Chapter 12 Text book notes Flashcards
What is the Gestalt approach to problem solving?
Believes that peoples success in problem solving depends on how they represent the problem in their mind and how they reorganize this representation
What is an example of how people represent things in their mind Kohler presented an image where there was a circule divided into four secotions and in the upper left quadrant there was a right angle triagle where the right angle corner touched the edge of the circle and the longest side diagnolly went downwards from it stopping just before the edge of the circle and asked participants to solve the radius. If participants just saw the shape as a triangle they would be unable to solve it but if they saw it as a rectangle then they could go from the upper corner with the right angle that touched the edge back to the center and find the radius. This illustrates two potential ways people could represent a problem to themselves.
What is restructuring and what is one of the ways in which it can be achieved?
Restructuring is when someone changes how they perceive something - restructuring can be achieved through insight - a sudden realization of a new way of thinking about a problem
Describe Metcalfe and Weibe’s findings
could hear the word weeb like anime fan and be asked how a word that produces the same sound but has a different spelling could be spelt- likely would involve us having to restructure the word and suddently finding one that worked (weibe if prouncunced like Kat’s last name would work) this could demonstrate both restructuring and spontanteous insight- Weibes experiment delt with both of these. Weibe had 2 groups of participants
Group 1: given an insight problem (a problem ike koehlers triangle problem where from the outset the procedure that had to be used to solve it was not clear)
Group 2: a noninsight problem- a problem where the procedure to solve it was clear
Asked both groups to try to solve their problems while ranking on a scale of 1-10 how close they thought they were to solving them
found that the participants with the non-insight porblems ratings steadily increased whereas participants with the insight problem often reported having their closeness to solving it a 3 15 seconds before they had solved it illustrating that insight did come to them instantly. Supporting the idea of spontaneous insight.
What are analytical problems
Problems that have a pre- established procedure that demonstrates how they are to be solved.
What is fixation and how does it impact problem solving according to Gestalt psychologists?
Fixation - is honing in on one specific aspect of a problem
Fixation can prevent an individual from solving a problem according to gestalt psychologists
Describe Duncker’s experiment?
using dunker (dunkin) donuts for something other then eating ex fixing a house (like the people who do it with ramen) would represent overcoming functional fixatedness - Duncker’s experiment delt with functional fixatedness. In Duncker’s experiment there were two conditions:
condition 1: matchbox held matches there were also tacks and a candle
condtion 2: matchbox did not hold matches again there were also tacks and a candle
Participants were asked how using the material they had could be used to perch the candle on the wall (the right answere would be to use the tacs to tack the matchbox to the wall and to place the candle ontop of the matchbox) foudn that it was more difficult for participants who had had the matchbox presented with matches in it to imagine using it as a stand - likely because it already seemed to serve another purpose (holding the matches) - this demonstrates functional fixatedness where people can only image an object as being used for its most common use and not any alternatives
Describe Maier’s two string problem
Maier like mayor or mayar like a horse - his name could refer to two different things but we might get stuck on the most common one similar to the idea of functional fixedness. Maier asked participants how they would get tie two strings on the opposite side of the room together if they were to far apart for you to be able to hold one and reach the other to grab it- in the room there was a chair and pliers. The correct answer was to be to hold onto one string and tie the pliers to the other string and pull it back and let it go - this would make it so that they would pendulum with enough force (due to the weight of the pliers) for it to swing close enough that an individual while holding the other string as close to it as they could to grab it which would allow them to tie them together. Participants often were unable to solve the problem because they could not imagine pliers being used as a weight which did not align with their standard use. Found that out of the 37 of the participants who could not solve the problem 23 were suddenly able to when the researcher “accidentally” pushed the string so it started to sway.
What is a mental set?
The ideas that someone brings to a problem regarding how to solve it based on what has worked in the past.
Describe Lunchins experiment
Lunchins- have a set of ingredients you can put togehter and probably will do formulically even though there might be easier ways to do so simmilar to lunchins mental set experiment.
Had two groups
Group 1: were given problems 2-6 which had to be solved using the formula A + B - 2C and then given two problems that could be solved using the aformentioned formula or doing A - B, (called the mental set group)
Group 2: were only given the problems that could be solved using A - B
Even though A - B was the simpler solution only 23% of the participants from the mental set group used it because the A + B - 2C had been established as the reliable solution previously - illustrates how we automatically try previously established solutions to new problems even if they may not be the easiest or best for the new problem.
