The use of analogy, including visual analogy, is a powerful problem-solving strategy that can help explain new problems in terms of familiar ones. There is evidence that problem-solvers have difficulty in making spontaneous use of this strategy, despite its proven effectiveness. However, guidance to use it greatly increases accessibility to analogy in problem-solving. In the design domain, evidence of the use of analogy has hitherto been mostly anecdotal. Our goal in this paper is to show through empirical data that analogy can be effective in facilitating design problem-solving, especially when explicit instructions for its use are given.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeanTSearlesDSingerHCowenS, 1990, “Learning concepts from biology text through pictorial analogies and an analogical study guide”The Journal of Educational Research83233–237
2.
BeveridgeMParkinsE, 1987, “Visual representation in analogical problem-solving”Memory and Cognition15230–237
3.
CatambroneRJonesCJonidesJSeifertC, 1995, “Reasoning about curvilinear motion: Using principles or analogy”Memory and Cognition23368–373
4.
DejongG, 1989, “The role of explanation in analogy; or, the curse of an alluring name”, in Similarity and Analogical Reasoning Eds VosniadouSOrtonyA (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) pp 346–365
5.
DunckerK, 1945, “On problem-solving”Psychological Monographs58 (270) special issue
6.
GentnerD, 1983, “Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy”Cognitive Science7155–170
7.
GentnerD, 1989, “The mechanisms of analogical learning”, in Similarity and Analogical Reasoning Eds VosniadouSOrtonyA (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) pp 199–239
GickMHolyoakK, 1983, “Schema induction and analogical transfer”Cognitive Psychology151–38
10.
GoldschmidtG, 1994, “Visual analogy in design”, in Cybernetics and Systems '94 Ed. TrapplR (World Scientific, Singapore) pp 507–514
11.
GoldschmidtG, 1995, “Visual displays for design; imagery, analogy and databases of visual images”, in Visual Databases in Architecture Eds KoutamanisATimmermansHVermeulenI (Avebury, Aldershot, Hants) pp 53–74
12.
GoldschmidtG, 1999, “Visual analogy: A strategy for design reasoning and learning”; copy available from the author
13.
LoganBSmithersT, 1993, “Creativity and design as exploration”, in Modeling Creativity and Knowledge-based Creative Design Eds GeroJMaherM (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ) pp 139–173
14.
NovickL, 1988, “Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition14510–520
15.
NovickLHolyoakK, 1991, “Mathematical problem-solving by analogy”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition17398–415
16.
ReedS, 1991Cognition (Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA)
17.
ReevesLWeisbergR, 1993, “On the concrete nature of human thinking: Content and context in analogical transfer”Educational Psychology13(3) and (4)
18.
SimonH, 1981The Sciences of the Artificialsecond edition (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
19.
SuwaMGeroJ SPurcellT, 1999, “Unexpected discoveries and S-inventions of design requirements: A key to creative designs”, in Computational Models of Creative Design IV Eds GeroJ SMaherM-L, Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney, Australia.
20.
VosniadouSOrtonyA, 1989, “Similarity and analogical reasoning: A synthesis”, in Similarity and Analogical Reasoning Eds VosniadouSOrtonyA (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) pp 1–17
21.
WeisbergRAlbaJ, 1982, “problem-solving is not like perception: More on Gestalt theory”Journal of Experimental Psychology111 (3) 326–330
