Skip to main content

Relational Reasoning and Its Manifestations in the Educational Context: a Systematic Review of the Literature

Abstract

Relational reasoning, the ability to discern meaningful patterns within otherwise unconnected information, is regarded as central to human learning and cognition and as particularly critical for those functioning in today’s information age. However, the literature on this foundational ability is currently housed within a range of domains of inquiry, where divergent terminology and methodologies are commonplace. This dispersion has made it difficult to harness the power of existing work to inform future research or guide educational practice. In order to address this lack of consolidation, a systematic review of relational reasoning was undertaken. Specifically, 109 empirical studies dealing with relational reasoning in general or one of four manifestations (i.e., analogy, anomaly, antinomy, and antithesis) were analyzed. Resulting data revealed trends across fields of inquiry, including a degree of conceptual ambiguity, conceptual and operational misalignment, and a lack of ecological validity in certain research paradigms. There were also particular forms and measures of relational reasoning that were more commonly investigated, as well as certain domains that were more often studied. Implications for how future research can examine relational reasoning as a multidimensional construct within educational contexts are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Acredolo, C., & Horobin, K. (1987). Development of relational reasoning and avoidance of premature closure. Developmental Psychology, 23(1), 13–21. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.23.1.13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B.-Y. (2009). Identifying and describing constructively responsive comprehension strategies in new and traditional forms of reading. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 69–114). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A., & The Disciplined Reading and Learning Research Laboratory. (2012). Reading into the future: competence for the 21st century. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 259–280. doi:10.1080/00461520.2012.722511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A., White, C. S., & Daugherty, M. (1997). Analogical reasoning and early mathematics learning. In L. D. English (Ed.), Mathematical reasoning: analogies, metaphors, and images: studies in mathematical thinking and learning (pp. 117–147). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahrens, K., Liu, H. L., Lee, C. Y., Gong, S. P., Fang, S. Y., & Hsu, Y. Y. (2007). Functional MRI of conventional and anomalous metaphors in Mandarin Chinese. Brain and Language, 100(2), 163–171. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2005.10.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angers, M. E. (2010). Mind, body, language, and “the embodied real” towards a psychoanalytically informed resolution of the antinomies of the Enlightenment. Issues in Psychoanalytic Psychology, 32(1–2), 73–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aubusson, P., Harrison, A. G., & Ritchie, S. (2006). Metaphor and analogy in science education. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Baldo, J. V., Bunge, S. A., Wilson, S. M., & Dronkers, N. F. (2010). Is relational reasoning dependent on language? A voxel-based lesion symptom mapping study. Brain and Language, 113(2), 59–64. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2010.01.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, L. J., Hoyle, A. M., & Towse, A. S. (2010). The facilitatory effect of negative feedback on the emergence of analogical reasoning abilities. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 28(3), 583–602. doi:10.1348/026151009X461744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baillargeon, R., & Graber, M. (1987). Where’s the rabbit? 5.5-month-old infants’ representation of the height of a hidden object. Cognitive Development, 2(4), 375–392. doi:10.1016/S0885-2014(87)80014-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, S. T., Friedman, O., & Leslie, A. M. (2010). The opposites task: using general rules to test cognitive flexibility in preschoolers. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11(2), 240–254. doi:10.1080/15248371003699944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellocchi, A., & Ritchie, S. M. (2011). Investigating and theorizing discourse during analogy writing in chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(7), 771–792. doi:10.1002/tea.20428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, I., Savardi, U., & Burro, R. (2011a). Perceptual ratings of opposite spatial properties: do they lie on the same dimension? Acta Psychologica, 138(3), 405–418. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.08.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, I., Savardi, U., & Kubovy, M. (2011b). Dimensions and their poles: a metric and topological approach to opposites. Language & Cognitive Processes, 26, 1232–1265. doi:10.1080/01690965.2010.520943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billow, R. M. (2003). Pursuing relational consciousness: thinking and antithinking in group. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 53(4), 459–477. doi:10.1521/ijgp.53.4.459.42835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binet, A., Simon, T., & Town, C. H. (1913). A method of measuring the development of the intelligence of young children. Chicago: Chicago Medical Book Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birney, D. P., & Halford, G. S. (2002). Cognitive complexity of suppositional reasoning: an application of the relational complexity metric to the knight-knave task. Thinking and Reasoning, 8(2), 109–134. doi:10.1080/13546780143000161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birney, D. P., Halford, G. S., & Andrews, G. (2006). Measuring the influence of complexity on relational reasoning: the development of the latin square task. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(1), 146–171. doi:10.1177/0013164405278570.

