Expertise overcomes impasse to yield far transfer and insight in problem-solving

References

• Ahmed, S., Wallace, K. M., & Blessing, L. T. (2003). Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks. Research in Engineering Design, 14(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-002-0023-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 612–637. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianchi, I., Branchini, E., Burro, R., Capitani, E., & Savardi, U. (2020). Overtly prompting people to “think in opposites” supports insight problem solving. Thinking & Reasoning, 26(1), 31–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2018.1553738
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bilalić, M., Graf, M., Vaci, N., & Danek, A. H. (2019). When the solution is on the doorstep: Better solving performance, but diminished Aha! experience for chess experts on the mutilated checkerboard problem. Cognitive Science, 43(8), e12771. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12771
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chein, J. M., Weisberg, R. W., Streeter, N. L., & Kwok, S. (2010). Working memory and insight in the nine-dot problem. Memory & Cognition, 38(7), 883–892. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.7.883
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chuderski, A., Jastrzębski, J., & Kucwaj, H. (2020). How physical interaction with insight problems affects solution rates, hint use, and cognitive load. British Journal of Psychology, 112, 120–143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: An overview. Design Studies, 25(5), 427–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cushen, P. J., & Wiley, J. (2018). Both attentional control and the ability to make remote associations aid spontaneous analogical transfer. Memory & Cognition, 46(8), 1398–1412. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-018-0845-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dane, E. (2010). Reconsidering the trade-off between expertise and flexibility: A cognitive entrenchment perspective. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 579–603.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies, R., & Talbot, R. J. (1987). Experiencing ideas: Identity, insight, and the imago. Design Studies, 8(1), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(87)90027-5
   Google Scholar
• Didierjean, A., & Nogry, S. (2004). Reducing structural-element salience on a source problem produces later success in analogical transfer: What role does source difficulty play? Memory & Cognition, 32(7), 1053–1064. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196881
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dietrich, A., & Kanso, R. (2010). A review of EEG, ERP, and neuroimaging studies of creativity and insight. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 822–848.https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019749
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncker, K. (1945). On problem solving. Psychological Monographs, 58(5), i–113. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093599
   Google Scholar
• Easton, G. (1982). Learning from case studies. Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• European Central Bank. (2017). How does innovation lead to growth? https://www.ecb.europa.eu/explainers/tell-me-more/html/growth.en.html. Retrieved 28 August 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Feltovich, P. J., Spiro, R. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1997). Issues of expert flexibility in contexts characterized by complexity and change. In P. J. Feltovich, K. M. Ford, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), Expertise in context (pp. 125–146). AAAI/MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Finke, R. (1990). Creative imagery. Discoveries and inventions in visualisation. LEA.
   Google Scholar
• Friedlander, K. J., & Fine, P. A. (2018). “The penny drops”: Investigating insight through the medium of cryptic crosswords. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 904. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00904
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gegenfurtner, A., Lehtinen, E., & Säljö, R. (2011). Expertise differences in the comprehension of visualizations: A meta-analysis of eye-tracking research in professional domains. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 523–552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9174-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12(3), 306–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(80)90013-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(83)90002-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goel, V. (1994). Sketches of thought. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hélie, S., & Sun, R. (2010). Incubation, insight, and creative problem solving: A unified theory and a connectionist model. Psychological Review, 117(3), 994–1024. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019532
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henok, N., Vallée-Tourangeau, F., & Vallée-Tourangeau, G. (2020). Incubation and interactivity in insight problem solving. Psychological Research, 1-12, 128–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-0992-9
   Google Scholar
• Jones, G. (2003). Testing two cognitive theories of insight. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(5), 1017–1027. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.29.5.1017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katona, G. (1940). Organizing and memorizing. Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.) (2010). Preface. In The Cambridge handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kershaw, T. C., & Ohlsson, S. (2004). Multiple causes of difficulty in insight: The case of the nine-dot problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.1.3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, E., & Kim, K. (2015). Cognitive styles in design problem solving: Insights from network-based cognitive maps. Design Studies, 40, 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, G., & Jarosz, A. (2011). A naturalistic study of insight. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 5(4), 335–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555343411427013
   Google Scholar
• Knauff, M., Budeck, C., Wolf, A. G., & Hamburger, K. (2010). The illogicality of stock-brokers: Psychological experiments on the effects of prior knowledge and belief biases on logical reasoning in stock trading. PLoS One, 5(10), e13483. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013483
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., Haider, H., & Rhenius, D. (1999). Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 25(6), 1534–1555. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.6.1534
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kokotovich, V., & Purcell, T. (2000). Mental synthesis and creativity - An experimental examination. Design Studies, 21(5), 437–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(00)00017-X
   Google Scholar
• MacGregor, J. N., Ormerod, T. C., & Chronicle, E. P. (2001). Information-processing and insight: A process model of performance on the nine-dot and related problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(1), 176–201. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.176
