Skip Navigation
UT wordmark
College of Liberal Arts wordmark
psychology masthead
Jacqueline Woolley, Chair The University of Texas at Austin, SEA 4.212, Austin, TX 78712 • (512) 475-7596

Arthur B Markman

Professor Ph.D., University of Illinois

Annabel Iron Worsham Centennial Professor
Arthur B Markman

Contact

Biography

After getting a B.S. in Cognitive Science from Brown University in 1988, I went on to graduate school in the Psychology Department at the University of Illinois, where I got my PhD in 1992. Then, I spent five years as an Assistant Professor in the Psychology Department at Columbia University. My research has focused on four main areas. First, I am interested in the way people see things to be similar, and how they process similarity and analogy comparisons. While the study of similarity is interesting for its own sake, it is also interesting because of what it can tell us about other psychological processes. In order to look at the way that our ability to make comparisons affects our cognitive processing, I also do research on category learning and decision making. I have also gotten interested in the way that motivational factors affect learning, decision making, and cognition more generally.

I am the director of the program in the Human Dimensions of Organizations. This program aims to provide education in the humanities and the social and behavioral sciences to people in business, nonprofits, government, and the military.  The aim is to teach leaders about how people, groups, and cultures influence the workplace.

__________________

In the Spring of 2013, I am teaching the Honors Seminar.  

In the past, I have taught the lower-division course in cognition, PSY 305, graduate seminars on Reasoning and Decision Making and Knowledge Representation.  I have also taught PSY 418, Statistics and Research Methods. An old syllabus for PSY 418 is available here. I have coordinated PSY 387R, Fundamentals of Cognition. I have also taught an undergraduate seminar on Reasoning and Decision Making, and a graduate seminar on Motivation and Learning.

__________________

Cognitive Science

I am currently the executive editor of the journal Cognitive Science. The journal is published by the Cognitive Science Society. For more information about the journal, check out this link. To submit a paper to the journal, go here.

The Departmental Limerick Committee

It pains me to admit that I am a member of the Psychology Department Limerick Committee.

 

Interests

Similarity and analogy, categorization, decision making and consumer behavior, and knowledge representation

PSY 359H • Honors Research I

42765 • Spring 2015
Meets M 100pm-400pm SEA 2.108
show description

Three lecture hours a week for one semester. Prerequisite: Upper-division standing, Psychology 301 and 418 with a grade of at least C in each, six semester hours of upper-division coursework in psychology, a grade point average of at least 3.50 in psychology courses taken at the University, a University grade point average of at least 3.25, and consent of the honors adviser.

PSY 379H • Honors Research II

43850 • Fall 2013
Meets M 200pm-500pm SEA 2.108
show description

Three lecture hours a week for one semester. Prerequisite: Upper-division standing, Psychology 301 and 418 with a grade of at least C in each, Psychology 458 and 359H, and consent of the honors adviser.

PSY 359H • Honors Research I

43475 • Spring 2013
Meets M 900am-1200pm SEA 3.250
show description

This course is designed as a "lab meeting" for the students doing honors research. Here, you'll get guidance about your honors project. We'll talk about doing a literature review and about designing a study. The group will serve as a sounding board for research ideas. We'll review materials for experiments and make suggestions about data analyses. In addition to talking about research, we'll also discuss careers in Psychology and related fields. Depending on the interests of the group, we can talk about admission to graduate school, and the many fields of study that you can pursue after getting your degree.

Your grade will be based on your performance on the written assigments. Due dates for the written assignments are presented below.

PSY 379H • Honors Research II

43280 • Fall 2011
Meets M 1200pm-300pm SEA 2.224
show description

This course is designed as a "lab meeting" for the students doing honors research. Here, you'll get guidance about your honors project. We'll talk about doing a literature review and about designing a study. The group will serve as a sounding board for research ideas. We'll review materials for experiments and make suggestions about data analyses.

In addition to talking about research, we'll also discuss careers in Psychology and related fields. Depending on the interests of the group, we can talk about admission to graduate school, and the many fields of study that you can pursue after getting your degree.

PSY 359H • Honors Research I

43845 • Spring 2011
Meets M 1200pm-300pm SEA 2.224
show description

Course Description

Department of Psychology Honors Program is designed to give outstanding students who plan a career in psychology an intensive exposure to research in psychology. Program consists of three formal courses: PSY 359H (Honors Research I), PSY 379H (Honors Research II), and PSY 158H (Honors Seminar). PSY 359H is seminar course which provides opportunity for discussion of various areas of psychology and issues related to research. Explore areas of interest and prepare to undertake independent work in area by reviewing previous research and writing an integrative review paper. Applications for the Department of Psychology Honors Program are available in the Undergraduate Office, SEA 2.218.

Grading Policy

TBA

Texts

TBA

 

PSY 394U • Knowledge Representation

44040 • Spring 2011
Meets T 1230pm-330pm SEA 4.242
show description

Seminars in Cognitive and Perceptual Systems. Three lecture hours a week for one semester. May be repeated for credit when the topics vary. Prerequisite: Graduate standing and consent of instructor.

PSY 355R • Reasoning & Decision Making-W

43980 • Spring 2010
Meets TTH 330pm-500pm SEA 2.108
show description

PSY 355R: Reasoning and Decision Making
Spring 2010
Unique Number 43980: TTh 3:30-5:00pm, SEA 2.108
Click here for a week by week class schedule.

Instructor
Who     Office     Office Hours     email
Art Markman     SEA 5.218     Wednesday 1-3
or by appointment     markman@psy.utexas.edu
Teaching Assistant
Section     Who     Office     Office Hours     email
44130     Ross Otto    

 
          rotto@mail.utexas.edu
Prerequisites:
Psychology 301 with a grade of C or better, Psychology 418 or an equivalent listed in the course schedule) with a C or better, and Upper-Division standing (60 hours completed).
Enrollment limitations
Enrollment in this course is limited to 30 students.
Goals
This course is a survey of psychological research on how people reason and make decisions. Reasoning is the ability to go beyond the information given in a situation to figure out what is going on. Decision making is the ability to select a course of action from among a set of possibilities. Understanding how people act helps us to understand fundamental problems in psychology such as whether people tend to act rationally. In addition, understanding how people think and decide in general can make us as individuals better reasoners and decision makers.
Format of classes
This course will meet two times a week for one hour and fifteen minutes. The classes will be a mix of seminar-type discussion, lectures and group projects.
Readings

There will be roughly one paper to read for each class session. I expect you to keep current on the reading to facilitate class discussion. Papers can be downloaded from the course page on the Blackboard system. The readings are a mix of summary articles and primary source readings. It may be slow-going to get through these readings at first, but it is well-worth getting familiar with the style and content of journal articles. Additional readings on any topic are available on request.
Assignments and examinations
Grading in this course is based on performance on weekly reaction papers, two exams, and a long paper.
Weekly Reaction Papers (10% of Grade)

