - 1998/7

N2 - In attempting to fit a model of analogical problem solving to protocol data of students solving physics problems, several unexpected observations were made. Analogies between examples and exercises (a form of case-based reasoning) consisted of two distinct types of events. During an initialization event, the solver retrieved an example, set up a mapping between it and the problem, and decided whether the example was useful. During a transfer event, the solver inferred something about the problem's solution. Many different types of initialization and transfer events were observed. Poor solvers tended to follow the example verbatim, copying each solution line over to the problem. Good solvers tried to solve the problem themselves, but referred to the example when they got stuck, or wanted to check a step, or wanted to avoid a detailed calculation. Rather than learn from analogies, both Good and Poor solvers tended to repeat analogies at subsequent similar situations. A revised version of the model is proposed (but not yet implemented) that appears to be consistent with all the findings observed in this and other studies of the same subjects.

AB - In attempting to fit a model of analogical problem solving to protocol data of students solving physics problems, several unexpected observations were made. Analogies between examples and exercises (a form of case-based reasoning) consisted of two distinct types of events. During an initialization event, the solver retrieved an example, set up a mapping between it and the problem, and decided whether the example was useful. During a transfer event, the solver inferred something about the problem's solution. Many different types of initialization and transfer events were observed. Poor solvers tended to follow the example verbatim, copying each solution line over to the problem. Good solvers tried to solve the problem themselves, but referred to the example when they got stuck, or wanted to check a step, or wanted to avoid a detailed calculation. Rather than learn from analogies, both Good and Poor solvers tended to repeat analogies at subsequent similar situations. A revised version of the model is proposed (but not yet implemented) that appears to be consistent with all the findings observed in this and other studies of the same subjects.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032112525&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032112525&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 347

EP - 388

JO - Cognitive Science

JF - Cognitive Science

SN - 0364-0213

IS - 3

ER -