本研究的主要目的在探討類比故事的表面特徵與結構特徵對於故事回想表現的影響，以及不同年齡層的學生在類比故事的回想表現上，受故事表面特徵與結構特徵的影響是否有所不同。
實驗一為重覆驗證Catrambone(2002)的類比故事研究，研究對象為120名大學生，目的在探討Catrambone的研究發現，在台灣大學生閱讀中文類比故事的情境中是否會重覆發生。實驗二主要討論不同年齡層的學生，在類比故事的回想表現上受到故事表面特徵與結構特徵的影響是否有所不同，研究對象為129名大學生，136名國二學生，132名國小六年級學生以及130名國小四年級學生。所得的資料以獨立樣本變異數分析法驗證假設。研究結果顯示：
一、類比故事表面特徵與結構特徵符合的程度對故事回想表現有影響，當類比故事的表面特徵或結構特徵符合的程度越高時，受試者的回想表現越佳，表面特徵與結構特徵二者並沒有交互作用。
二、類比表現有發展上的差異。國小四年級學童的故事回想表現與其他年齡層學生有顯著不同，小學四年級的故事回想表現比起其他年齡層都較差，大學生在閱讀各故事版本的回想表現比起其他年齡層都較佳，隨著年齡越大，學生的故事回想得分有越高的趨勢。
三、不同年齡組的學生受詞彙符合數與結構符合數所影響的故事回想比率組型也有所不同。其中大學生對於詞彙符合量與結構符合量的反應最敏銳。國中二年級學生的反應組型與大學生相似，但是不若大學生分化的那麼清楚。至於國小六年級與四年級學生對詞彙符合量與結構符合量反應的分化程度，則比大學生與國二生更低。

Abstract
The main purpose of this research is to investigate the effects of superficial feature and structure feature matches of analogical stories on students’ story reminding performance, and whether the effects are different with age.
The purpose of Experiment 1, is to examine if the findings of Catrambone's(2002) research will be found in Taiwan college students while they read Chinese analogical stories. The purpose of Experiment 2 is to investigate if the effects of superficial and structure feature matches on story reminding performance will change with different age groups. The data obtained are analyzed by ANOVA. The findings are as follows:
1. The result suggested that both surface feature and structure feature may influence story reminding performance. The better the two features matched, the better the story reminding performance. There was no interaction between the two factors.
2.The effects of surface feature and structural feature matches on story reminding performance changed with age. There was a significant difference between the performance of fourth graders in elementary school and that of other age groups. The performance of college students was better than that of other age groups in all conditions. The performance of story reminding improved with the increase of age.
3. The reminding patterns of different age groups were different. College students showed the strongest response to entity match and structure match. College students and second graders in junior high school showed similar story reminding patterns, but the response differentiation of junior high school students were not as clear as that of college students. The sixth and fourth graders in elementary school showed much less clear differentiation of entity match and structure match response than college students and junior high school students did.

一、中文文獻
江淑卿(民90)：兒童類比推理能力的學習潛能評估研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系教育心理學報，33，47-64。
任宗浩(民91)：類比思考人工智慧研究及其對於科學教育的意涵，科學教育月刊，248，2-15。
林靜雯(民89)：由概念改變及心智模式初探多重類比對國小四年級學生電學概念學習之影響。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
邱美虹(民82)：類比與科學概念的學習。教育研究資訊，1(6)，79-90。
邱美虹、高淑芬(民88)：類比對應學生建構原子結構信表徵之影響。師大學報教育科學類，44(1、2)，31-59。
屠名正(譯)(民92)：心智─認知科學導論。台北：五南出版社。Thagard , P.(1996). Introduction to Cognitive Science. 2 nd ed.
