Abstract
Prior studies of A:B::C:D verbal analogies have identified several factors that affect performance, including the semantic similarity between source and target domains (semantic distance), the semantic association between the C-term and incorrect answers (distracter salience), and the type of relations between word pairs. However, it is unclear how these stimulus properties affect performance when utilized together. To test their interactive effects, we created a verbal analogy stimulus set that factorially crossed these factors and presented participants with an analogical stem (A:B::C:?) with two response choices: an analogically correct (D) and incorrect distracter (D') term. The semantic distance between source and target word pairs was manipulated creating near (BOWL:DISH::SPOON:SILVERWARE) and far (WRENCH:TOOL::SAD:MOOD) analogies. The salience of an incorrect distracter (D') was manipulated using the sematic distance with the C-term creating low (DRAWER) and high (FORK) salience distracters. Causal, compositional, and categorical relations were presented across these conditions. Accuracies were higher for semantically near than far analogies and when distracter salience was low than high. Categorical relations yielded better performance than the causal and compositional relations. Moreover, a three-way interaction demonstrated that the effects of semantic distance and distracter salience had a greater impact on performance for compositional and causal relations than for the categorical ones. We theorize that causal and compositional analogies, given their less semantically constrained responses, require more inhibitory control than more constraining relations (e.g., categorical).