Each week, you are expected to turn in a reaction paper to at least one of the readings for that week. Reaction papers are due at the end of class on Thursday. I recommend writing it before the class when we are scheduled to discuss a particular article, though, so that you have comments in mind to discuss in class. Reaction papers should describe your reactions to the reading. That is, they should not be a summary of what you read. Rather, I'd like your opinions. Is the theory or the studies presented by the authors sufficient to explain what the authors would like to explain? Are there things that are not well explained by the theory presented? Is there other evidence you know about that would suggest a problem with the authors' approach? What do you think are the main advances of the work, or how does it fail to take into account other work. Feel free to draw on your own expertise in other areas of psychology or from other disciplines. If you think a particular theory would be helpful for some problem you have been thinking about, say so. If you felt a particular article was confusing, say that too. I will read your reaction papers each week, and respond to them.
Exams (40% of grade)

There will be two exams in the course. They will be essay exams. One will be in class at the middle of the semester, one will be at the end. The exams are cumulative. The exams will ask questions designed to show that you can integrate your thoughts across the ideas presented during the course.
Long Paper (50% of grade)

The centerpiece of the semester will be a long paper that you will write on a topic of your choosing in the area of reasoning or decision making. I would like you to select an area covered in the class, read about the prevailing theories in that area, and then propose a study that would address the issues you raise. This style of paper is similar to the kinds of fellowship and grant proposals that psychologists often have to write to get funding for their research.

The paper will be written in three stages. At about the 4-week mark of the semester, each student will turn in a two-paragraph summary of the paper they are planning to write. I will read these topic proposals and make comments and suggestions. A first draft of the paper will be due about 5-weeks before the end of the semester. I will read and comment on these drafts. 1/3 of your paper grade will be based on the quality of these drafts. At this stage, you will also do some peer editing. You will be assigned a partner in the class, and you will read your partner's paper and your partner will read your paper and provide feedback. The final version of the paper will be turned in on the last day of classes. The remaining 2/3 of your paper grade will be based on the final version of the paper.
Policy on missed exams
No make-up exams will be given. If one exam is missed, then with a note from a doctor or a dean, the other exam will count for your exam grade for the semester. In the absence of a note from a doctor or a dean, or if more than one exam is missed, then the missed exams will be entered as a 0 in the computation of your final grade.
Policy on extra credit
I am always on the lookout for good cartoons to use as examples in class. One point toward your final grade will be awarded to any student who brings a cartoon that is relevant to a point discussed in class along with a paragraph describing why it is relevant. Credit for a particular cartoon will be given only to the first student bringing in that cartoon.
Policy on independent of work and plagiarism
You are expected to do all exams individually. If any student is caught cheating on an exam either by copying from someone else or by using outside material, they will be given an F in the course and the matter will be turned over to the appropriate deans.
Policy on students with disabilities.
We will make every effort to accommodate students with disabilities. Students with disabilities must present documentation of their disability from the Office of the Dean of Students--Services for Students with Disabilities as early in the semester as possible in order to facilitate any necessary accommodations. No accommodations will be made for students who do not have documentation from the Dean of Students office.

Week by week class schedule

Powerpoint versions of the lectures can be downloaded by clicking on the right-most column. I recommend printing them out 3 or 6 to a page and bringing them to class to take notes.
Date
   
Topic
   
Reading
   
Assignment
   
Lecture Notes
January 19     Introduction            
January 21     Types of reasoning     Markman, A.B., & Gentner, D. (2001). Thinking. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 223-247     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
January 26     Logical Reasoning:
Deduction             Powerpoint
January 28     Logical Reasoning:
Mental models     Johnson-Laird, P.N. (2001). Mental models and deduction. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(10), 434-442.     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
February 2     Logical Reasoning: Induction     Osherson, D.N., Smith, E.E., Wilkie, O., Lopez, A., Shafir, E. (1990). Category-based induction. Psychological Review, 97(2), 185-200.         Powerpoint
February 4     What is causality?     Hume, D. (1772). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. (Excerpt from the chapter on Cause and Effect)     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
February 9     Causes and explanations     Wilson, R.A., & Keil, F.C. (1998). The shadows and shallows of explanations. Minds and Machines, 8, 137-159.         Powerpoint
February 11     Reasoning about causes    

Kim, N.S., & Ahn, W.K. (2002). Clinical psychologists' theory-based representations of mental disorders predict their diagnostic reasoning and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131(4), 451-476.
    Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
February 16     Scientific reasoning     Tweney, R.D. (1998). Toward a cognitive psychology of science: Recent research and its implications. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 5, 150-154.         Powerpoint
February 18     Mental models and naive physics    

McCloskey, M. (1983). Intuitive physics. Scientific American, 248, 4, 122-130.
    Paper proposal due; Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
February 23     Analogical Reasoning    

Gentner, D., & Markman, A.B. (1997). Structural alignment in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1), 45-56.
        Powerpoint
February 25     Analogy and problem solving    

Gick, M.L., & Holyoak, K.J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306-355.
    Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
March 2     Creativity     Simonton, D.K. (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, Personal, Develpomental, and Social Aspects. American Psychologist, 55, 151-158.         Powerpoint
March 4     Writing         No Reaction Paper this week    
March 9     Midterm Exam    

An copy of an old exam is available here to help you study.

An Answer key for the Spring 08 Midterm.
       
March 11     Rationality: What does it mean to be rational?     Shafir, E. & LeBoeuf, R.A. (2002). Rationality. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 491-517.     No Reaction Paper this week     Powerpoint
March 16 and March 18     No Class, Spring Break             Powerpoint
March 23     Decision making and economics     Markman, A.B., & Medin, D.L. (2001). Decision making. In D.L. Medin & H. Pashler (Eds.) Stevens Handbook of Experimental Psychology (pp. 413-466). New York: John Wiley and Sons.     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
March 25     Heuristics and biases     Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39(4), 341-350.            
March 30     Heuristics and biases     Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., & Thaler, R.H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193-206.         Powerpoint
April 1     Mental accounting     Shefrin, H.M., & Thaler, R.H. (1992). Mental accounting, saving, and self-control. In G. Loewenstein & J. Elster (Eds.) Choice over time. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
April 6     Emotion, motivation, and decision making     Lowenstein, G.F., Weber, E.U., Hsee, C.K., Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127(2), 267-286.         Powerpoint
April 8     Emotion, motivation, and decision making    

Markman, A.B., & Brendl, C.M. (2000). The influence of goals on value and choice. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 39, 97-129.
    First Draft of Papers Due;
No Reaction Paper This week     Powerpoint
April 13     Emotion, motivation, and decision making    

Damasio, A.R. (1994). Descartes' error. New York: Bard Books. (Chapters 1-3)
    Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
April 15     Peer Editing Session    

 
           
April 20     Emotion, motivation, and decision making    

Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300.

