Spatial alignment supports comparison of life science images

Visual comparisons are pervasive in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) instruction and practice. In previous work, adults' visual comparisons of simple stimuli were faster and more accurate when the layout of a display facilitated alignment of corresponding elements-the spatial alignment principle (Matlen et al., 2020). Here, we asked whether the spatial alignment principle extends to rich, educationally relevant stimuli, and how prior experience and spatial skill relate to spatial alignment effects. Participants were asked to find an incorrect bone within a skeleton, presented individually or paired with a correct skeleton in a layout that did (direct placement) or did not (impeded placement) support alignment (Kurtz & Gentner, 2013). Consistent with the spatial alignment principle, undergraduates (Study 1) showed an advantage of direct over impeded placement. Middle schoolers (Study 2) showed a direct advantage on items presented in atypical orientations. That atypical items showed the strongest effects suggests that direct placement may help most when materials are less familiar. However, neither individual differences in undergraduates' STEM course history, nor undergraduates' or middle schoolers' spatial skills moderated spatial alignment effects. Thus, applying the spatial alignment principle in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics has potential to improve visual comparisons, especially those that are challenging, for students of all spatial skill levels. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Analogical Comparison Promotes Theory-of-Mind Development

Theory-of-mind (ToM) is an integral part of social cognition, but how it develops remains a critical question. There is evidence that children can gain insight into ToM through experience, including language training and explanatory interactions. But this still leaves open the question of how children gain these insights-what processes drive this learning? We propose that analogical comparison is a key mechanism in the development of ToM. In Experiment 1, children were shown true- and false-belief scenarios and prompted to engage in multiple comparisons (e.g., belief vs. world). In Experiments 2a, 2b, and 3, children saw a series of true- and false-belief events, varying in order and in their alignability. Across these experiments, we found that providing support for comparing true- and false-belief scenarios led to increased performance on false-belief tests. These findings show that analogical comparison can support ToM learning.

Working memory predicts children's analogical reasoning

Analogical reasoning is the cognitive skill of drawing relationships between representations, often between prior knowledge and new representations, that allows for bootstrapping cognitive and language development. Analogical reasoning proficiency develops substantially during childhood, although the mechanisms underlying this development have been debated, with developing cognitive resources as one proposed mechanism. We explored the role of executive function (EF) in supporting children's analogical reasoning development, with the goal of determining whether predicted aspects of EF were related to analogical development at the level of individual differences. We assessed 5- to 11-year-old children's working memory, inhibitory control, and cognitive flexibility using measures from the National Institutes of Health Toolbox Cognition battery. Individual differences in children's working memory best predicted performance on an analogical mapping task, even when controlling for age, suggesting a fundamental interrelationship between analogical reasoning and working memory development. These findings underscore the need to consider cognitive capacities in comprehensive theories of children's reasoning development.