Class Notes (1,051,144)
CA (601,375)
UTSG (50,679)
PSY (4,053)
Lecture 8

LEC8 – Theories of Deduction and Conditional Reasoning Oct 29 2009

2 pages66 viewsFall 2009

Course Code
John Vervaeke

This preview shows half of the first page. to view the full 2 pages of the document.
PSY370 Thinking & Reasoning
LEC7 Theories of Deduction and Conditional Reasoning
Oct, 29th, 2009
Weisberg: Homogenous class for Insight Problems
Gilhooly & Moody (2005)
! Determine whether or not restructuring is necessary for solving the problem
! if it was necessary then it was pure insight problem
! if it was not necessary then it was pure non-insight problem
! if it was helpful but necessary then it was a hybrid problem
! G&M varied number of insight problems
! subjects were tested on all insight and non-insight problems
! did positive manifold: how performance on one test correlates to another
! if how I am doing on one problem is predictive of how I am doing on another problem, then
the problems share something similar
! see if there is a positive manifold between insight problems
! if there was none, then this will be strong evidence against the insight problems as a class
! if there is, then there is evidence for insight problems as a class
! researchers also measured ppl's abilities and see which one is predictive of success on insight
! RESULT: strong positive manifold b/w insight problems, non-insight tasks cluster mainly with
non-insight tasks (not strong positive manifold, but moderate)
! this supports the notion that there are clear underlying processes for insight tasks that are
not shared with non-insight problems
! RESULT: measures of cognitive flexibility are particularly important for insight problem
solving and not on non-insight problems
! cognitive flexibility are used for figural fluidity test and alternative use test
! figural fluidity test
produce as many patterns as you can by joining 2 dots when given 5 dots
the more figures you can produce, the more fluid you are
this involes restructuring and
! alternative use test
produce as many uses for 6 common objects that is different than the normal use
this involves overcoming functional fixedness
also involves restructuring etc.
! insight involves working memory, switching of attention, and inhibition of irrelevant
! only when correct switch of attention, inhibition then do you get the problem formulation that is
productive of solving the problem
Flak & Weisberg 2004
! exp. result challenges Schooler and Melcher
! concurrent verbalization impair insight problems and not non-insight problems
! perhaps this is b/c there are different ways in using language such that some impair insight
problems while other trigger insight problems
! looked at independent line of research developed by Schooler and other: Verbal overshadowing
! concurrent verbalization do not only impair insight problems but other processes
! relationship b/w language use and cognitive processing are much more subtle
! verbal overshadowing for face recognition, deep analogies etc.
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Loved by over 2.2 million students

Over 90% improved by at least one letter grade.