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier, N. R. F. (1931). Reasoning in humans: II. The solution of a problem and its appearance in consciousness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 12(2), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0071361
   Google Scholar
• Metcalfe, J., & Wiebe, D. (1987). Intuition in insight and non-insight problem-solving. Memory & Cognition, 15(3), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197722
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKenna, A. F. (2015). Adaptive expertise and knowledge fluency in design and innovation. In Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ohlsson, S. (1984). Restructuring revisited. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.1984.tb01001.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohlsson, S. (1992). Information-processing explanations of insight and related phenomena. In M. T. Keane & K. J. Gilhooly (Eds.), Advances in the psychology of thinking (Vol. 1, pp. 1–44). Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
   Google Scholar
• Ohlsson, S. (2011). Deep learning: How the mind overrides experience. Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Öllinger, M., Fedor, A., Brodt, S., & Szathmáry, E. (2017). Insight into the ten-penny problem: Guiding search by constraints and maximization. Psychological Research, 81(5), 925–938. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-016-0800-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öllinger, M., Jones, G., & Knoblich, G. (2014). The dynamics of search, impasse, and representational change provide a coherent explanation of difficulty in the nine-dot problem. Psychological Research, 78(2), 266–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-013-0494-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ormerod, T. C., & MacGregor, J. N. (2017). Enabling spontaneous analogy through heuristic change. Cognitive Psychology, 99, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2017.09.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ormerod, T. C., MacGregor, J. N., Banks, A., & Rusconi, P. (2021). PRODIGI: A theory and computational implementation of insight problem-solving through progress maximization and idea discovery.
   Google Scholar
• Ormerod, T. C., MacGregor, J. N., & Chronicle, E. P. (2002). Dynamics and constraints in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(4), 791–799. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.28.4.791
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ormerod, T. C., MacGregor, J. N., Chronicle, E. P., Dewald, A. D., & Chu, Y. (2013). Act first, think later: Effects of maximization, minimization and lookahead on inferential planning in problem-solving. Memory & Cognition, 41(7), 1096–1108. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0318-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perkins, D. (2000). Archimedes’ bathtub: The art and logic of breakthrough thinking. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Reuber, R. (1997). Management experience and management expertise. Decision Support Systems, 21(2), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(97)00017-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rickards, T. (1997). Creativity and problem-solving at work. Gower.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, W. (2021, September 5). Feeling stumped: Investigating dimensions of impasse. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/4zhse
   Google Scholar
• Ross, W., & Vallée-Tourangeau, F. (2021). Catch that word: Interactivity, serendipity and verbal fluency in a word production task. Psychological Research, 85(2), 842–856. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-019-01279-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sala, G., & Gobet, F. (2017). Does chess instruction improve mathematical problem-solving ability? Two experimental studies with an active control group. Learning & Behavior, 45(4), 414–421. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-017-0280-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salvi, C., Bricolo, E., Bowden, E., Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2016). Insight solutions are correct more often than those achieved by analysis. Thinking & Reasoning, 22(4), 443–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2016.1141798
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sio, U. N., & Ormerod, T. C. (2009). Does incubation enhance problem solving? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135(1), 94–120. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014212
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sio, U. N., & Ormerod, T. C. (2015). Incubation and cueing effects in problem-solving: Set aside the difficult problems but focus on the easy ones. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(1), 113–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2014.886626
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (1995). The nature of insight. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, L. E., & Lleras, A. (2009). Swinging into thought: Directed movement guides insight in problem solving. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(4), 719–723. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.4.719
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vallée-Tourangeau, F., Steffensen, S. V., Vallée-Tourangeau, G., & Sirota, M. (2016). Insight with hands and things. Acta Psychologica, 170, 195–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.08.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vallée‐Tourangeau, F., & March, P. L. (2020). Insight out: Making creativity visible. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 54(4), 824–842. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.409
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb, M. E., Little, D. R., & Cropper, S. J. (2016). Insight is not in the problem: Investigating insight in problem solving across task types. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1424. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01424
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weisberg, R. W. (1995). Prolegomena to theories of insight in problem solving: A taxonomy of problems. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weisberg, R. W. (2011). Frank Lloyd Wright’s Fallingwater: A case study of inside-the-box creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 23(4), 296–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.621814
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werner, K., Raab, M., & Fischer, M. H. (2019). Moving arms: The effects of sensorimotor information on the problem-solving process. Thinking & Reasoning, 25(2), 171–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2018.1494630
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiley, J. (1998). Expertise as mental set: The effects of domain knowledge in creative problem solving. Memory & Cognition. 716–730. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211392
   Google Scholar
• Woodworth, R. S., & Schlosberg, H. (1954). Experimental psychology (Rev. ed.). Holt.
   Google Scholar