Maddox, W.T., & Markman, A.B. (in press). The motivation-cognition interface in learning and decision-making. Current Directions in Psychological Science.
        Powerpoint
April 22     Naturalistic decision making    

Galanter, C.A., & Patel, V.L. (2005). Medical decision making: A selective review for child psychiatrists and psychologists. Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology, 46(7), 675-689.
    Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
April 27     Protected values     Tetlock, P.E. (2003). Thinking the unthinkable: Sacred values and taboo cognitions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(7), 320-324.         Powerpoint
April 29     Culture influences on reasoning and decision making     Peng, K., & Nisbett, R.E. (1999). Culture dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54, 741-754.     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
May 4     Culture influences on reasoning and decision making     Markman, A.B., Grimm, L.R., & Kim, K. (2009). Culture as a vehicle for studying individual differences.  To appear in R.S. Wyer, C.Y. Chiu, & Y.Y. Hong (Eds.) Understanding Culture:  theory, research and application (pp. 93-106).  New York:  Taylor and Francis.
        Powerpoint
May 6     Consumer Psychology    

Loken, B. (2006). Consumer Psychology: Categorization, inferences, affect, and persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology, 57 453-485.
    Reaction Paper Due    
May 7     Papers due!!     Your final papers are due on May 7 by 5pm. Please turn in your final paper draft along with the rough draft. Papers may be turned in to Dr. Markman's mailbox.        
TBA     Final Exam    

Sample Final Exam
       
                     

This page last modified on Tuesday, January 5, 2010.
PSY 355R: Reasoning and Decision Making
Spring 2010
Unique Number 43980: TTh 3:30-5:00pm, SEA 2.108
Click here for a week by week class schedule.
Instructor
Who     Office     Office Hours     email
Art Markman     SEA 5.218     Wednesday 1-3
or by appointment     markman@psy.utexas.edu
Teaching Assistant
Section     Who     Office     Office Hours     email
44130     Ross Otto    

 
          rotto@mail.utexas.edu
Prerequisites:
Psychology 301 with a grade of C or better, Psychology 418 or an equivalent listed in the course schedule) with a C or better, and Upper-Division standing (60 hours completed).
Enrollment limitations
Enrollment in this course is limited to 30 students.
Goals
This course is a survey of psychological research on how people reason and make decisions. Reasoning is the ability to go beyond the information given in a situation to figure out what is going on. Decision making is the ability to select a course of action from among a set of possibilities. Understanding how people act helps us to understand fundamental problems in psychology such as whether people tend to act rationally. In addition, understanding how people think and decide in general can make us as individuals better reasoners and decision makers.
Format of classes
This course will meet two times a week for one hour and fifteen minutes. The classes will be a mix of seminar-type discussion, lectures and group projects.
Readings

There will be roughly one paper to read for each class session. I expect you to keep current on the reading to facilitate class discussion. Papers can be downloaded from the course page on the Blackboard system. The readings are a mix of summary articles and primary source readings. It may be slow-going to get through these readings at first, but it is well-worth getting familiar with the style and content of journal articles. Additional readings on any topic are available on request.
Assignments and examinations
Grading in this course is based on performance on weekly reaction papers, two exams, and a long paper.
Weekly Reaction Papers (10% of Grade)

Each week, you are expected to turn in a reaction paper to at least one of the readings for that week. Reaction papers are due at the end of class on Thursday. I recommend writing it before the class when we are scheduled to discuss a particular article, though, so that you have comments in mind to discuss in class. Reaction papers should describe your reactions to the reading. That is, they should not be a summary of what you read. Rather, I'd like your opinions. Is the theory or the studies presented by the authors sufficient to explain what the authors would like to explain? Are there things that are not well explained by the theory presented? Is there other evidence you know about that would suggest a problem with the authors' approach? What do you think are the main advances of the work, or how does it fail to take into account other work. Feel free to draw on your own expertise in other areas of psychology or from other disciplines. If you think a particular theory would be helpful for some problem you have been thinking about, say so. If you felt a particular article was confusing, say that too. I will read your reaction papers each week, and respond to them.
Exams (40% of grade)

There will be two exams in the course. They will be essay exams. One will be in class at the middle of the semester, one will be at the end. The exams are cumulative. The exams will ask questions designed to show that you can integrate your thoughts across the ideas presented during the course.
Long Paper (50% of grade)

The centerpiece of the semester will be a long paper that you will write on a topic of your choosing in the area of reasoning or decision making. I would like you to select an area covered in the class, read about the prevailing theories in that area, and then propose a study that would address the issues you raise. This style of paper is similar to the kinds of fellowship and grant proposals that psychologists often have to write to get funding for their research.

The paper will be written in three stages. At about the 4-week mark of the semester, each student will turn in a two-paragraph summary of the paper they are planning to write. I will read these topic proposals and make comments and suggestions. A first draft of the paper will be due about 5-weeks before the end of the semester. I will read and comment on these drafts. 1/3 of your paper grade will be based on the quality of these drafts. At this stage, you will also do some peer editing. You will be assigned a partner in the class, and you will read your partner's paper and your partner will read your paper and provide feedback. The final version of the paper will be turned in on the last day of classes. The remaining 2/3 of your paper grade will be based on the final version of the paper.
Policy on missed exams
No make-up exams will be given. If one exam is missed, then with a note from a doctor or a dean, the other exam will count for your exam grade for the semester. In the absence of a note from a doctor or a dean, or if more than one exam is missed, then the missed exams will be entered as a 0 in the computation of your final grade.
Policy on extra credit
I am always on the lookout for good cartoons to use as examples in class. One point toward your final grade will be awarded to any student who brings a cartoon that is relevant to a point discussed in class along with a paragraph describing why it is relevant. Credit for a particular cartoon will be given only to the first student bringing in that cartoon.
Policy on independent of work and plagiarism
You are expected to do all exams individually. If any student is caught cheating on an exam either by copying from someone else or by using outside material, they will be given an F in the course and the matter will be turned over to the appropriate deans.
Policy on students with disabilities.
We will make every effort to accommodate students with disabilities. Students with disabilities must present documentation of their disability from the Office of the Dean of Students--Services for Students with Disabilities as early in the semester as possible in order to facilitate any necessary accommodations. No accommodations will be made for students who do not have documentation from the Dean of Students office.

