Analogy was studied in real-world engineering design, using the in vivo method. Analogizing was found to occur frequently, entailing a roughly equal amount of within- and between-domain analogies. In partial support for theories of unconscious plagiarism (Brown & Murphy, 1989; Marsh, Landau, & Hicks, 1996) and Ward’s (1994) path-of-least-resistance model, it was found that the reference to exemplars (in the form of prototypes) significantly reduced the number of between-domain analogies between source and target, as compared with using sketches or no external representational systems. Analogy served three functions in relation to novel design concepts: identifying problems, solving problems, and explaining concepts. Problem identifying analogies were mainly within domain, explanatory analogies were mainly between domain, and problem-solving analogies were a mixture of within- and between-domain analogies.
Bearman, C. R., Ball, L. J., &Ormerod, T. C. (2002). An exploration of real-world analogical problem solving in novices. In W. D. Gray & C. D. Schunn (Eds.),Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 101–106). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Beveridge, M., &Parkins, E. (1987). Visual representation in analogical problem solving.Memory & Cognition,15, 230–237.
Bonnardel, N., &Marmèche, E. (2004). Evocation processes by novice and expert designers: Towards stimulating analogical thinking.Creativity & Innovation Management,13, 176–186.
Brown, A. S., &Murphy, D. R. (1989). Cryptomnesia: Delineating inadvertent plagiarism.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 432–442.
Casakin, H. (2003). Visual analogy as a cognitive strategy in the design process: Expert versus novice performance. In N. Cross & E. Edmonds (Eds.),Expertise in design. Sydney: University of Technology, Creativity & Cognition Press.
Casakin, H., &Goldschmidt, G. (1999). Expertise and the use of visual analogy: Implications for design education.Design Studies,20, 153–175.
Christensen, B. T. (2005). A methodology for studying design cognition in the real-world [Online]. InDigital proceedings from NORDES: The First Nordic Design Research Conference. Copenhagen.
Christiaans, H., &Andel, J. v. (1993). The effects of examples on the use of knowledge in a student design activity: The case of the “flying Dutchman.”Design Studies,14, 58–74.
Craig, D. L., Nersessian, N. J., &Catrambone, R. (2002). The role of diagrams and diagrammatic affordances in analogy. In W. D. Gray & C. D. Schunn (Eds.),Proceedings from the 24th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 250–255). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dahl, D. W., &Moreau, P. (2002). The influence and value of analogical thinking during new product ideation.Journal of Marketing Research,39, 47–60.
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, MA: MIT Press.
Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, & J. Vaid (Eds.),Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 461–493). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Dunbar, K. (2001a). 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, MA: MIT Press.
Dunbar, K. (2001b). What scientific thinking reveals about the nature of cognition. In K. Crowley, C. D. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.),Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings (pp. 115–140). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dunbar, K., &Blanchette, I. (2001). The in vivo/in vitro approach to cognition: The case of analogy.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,5, 334–339.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., &Smith, S. M. (1992).Creative cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gentner, D. (1998). Analogy. In W. Bechtel & G. Graham (Eds.),A companion to cognitive science (pp. 107–113). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Gentner, D., Rattermann, M. J., &Forbus, K. D. (1993). The roles of similarity in transfer: Separating retrievability from inferential soundness.Cognitive Psychology,25, 524–575.
Ghiselin, B. (1954).The creative process: A symposium. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Goel, V. (1995).Sketches of thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
Goldschmidt, G. (2001). Visual analogy: A strategy for design reasoning and learning. In C. M. Eastman, W. M. McCracken, & W. C. Newstetter (Eds.),Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education (pp. 199–220). Amsterdan: Elsevier.
Gordon, W. J. J. (1961).Synectics: The development of creative capacity. New York: Harper & Row.
Holyoak, K. J., &Koh, K. (1987). Surface and structural similarity in analogical transfer.Memory & Cognition,15, 332–340.
