Insight into the ten-penny problem: guiding search by constraints and maximization

Michael Öllinger, Anna Fedor, Svenja Brodt, E. Szathmáry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

For a long time, insight problem solving has been either understood as nothing special or as a particular class of problem solving. The first view implicates the necessity to find efficient heuristics that restrict the search space, the second, the necessity to overcome self-imposed constraints. Recently, promising hybrid cognitive models attempt to merge both approaches. In this vein, we were interested in the interplay of constraints and heuristic search, when problem solvers were asked to solve a difficult multi-step problem, the ten-penny problem. In three experimental groups and one control group (N = 4 × 30) we aimed at revealing, what constraints drive problem difficulty in this problem, and how relaxing constraints, and providing an efficient search criterion facilitates the solution. We also investigated how the search behavior of successful problem solvers and non-solvers differ. We found that relaxing constraints was necessary but not sufficient to solve the problem. Without efficient heuristics that facilitate the restriction of the search space, and testing the progress of the problem solving process, the relaxation of constraints was not effective. Relaxing constraints and applying the search criterion are both necessary to effectively increase solution rates. We also found that successful solvers showed promising moves earlier and had a higher maximization and variation rate across solution attempts. We propose that this finding sheds light on how different strategies contribute to solving difficult problems. Finally, we speculate about the implications of our findings for insight problem solving.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-14
Number of pages14
JournalPsychological Research
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - Sep 3 2016

Fingerprint

Veins
Control Groups
Problem Solving
Heuristics
Drive
Cognitive Models
Control Group
Testing
Experimental Group

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Insight into the ten-penny problem : guiding search by constraints and maximization. / Öllinger, Michael; Fedor, Anna; Brodt, Svenja; Szathmáry, E.

In: Psychological Research, 03.09.2016, p. 1-14.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{01029b40e19448b5bea40baba4c4586e,
title = "Insight into the ten-penny problem: guiding search by constraints and maximization",
abstract = "For a long time, insight problem solving has been either understood as nothing special or as a particular class of problem solving. The first view implicates the necessity to find efficient heuristics that restrict the search space, the second, the necessity to overcome self-imposed constraints. Recently, promising hybrid cognitive models attempt to merge both approaches. In this vein, we were interested in the interplay of constraints and heuristic search, when problem solvers were asked to solve a difficult multi-step problem, the ten-penny problem. In three experimental groups and one control group (N = 4 × 30) we aimed at revealing, what constraints drive problem difficulty in this problem, and how relaxing constraints, and providing an efficient search criterion facilitates the solution. We also investigated how the search behavior of successful problem solvers and non-solvers differ. We found that relaxing constraints was necessary but not sufficient to solve the problem. Without efficient heuristics that facilitate the restriction of the search space, and testing the progress of the problem solving process, the relaxation of constraints was not effective. Relaxing constraints and applying the search criterion are both necessary to effectively increase solution rates. We also found that successful solvers showed promising moves earlier and had a higher maximization and variation rate across solution attempts. We propose that this finding sheds light on how different strategies contribute to solving difficult problems. Finally, we speculate about the implications of our findings for insight problem solving.",
author = "Michael {\"O}llinger and Anna Fedor and Svenja Brodt and E. Szathm{\'a}ry",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1007/s00426-016-0800-3",
language = "English",
pages = "1--14",
journal = "Psychological Research",
issn = "0340-0727",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Insight into the ten-penny problem

T2 - guiding search by constraints and maximization

AU - Öllinger, Michael

AU - Fedor, Anna

AU - Brodt, Svenja

AU - Szathmáry, E.

PY - 2016/9/3

Y1 - 2016/9/3

N2 - For a long time, insight problem solving has been either understood as nothing special or as a particular class of problem solving. The first view implicates the necessity to find efficient heuristics that restrict the search space, the second, the necessity to overcome self-imposed constraints. Recently, promising hybrid cognitive models attempt to merge both approaches. In this vein, we were interested in the interplay of constraints and heuristic search, when problem solvers were asked to solve a difficult multi-step problem, the ten-penny problem. In three experimental groups and one control group (N = 4 × 30) we aimed at revealing, what constraints drive problem difficulty in this problem, and how relaxing constraints, and providing an efficient search criterion facilitates the solution. We also investigated how the search behavior of successful problem solvers and non-solvers differ. We found that relaxing constraints was necessary but not sufficient to solve the problem. Without efficient heuristics that facilitate the restriction of the search space, and testing the progress of the problem solving process, the relaxation of constraints was not effective. Relaxing constraints and applying the search criterion are both necessary to effectively increase solution rates. We also found that successful solvers showed promising moves earlier and had a higher maximization and variation rate across solution attempts. We propose that this finding sheds light on how different strategies contribute to solving difficult problems. Finally, we speculate about the implications of our findings for insight problem solving.

AB - For a long time, insight problem solving has been either understood as nothing special or as a particular class of problem solving. The first view implicates the necessity to find efficient heuristics that restrict the search space, the second, the necessity to overcome self-imposed constraints. Recently, promising hybrid cognitive models attempt to merge both approaches. In this vein, we were interested in the interplay of constraints and heuristic search, when problem solvers were asked to solve a difficult multi-step problem, the ten-penny problem. In three experimental groups and one control group (N = 4 × 30) we aimed at revealing, what constraints drive problem difficulty in this problem, and how relaxing constraints, and providing an efficient search criterion facilitates the solution. We also investigated how the search behavior of successful problem solvers and non-solvers differ. We found that relaxing constraints was necessary but not sufficient to solve the problem. Without efficient heuristics that facilitate the restriction of the search space, and testing the progress of the problem solving process, the relaxation of constraints was not effective. Relaxing constraints and applying the search criterion are both necessary to effectively increase solution rates. We also found that successful solvers showed promising moves earlier and had a higher maximization and variation rate across solution attempts. We propose that this finding sheds light on how different strategies contribute to solving difficult problems. Finally, we speculate about the implications of our findings for insight problem solving.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84984871006&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84984871006&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00426-016-0800-3

DO - 10.1007/s00426-016-0800-3

M3 - Article

C2 - 27592343

AN - SCOPUS:84984871006

SP - 1

EP - 14

JO - Psychological Research

JF - Psychological Research

SN - 0340-0727

ER -