  • Bohan, J., & Sanford, A. (2008). Semantic anomalies at the borderline of consciousness: an eye-tracking investigation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(2), 232–239. doi:10.1080/17470210701617219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohn, R. E., & Short, J. E. (2009). How much information? 2009 report on American consumers. La Jolla: UC San Diego Global Information Industry Center. Retrieved from http://hmi.ucsd.edu/pdf/HMI_2009_ConsumerReport_Dec9_2009.pd

  • Bostrom, A. (2008). Lead is like mercury: risk comparisons, analogies and mental models. Journal of Risk Research, 11(1–2), 99–117. doi:10.1080/13669870701602956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braasch, J. L. G., & Goldman, S. R. (2010). The role of prior knowledge in learning from analogies in science texts. Discourse Processes, 47, 447–479. doi:10.1080/01638530903420960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broughton, S. H., & Sinatra, G. M. (2010). Text in the science classroom: promoting engagement to facilitate conceptual change. In M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing reading research to life (pp. 232–256). New York, NY US: Guilford Press.

  • Broughton, S. H., Sinatra, G. M., & Reynolds, R. E. (2010). The nature of the refutation text effect: an investigation of attention allocation. The Journal of Educational Research, 103(6), 407–423. doi:10.1080/00220670903383101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruttin, C. D. (2011). Computerised assessment of an analogical reasoning test: effects of external memory strategies and their positive outcomes in young children and adolescents with intellectual disability. Educational and Child Psychology, Computerised Approaches to Assessment, 28(2), 18–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulloch, M. J., & Opfer, J. E. (2009). What makes relational reasoning smart? Revisiting the perceptual-to-relational shift in the development of generalization. Developmental Science, 12(1), 114–122. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00738.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, S. A., Wendelken, C., Badre, D., & Wagner, A. D. (2005). Analogical reasoning and prefrontal cortex: evidence for separable retrieval and integration mechanisms. Cerebral Cortex, 15(3), 239–249. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhh126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, R. B. (1940). A culture-free intelligence test. I. Journal of Educational Psychology, 31(3), 161–179. doi:10.1037/h0059043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, Y. J., Wang, F. T. Y., Chen, S. F., & Ma, T. S. (2012). Anomaly detection to increase commuter safety for individuals with cognitive impairments. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 24(1), 9–17. doi:10.1007/s10882-011-9251-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4(1), 55–81. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90004-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., Zhou, X., Chen, C., Dong, Q., Zang, Y., Qiao, S., Yang, T., et al. (2007). The neural basis of processing anomalous information. NeuroReport: For Rapid Communication of Neuroscience Research, 18(8), 747–751. doi:10.1097/WNR.0b013e3280ebb49b.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., & Slotta, J. D. (1993). The ontological coherence of intuitive physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2–3), 249–260. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1002&3_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., & Roscoe, R. D. (2002). The processes and challenges of conceptual change. In M. Limon & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: issues in theory and practice (pp. 3–27). Amsterdam: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1998). The structure of discussions that promote reasoning. Teachers College Record: Topics for the New Educational Psychology, 100(2), 315–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: a theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63(1), 1–49. doi:10.2307/1170558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Children’s responses to anomalous scientific data: how is conceptual change impeded? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 327–343. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, S., Moody, T. D., Fernandino, L., Mumford, J. A., Poldrack, R. A., Cannon, T. D., Knowlton, B. J., et al. (2010). Common and dissociable prefrontal loci associated with component mechanisms of analogical reasoning. Cerebral Cortex, 20(3), 524–533. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, S., Holyoak, K. J., & Cannon, T. D. (2007). Analogical reasoning in working memory: resources shared among relational integration, interference resolution, and maintenance. Memory & Cognition, 35(6), 1445–1455. doi:10.3758/BF03193614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M., & Wertschb, J. V. (1996). Beyond the individual-social antinomy in discussions of Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 39(5), 250–256. doi:10.1159/000278475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crone, E. A., Wendelken, C., Van Leijenhorst, L., Honomichl, R. D., Christoff, K., & Bunge, S. A. (2009). Neurocognitive development of relational reasoning. Developmental Science, 12(1), 55–66. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00743.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cubukcu, E., & Cetintahra, G. E. (2010). Does analogical reasoning with visual clues affect novice and experienced design students’ creativity? Creativity Research Journal, 22(3), 337–344. doi:10.1080/10400419.2010.504656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darden, L. (1995). Exemplars, abstractions, and anomalies: Representations and theory change in Mendelian and molecular genetics. In J. G. Lennox & G. Wolters (Eds.), Concepts, theories, and rationality in the biological sciences (pp. 137–158). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denaes, C. (2012). Analogical matrices in young children and students with intellectual disability: reasoning by analogy or reasoning by association? Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 25(3), 271–281. doi:10.1111/j.1468-3148.2011.00665.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Depino, A. M., Lucchina, L., & Pitossi, F. (2011). Early and adult hippocampal TGF-β1 overexpression have opposite effects on behavior. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 25(8), 1582–1591. doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2011.05.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Saussure, F., (2011). Course in general linguistics (trans: Baskin, W.). New York: Columbia University Press. (Original work published 1916).

