Respects for Similarity

Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., & Gentner, D. (1993). Respects for Similarity. Psychological Review, 100(2), 254-278.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Primary research

Year

1993

Volume

100

Issue

2

Pages

254-278

ISSN

0033-295X

DOI

10.1037/0033-295x.100.2.254

DOI registrant

American Psychological Association

Link

https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.254

Cited from

cognitive_science

Cited by

2 citations across 2 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Comparison
  • Medin, Goldstone, and Gentner (1993) argue at length that any usable theory of similarity requires precisely this kind of role-decomposition — most centrally the explicit "respects" along which the comparison runs — without which similarity-talk collapses into the vacuity Goodman warned of.

    This sourceArgues any usable similarity construct requires explicit "respects" (dimensions of comparison) supplied by the comparison process itself — the canonical articulation of dimension-selection as a structural role in comparison.

Domain-specific

• Ugly duckling theorem
  • The entry records a descriptive analytical identity; practical use requires the governing domain's evidence, standards, and safety obligations.

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 2 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:9d3beead10b5 · see in the full table