Ran Hassin,
Tel Aviv University, Israel.
email: hassin@freud.tau.ac.il
Abstract
Accumulating evidence suggests that similarity comparisons not only
reflect a relation between the compared objects (or terms), but are
themselves constructive processes that may create similarity. It is
proposed here that such comparisons may be either similarity- or
difference-oriented. In difference-oriented judgments, people tend to
interpret ambiguous components of the compared objects in a manner
that diminishes similarity, while in similarity-oriented judgments
they tend to interpret those components in a way that emphasizes
similarity. Thus, a change of the orientation of the comparison may
lead to an entirely different representation of the given
objects. This hypothesis was confirmed in a study with 60
undergraduates at Tel-Aviv University. Subjects were asked to make
either similarity or difference judgments for pairs of drawn
figures. Each pair contained an ambiguous figure (e.g., a duck-rabbit)
and a very similar but non-ambiguous one (e.g., a rabbit). Subjects in
the similarity condition exhibited a greater tendency to interpret the
ambiguous object in light of the unambiguous one (i.e., as a rabbit)
than subjects in the difference condition, and vice versa: those asked
to make difference judgments tended to interpret the ambiguous figure
in light of the complement interpretation (i.e., as a duck) more than
the subjects who made similarity judgments.