  • Diakidoy, I. A. N., Mouskounti, T., & Ioannides, C. (2011). Comprehension and learning from refutation and expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(1), 22–38. doi:10.1598/RRQ.46.1.2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dumontheil, I., Houlton, R., Christoff, K., & Blakemore, S. J. (2010). Development of relational reasoning during adolescence. Developmental Science, 13(6), 15–24. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.01014.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 365–395). Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, K. (2001). The analogical paradox: why analogy is so easy in naturalistic settings yet so difficult in the psychological laboratory. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 313–334). Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, L., Figueras, B., Mellanby, J., & Langdon, D. (2011). Verbal and spatial analogical reasoning in deaf and hearing children: the role of grammar and vocabulary. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 16(2), 189–197. doi:10.1093/deafed/enq051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C., Satlow, E., & Gaskins, I. (2009). Grapho-phonemic enrichment strengthens keyword analogy instruction for struggling young readers. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 25(2–3), 162–191. doi:10.1080/10573560802683549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • English, L. D. (1998). Children’s reasoning in solving relational problems of deduction. Thinking and Reasoning, 4(3), 249–281. doi:10.1080/135467898394157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eslinger, P. J., Blair, C., Wang, J., Lipovsky, B., Realmuto, J., Baker, D., Thorne, S., et al. (2009). Developmental shifts in fMRI activations during visuospatial relational reasoning. Brain and Cognition, 69(1), 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2008.04.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fales, C. L., Knowlton, B. I., Holyoak, K. J., Geschwind, D. H., Swerdloff, R. S., & Gonzalo, I. G. (2003). Working memory and relational reasoning in Klinefelter syndrome. Journal of International Neuropsychological Society, 9(6), 839–846. doi:10.1017/S1355617703960036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fast, K. V., & Campbell, G. (2004). “I still like Google:” university students’ perceptions of searching OPACs and the web. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 41, 138–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrington-Flint, L., Canobi, K. H., Woor, C., & Faulkner, D. (2007). The role of relational reasoning in children’s addition concepts. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25, 227–246. doi:10.1348/026151006X108406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrington-Flint, L., & Wood, C. (2007). The role of lexical analogies in beginning reading: insights from children’s self-reports. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 326–338. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faustmann, A., Murdoch, B. E., Finnigan, S. P., & Copland, D. A. (2007). Effects of advancing age on the processing of semantic anomalies in adults: evidence from event-related brain potentials. Experimental Aging Research, 33(4), 439–460. doi:10.1080/03610730701525378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, H. J., & Sanford, A. J. (2008). Anomalies in real and counterfactual worlds: an eye-movement investigation. Journal of Memory and Language, 58(3), 609–626. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.06.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, R. S., Norberg, A., & Lundman, B. (2008). Embracing opposites: meanings of growing old as narrated by people aged 85. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 67(3), 259–271. doi:10.2190/AG.67.3.d.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filik, R. (2008). Contextual override of pragmatic anomalies: evidence from eye movements. Cognition, 106(2), 1038–1046. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filik, R., & Leuthold, H. (2008). Processing local pragmatic anomalies in fictional contexts: evidence from the N400. Psychophysiology, 45(4), 554–558. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2008.00656.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (1995). Perennial antinomies and perpetual redrawings: is there progress in the study of mind? In R. Solso & D. Massaro (Eds.), The science of the mind: 2001 and beyond (pp. 65–78). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7(2), 155–170. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0702_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and transfer: a general role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 393–405. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goel, V., & Dolan, R. J. (2001). Functional neuroanatomy of three-term relational reasoning. Neuropsychologia, 39(9), 901–909. doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(01)00024-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldwater, M. B., Tomlinson, M. T., Echols, C. H., & Love, B. C. (2011). Structural priming as structure-mapping: children use analogies from previous utterances to guide sentence production. Cognitive Science, 35(1), 156–170. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01150.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, P. C., & Moser, S. (2007). Insight into analogies: evidence from eye movements. Visual Cognition, 15(1), 20–35. doi:10.1080/13506280600871891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goswami, U. (1992). Analogical reasoning in children. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goswami, U., & Mead, F. (1992). Onset and rime awareness and analogies in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 27(2), 152–162. doi:10.2307/747684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goswami, U., & Bryant, P. (1992). Rhyme, analogy, and children’s reading. In P. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 49–63). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. E., Fugelsang, J. A., Kraemer, D. J. M., & Dunbar, K. N. (2008). The micro-category account of analogy. Cognition, 106(2), 1004–1016. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.03.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. E., Kraemer, D. J., Fugelsang, J. A., Gray, J. R., & Dunbar, K. N. (2012). Neural correlates of creativity in analogical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(2), 264–272. doi:10.1037/a0025764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, J. R., & Brophy, P. (2005). Student searching behavior and the web: use of academic resources and Google. Library Trends, 53(4), 539–554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heit, E., & Nicholson, S. P. (2010). The opposite of Republican: polarization and political categorization. Cognitive Science, 34(8), 1503–1516. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01138.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hesse, M. B. (1959). On defining analogy. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 60, 79–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, D. R. (2001). Epilogue: Analogy as the core of cognition. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 499–538). Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holliway, D. R. (2007). Spontaneous analogies in referential writing. Communication & Cognition, 40(1–2), 127–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holyoak, K. J. (2012). Analogy and relational reasoning. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (2005). Relational reasoning in a neurally plausible cognitive architecture: an overview of the LISA project. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(3), 153–157. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00350.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iozzi, L., & Barbieri, M. S. (2009). Preschoolers’ use of analogies in referential communication. First Language, 29(2), 192–207. doi:10.1177/0142723708099453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ivanova, I., Pickering, M. J., Branigan, H. P., McLean, J. F., & Costa, A. (2012). The comprehension of anomalous sentences: evidence from structural priming. Cognition, 122(2), 193–209. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2011.10.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Henry Holt and Company.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • James, M. C., & Scharmann, L. C. (2007). Using analogies to improve the teaching performance of preservice teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 565–585. doi:10.1002/tea.20167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjeldergaard, P. M., & Higa, M. (1962). Degree of polarization and the recognition value of words selected from the semantic atlas. Psychological Reports, 11(3), 629–630. doi:10.2466/pr0.1962.11.3.629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowlton, B. J., Morrison, R. G., Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (2012). A neurocomputational system for relational reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Science, 16, 373–381. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig, C. S., Platt, R. D., & Griggs, R. A. (2007). Using dual-process theory and analogical transfer to explain facilitation on a hypothetico-deductive reasoning task. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung, 71(4), 495–502. doi:10.1007/s00426-006-0046-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokinov, B., & Petrov, A. (2001). Integrating memory and reasoning in analogy-making: The AMBR model. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 499–538). Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kostic, B., Cleary, A. M., Severin, K., & Miller, S. W. (2010). Detecting analogical resemblance without retrieving the source analogy. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(3), 405–411. doi:10.3758/PBR.17.3.405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosugi, D., Ishida, H., Murai, C., & Fujita, K. (2009). Nine- to 11-month-old infants’ reasoning about causality in anomalous human movements. Japanese Psychological Research, 51(4), 246–257. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5884.2009.00407.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krawczyk, D. C. (2012). The cognition and neuroscience of relational reasoning. Brain Research, 1428, 13–23. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2010.11.080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krawczyk, D. C., Morrison, R. G., Viskontas, I., Holyoak, K. J., Chow, T. W., Mendez, M. F., Miller, B. L., et al. (2008). Distraction during relational reasoning: the role of prefrontal cortex in interference control. Neuropsychologia, 46(7), 2020–2032. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krawczyk, D. C., McClelland, M. M., Donovan, C. M., Tillman, G. D., & Maguire, M. J. (2010). An fMRI investigation of cognitive stages in reasoning by analogy. Brain Research, 1342, 63–73. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2010.04.039.

