Get 2 days of premium access
Study Guides (380,000)
US (220,000)
Rutgers (2,000)
14:50 (600)
Final

# 01:830:305 Study Guide - Final Guide: Equation Group, Triangle Group, Pliers

Department
Psychology
Course Code
01:830:305
Professor
Dr. Santos
Study Guide
Final

This preview shows pages 1-2. to view the full 6 pages of the document.
Problem- obstacle b/w present state and a goal
Solution isn’t obvious, need thinking
Gestalt approach- restructure and reorganisation of the representation of problem
crossword - reorganize
Kohler’s circle problem- solve for X- restructure, requires mental rotation
Outcome of process called insight- sudden realization after restructuring
Involves creating a new representation
Depends on how the problem is represented in mind
Metcalfe and Wiebe- who can predict when they will reach a solution? Insight vs. algebra
Report “warmth” every 15 secs
Triangle group, chain group and equation group
Obstacles to solving problems:
Functional fixedness: this object can only do this thing
Ex- candle problem- Dunker
Candle, matches in match box and tacs
Matches inside box vs. outside box
More people solved prob when matches was outside box
Ex- 2 strings problem- Maiers
Strings, chair and pliers
In the video: used chair, pliers, strings and yellow eraser
Mental set- preconceived notion on how to approach a problem
Based on past experiences
Ex- water jug problem- luchins
Get 100 by mixing water from 3 jugs
Mental set- desired amount= B-A-2C
Mental set vs. non-mental set group
Problem #8 28 59 3 Use A-C to get 25
Information- processing approach- looking at computers
Newell & Simon
Problem space has initial, intermediate and goal stages
Ex, tower of Hanoi
There are operators/rules to get to goal stage
Means-end analysis: reduce differences between initial and goal states
Problem space- all possible ways to solve problem, used in computer science
It provides a way to specify the possible pathways from the initial to goal states.
It showed people solve some problems in a stepwise manner using subgoals.
Importance of how a problem is stated
Cognitive factors in problem solving
Ex- Mutilated-checkerboard problem
64 squares, you need 32 dominoes, if you take 2 red pieces away, you
can’t solve the problem

Only pages 1-2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Kaplan and Simon- rephrasing a problem helps?
They presented 4 version of checkerboard
Conditions differed in how much information provided about the squares
Easier to solve when information is provided that points toward the correct
representation of the problem
Analogical problem solving
Use solution from similar prob to solve new prob
Using analogies to solve problems- transfer analogy form 1 prob to another
Ex. Wedding problem
Analogical transfer- looking at 1 prob learned and transferring knowledge
Source problem- check pattern, experience solving prob
Target prob- russian wedding, trying to solve
Analogy transfer
Duncker’s radiation problem- many small lasers can be used at different angles
Fortress story- small groups can go and meet at the castle
Both are similar in that you can use what you earned from first prob to solve
second prob
Gick and Holyoak- only 10% solved radiation and 30% solved fortress
70% couldn’t use analogy transfer
Creativity
Divergent thinking: open-ended; large number of potential “solutions”
New connections between existing ideas
Cork in the bottle problem- solved by blowing a plastic bag
Judgement- evaluation of evidence to base decision
Reasoning- conclusions
Decision- make choices
Decision making processes
Ex- scouting athletes
Jugement- he looks heavy
Reasoning- past heavy players did not succeed
Decision- don’t draft him
Inductive reasoning- based on observation
Generalize one example for broad conclusion
Conclusions from evidence
Not definitely true
General state to specific case
Make scientific discoveries- hypothesis
Predict what will happen based on what has happened in the past
Ex- sun has risen in NJ
Ex- all crows are black
Sun is better conclusion