Analogías para asustar y tranquilizar: dos estudios sobre recuperación y evaluación de argumentos analógicos
Main Article Content
Abstract
In our daily lives we often resort to argumentation through analogies when we try to show others our position on the issue at hand. Two experiments that analyze the retrieval and evaluation of analogical arguments with different argumentative purposes are reported in this article. In Experiment 1, the structure and semantic distance of analogies retrieved by 109 university students were analyzed when different communication purposes were indicated. It was found that people recover analogies with complete structure (i.e. analogies with explicit inferences) and close semantic distance to a greater extent. In Experiment 2 it was inquired if the types of analogies recovered in the previous experiment are effective (i.e., persuasive) for the recipient. The data found show a significant difference in their persuasive efficacy in favor of the arguments in which complete analogies are used.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
La RACC aplicará la licencia internacional de atribuciones comunes creativas (Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Bajo esta licencia, se permite cualquier explotación de la obra, incluyendo la explotación con fines comerciales y la creación de obras derivadas, la distribución de las cuales también está permitida sin ninguna restricción. Esta licencia es una licencia libre según la Freedom Defined. La única condición es que siempre y en todos los casos se cite a los autores y a la fuente original de publicación (i.e., RACC). Esta licencia fue desarrollada para facilitar el acceso abierto, gratuito y libre a trabajos originales científicos y artísticos.
References
American Psychological Association [APA]. (2010). Manual de publicaciones de la American Psychological Association (6a ed.). Editorial El Manual Moderno.
Bohan, A., & Keane, M. T. (2005). Boosting analogical arguments: The effects of goodness & complexity on everyday arguments. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 27, 304-309. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8v31k4xp
Briñol, P., Stavraki, M., Horcajo, J., & Gandarillas, B. (2016). Emoción y persuasión. En I. Schweiger Gallo & J. R. Torregrosa Peris (Coord.), Perspectivas en el estudio de las emociones (pp. 85-122). Grupo 5.
De la Fuente, J., & Minervino, R. A. (2009). Pensamiento analógico. En M. Carretero & M. Asensio (Coord.), Psicología del pensamiento (pp. 247-268). Alianza.
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7(2), 155-170. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0702_3
Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. En S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199-242). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511529863.011
Gentner, D., & Smith, L. (2012). Analogical reasoning. En V. S. Ramachandran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (2° Ed., pp. 130-136). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-375000-6.00022-7
Gentner, D., & Wolff, P. (2000). Metaphor and knowledge change. En E. Dietrich & A. Markman (Eds.), Cognitive dynamics: Conceptual change in humans and machines (pp. 295-342). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Goode, M. R., Dahl, D. W., & Moreau, C. P. (2010). The Effect of Experiential Analogies on Consumer Perceptions and Attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(2), 274-286. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.47.2.274
Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G. (2012). Analogy and relational reasoning. En K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 234-259). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199734689.013.0013
Holyoak, K. J., Novick, L. R., & Melz, E. R. (1994). Component processes in analogical transfer: Mapping, pattern completion, and adaptation. En K. J. Holyoak & J. A. Barden (Eds.), Advances in connectionist and neural computation theory, Vol. 2: Analogical Connections (pp. 113-180). Ablex Publishing.
Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. R. (1994). Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4549.001.0001
Keane, M. T., & Bohan, A. (2004). Should politicians stop using analogies? Whether analogical arguments are better than their factual equivalents. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 26, 660-665. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0m94034t
Loewenstein, J. (2010). How one’s hook is baited matters for catching an analogy. En B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory (Vol. 53, pp. 149-182). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(10)53004-4
Markman, A. B., & Stilwell, C. H. (2001). Role-governed categories. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 13(4), 329-358. https://doi.org/10.1080/09528130110100252
Minervino, R. A., Oberholzer, N., & Trench, M. (2008). Similarity between propositional elements does not always determine judgments of analogical relatedness. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 30, 921-926. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1dr9n7mn
Minervino, R., Oberholzer, N., & Trench, M. (2013). Overall Similarity Overrides Element Similarity when Evaluating the Quality of Analogies. Journal of Cognitive Science, 14(3), 287-317. https://doi.org/10.17791/jcs.2013.14.3.287
Moscovici, S. (1985). Social influence and conformity. En G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 347-412). Random House.
Moya, M. (2000). Persuasión y cambio de actitudes. En J. F. Morales & C. Huici (Coord.), Psicología social (pp. 153-170). UNED.
Oberholzer, N., Trench, M., & Minervino, R. (2011a). Analogía y cambio representacional. En C. Richaud & V. Lemos (Eds.), Investigación en Ciencias del Comportamiento (Vol. 1, pp. 335-358). UADP-CONICET.
Oberholzer, N., Trench, M., & Minervino, R. (2011b). When lighting a candle becomes a superstition: Analogical recategorization through the application of relational categories. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 33, 568-573. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9135g0bc
Perrott, D. A., Gentner, D., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2005). Resistance is futile: The unwitting insertion of analogical inferences in memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(4), 696-702. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196760
Thagard, P., & Shelley, C. (2001). Emotional analogies and analogical inference. En D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The Analogical Mind: Perspectives from Cognitive Science (pp. 335-362). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1251.001.0001
Tavernini, L. M. (2018). El rol de la semántica en la evaluación de calidad de las analogías: el enfoque estándar versus el enfoque categorial [Tesis doctoral]. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Facultad de Psicología. https://ri.conicet.gov.ar/handle/11336/86647
Trench, M., & Minervino, R. A. (2020). Distant Connections: The Memory Basis of Creative Analogy. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52545-3