Week by week class schedule

Powerpoint versions of the lectures can be downloaded by clicking on the right-most column. I recommend printing them out 3 or 6 to a page and bringing them to class to take notes.
Date
   
Topic
   
Reading
   
Assignment
   
Lecture Notes
January 19     Introduction            
January 21     Types of reasoning     Markman, A.B., & Gentner, D. (2001). Thinking. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 223-247     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
January 26     Logical Reasoning:
Deduction             Powerpoint
January 28     Logical Reasoning:
Mental models     Johnson-Laird, P.N. (2001). Mental models and deduction. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(10), 434-442.     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
February 2     Logical Reasoning: Induction     Osherson, D.N., Smith, E.E., Wilkie, O., Lopez, A., Shafir, E. (1990). Category-based induction. Psychological Review, 97(2), 185-200.         Powerpoint
February 4     What is causality?     Hume, D. (1772). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. (Excerpt from the chapter on Cause and Effect)     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
February 9     Causes and explanations     Wilson, R.A., & Keil, F.C. (1998). The shadows and shallows of explanations. Minds and Machines, 8, 137-159.         Powerpoint
February 11     Reasoning about causes    

Kim, N.S., & Ahn, W.K. (2002). Clinical psychologists' theory-based representations of mental disorders predict their diagnostic reasoning and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131(4), 451-476.
    Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
February 16     Scientific reasoning     Tweney, R.D. (1998). Toward a cognitive psychology of science: Recent research and its implications. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 5, 150-154.         Powerpoint
February 18     Mental models and naive physics    

McCloskey, M. (1983). Intuitive physics. Scientific American, 248, 4, 122-130.
    Paper proposal due; Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
February 23     Analogical Reasoning    

Gentner, D., & Markman, A.B. (1997). Structural alignment in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1), 45-56.
        Powerpoint
February 25     Analogy and problem solving    

Gick, M.L., & Holyoak, K.J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306-355.
    Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
March 2     Creativity     Simonton, D.K. (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, Personal, Develpomental, and Social Aspects. American Psychologist, 55, 151-158.         Powerpoint
March 4     Writing         No Reaction Paper this week    
March 9     Midterm Exam    

An copy of an old exam is available here to help you study.

An Answer key for the Spring 08 Midterm.
       
March 11     Rationality: What does it mean to be rational?     Shafir, E. & LeBoeuf, R.A. (2002). Rationality. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 491-517.     No Reaction Paper this week     Powerpoint
March 16 and March 18     No Class, Spring Break             Powerpoint
March 23     Decision making and economics     Markman, A.B., & Medin, D.L. (2001). Decision making. In D.L. Medin & H. Pashler (Eds.) Stevens Handbook of Experimental Psychology (pp. 413-466). New York: John Wiley and Sons.     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
March 25     Heuristics and biases     Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39(4), 341-350.            
March 30     Heuristics and biases     Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., & Thaler, R.H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193-206.         Powerpoint
April 1     Mental accounting     Shefrin, H.M., & Thaler, R.H. (1992). Mental accounting, saving, and self-control. In G. Loewenstein & J. Elster (Eds.) Choice over time. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
April 6     Emotion, motivation, and decision making     Lowenstein, G.F., Weber, E.U., Hsee, C.K., Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127(2), 267-286.         Powerpoint
April 8     Emotion, motivation, and decision making    

Markman, A.B., & Brendl, C.M. (2000). The influence of goals on value and choice. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 39, 97-129.
    First Draft of Papers Due;
No Reaction Paper This week     Powerpoint
April 13     Emotion, motivation, and decision making    

Damasio, A.R. (1994). Descartes' error. New York: Bard Books. (Chapters 1-3)
    Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
April 15     Peer Editing Session    

 
           
April 20     Emotion, motivation, and decision making    

Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300.

Maddox, W.T., & Markman, A.B. (in press). The motivation-cognition interface in learning and decision-making. Current Directions in Psychological Science.
        Powerpoint
April 22     Naturalistic decision making    

Galanter, C.A., & Patel, V.L. (2005). Medical decision making: A selective review for child psychiatrists and psychologists. Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology, 46(7), 675-689.
    Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
April 27     Protected values     Tetlock, P.E. (2003). Thinking the unthinkable: Sacred values and taboo cognitions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(7), 320-324.         Powerpoint
April 29     Culture influences on reasoning and decision making     Peng, K., & Nisbett, R.E. (1999). Culture dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54, 741-754.     Reaction Paper Due     Powerpoint
May 4     Culture influences on reasoning and decision making     Markman, A.B., Grimm, L.R., & Kim, K. (2009). Culture as a vehicle for studying individual differences.  To appear in R.S. Wyer, C.Y. Chiu, & Y.Y. Hong (Eds.) Understanding Culture:  theory, research and application (pp. 93-106).  New York:  Taylor and Francis.
        Powerpoint
May 6     Consumer Psychology    

Loken, B. (2006). Consumer Psychology: Categorization, inferences, affect, and persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology, 57 453-485.
    Reaction Paper Due    
May 7     Papers due!!     Your final papers are due on May 7 by 5pm. Please turn in your final paper draft along with the rough draft. Papers may be turned in to Dr. Markman's mailbox.        
TBA     Final Exam    

Sample Final Exam
       
                     

This page last modified on Tuesday, January 5, 2010.

PSY 394U • Motivatnl Procs In Lrn & Perf

44191 • Spring 2010
Meets M 100pm-400pm SEA 5.106
show description

Seminars in Cognitive and Perceptual Systems. Three lecture hours a week for one semester. May be repeated for credit when the topics vary. Prerequisite: Graduate standing and consent of instructor.

PSY 379H • Honors Research II-W

44220 • Fall 2009
Meets M 100pm-400pm SEA 2.108
show description

 

PSY 379H: Honors Research II

Fall 2009

M 1-4 pm Location SEA 2.108

Instructor

Who          Office          Office Hours          email

Art Markman          SEA 5.218          Tuesday 10am-Noon

or by appointment          markman@psy.utexas.edu

Teaching Assistant

Who          Office          Office Hours          email          Lab/Office Phone

Jon Rein                                jrein@mail.utexas.edu           

 

Click here for the list of students and projects.

Course information

This course is designed as a "lab meeting" for the students doing honors research. Here, you'll get guidance about your honors project. We'll talk about doing a literature review and about designing a study. The group will serve as a sounding board for research ideas. We'll review materials for experiments and make suggestions about data analyses.

 

In addition to talking about research, we'll also discuss careers in Psychology and related fields. Depending on the interests of the group, we can talk about admission to graduate school, and the many fields of study that you can pursue after getting your degree.

Requirements

Obviously, the main requirement to be in this course is to have been accepted into the honors program. If you have not been accepted into the honors program (or are not sure), please check with Prof. Markman before attending the class. You ought to know whether you were accepted into the honors program, because you would have been in this seminar last semester as well.

 

The goal for this semester is to complete your honors project and your honors thesis. In addition, you must participate in the poster session at the end of the semester in which you present your project to the department. Details about the poster session will be provided in class.

Sample Papers

 

Here are a couple of papers from past honors seminars chosen more-or-less at random as examples for you to ponder as you work on your drafts.

 

Sample paper 1

 

Sample paper 2

Sample CVs

 

Here are the sample CVs that we looked at in class if you're looking for examples to create your own.

 

    * Beevers CV

    * Markman CV

 

Student Information

In order to keep track of what everyone is up to, here's a list of the students in this seminar. Eventually, all of you will have home pages, which will be linked to this page. Also, if you have a personal home page, it can be linked to your name in this table.