Holyoak, K. J., &Thagard, P. (1995).Mental leaps: Analogy in creative thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jaarsveld, S., &van Leeuwen, C. (2005). Sketches from a design process: Creative cognition inferred from intermediate products.Cognitive Science,29, 79–101.
Jansson, D. G., &Smith, S. M. (1991). Design fixation.Design Studies,12, 3–11.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1989). Analogy and the exercise of creativity. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.),Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 313–331). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Luchins, A. S. (1942). Mechanisation in problem solving: The effect of Einstellung.Psychological Monographs,54(Whole No. 248).
Maier, N. R. F. (1931). Reasoning in humans: II. The solution of a problem and its appearance in consciousness.Journal of Comparative Psychology,8, 181–194.
Marsh, R. L., Bink, M. L., &Hicks, J. L. (1999). Conceptual priming in a generative problem-solving task.Memory & Cognition,27, 355–363.
Marsh, R. L., &Bower, G. H. (1993). Eliciting cruptomnesia: Unconscious plagiarism in a puzzle task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 673–688.
Marsh, R. L., &Landau, J. D. (1995). Item availability in cryptomnesia: Assessing its role in two paradigms of unconscious plagiarism.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1568–1582.
Marsh, R. L., Landau, J. D., &Hicks, J. L. (1996). How examples may (and may not) constrain creativity.Memory & Cognition,24, 669–680.
Marsh, R. L., Landau, J. D., &Hicks, J. L. (1997). Contributions of inadequate source monitoring to unconscious plagiarism during idea generation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,23, 886–897.
Marsh, R. L., Ward, T. B., &Landau, J. D. (1999). The inadvertent use of prior knowledge in a generative cognitive task.Memory & Cognition,27, 94–105.
McGown, A., Green, G., &Rodgers, P. A. (1998). Visible ideas: Information patterns of conceptual sketch activity.Design Studies,19, 431–453.
Purcell, A. T., &Gero, J. S. (1992). Effects of examples on the results of a design activity.Knowledge-Based Systems,5, 82–91.
Römer, A., Pache, M., Weisshahn, G., Lindemann, U., &Hacker, W. (2001). Effort-saving product representations in design—results of a questionnaire survey.Design Studies,22, 473–491.
Roozenburg, N. F. M., &Eekels, J. (1996).Product design: Fundamentals and methods. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
Shepard, R. N. (1978). Externalization of mental images and the act of creation. In B. S. Randawa & W. E. Cofman (Eds.),Visual learning, thinking, and communication (pp. 133–189). New York: Academic Press.
Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., &Schumacher, J. S. (1993). Constraining effects of examples in a creative generation task.Memory & Cognition,21, 837–845.
Terninko, J., Zusman, A., &Zlotin, B. (1998).Systematic innovation An introduction to TRIZ. Boca Raton: St Lucie Press.
Vosniadou, S., &Ortony, A. (1989). Similarity and analogical reasoning: A synthesis. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.),Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 1–7). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ward, T. B. (1994). Structured imagination: The role of category structure in exemplar generation.Cognitive Psychology,27, 1–40.
Ward, T. B. (1995). What’s old about new ideas? In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.),The creative cognition approach (pp. 157–178). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ward, T. B. (1998). Analogical distance and purpose in creative thought: Mental leaps versus mental hops. In K. J. Holyoak, D. Gentner, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.),Advances in analogy research: Integration of theory and data from the cognitive, computational, and neural sciences (pp. 221–230). Sofia: New Bulgarian University.
Ward, T. B., Patterson, M. J., Sifonis, C. M., Dodds, R. A., &Saunders, K. N. (2002). The role of graded category structure in imaginative thought.Memory & Cognition,30, 199–216.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Christensen, B.T., Schunn, C.D. The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and preinventive structure: the case of engineering design. Memory & Cognition 35, 29–38 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195939
- Design Object
- External Support
- Analogical Reasoning
- External Representation
- Medical Plastic