Ronald J. Burke

Attempts to Predict Success on an Insight Problem

18 predictor variables were related to a pass-fail criterion of success on Maiets Hatrack Problem (Maier, 1945), a problem requiring insight. The correlations of all 18 predictors with the criterion were uniformly low and insignificant, pointing up our inability to predict success on an insight problem. It is suggested that insight problems may require different abilities for their solution than “other” problems. The fact that consistent relationships fail to appear when insight problems are used as the experimental task further supports this suggestion. An explanation based on the assumption that blind trial and error is the type of mental process engaged in by a person when trying to solve an insight problem, was evaluated. The behavioral data indicated that this explanation was inadequate in explaining performance of Ss on this problem because Ss tended to approach the problem in a selective manner (persisted in directions), and increased time for search did not increase the number of correct solutions produced.

Test of the Concept of “Availability of Functions” in Problem Solving:

135 male college students solved Maiers Hatrack Problem (Maier, 1945) in an experiment designed to evaluate Saugstads “availability of functions” concept. Saugstad has stated that Ss will solve any problem if they have the necessary functions available. The data indicated that: (1) Ss failing to solve the problem had the necessary or relevant experiences, (2) Ss who solved and those who did not solve the problem had very similar experiences, and (3) selecting the relevant experience resulted in the immediate solution of the problem by a majority of Ss. Contrary to Saugstads contention, Ss will not necessarily solve a problem if they have the essential functions or past experiences. Recognizing experiences as relevant to a problems requirements, selecting experiences from a given repertoire, fragmenting experiences into parts, and recombining parts of experiences into solutions are functions that seem essential, yet are excluded when problem solving is regarded as a form of generalized learning. Three groups of problem solvers, differing in their degrees of success with the Hatrack Problem, had strikingly similar available functions, but differed in the way they selected from their past experiences when confronted with the problem of finding uses for the pole structure.

DOES TRAINING WITH DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT ON SIMILAR PROBLEMS HELP IN SOLVING A NEW PROBLEM

An experiment to determine, for achieving correct solutions to the Hatrack Problem whether prior experience on a simpler version of the problem helps and the effects of positive and negative reinforcement. After 30 min., 50.0% of the 30 Ss with no experience but only 25.0% of the 60 Ss with experience on the simpler version solved the problem (p < .05). Positive and negative reinforcement showed no differential effects for 30 Ss receiving each. Previous experience may inhibit productive problem solving by providing too many false directions. Principles of reinforcement developed for learning are limited in their applicability to problem-solving behavior.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN RECOGNIZING THE CORRECT ANSWER TO A PROBLEM

Previous research has shown the superiority of performance of males over that of females in solving Maiers horse trading problem. This investigation represented an attempt to reduce this sex difference by requiring Ss only to recognize the correct answer and its underlying reason. Consistent with earlier findings, 67.4% of the males and 34.2% of the females correctly solved the problem (p < .01). Comparison with results of Hoffman and Maier (1961) suggests that the modified version of the problem had little effect on the percentage of males and females correctly solving the problem.

STUDIES IN CREATIVITY: II. INFLUENCE OF MOTIVATION IN THE REORGANIZATION OF EXPERIENCE

Individuals differ in the way they store and utilize information. Some tend to retain associative bonds (using combinations previously associated); others tend to fragment the paired elements; and still others violate associative bonds by regrouping the elements. The major objective of this study was to determine whether the individual differences were due to differences in ability or in preference. Since preferences are readily altered by motivational changes, Ss were told that they would not be given credit when information units were reproduced as learned but that credit would be given if the learned elements were either used individually (fragmented) or regrouped (reorganized). The result of this altered motivation was a decrease in the use of previously paired elements and an increase in fragmented elements. However, reorganization of elements did not increase. It is concluded that the differences people show in the reorganization of learned information are primarily due to variations in ability rather than in preferences. The fact that some individuals still continue to use associative bonds, despite the motivational change, also indicates basic differences in ability.

Influence of Timing of Hints on Their Effectiveness in Problem Solving

To determine whether the receptivity and effectiveness of hints was related to the length of time Ss had spent on a problem before receiving them, a good and a poor hint were used in the Hatrack Problem (Maier, 1945) with 383 male college students, who were individually tested. Three stages of problem solving were selected for each hint in order to measure the importance of timing. These were as follows: (1) at the outset, before problem-solving activity had started, (2) at a point when Ss were about to give up after experiencing a variety of failures, and (3) at an intermediate stage when S might be actively involved in exploring his own ideas. (1) Differences attributable to the stages at which the hints were introduced were not significant for either hint. This similarity seemed to result from the manner in which the hints interrupted ongoing activity. Ss were told that the hint was applicable. (2) The analysis of activity following the hint supported an earlier study demonstrating that the effect of the hint was to eliminate activity incongruous with it. Thus the value of each hint depended upon the incorrect activity it eliminated. (3) The timing of the hint did not influence subsequent problem-solving activity.