Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Commonalities and differences in similarity comparisons

A B Markman1, D Gentner

  • 1Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA. markman@psych.columbia.edu

Memory & Cognition
|March 1, 1996
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Structural alignment in similarity and difference judgments.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2013
Same author

Comparison and choice: Relations between similarity processes and decision processes.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2013
Same author

How do indirect measures of evaluation work? Evaluating the inference of prejudice in the Implicit Association Test.

Journal of personality and social psychology·2001
Same author

Structural alignment facilitates the noticing of differences.

Memory & cognition·2001
Same author

Thinking.

Annual review of psychology·2001
Same author

Structure mapping in the comparison process.

The American journal of psychology·2000
Same journal

Limited protective effects of multilingualism against age-related cognitive decline.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

Validation of illustrated texts: Can pictures raise awareness of inconsistencies?

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

4I remember (and forget) your happy smiling face: Directed forgetting of emotionally expressive faces of in-group and out-group members.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

Identity in the spotlight: Matching faces without overlapping features.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

Test delay and change awareness moderate retroactive and proactive memory effects.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

The Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) illusion in short-term memory: Opposite effects of retention interval on true and false recognition.

Memory & cognition·2026
See all related articles

Cognitive similarity relies on comparing structured representations, yielding commonalities and two types of differences. Alignable differences, linked to commonalities, are more crucial to similarity judgments than nonalignable ones.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Human Perception
  • Decision Making

Background:

  • Similarity is fundamental to cognition, influencing perception, memory, and decision-making.
  • Current models conceptualize similarity as a comparison of structured representations.
  • This comparison process generates commonalities and distinct types of differences: alignable and nonalignable.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide empirical evidence for the tripartite distinction of similarity components: commonalities, alignable differences, and nonalignable differences.
  • To investigate the relative importance of alignable versus nonalignable differences in similarity judgments.
  • To explore the implications of this distinction for broader cognitive processes.

Main Methods:

  • A commonality and difference listing study using pairs of pictures was conducted.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Participants listed commonalities and differences between presented image pairs.
  • A second study experimentally manipulated the impact of alignable and nonalignable differences on perceived similarity.

    • Main Results:

    • Alignable differences, those connected to commonalities, were found to be central to the comparison process.
    • Alignable differences had a greater negative impact on perceived similarity than nonalignable differences.
    • The findings support the theoretical distinction between alignable and nonalignable differences.

    Conclusions:

    • The distinction between alignable and nonalignable differences is critical for understanding similarity.
    • Alignable differences play a more significant role in similarity judgments due to their relationship with commonalities.
    • These findings have implications for understanding various cognitive processes that involve comparison and judgment.