Explanation recruits comparison in a category-learning task
Abstract
Generating explanations can be highly effective in promoting category learning; however, the underlying mechanisms are not fully understood. We propose that engaging in explanation can recruit comparison processes, and that this in turn contributes to the effectiveness of explanation in supporting category learning. Three experiments evaluated the interplay between explanation and various comparison strategies in learning artificial categories. In Experiment 1, as expected, prompting participants to explain items' category membership led to (a) higher ratings of self-reported comparison processing and (b) increased likelihood of discovering a rule underlying category membership. Indeed, prompts to explain led to more self-reported comparison than did direct prompts to compare pairs of items. Experiment 2 showed that prompts to compare all members of a particular category ("group comparison") were more effective in supporting rule learning than were pairwise comparison prompts. Experiment 3 found that group comparison (as assessed by self-report) partially mediated the relationship between explanation and category learning. These results suggest that one way in which explanation benefits category learning is by inviting comparisons in the service of identifying broad patterns.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Asking people to generate verbal explanations for their observations supports the discovery of broad and simple patterns.
“As a third category, studies find that asking people to generate verbal explanations for their observations supports the discovery of broad and simple patterns (Edwards et al., 2019;Walker et al., 2017;Williams & Lombrozo, 2010;2013).”
From Mind Your Step (by Step): Chain-of-Thought can Reduce Performance on Tasks where Thinking Makes Humans Worse (2024) · cites this paper as Edwards et al., 2019
Cites
Schema induction and analogical transfer
Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(83)90002-6 · Cited by 2,955 · see citing works
Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems
Chi, M. (1989) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1016/0364-0213(89)90002-5 · Cited by 2,287 · see citing works
A contrastive account of explanation generation
Chin-Parker, S., & Bradner, A. (2017) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-017-1349-x · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The power of internal feedback: Exploiting natural comparison processes
Nicol, D. (2021) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1823314 · Cited by 402 · see citing works
Liu, R., Geng, J., Wu, A. J., Sucholutsky, I., Lombrozo, T., & Griffiths, T. L. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.21333 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
“As a third category, studies find that asking people to generate verbal explanations for their observations supports the discovery of broad and simple patterns (Edwards et al., 2019; Walker et al., 2017; Williams & Lombrozo, 2010; 2013).”
Self-citation
- Authors
- Edwards, B. J., Williams, J. J., Gentner, D., & Lombrozo, T.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Princeton University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Edwards, Brian J.
- Venue
- Cognition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-04
- Volume
- 185
- Pages
- 21-38
- ISSN
- 0010-0277 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2911165400
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 5.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- NSF Graduate Research Fellowship
- NSF SLC (SBE-0541957)
- ONR (N00014-13-1-0470)
- NSF (DRL-1056712)
- McDonnell Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Keywords
- explanation, category learning, rule induction, group comparison, pairwise comparison, mediation, pattern detection
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Concept Formation, Humans, Judgment, Learning, Thinking
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review