Student Name          Project Title          Project Home Page

Callan Cooper                   http://sites.google.com/site/callancooper/

Daniel Jones                   http://sites.google.com/site/danieljonessite/

Allison Kalpakci                   http://sites.google.com/site/allihkalpakci/

Jared Kilmer                   http://sites.google.com/site/jaredkilmer/

Judy Kim                   http://sites.google.com/site/judykim09/

Colby Lucas                   http://sites.google.com/site/colbylucas/

Melissa McInnis                   http://webspace.utexas.edu/mam4275/www

Rachel Meyerson                   http://sites.google.com/site/psychologyhonorsproject/

Victorial Mueller                   http://webspace.utexas.edu/vam492/www/Site/

Cristina Porras                   https://webspace.utexas.edu/cp3459/www

Laura Ryan                   http://sites.google.com/site/lauraryanresearch

Ashley Vivlamore                   http://sites.google.com/site/ashleyvivlamore/

Brooke Wooley                   https://webspace.utexas.edu/bew344/website

Rich Nieto                   https://webspace.utexas.edu/rn633/www/

PSY 359H • Honors Research I

43255 • Spring 2009
Meets M 100pm-400pm SEA 2.108
show description

Three lecture hours a week for one semester. Prerequisite: upper-division standing, Psychology 301 and 418 with a grade of at least C in each, six semester hours of upper-division coursework in psychology, a grade point average of at least 3.50 in psychology courses taken at the university, a University grade point average of at least 3.25, and consent of the honors advisor.

 

PSY 394U • Reasoning And Decision Making

43440 • Spring 2009
Meets W 100pm-400pm SEA 5.106
show description

Seminars in Cognition and Perception. Three lecture hours a week for one semester. May be repeated for credit when the topics vary. Prerequisite: Graduate standing and consent of instructor.

Publications


Similarity and Analogy

Markman, A.B. & Gentner, D. (1993). Splitting the differences: A structural alignment view of similarity. Journal of Memory and Language, 32(4), 517-535.

download


Markman, A.B. & Gentner, D. (1993). Structural alignment during similarity comparisons. Cognitive Psychology, 25(4), 431-467.

download


Gentner, D. & Markman, A.B. (1994). Structural alignment in comparison: No difference without similarity. Psychological Science, 5(3), 152-158.

download coming soon


Gentner, D., Rattermann, M.J., Markman, A.B., & Kotovsky, L. (1995). Two forces in the development of relational similarity. In G.S. Halford & T. Simon (Eds), Developing Cognitive Competence: New Approaches to Process Modelling, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

download coming soon


Markman, A.B., & Gentner, D. (1996). Commonalities and differences in similarity comparisons. Memory and Cognition, 24(2), 235-249.

download coming soon


Markman, A.B. (1996). Structural alignment in similarity and difference judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 3(2), 227-230.

download


Markman, A.B. (1996). Extended book review of French's "The subtlety of sameness", The International Journal of Neural Systems, 7(5), 665-670.

download coming soon


Gentner, D., Brem, S., Ferguson, R., Markman, A.B., Wolff, P., Levidow, B.N., & Forbus, K.D. (1997). Analogical reasoning and conceptual change: A case study of Johannes Kepler. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(1), 3-40.

download coming soon


Gentner, D., & Markman, A.B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1), 45-56.

download


Markman, A.B., & Gentner, D. (1997). The effects of alignability on memory. Psychological Science, 8(5), 363-367.

download


Markman, A.B. (1997). Constraints on analogical inference. Cognitive Science, 21(4), 373-418.

download


Forbus, K.D., Gentner, D., Markman, A.B., & Ferguson, R.W. (1998). Analogy just looks like high level perception. Why a domain-general approach to analogical mapping is right. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 10(2), 231-257.

download


Markman, A.B., & Gentner, D. (2000). Structure mapping in the comparison process. American Journal of Psychology, 113, 501-538.

download


Markman, A.B., & Gentner, D. (2001). Thinking. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 223-247.

download


Gentner, D., & Markman, A.B. (2002). Analogy-based reasoning and metaphor. In M.A. Arbib (Ed.) The Handbook of Brain Theory and Neural Networks (2nd ed.). (pp. 106-109) Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

download coming soon


Dietrich, E., Markman, A.B., Stilwell, C.H., & Winkley, M. (2003). The role of representational change in chance discovery. In Y. Ohsawa & P. McBurney (Eds.) Chance Discovery: Foundations and applications (pp. 208-230). Heidelberg: Springer.

download coming soon


Markman, A.B., & Gentner, D. (2005). Nonintentional similarity processing. In R. Hassin, J.A. Bargh, & J.S. Uleman (Eds.) The new unconscious. (pp. 107-137) New York: Oxford University Press.

download


Larkey, L.B., & Markman, A.B. (2005). Processes of similarity judgment. Cognitive Science, 29(6), 1061-1076.

download


Linsey, J.S., Laux, J., Clauss, E.F., Wood, K.L., & A Markman, A.B. (2007). Effects of analogous product representation on design-by-analogy. International Conference on Engineering Design ICED'07. Paris, France.

download


Markman, A.B., Taylor, E., & Gentner, D. (2007). Auditory presentation leads to better analogical retrieval than written presentation. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14(6), 1101-1106.

download


Linsey, J.S., Wood, K.L., & Markman, A.B. (2008). Modality and representation in analogy. Artificial Intelligence for Engeinnering Design, Analysis, and Manufacturing, 22(2), 85-210.

download


Markman, A. B., Wood, K. L., Linsey, J. S., Murphy, J. T., & Laux, J. (2009). Supporting innovation by promoting analogical reasoning. In A. B. Markman & K. L. Wood (Eds.), Tools for Innovation (pp. 85-103). New York: Oxford University Press.

download


Rein, J.R., & Markman, A.B. (2010). Assessing the concreteness of relational representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(6), 1452-1465.

download


Grimm, L.R., Rein, J.R., & Markman, A.B. (2012). Determining transformation distance in similarity: Considerations for assessing representational changes a priori. Thinking and Reasoning, 18(1), 59-80.

download coming soon


(back to top)

 

Decision Making

Medin, D.L., Goldstone, R.L., & Markman, A.B. (1995). Comparison and choice: Relations between similarity processing and decision processing. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 2(1), 1-19.

download coming soon


Markman, A.B., & Medin, D.L. (1995). Similarity and alignment in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 63(2), 117-130.

download


Lindemann, P.G., & Markman, A.B. (1996). Alignability and attribute importance in choice. In The proceedings of the 18th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. San Diego, CA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

download


Brendl, C.M., Markman, A.B., & Higgins, E.T. (1998). Mentale Buchhaltung als Selbst-Regulation: Representativitat fur ziel-geleitete Kategorien [Mental accounting as self-regulation: Representativeness to goal-derived categories. Zeitschrift fuer Sozialpsychologie, 29, 89-104.. (An English translation of this paper can be obtained from any of the authors).

