480 likes | 583 Views
Testing Similarity is Proximity in Realistic Reasoning Situations. Bodo Winter & Teenie Matlock. Cognitive and Information Sciences. 23-28 June, 2013. SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITY. SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITY Casasanto (2008). SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITY Casasanto (2008). duty. pride.
E N D
Testing Similarity is Proximityin Realistic Reasoning Situations Bodo Winter & Teenie Matlock Cognitive and Information Sciences 23-28 June, 2013
SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITYCasasanto (2008) duty pride
SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITYCasasanto (2008) duty pride
SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITYCasasanto (2008) duty pride
SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITYCasasanto (2008) Howsimilar in meaning? similar not similar 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITYBoot & Pecher (2012), cf. Breaux & Feist (2008) "same" "different"
SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITYBoot & Pecher (2012), cf. Breaux & Feist (2008)
SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITYBoot & Pecher (2012), cf. Breaux & Feist (2008)
BUT… …the research is entirely within-subjects (for a discussionofproblemswiththis, cf. Stanovich & West, 2008) … the research focuses on abstract tasks … the unidirectionality/asymmetry of this metaphor has not been extensively tested
82 participants Condition 1: close Condition 2: far
Space affects similarity ratings t(80)=2.34, p<0.03
Our experiments Stimuli: People Experiment 1 Space > Similarity Experiment 2 Similarity > Space
Similar text “Ann and Jen attend the same class, but they have never talked to each other. Ann likes hip hop, and Jen does, too. They have similar political ideals. Ann is rather conservative, and so is Jen. Also, Ann is outgoing, and Jen is, too.”
Dissimilar text “Ann and Jen attend the same class, but they have never talked to each other. Ann likes pop, but Jen loves jazz. They have different political ideals. Ann is rather conservative, but Jen is not. Also, Ann is outgoing but Jen is shy.”
Similarity affects distance t(334.73)=6.96,p<0.0001
Our experiments Stimuli: People Stimuli: Cities Experiment 1 Experiment 3 Space > Similarity Similarity > Space Experiment 2 Similarity > Space
Similar text “The city of Swaneplam has just finished its annual budget, and so has the city of Scaneplave. Swaneplam decided to invest more in education and public healthcare this year. It will also contribute generously to its public transportation system. Similarly, Scaneplave will increase funding for education and healthcare. Also likeSwaneplam, Scaneplave will dramatically expand funds for transportation this year.”
Dissimilar text “The city of Swaneplam has just finished its annual budget, and so has the city of Scaneplave. Swaneplam decided to invest more in education and public healthcare this year. It will also contribute generously to its public transportation system. In contrast, Scaneplave will decrease funding for education and healthcare. Also unlikeSwaneplam, Scaneplave will dramatically slash funds for transportation this year.”
Design • Semantic Similarity Similar vs. Different • Phonological Similarity Scaneplave / Swaneplam Scaneplave / Mouchdalt 368participants
Semantic Manipulation t(361)=2.44, p<0.02
Phonological Manipulation t(361)=1.39, p=0.16 Scaneplave vs.Mouchdalt Scaneplave vs.Swaneplam
Our experiments Stimuli: People Stimuli: Cities Experiment 1 Experiment 3 Space > Similarity Similarity > Space Experiment 2 Experiment 4 Similarity > Space Space > Similarity
Condition 1: close Condition 2: far 40 participants
Space affects similarity ratings t(78)=2.31, p<0.03
Our experiments Stimuli: People Stimuli: Cities Experiment 1 Experiment 3 Space > Similarity Similarity > Space Experiment 2 Experiment 4 Similarity > Space Space > Similarity
Conclusions #1 Convergent evidence for SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITY • Between subjects • Richer linguistic stimuli • More concrete
Conclusions #2 Unidirectionality/Asymmetry ofSIMILARITY IS PROXIMITY ? Space > Similarity Similarity > Space
Conclusions #2 Physical Warmth > Social Warmth Social Warmth > Physical Warmth Williams & Bargh (2008a) Zhong & Leonardelli (2008) Distance >Social Warmth Social Warmth > Distance Williams & Bargh (2008b) Matthews & Matlock (2011) Space >Number Number >Space e.g., Dehaene et al. (1993) eg., Fischer et al. (2003)
Conclusions #3 (1) People judge entities to be more similar to each other when they are placed closely in space (2) People judge entities to be closer to each other when they are thought to be more similar
Conclusions #3 (1) People judge entities to be more similar to each other when they are placed closely in space (2) People judge entities to be closer to each other when they are thought to be more similar
Conclusions #3 This reflects how a metaphor such as SIMILARITY IS PROXIMITY plays a role in everyday reasoning Winter & Matlock (accepted)
Collaborator Research Assistants THANK YOU Jesse Falke Teenie Matlock Christy Banks