Abstract
Analogical reasoning refers to one’s ability to derive the relation between stimuli, a process necessary for completing Aristotle’s proportional analogies, A:B::C:D. The ability to engage in complex reasoning of this nature would benefit many students with disabilities, given that they have appropriate prerequisite skills. However, the means to establish reasoning skills of this nature with students with specialized learning needs has yet to be addressed within experimental research. The current study set out to develop a procedure to teach analogical reasoning that could be used by educators across a variety of curricula. To ensure experimental control, arbitrarily related abstract figures were tested initially. Two three-member classes of abstract figures (A1-B1-C1 and A2-B2-C2) were presented to 12 adult participants via computer software. Adult participants were tested first such that inconclusive findings could not be attributed to impaired language skills, as could be the case with students with autism. Participants were trained to vocally label AB and BC pairs from within the same class as “same” and pairs from different classes as “different.” Vocal label and analogy tests with these relations followed. During the analogy tests, selecting the comparison with “same” terms was correct when the sample had “same” terms, vice versa with “different.” This testing sequence was repeated with variations of the trained compounds (BA, CB, AC, and CA). Equivalence class formation was tested with the figures presented individually in a matching task (e.g., selecting B1 in presence of A1 when told “Select same”). Six of the 12 participants passed all presented tasks, supporting the viability of this procedure. Had all the participants displayed the proficiency of these participants, the work would have been immediately extended to children of five years of age and then to children with autism. Once a reliable procedure is established, subsequent studies should follow this trajectory to ensure that the protocol is effective with learners with disabilities. The failures of the six participants give rise to a number of conjectures that should be examined in future research. The participants may have failed to use appropriate strategies to form the analogical relations. Future studies should examine modifications to the procedures used within this study to establish useful learning strategies such as naming the individual figures or naming categories of figures. Ultimately, this work contributes to the analogical reasoning literature as the first experimental study to include verbal response topographies. The successes of six participants indicate that the developed procedure has the potential to be useful to special educators working to train learners to display analogical relations between stimuli.