Testing two cognitive theories of insight
Testing two cognitive theories of insight
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/0278-7393.29.5.1017
复制
发表时间：
2003-09-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Jones, G
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jones, G
当问题解决者看不清如何解决问题时，问题解决中的洞察力就会出现，然后--“啊哈！“--突然意识到如何解决它。有两个当代理论被提出来解释洞察力。表征变化理论（Representational Change Theory）G. Knoblich，S. Ohlsson，& G. E. Rainey，2001）提出，洞察力是通过放松对问题的自我约束和分解问题中的分块项目来实现的。进度监控理论（例如，J. N. MacGregor，T. C. Ormerod，& E. P. Chronicle，2001）提出，只有当在剩下的步骤中明显无法实现目标时，才寻求洞察力。这两个理论在一个无限移动问题中进行了测试，这两个理论以前都没有被应用过。结果支持两者，但实验操作的问题表明，表征变化理论是更好的性能指标。研究结果表明，可测试的相反的预测，可以检查理论的洞察力和眼动数据的使用是一个富有成效的方法，既检查洞察力和测试理论的洞察力。
Insight in problem solving occurs when the problem solver fails to see how to solve a problem and then-"aha!"-there is a sudden realization how to solve it. Two contemporary theories have been proposed to explain insight. The representational change theory (e.g., G. Knoblich, S. Ohlsson, & G. E. Rainey, 2001) proposes that insight occurs through relaxing self-imposed constraints on a problem and by decomposing chunked items in the problem. The progress monitoring theory (e.g., J. N. MacGregor, T. C. Ormerod, & E. P. Chronicle, 2001) proposes that insight is only sought once it becomes apparent that the distance to the goal is unachievable in the moves remaining. These 2 theories are tested in an unlimited move problem, to which neither theory has previously been applied. The results lend support to both, but experimental manipulations to the problem suggest that the representational change theory is the better indicator of performance. The findings suggest that testable opposing predictions can be made to examine theories of insight and that the use of eye movement data is a fruitful method of both examining insight and testing theories of insight.