  • Krawczyk, D. C., McClelland, M. M., & Donovan, C. M. (2011). A hierarchy for relational reasoning in the prefrontal cortex. Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 47(5), 588–597. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2010.04.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreezer, G., & Dallenbach, K. M. (1929). Learning the relation of opposition. The American Journal of Psychology, 41, 432–441. doi:10.2307/1414683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroger, J. K., Sabb, F. W., Fales, C. L., Bookheimer, S. Y., Cohen, M. S., & Holyoak, K. J. (2002). Recruitment of anterior dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in human reasoning: a parametric study of relational complexity. Cerebral Cortex, 12(5), 477–485. doi:10.1093/cercor/12.5.477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, P. D., Piacente-Cimini, S., & Williams, L. A. (2007). The role of writing in learning from analogies. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 595–611. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2007). Coordinating own and other perspectives in argument. Thinking and Reasoning, 13(2), 90–104. doi:10.1080/13546780600625447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam, W. K., Maxwell, J. P., & Masters, R. S. W. (2009). Analogy versus explicit learning of a modified basketball shooting task: performance and kinematic outcomes. Journal of Sports Sciences, 27(2), 179–191. doi:10.1080/02640410802448764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H. S., & Holyoak, K. J. (2008). The role of causal models in analogical inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(5), 1111–1122. doi:10.1037/a0012581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leech, R., Mareschal, D., & Cooper, R. P. (2007). Relations as transformations: implications for analogical reasoning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(7), 897–908. doi:10.1080/17470210701288599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leroy, S., Parisse, C., & Maillart, C. (2012). Analogical reasoning in children with specific language impairment. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 26(4), 380–396. doi:10.3109/02699206.2011.641059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • List, A., Grossnickle, E. M., & Alexander, P. A., (2012). Students’ source selections, justifications, and evaluations when responding to different question types. International Conference on Conceptual Change, Trier, Germany.

