Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society

Analogical reasoning is one of the most common ways individuals bring previous experience to bear on unfamiliar situations. Most theories describe this process as a structured comparison that involves mapping the relational properties between a familiar source and unfamiliar target. This both allows the transfer of useful inferences from the source to the target and highlights the common structure shared by both analogs, represented by an abstract schema. This schema can help with identifying and reasoning about structurally similar situations in the future. While researchers have studied how representations of source and target analogs undergo alterations as a result of this mapping process, little attention has been paid to how the abstract schemas thought to guide future analogical reasoning might similarly change with use. We explore this question in two experiments and present evidence that suggests abstract schemas do indeed drift under certain conditions.