Describe Newell and Simon’s search approach to problem solving
According to Newell and Simon when people solve problems there is not just an initial strucutre and one reorganization they spend their time searching on how to structure it.
What is means - end analysis?
When a final goal is broken down into smaller subgoals to aim to reach (part of newell and simons approach to problem solving)
What are all the terms that Newell and Simon use when solving problems
Initial state - how everything is at the beggining of the problem before we have tried to solve it
Goal state - final solution to the problem ‘
Intermediate state - all the stages that occur after we take the first step closer to solving the problem and the final solution (ex in hanoi tower having one of the disks on another peg)
Operators - the specific actions we can take to achieve the steps closer - howe we can interact with the conditions of the problem - governed by rules (ex we can move the discs pegs to get to different stages however how we can do this is restricted by rules - as we can not move more then one at once or place the larger ones on top of the smaller ones)
Problem state - all the different conditions that could arise from our operations - all different possible dsic peg placement arrangments we could have.
subgoals - smaller stages that we attempt to reach in order to reach our goal sometimes in order to reach a subgoal it looks like we are moving away from our original goal
Newell like New L like New level we solve problems in terms of levels (subgoals)
Newell and Simon’s model does not just examine start and end examines all possible ways to get there and maintains that we solve problems using steps called subgoals
Describe the mutilated checkerboard experiment
Kaplan and Simon
Show participants an image of a checkerboard
tell them that the checkerboard has 64 squares and each square can be covered by a domino (which must go over two squares) when 32 dominos are used. Asked participants if this could be done using 31 if two red squares from opposite ends were removed. The key to knowing the correct answere to the problem (which was “no”) was knowing that a domino can only cover two squares of different colors (a domino can only be layed vertically or horizaontally and in a checker board you only bet the same color if you go diagnoally- since know there were two of the same color (since two of the same color had been taken away) it was now impossible to cover the board using the dominos)
Kaplan and Simon then manipulated how what had originally been the differences of colors of the squares were represented - wanted to see what would draw peopes attention the most to that both vertically and horizonally you could not get the same color beside each oterh)
Board 1: was blank - just a grid of 64 squares but no color marked them participants would have to take their prior knowledge of what a chess board looked like and imagine it on the blank grid in order to visualize it
Board 2: normal coloring (black and pink)
Board 3: instead of having the squares be different colors the squares were labelled black and pink
Board 4: the squares were all the same color (white) but were either labelled with bread or butter
Found that the bread and butter condition emphasised the difference the most and the blank grid emphasized it the least. The bread and butter group on average required 1 hints whereas the bread and butter group on average required 3.14 hints additionally the bread and butter group solved the problem twice as quickly as the blank group.
Analogical transfer
Analogy is likingening one thing to another- analogical transfer is similar it is noting likeness (connections) between problems and their solutions. Just transfereing our previous knowledge of like issues to our current situation
What is anological problem solving
A type of analogical transfer (refers to brining any information regarding a previously enoucntered problem to a new problem - including which solution worked) involves trying to use solutions that have worked for previous problems to solve new problems
What is a target and source problem?
A target problem is a problem that an individual is attempting to solve right now whereas a source problem is a problem that has some likeness to their target problem that they can draw an analogy from
Describe Glick and Holyoaks findings
Glick and Holyoak
used Dunker’s (had done the functional fixatedness problem with candles) problem: which stated that “a patient had a tumor that needed to be removed or they would die. They could either try to use a intense ray that would kill the tumor and kill off other tissues or a less intense ray that would not kill of the tumor or other tissues. How would they eliminate the tumor without killing off the surrounding tissue?” Only 10% of patients answered correctly to use several of the smaller rays from different areas so they would not have such intense radiation that they killed tissue at their areas of entry and have them all meet at the tumor which would now produce an intense enough radiation for them to kill it. Glick and Holyoak tried to present them with another story that took place in a time where people likely thought oaks were holy (holyoak- very different from the accessing radiation with a click - glick story). Presented participants with a story, (which they claimed that they had done for memory purposes) where a group was trying to overthrow a dictator in a fortress but the dictator had planted mines on the roads- the mines would not fall under the weight of a few men but would under the weight of all of them. The men solved the problem by dividing up and going down different roads so that the total of them could reach the fortress without having triggered off the mines. This solution of having to have smaller groups reach the target in different ways and then provide their full force at the target was the solution that the tumor problem was looking for.