張春興(民80)：現代心理學。台北：東華書局。
張景媛(民82)：由訊息處理模式談教學策略。中等教育，44，3，48-57。
張麗芬(民81)：幼兒類比推理能力之研究。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文。
張麗芬(民83)：幼兒的類比推理能力。國教天地，103，40-47。
張麗芬(民84)：學前幼兒的類比推理能力。國立屏東師範學院屏東師範學報，8，527-560。
張麗芬(民86)：幼兒解決幾何類比題能力的發展。國立台南師範學院「初等教育學報」，10，357-388。
黃幸美(民84)：類比推理思考及其在教育上的應用。教育研究資訊，3(3)，28-142。
黃幸美(民89)：兒童問題討論解決類比推理問題之探討。台北市立師範學院學報，31，49-72。
黃幸美(民90)：兒童解決數學及自然科學問題的問答討論與類比推理思考之研究，國立台灣師範大學教育心理學系教育心理學報32(2)，121-142。
黃幸美、林美珍、鄭晉昌(民86)：提示對學童問題解決的影響，國立政治大學「教育與心理研究」，20，111-140。
黃幸美、鄭晉昌(民89)：解決數學問題的類比推理思考─問題相似性與領域知識的影響。台北市立師範學院學報，31，135-160。
蔡聰暉 (民90)：由心智模式探討學生導引之類比教學對國二學生溫度與熱概念學習。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
鄭昭明(民82)：認知心理學。台北：桂冠出版社。
鄭婉敏(民87)：訊息處理模式取向的學習研究對教學的啟示。國立台中師範學院國民教育研究所活民教育研究集刊，(6)，65-79。
二、西文文獻
Blanchette, I., & Dunbar, K. (2000). How analogies are generated: The role of structural and superficial similarity. Memory & Cognition, 28, 108-124.
Blanchette, I., & Dunbar, K. (2002). Representational change and analogy: How analogical inferences alter target representations, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning , Memory , and Cognition, 28(4), 672-685.
Caplan, L. J., & Schooler, C. (2000).On the use of analogy in text-based memory and comprehension : the interaction between complexity of within-domain encoding and between-domain processing. The Journal of TheLearning Sciences, 8(1),41-70.
Catrambone, R. & Holyoak, K. J. (1989). Over come limitation on problem transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15 (6). 1147-1156.
Catrambone, R.(1998). The subgoal learning model and problem-solving transfer:Creating better examples so that students can solve novel problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology : General, 127, 355-376.
Catrambone, R. (2002). The effects of surface and structural feature matches on the access of story analogs. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 28 (2), 318-334.
Chen, Z. (2001). Analogical problem solving : A hierarchical analysis of procedural similarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning , Memory , and Cognition,28(1),81-98.
Dunbar, K (2001). Why analogy is so easy in natrualistic Settings yet so difficult in the psychological laboratory . In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind. (pp.313-322). London: MIT Press.
Forbus., K. D. (2001). Exploring analogy in the large. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind. (pp.313-322). London : MIT Press.
Fujimura, N. (2001). Facilitating children’s proportional reasoning: a model of reasoning process and effects of intervention on stratege change. Journal of Educational Psychology. 93(3), 589-603.
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-Mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science , 7 , 155-170.
Gentner, D. (1989).Structure mapping theory. Similarity and analogical reasoning.In S. Vosniadou, & A. Ortony(Eds.), Nework:Cambridge University Press.
Gentner, D. (1998). Analogy. In W. Bechtel & G. Graham (Eds.) , A companion to cognitive science (pp. 107-113). Oxford : Blackwell.
Gentner, D., & Holyoak, K. J.(1997). Reasoning and learning by analogy. American Psychology, 52(1), 32-34.
Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52, 45-56.
Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and Transfer: A general role for analogical encoding, Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 393-408.
Gentner, D., Rattermann, M.J., & Forbus, K.D.(1993).The roles of similarity in transfer:Separating retrieval from inferential soundness.Cognitive Psychology, 25, 524-575.
Gick, M.L., & Holyoak, K. J.(1987). The cognitive basis of knowledge transfer. In S. M. Cormier & J. D. Hagman(Eds), (pp9-46),Orlando, FL: Scademic Press.
Gowsami, U. (2001).Analogical reasoning in children. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind (pp.437-469). London: MIT Press.
Hofstadter, D. R.(2001).Analgoy as the core of cognition . In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind. (pp.499-537). London: MIT Press.
Holyoak, K. J., & Hummel, J. E.(2001).Toward an understanding of analogy within a bilolgical symbol system. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind. (pp.313-322). London: MIT Press.
Holyoak, K. J., & Koh, K.(1987). Surface and structural similarity in analogical transfer. Memory and Cogintion, 15, 332-340.