download coming soon


Zhang, S., & Markman, A.B. (1998). Overcoming the early entrant advantage via differentiation: The role of alignable and nonalignable differences. Journal of Marketing Research. 35, 413-426.

download


Markman, A.B., & Brendl, C.M. (2000). The influence of goals on value and choice. In D.L. Medin (Ed.) The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 39. (pp. 97-129) San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

download


Markman, A.B., & Moreau, C.P. (2001). Analogy and analogical comparison in choice. In D. Gentner, K.J. Holyoak, & B. Kokinov (Eds.) Analogy: Theoretical and Empirical Research. (pp. 363-400) Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

download coming soon


Moreau, C.P., Lehman, D.R., & Markman, A.B. (2001). Entrenched category structures and resistance to 'really' new products. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(1), 14-29.

download coming soon


Moreau, C.P., Markman, A.B., & Lehman, D.R. (2001). 'What is it?' Categorization flexibility and consumers' responses to really new products. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 489-498.

download


Zhang, S., & Markman, A.B. (2001). Processing product-unique features: Alignment and involvement in preference construction. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11(1), 13-27.

download


Brendl, C.M., Markman, A.B., & Messner, C. (2001). How do indirect measures of evaluation work? Evaluating the inference of prejudice in the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(5), 760-773.

download


Markman, A.B., & Medin, D.L. (2002). Decision Making. In D.L. Medin & H. Pashler (Eds.) Stevens Handbook of Experimental Psychology (3rd Edition), Volume 2. (pp. 413-466). New York: John Wiley and Sons.

download


Brendl, C.M., Markman, A.B., & Messner, C. (2003). Devaluation of goal-unrelated choice options. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 463-473.

download coming soon


Brendl, C.M., Markman, A.B., & Messner, C. (2005). Indirectly measuring evaluations of several attitude objects in relation to a neutral reference point. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(4), 346-368.

download


Markman, A.B., & Brendl, C.M. (2005). Goals, policies, preferences, and actions. In F.R. Kardes, P.M. Herr, & J. Nantel (Eds.) Applying social cognition to consumer-focused strategy. (pp. 183-200). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

download


Markman, A.B., Brendl, C.M., & Kim, K. (2007). Preference and the specificity of goals. Emotion, 7(3), 680-684.

download


Worthy, D.A., Maddox, W.T., & Markman, A.B. (2007). Regulatory fit effects in a choice task. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14(6), 1125-1132.

download coming soon


Worthy, D.A., Maddox, W.T., & Markman, A.B. (2008). Ratio and difference comparisons of expected reward in decision making tasks. Memory and Cognition, 36(8), 1460-1469.

download


Otto, A.R., Gureckis, T.M., Markman, A.B., & Love, B.C. (2009). Navigating through abstract decision spaces: Evaluating the role of state generalization in a dynamic decision task. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review.

download


Markman, A.B. & Loewenstein, J. (2010). Structural comparison and consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20, 126-137.

download


Otto, A.R., Markman, A.B., Gureckis, T.M., & Love, B.C. (2010). Regulatory fit and systematic exploration in a dynamic decision-making environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(3), 797-804.

download


Otto. A.R., Taylor, E.G., & Markman, A.B. (2011). There are at Least Two Kinds of Probability Matching: Evidence from a Secondary Task. Cognition. 118, 274-279.

download


Otto, A.R., Markman, A.B., & Love, B.C. (in press). Taking more now: The optimality of impulsive choice hinges on environment structure. Social Psychological and Personality Science.

download


(back to top)

 

Categorization

Markman, A.B. (1989). LMS rules and the inverse base-rate effect: Comment on Gluck and Bower (1988). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 417-421.

download


Wisniewski, E.J. & Markman, A.B. (1993). The role of structural alignment in conceptual combination. In The Proceedings of the 15th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Boulder, CO.

download


Markman, A.B., Yamauchi, T., & Makin, V.S. (1997). The creation of new concepts: A multifaceted approach to category learning. In T.B. Ward, S.M. Smith & J. Vaid (Eds.) Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

download coming soon


Markman, A.B., & Wisniewski, E.J. (1997). Similar and different: The differentiation of basic level categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,23(1), 54-70.

download


Markman, A.B. (1997). Structural alignment in similarity and its influence on category structure. Cognitive Studies, 4, 19-37.

download coming soon


Yamauchi, T., & Markman, A.B. (1998). Category learning by inference and classification. Journal of Memory and Language, 39(1), 124-148.

download


Markman, A.B., & Makin, V.S. (1998). Referential communication and category acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 331-354.

download


Yamauchi, T., & Markman, A.B. (2000). Learning categories composed of varying instances: The effect of classification, inference, and structural alignment. Memory and Cognition, 28(1), 64-78.

download coming soon


Yamauchi, T., &amp Markman, A.B. (2000). Inference using categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 776-795.

download


Markman, A.B. (2001). Structural alignment, similarity, and the internal structure of category representations. In U. Hahn, & M. Ramscar (Eds.) Similarity and Categorization (pp. 109-130). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

download coming soon


Markman, A.B., & Stilwell, C.H. (2001). Role-governed categories. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 13(4), 329-358.

download


Yamauchi, T., Love, B.C., & Markman, A.B. (2002). Learning nonlinearly separable categories by inference and classification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(3), 585-593.

download


Markman, A.B., & Maddox, W.T. (2003). Classification of exemplars with single and multiple feature manifestations: The effects of relevant dimension variation and category structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(1), 107-117.

download


Markman, A.B., & Ross, B.H. (2003). Category use and category learning. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4), 592-615.

download


Love, B.C., & Markman, A.B. (2003). The non-independence of stimulus properties in category learning. Memory and Cognition, 31(5), 790-799.

download


Markman, A.B., & Stilwell, C.H. (2004). Concepts a la modal: Review of Prinz's "Furnishing the Mind." Philosophical Psychology, 17(3), 391-401.

download


Markman, A.B. (2005). What are categories and why are they coherent? In W.K. Ahn, R.L. Goldstone, B.C. Love, A.B. Markman, & P. Wolff (Eds.) Categorization inside and outside the laboratory: Essays in honor of Douglas L. Medin. (pp. 215-227). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

download coming soon


Bohil, C.J., Markman, A.B., & Maddox, W.T. (2005). A feature-salience analogue of the inverse base-rate effect. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving, 15(1), 17-28.

download


Markman, A.B., Baldwin, G.C., & Maddox, W.T. (2005). The interaction of payoff structure and regulatory focus in classification. Psychological Science, 16(11), 852-855.

download


Markman, A.B., Maddox, W.T., & Baldwin, G.C. (2005). The implications of advances in research on motivation for cognitive models. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 17(4), 371-384.

download


Maddox, W.T., Markman, A.B., & Baldwin, G.C. (2006). Using classification to understand the motivation-learning interface. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 47, 213-250.