  • Maguire, M. J., McClelland, M. M., Donovan, C. M., Tillman, G. D., & Krawczyk, D. C. (2012). Tracking cognitive phases in analogical reasoning with event-related potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(2), 273–281. doi:10.1037/a0025485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marková, I. (1987). On the interaction of opposites in psychological processes. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 17(3), 279–299. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.1987.tb00100.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. W. (1991). Examining personal relationship thinking: the relational cognition complexity instrument. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 8(4), 467–480. doi:10.1177/026540759184002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, M. F., Magee, J. C., Kuwabara, K., & Nind, L. (2010). Specialization in relational reasoning: the efficiency, accuracy, and neural substrates of social versus nonsocial inferences. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1(4), 318–326. doi:10.1177/1948550610366166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matte-Blanco, I. (1988). Thinking, feeling, and being: clinical reflections on the fundamental antinomy of human beings and world. Florence: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, M. (1993). Analogy-making as perception: a computer model. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, R. K., Pandey, A., & Srinivasan, N. (2011). Revisiting the scrambling complexity hypothesis in sentence processing: a self-paced reading study on anomaly detection and scrambling in Hindi. Reading and Writing, 24(6), 709–727. doi:10.1007/s11145-010-9255-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosenthal, P. B. (1988). Anopheles and antinomies in reading research. The Reading Teacher, 42(3), 234–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, R. G., Doumas, L. A. A., & Richland, L. E. (2011). A computational account of children’s analogical reasoning: balancing inhibitory control in working memory and relational representation. Developmental Science, 14(3), 516–529. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00999.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morsanyi, K., & Holyoak, K. J. (2010). Analogical reasoning ability in autistic and typically developing children. Developmental Science, 13(4), 578–587. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00915.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munnelly, A., Dymond, S., & Hinton, E. C. (2010). Relational reasoning with derived comparative relations: a novel model of transitive inference. Behavioural Processes, 85(1), 8–17. doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2010.05.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutonyi, H. (2007). Analogies, metaphors, and similes for HIV/AIDS among Ugandan grade 11 students. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 53(2), 189–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Opfer, J. E., & Gelman, S. A. (2011). Development of the animate–inanimate distinction. In U. Goswami (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (2nd ed., pp. 213–238). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • PBS Newshour Online (2010, December 10). Math, science, reading scores show U.S. schools slipping behind. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/us/july-dec10/education_12-10.html

  • Perret, P., Bailleux, C., & Dauvier, B. (2011). The influence of relational complexity and strategy selection on children’s reasoning in the Latin square task. Cognitive Development, 26(2), 127–141. doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2010.12.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1928/1966). Judgment and reasoning in the child. Totowa: Littlefield, Adams, & Co.