Notably only 30% of participants got the answere correctly even after hearing the story- this demonstrated that the majority of people would miss analogous solutions. When Glick and Holyoak told participants to think about the story that they had read the number of partiicpants who got the answere to dunkens tumor problem increased to 75%.
What are the 3 steps that Glick and Holyolk determined through their tumor and fortress (tumor in the time og click like glick fortress in the time when people thought oaks were holy, holy oak) are used when engaging in analogical problem solving .
- Noticing: Recognizing that there is some sort of simmilarity between the target problem and a source problem (don’t have to know the exact nature of the simmilairty that can be found during mapping however just have to somehow know that it parallels a preivously encountered problem)
- Mapping: figuring out where the source and target problem are simmilar
- Applying: using the simmilarities to determine what aspects of the source problems solution can be applied to the target problem
Describe Gentner and Goldin Meadow’s findings
If you want to get to Goldin Meadow (heaven ) according to some beliefs you must negotiate and according to others you must have solved all problems in your life using one correct solution. Simmilar to Gentner and Goldin Meadows experiment where they had participants try to apply solutions from other problems that envolved negotiating to a new problem that involved negotiating.
Gentner and Goldin Meadow split participants into 2 groups
Group 1 read sample problems in which trade off negotiating was used. Trade off involves one person giving up something to another peerson in exchange for getting what they want ex if two sisters are fighting over an organge but one wnats the peel and the other wants the juice - if one says “I’ll let you have the peel if you let me have the juice” it demonstrates trade off negotiation.
Group 2 read sample problems in which contingency negotiating was used. Contingency negotiating involves a person getting what they want but only if certain specific things happen- ex an author wants 18% royalties but the publisher only wants to give 12% they coudl reach an agreement where the author gets 18% royalties if there are high sales and lower royalties if there are low sales. So illustrates an instance where someones ability to get what they want is dependent (contingent) on something else happening first.
Then presented both groups with a new problem where either contingency or trade off strategy could be used to solve it found that the group who had read the trade off samples were more likley to use trade off solutions and the group who had read contingency samples were more likley to use contingency solutions - illustrates that analogical problem solving was used.
What is analogical encoding
Simmilar to analogical transfer except in this case both simmilarities and differences are compared.
What is in vivo problem solving research who invented it, what are its pros and cons
In vivo desensitization refered to teaching the person to display calming startegies while encountering the object of their fear in real life rather then imagined in a controlled settign - so in vivo means real life - therefore in vivo problem solving reasearch means reasearch on problem solvign in real life. Arguablly the majority real life is not super reflected in a laboratory so real life means more naturalistic observation. In vivo problem solving research therefore refers to examining how problems are solved in real life through naturalistic observation. In vivo problem solving research was created by Dunbar who watched recordings of university reaserch boards and people trying to create a new product interacting and looked for evidence of analogical problem solving in them.
pros- accurate to real life
cons - time consuming can not control variables
Findings: found that the university board used analogical problem solving 3-15 times in an hour
a similar study done using Dunbars methods (of watching a recording of an organization interacting and analyzing it for analogue problem solving) aka in vivo problem solving reaserch (because it involves looking at real life not a controlled setting) Christensen and Schunn found that engineers engaged in analogical problem solving every 5 minutes overall shows that we use analogical problem solving in real life.
Describe Chase and Simons experiment
Simon and Newell - means to end model
Simon worked on computers so deals with memory simmilarily in his questioning with Chase (the one time I got a stalemate in chess with larry I had been CHASEing his king for a while - chase like chess, chess experiment) of why experts are better at solving problems in their feild he disocovered that the reason involved memory. Had a chess experts with over 10,000 hours of experience and novices with under 100 hours of experience look at a board in which the peices were arranged in a specific way for 5 seconds and then attempt to reacreate it.
Findings: when the peices were arranged on the board in a way that would be possible in a chess game the experts performed much better then the novices however when the peices were arranged in way that was not possible in chess games the novices and experts had equal performances - this indicates tha