download


Markman, A.B., Maddox, W.T., & Worthy, D.A. (2006). Choking and excelling under pressure. Psychological Science, 17(11), 944-948.

download


Maddox, W.T., Baldwin, G.C., & Markman, A.B. (2006). A test of the regulatory fit hypothesis in perceptual classification learning. Memory and Cognition, 34(7), 1377-1397.

download


Markman, A.B., Maddox, W.T., Worthy, D.A., & Baldwin, G.C. (2007). Using regulatory focus to explore implicit and explicit processing on concept learning. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 14(9-10), 132-155.

download


Grimm, L.R., Markman, A.B., Maddox, W.T., & Baldwin, G.C. (2008). Differential effects of regulatory fit on category learning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 920-927.

download


Markman, A.B., Maddox, W.T., & Worthy, D.A. (2006). Choking and excelling under pressure. Psychological Science, 17(11), 944-948.

download


Worthy, D.A., Markman, A.B., & Maddox, W.T. (2009). What is pressure? Evidence for social pressure as a type of regulatory focus. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16(2), 344-349.

download


Worthy, D.A., Markman, a.B., & Markman, W.T. (2009). Choking and excelling under pressure in experienced classifiers. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 71(4), 924-935.

download


Rein, J.R., Goldwater, M.B., & Markman, A.B. (2010). What is typical about the typicality effect in category-based induction? Memory and Cognition, 38(3), 377-388.

download


Goldwater, M.B., Markman, A.B., & Stilwell, C.H. (2011). The empirical case for role-governed categories. Cognition, 118, 359-376.

download


Goldwater, M.B. & Markman, A.B. (2011). Categorizing entities by common role. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 18(2), 406-413.

download


(back to top)

 

Knowledge Representation and Philosophy of Psychology

Markman, A.B. (1999). Knowledge Representation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

download coming soon


Dietrich, A.B., &amp Markman, A.B. (Eds.) (2000). Cognitive Dynamics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

download coming soon


Markman, A.B., &amp Dietrich, E. (2000). In defense of representation. Cognitive Psychology, 40, 138-171.

download


Markman, A.B., &amp Dietrich, E. (2000). Extending the classical view of representation.Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 4, 70-75.

download


Markman, A.B. (2002). Knowledge Representation. In D.L. Medin & H. Pashler (Eds.) Stevens Handbook of Experimental Psychology (3rd Edition), Volume 2. (pp. 165-208). New York: John Wiley and Sons.

download coming soon


Dietrich, E., & Markman, A.B. (2003). Discrete thoughts: Why cognition must use discrete representations. Mind and Language, 18, 95-119.

download


Woolley, J.D., Boerger, E.A., & Markman, A.B. (2004). A visit from the Candy Witch: Factors influencing young children's belief in a novel fantastical entity. Developmental Science. 7(4), 456-468

download coming soon


Markman, A.B., & Brendl, C.M. (2005). Constraining theories of embodied cognition. Psychological Science, 16(1), 6-10.

download


Markman, A.B., Beer, J.S., Grimm, L.R., Rein, J.R., & Maddox, W.T. (2009). The optimal level of fuzz: Case studies in a methodology for psychological research. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 21(3), 197-215

download


Goldwater, M.B., & Markman, A.B. (2009). Constructional sources of implicit agents in sentence comprehension. Cognitive Linguistics, 20(4), 675-702.

download


(back to top)

 

Reasoning, Performance, and Individual Differences

Kim, K. & Markman, A.B. (2006). Differences in Fear of Isolation as an explanation of Cultural Differences: Evidence from memory and reasoning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 350-364.

download


Kim, K., Narvaez, L.R., & Markman, A.B. (2007). Self-construal and the processing of covariation information in causal reasoning. Memory and Cognition, 35(6), 1337-1343.

download


Grimm, L.R., Markman, A.B., Maddox, W.T., & Baldwin, G.C. (2009). Stereotype threat reinterpreted as a regulatory mismatch. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2), 288-304.

download


Markman, A.B., Grimm, L.R., & Kim, K. (2009). Culture as a vehicle for studying individual differences. In R.S. Wyer, C.Y. Chiu, & Y.Y. Hong (Eds.) Understanding Culture: A theory, research and application (pp. 93-106). New York: A Taylor and Francis.

download


Worthy, D.A., Markman, A.B., & Maddox, W.T. (2009). Choking and excelling at the free-throw line. International Journal of Creativity and Problem Solving, 19(1), 53-58.

download


Maddox, W.T., Filoteo, J.V., Glass, B.D., & Markman, A.B. (2010). Regulatory match effects on a modified Wisconsin Card Sort task. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 16, 352-359.

download


Laux, J.P., Goedert, K.M., & Markman, A.B. (2010). Causal discounting in the presence of a stronger cue is due to bias. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 17(2), 213-218.

download


Maddox, W.T., & Markman, A.B. (2010). The motivation-cognition interface in learning and decision making. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(2), 106-110.

download


Glass, B.D., Maddox, W.T., Markman, A.B., Schnyer, D.M., Bowen, C., Savarie, Z.R., & Matthews, M.D. (2011). The effects of 24-hour sleep deprivation on the exploration-exploitation trade-off. Biological Rhythm Research 42, 99-110.

download


Vohs, K.D., Glass, B.D., Maddox, W.T., & Markman, A.B. (2011). Ego depletion is not just fatigue: Evidence from a total sleep deprivation experiment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(2), 166-173.

download


Glass, B.D., Maddox, W.T., & Markman, A.B. (2011). Regulatory fit effects on stimulus identification. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 73, 927-937.

download


Worthy, D.A., Brez, C.C., Markman, A.B., & Maddox, W.T. (in press). Motivational influences on cognitive performance in children: Focus over fit. Journal of Cognition and Development.

download coming soon


Grimm, L.R., Markman, A.B., & Maddox, W.T. (in press). End-of-semester syndrome: How situational regulatory fit affects test performance over an academic semester. Basic and Applied Social Psychology.

download coming soon


(back to top)

 

Media

 

Dr. Phil

Loading the player ...

Smart People, Bad Choices
One of the world's leading researchers in cognitive psychology and a member of the Dr. Phil Advisory Board, Dr. Art Markman, talks about his book, Smart Thinking, and the three-part formula for employing effective learning and smart thinking in your daily life. Don’t miss Dr. Markman’s five keys to breaking any bad habit!


UT Knowledge Matters

Ask a UT Psychologist - Art Markman
Psychologist Art Markman, author of "Smart Thinking" (Penguin, Jan. 2012) and director of Human Dimensions of Organizations, discusses the consequences of suppressing emotions, and how to come up with new problem-solving ideas. Watch him discuss these topics and more in a Knowledge Matters 2-part video series.