  • Prado, J., Van der Henst, J. B., & Noveck, I. A. (2008). Spatial associations in relational reasoning: evidence for a SNARC-like effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(8), 1143–1150. doi:10.1080/17470210801954777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prado, J., Van Der Henst, J. B., & Noveck, I. A. (2010). Recomposing a fragmented literature: how conditional and relational arguments engage different neural systems for deductive reasoning. NeuroImage, 51(3), 1213–1221. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prehn, K., Heekeren, H. R., & van der Meer, E. (2011). Influence of affective significance on different levels of processing using pupil dilation in an analogical reasoning task. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 79(2), 236–243. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2010.10.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preusse, F., van der Meer, E., Deshpande, G., Krueger, F., & Wartenburger, I. (2011). Fluid intelligence allows flexible recruitment of the parieto-frontal network in analogical reasoning. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 5(22), 1–14. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2011.00022.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raven, J. C. (1941). Standardization of progressive matrices, 1938. The British Journal of Medical Psychology, 19, 137–150. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8341.1941.tb00316.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, A. L., Haring, S. H., Levin, J. R., Patall, E. A., & Robinson, D. H. (2013). Models of not-so-good behavior: yet another way to squeeze causality and recommendations for practice out of correlational data. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 241–247. doi:10.1037/a0030368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richland, L. E., Chan, T. K., Morrison, R. G., & Au, T. K. F. (2010). Young children’s analogical reasoning across cultures: similarities and differences. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 105(1–2), 146–153. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2009.08.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richland, L. E., & McDonough, I. M. (2010). Learning by analogy: discriminating between potential analogs. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 28–43. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.09.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richland, L. E., Zur, O., & Holyoak, K. J. (2007). Cognitive supports for analogies in the mathematics classroom. Science, 316(5828), 1128–1129. doi:10.1126/science.1142103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz, F. J., & Luciano, C. (2011). Cross-domain analogies as relating derived relations among two separate relational networks. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 95(3), 369–385. doi:10.1901/jeab.2011.95-369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B., & Lackey, D. (1973). Essays in analysis. New York: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siddiqi, H. (2012). The relevance of thinking-by-analogy for investors’ willingness-to-pay: an experimental study. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(1), 19–29. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2011.08.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanford, A. J., Leuthold, H., Bohan, J., & Sanford, A. J. S. (2011). Anomalies at the borderline of awareness: an ERP study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(3), 514–523. doi:10.1162/jocn.2009.21370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savage, R. S., Deault, L., Daki, J., & Aouad, J. (2011). Orthographic analogies and early reading: evidence from a multiple clue word paradigm. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 190–205. doi:10.1037/a0021621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaeken, W., Van der Henst, J. B., Schroyens, W., & d’ Ydewalle, G. (2007). The mental models theory of relational reasoning: premises’ relevance, conclusions’ phrasing, and cognitive economy. In W. Schaeken, A. Vandierendonck, & W. Schroyens (Eds.), The mental models theory of reasoning: refinements and extensions (pp. 129–150). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Cogan, L. S., Jakwerth, P. M., & Houang, R. T. (1999). Facing the consequences: using TIMSS for a closer look at US mathematics and science education. New York: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & Sullivan, G. S. (1994). Promoting relational thinking: elaborative interrogation for students with mild disabilities. Exceptional Children, 60(5), 450–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebag, M., & Rouveirol, C. (2000). Resource-bounded relational reasoning: induction and deduction through stochastic matching. Machine Learning, Multistrategy Learning, 38(1), 41–62. doi:10.1023/A:1007629922420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaumyan, S. (2006). Antinomies of language and language operations of the mind. In H. R. Arabnia, E. B. Kozerenk, & S. Shaumyan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on machine learning; models, technologies & applications, MLMTA (pp. 3–9). Las Vegas: CSREA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiff, R., & Ravid, D. (2007). Morphological analogies in Hebrew-speaking university students with dyslexia compared with typically developing gradeschoolers. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 36(3), 237–253. doi:10.1007/s10936-006-9043-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, G. L., Cardillo, E. R., Kranjec, A., Lehet, M., Widick, P., & Chatterjee, A. (2012). Not all analogies are created equal: associative and categorical analogy processing following brain damage. Neuropsychologia, 50(7), 1372–1379. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.02.022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, L. E., Goodman, N. D., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Jenkins, A. C. (2008). Going beyond the evidence: abstract laws and preschoolers’ responses to anomalous data. Cognition, 109(2), 211–223. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slotta, J. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2006). Helping students understand challenging topics in science through ontology training. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 261–289. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2402_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinatra, G. M., & Broughton, S. H. (2011). Bridging reading comprehension and conceptual change in science education: the promise of refutation text. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(4), 374–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Son, J. Y., Smith, L. B., & Goldstone, R. L. (2011). Connecting instances to promote children’s relational reasoning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 108(2), 260–277. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2010.08.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen, R. A. (2003). A brief history of the paradox: philosophy and the Labyrinths of the mind. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man: their nature and measurement. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, A. C. (2006). Equivalence and relational thinking: preservice elementary teachers’ awareness of opportunities and misconceptions. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9(3), 249–278. doi:10.1007/s10857-006-9000-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (1977). Intelligence, information processing, and analogical reasoning: the componential analysis of human abilities. Oxford: Lawrence Erlbaum Stevenson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, C. E., Resing, W. C. M., & Froma, M. N. (2009). Analogical reasoning skill acquisition with self-explanation in 7–8 year olds: does feedback help? Educational and Child Psychology Reasoning in Children and Adolescents, 26(3), 6–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, C. E., Touw, K. W. J., & Resing, W. C. M. (2011). Computer or paper analogy puzzles: does assessment mode influence young children’s strategy progression? Educational and Child Psychology Computerised Approaches to Assessment, 28(2), 67–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, I., Barnes-Holmes, D., Roche, B., & Smeets, P. M. (2001). Generating derived relational networks via the abstraction of common physical properties: a possible model of analogical reasoning. Psychological Record, 51(3), 381–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, A. J., Kidd, E., & Haigh, M. (2009). Early sensitivity to discourse-level anomalies: evidence from self-paced reading. Discourse Processes, 46(1), 46–69. doi:10.1080/01638530802629091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strømsø, H. I., & Bråten, I. (2010). The role of personal epistemology in the self-regulation of Internet-based learning. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 91–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Summers, B., & Duxbury, D. (2012). Decision-dependent emotions and behavioral anomalies. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 118(2), 226–238. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.03.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanca, M., Grossberg, S., & Pinna, B. (2010). Probing perceptual antinomies with the watercolor illusion and explaining how the brain resolves them. Seeing and Perceiving, 23(4), 295–333. doi:10.1163/187847510X532685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, E. G., & Hummel, J. E. (2009). Finding similarity in a model of relational reasoning. Cognitive Systems Research, Analogies—Integrating Cognitive Abilities, 10(3), 229–239. doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2008.09.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J. P., French, R., & Vezneva, M. (2010). Cognitive load and semantic analogies: searching semantic space. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(4), 569–574. doi:10.3758/PBR.17.4.569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trey, L., & Khan, S. (2008). How science students can learn about unobservable phenomena using computer-based analogies. Computers in Education, 51(2), 519–529. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.05.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trickett, S. B., Trafton, J. G., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). How do scientists respond to anomalies? Different strategies used in basic and applied science. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 711–729. doi:10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01036.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tunteler, E., & Resing, W. C. M. (2007). Effects of prior assistance in using analogies on young children’s unprompted analogical problem solving over time: a microgenetic study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 43–68. doi:10.1348/000709906X96923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tunteler, E., & Resing, W. C. M. (2010). The effects of self and other scaffolding on progression and variation in children’s geometric analogy performance: a microgenetic research. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 9(3), 251–272. doi:10.1891/1945-8959.9.3.251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tzuriel, D. (2007). Transfer effects of teaching conceptual versus perceptual analogies. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 6(2), 194–217. doi:10.1891/194589507787382232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tzuriel, D., & George, T. (2009). Improvement of analogical reasoning and academic achievement by the Analogical Reasoning Programme (ARP). Educational and Child Psychology, Reasoning in Children and Adolescents, 26(3), 71–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzuriel, D., & Shamir, A. (2010). Mediation strategies and cognitive modifiability in young children as a function of Peer Mediation with Young Children program and training in analogies versus math tasks. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 9(1), 48–72. doi:10.1891/1945-8959.9.1.48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullstadius, E., Carlstedt, B., & Gustafsson, J. E. (2008). The multidimensionality of verbal analogy items. International Journal of Testing, 8(2), 166–179. doi:10.1080/15305050802001243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vakil, E., Lifshitz, H., Tzuriel, D., Weiss, I., & Arzuoan, Y. (2011). Analogies solving by individuals with and without intellectual disability: different cognitive patterns as indicated by eye movements. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32(2), 846–856. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2010.08.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Gog, T., Paas, F., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2004). Process-oriented worked examples: improving transfer performance through enhanced understanding. Instructional Science, 32(1), 83–98. doi:10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021810.70784.b0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Henst, J.-B., & Schaeken, W. (2005). The wording of conclusions in relational reasoning. Cognition, 97(1), 1–22. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2004.06.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Tartwijk, J., Van Rijswijk, M., Tuithof, H., & Driessen, E. W. (2008). Using an analogy in the introduction of a portfolio. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(4), 927–938. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2007.11.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vissers, C. T. W. M., Virgillito, D., Fitzgerald, D. A., Speckens, A. E. M., Tendolkar, I., van Oostrom, I., & Chwilla, D. J. (2010). The influence of mood on the processing of syntactic anomalies: evidence from P600. Neuropsychologia, 48(12), 3521–3531. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viskontas, I. V., Morrison, R. G., Holyoak, K. J., Hummel, J. E., & Knowlton, B. J. (2004). Relational integration, inhibition, and analogical reasoning in older adults. Psychology and Aging, 19(4), 581–591. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.19.4.581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volle, E., Gilbert, S. J., Benoit, R. G., & Burgess, P. W. (2010). Specialization of the rostral prefrontal cortex for distinct analogy processes. Cerebral Cortex, 20(11), 2647–2659. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhq012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walther, H. (2010). Anomalies in intertemporal choice, time-dependent uncertainty and expected utility—a common approach. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31(1), 114–130. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2009.11.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waltz, J. A., Knowlton, B. J., Holyoak, K. J., Boone, K. B., Mishkin, F. S., de Menezes Santos, M., Thomas, C. R., & Miller, B. L. (1999). A system for relational reasoning in human prefrontal cortex. Psychological Science, 10(2), 119–125. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, R. E., Allen, K. V., Sommerfield, A. J., Deary, I. J., & Frier, B. M. (2004). Acute hypoglycemia impairs nonverbal intelligence. Diabetes Care, 27(6), 1447–1448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, C. E., & Chatterjee, A. (2012). A bilateral frontoparietal network underlies visuospatial analogical reasoning. NeuroImage, 59(3), 2831–2838. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.09.030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts-Perotti, J., & Woods, D. D. (2009). Cooperative advocacy: an approach for integrating diverse perspectives in anomaly response. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 18(2), 175–198. doi:10.1007/s10606-008-9085-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, K., & Lavric, A. (2008). Syntactic anomaly elicits a lexico-semantic (N400) ERP effect in the second language but not the first. Psychophysiology, 45(6), 920–925. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2008.00691.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendelken, C., Nakhabako, N., Donohue, S. E., Carter, C. S., & Bunge, S. A. (2008). “Brain is to thought as stomach is to??”: investigating the role of rostrolateral prefrontal cortex in relational reasoning. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(4), 682–693. doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wertheimer, M. (1900). Gestalt theory. Raleigh: Hayes Barton.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, C. S., & Caropreso, E. J. (1989). Training in analogical reasoning processes: effects on low socioeconomic status preschool children. The Journal of Educational Research, 83(2), 112–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, R. Z., Yang, W., Garcia, D., & McCadden, E. P. (2008). Effects of multimedia and schema induced analogical reasoning on science learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Living, 24(6), 474–482. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00282.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, M., Meng, H., Xu, Z., Du, F., Liu, T., Li, Y., & Chen, F. (2011). The neuromechanism underlying verbal analogical reasoning of metaphorical relations: an event-related potentials study. Brain Research, 1425, 62–74. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2011.09.041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Denis Dumas.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Table 1

Relational reasoning in general literature summary table (PDF 81.7 kb)

Table 2

Particular manifestations of relational reasoning literature summary table (PDF 232 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dumas, D., Alexander, P.A. & Grossnickle, E.M. Relational Reasoning and Its Manifestations in the Educational Context: a Systematic Review of the Literature. Educ Psychol Rev 25, 391–427 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9224-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9224-4

Keywords

  • Relational reasoning
  • Analogy
  • Anomaly
  • Antinomy
  • Antithesis