Holyoak, K.J., Gentner, D., & Kokinov, B. N. (2001).Instroduction: The place of analogy in cognition . In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind(pp.1-20). London: MIT Press.
Keane, M. T. (1987), On retrieving analogues when solving problems. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 39(A), 29-41.
Keane, M. T., Ledgeway, T., & Duff, S.(1994).Constraints on analogical mapping : A comparison of three models. Cognitive Science, 18, 387-438.
Kolodner, J. L. (2002). Analogical and case-based reasoning: their implications for education. The Journal of The Learning Science, 11(1), 123-126.
Kurtz, K. J., Mao, C. H., & Gentner, D.(2001). Learning by analogical bootstrapping. The Journal of The learning sciences, 10(4), 417-446.
Kubos, T. T., Holyoak, K. J., & Hummel, J. E. (2002). The role of textual coherence in incremental analogical mapping. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 407-435.
Markman, A. B. & Gentner, D., (1993). Structural alignment during similarity Comparisons. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 431-467.
Markman, A. B. (1997). Constraints on analogical inference. Cognitive Science, 21(4), 373-418.
McKoon, G., Ratcliff, R. (1990). Textual inferences : models and measures. In D. A. Balota, G. B. F. d’Arcais, K. Rayner(Eds.)
McKoon, G., Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inferences during reading. Psychology Review, 99, 440-466.
Nash, J. G., Schumacher, G. M., & Carlson, B.W(1993).Writing form source: A structure mapping model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(1),159-170.
Petrov, A. & Kokinov, B. (1998). Mapping and access in analogy-making: Independent or interactive? In K. J. Holyoak, D. Gentner, & B.N. Kokinov (Eds.), A Simulation Experiment with AMBR. (pp. 124-134). Sofia: NBU Press.
Phye, G. D. (2001). Problem-solving instruction and problem-solving transfre: The correspondence issue. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 571-578.
Ross, B.(1989). Reminding inlearning and instraction. In S. Vosniadou, & A. Ortony(Eds), Nework:Cambridge University Press.
Ross, B.(1984). Remindings and their effects in learning and cognitive skill. Cognitive Psycology, 16, 371-416.
Rattermann, M.J., & Gentner, D. (1998).The effect of language on similarity:The use of relational labels improves young children's performance in a mapping task. In K. Holyoak, D. Gentner, &. B. Kokinov(Eds.)(pp274-282).Sophia:New Bulgarian University.
Spellman, B. A., & Holyoak , K. J.(1992). If Saddam is Hitler them who is George Bush ? Analogical mapping between systems of social roles, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(6), 913-933.
Thagard, P. & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). The analogical mind. American Psychologist. 52(1) , 35-44.
Vosniadou, S., & Ortony. A. (1989). Analogy reasoning. Similarity and analogical reasoning.In S. Vosniadou, & A. Ortony(Eds.), Nework:Cambridge University Press.
Vosniadou, S. V., & Schommer, M. (1988). Expalnatory analogies can help children acquire information from expository text. Journal of Educational Psychology. 80(4), 524-536.
Yanowitz, K.L. (2001). Transfer of structure-related and arbitrary information in analogical reasoning. The Psychological Record, 51, 357-379.
Yanowitz, K.L. (2001). Using analogies to improve elementary school students' inferential reasoning about scientific concepts. School Science and Mathematics, 101(3),133-142.
Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P.(1997). The analogical mind. Retrieved Dec 20, 2003, from http://cogsci.uwaterloo.ca/Articles/Pages/Analog.Mind.html.
Kokinov B. (1998). Analogy is like cognition : dynamic, emergent, and context-sensitive. Dec 20, 2003, Retrieved from http://hps.elte.hu/~zemplen/materials/sofia2000/personal/kokinov/challeng.pdf.
O'Donoghue, D.(1999).Constraining analogical Inference with memory-based verification. Retrieved Dec 20, 2003, from http://www.cs.may.ie/~dod/pubs/99-aics.pdf.
O'Donoghue, D.(1999). An integrated analogy model for creative reasoning.
Retrieved Dec 20 , from http://www.cs.may.ie/~dod/pubs/97-cmocc.pdf.