UT Game Changers

Art Markman: Smart Thinking: Three Essential Keys to Solve Problems, Innovate, and Get Things Done
Intelligence and smart thinking are not the same. In fact, sciences confirms that smart thinking is not an innate quality but rather a skill to be cultivated. Drawing on diverse studies of the mind, from psychology to linguistics, philosophy, and learning science, Markman demonstrates the difference between smart thinking and raw intelligence, showing how memory works, how to learn effectively, and how to use knowledge to get things done.


Science Network Interview

Loading the player ...

CogSci 2011
Arthur Markman is director of the Similarity and Cognition Lab at the University of Texas. He studies how people learn, how people perform under pressure, and how incentives affect performance. His research has focused on three main areas. First, he is interested in the way people see things to be similar, and how they process similarity and analogy comparisons. While the study of similarity is interesting for its own sake, it is also interesting because of what it can tell us about other psychological processes. In order to look at the way that our ability to make comparisons affects our cognitive processing, he also does research on category learning and decision making. He is a Governing Board member of the Cognitive Science Society and Executive Editor of the Cognitive Science Journal. He shares insights into current issues ranging from the psychology of politics to teen drug-taking behavior in Ulterior Motives, a blog series in Psychology Today.


Views and Brews at Cactus Cafe

Smart Thinking
Sometimes “thinking smarter” is less about learning and more about re-thinking the way we think and why. In this intimate discussion at the Cactus Cafe UT Psychology Professor and author of Smart Thinking: Three Essential Keys to Solve Problems, Innovate, and Get Things Done Dr. Art Markman, along with UT Music Professor and author of Intelligent Music Teaching: Essays on the Core Principals of Effective Instruction, Dr. Bob Duke explored modes of study and changing perspectives that can help all of us be more effective and efficient thinkers and teachers.

Podcast


Research + Pizza Presentation

Dr. Art Markman - Annabel Irion Worsham Centennial Professor in the Department of Psychology - discussed his work in the field of cognitive science.
Markman has written a book on the subject, Smart Thinking, that differentiates between raw intelligence and the act of using intelligence to understand memory, learn effectively and accomplish goals.

Podcast


Empathy Interview

Art Markman & Edwin Rutsch: How to Build a Culture of Empathy with Science
"Why Empathy Makes You More Helpful.  There is a lot of research suggesting that empathy increases people’s desire to help others.  Empathy is the ability to share other people’s emotion. The better able you are to feel what someone else is feeling, the more likely you are to want to help them when they are in a difficult situation. This ability also extends to animals.  We are able to project feelings onto animals like dogs, and that increases our need to help them.  But, what is it about empathy that promotes the need to help?"


Saathi Wellness Social Media Week Panel

Changing Face
Panel discusses the changing face of technology during the New York Health and Wellness Social Media Week.


KXAN Austin Interview

'Smart Thinking' New Book by UT Professor
Dr. Art Markman, professor of Psychology and Marketing at the University of Texas, is the author of the book "Smart Thinking - Three Essential Keys to Solve Problems, Innovate, and Get Things Done."

Books

Smart Thinking

Smart thinking

 

Arthur B. Markman

Smart Thinking
January 2012
Perigee Books
Smart Thinking Website

 

Tools for Innovation

Tools for Innovation

 

Arthur B. Markman, Kristin L. Wood

Tools for Innovation
August 2009
Oxford University Press

 

Knowledge Representation

Knowledge Representation

 

Arthur B. Markman

Knowledge Representation
November 1998
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

 

Similarity and Cognition Lab

The Similarity and Cognition Lab

Seay Psychology Building (SEA) 5.130
University of Texas at Austin

 

Participants wanted for research studies.

We need research participants who can come to the lab to participate in studies. If you are in the Austin, Texas area, and if you are interested in participating in a study in the lab and to help out in our research, please click here.

Research Overview

The Similarity and Cognition Lab, run by Art Markman, does research on how people see things to be similar to each other and how the way that we can compare things affects other aspects of cognition.

One of the core organizing frameworks of the lab is a search for ways to study cognitive processes that provide a good balance between the control that laboratory experiments allow and ecological validity. That is, whatever we study in the lab should bear some resemblance to what people do in their daily lives (when they are not participating in an experiment). We use this philosophy in our studies of comparison, decision making, and categorization.

Comparison is a central aspect of cognitive processing that affects abilities as simple as noticing that a pair of identical twins are in fact the same to our ability to notice that an atom is like the solar system, because something revolves around something else in each. The research we do on similarity and comparison reflects that the same process can account for both the mundane similarity comparisons and also the more complex analogical comparisons.

Of course, the study of similarity is primarily interesting, because we believe that the process of making comparisons operates in domains beyond similarity. Two areas that we have looked at in particular are Decision Making and Categorization.

The research on Decision Making focuses on the processes that people use to choose among a set of alternatives. One thing that people seem to do is to compare the alternatives they are choosing between. In these comparisons (as in similarity comparisons), corresponding pieces of information become important. For example, when choosing which of two colleges is best, people are more likely to pay attention to information about the academic reputation of the schools if they have information about the reputation of both schools than if they have that information about only one school. Thus, you could have some feature of a choice that you think is quite important, but you might not pay much attention to it if you don't have a corresponding piece of information for all of the options. We are also interested in the influence of people's goals on what they value. We are using the patterns of change in people's preferences for items when a goal is activated to better understand what people's goals are.

The research on Categorization is primarily focused on how the way people use categories affects what they learn about them. In some research, we have contrasted learning categories by learning to classify new items with learning categories by learning to predict features of new items. In other research, we have asked people to build LEGO models collaboratively in an effort to understand how communicating (in this case about LEGO pieces) affects the categories (of LEGO pieces) that are formed.  We have also explored how people learn categories in the process of forming preferences about them.

We also study different types of categories. Most research examines how people learn which features are associated with a category or which features help to distinguish one category from another. We are also interested in the development of role-governed categories, which are categoiries that are defined by the role they play in some situation. For example, there is no particular set of properties that defines something as a game. Instead, games are the kinds of things that people play. Similarly, a barrier is not defined by a set of properties, but instead is marked by being the sort of thing that obstructs. We are developing methods to examine how role-governed categories are learned and how learning of role-governed categories differs from learning of categories associated with sets of features.

Finally, we explore the relationship between motivation and learning broadly. We are interested in whether people's orientation to potential gains and losses in the environment affect performance on a range of cognitive tasks. We find that when this orientation to gains or losses matches the actual rewards available in the environment, then people are more flexible in their performance than when there is a mismatch between their motivational orientation and the reward structure of the environment.

Who are we?

Lab Manager

  • J. Grant Loomis

Graduate Students


Alumni of the lab

Graduate Students

Undergrads etc.

  • Erin Spalding
  • Kristin Austin
  • Danny Chung
  • Noah Cornman
  • Sam Day
  • Billy Dilly
  • Christin Grant
  • Brian Gurbach
  • Joel Holder
  • Randy Jupio
  • Valerie Makin
  • Saskia Traill
  • Evelyn Novello
  • Adalis Sanchez
  • Eric Taylor
  • Loan Vuong
bottom border