Starnb

The Problem-Solving Cycle/Steps

We engage in problem solving when we need to overcome obstacles to answer a
question or to achieve a goal. If we quickly can retrieve an answer from memory,
we do not have a problem. If we cannot retrieve an immediate answer, then we
have a problem to be solved. This section describes the steps of the problem
solving eyele, which include problem identification, problem definition, strateg
formulation, organization of information, allocation of resources, monitoring, and
evaluation. In considering the steps, remember also the importance of flexibility in
following the various steps of the cycle. Successful problem solving may involve
occasionally tolerating some ambiguity regarding how best to proceed. Rarely can
we solve problems by following any one optimal sequence of problem-solving
steps. Moreover, we may go back and forth through the steps. We can change their
order as need be, or even skip or add steps when it seems appropriate. How people
solve problems depends partly on how they understand them (Whitten & Graesser,
2003).Consider an example of how understanding matters.

1. Problem identification: As odd as it sounds, identifying a situation as

problematic is sometimes a difficult step. We may fail to recognize that we have a
goal. For example, we might need to stay out of the path of an oncoming car we
fail to observe. Or we might fail to recognize that our path to a goal is obstructed.
An example would be needing to obtain more money because we lack enough to
buy something we want. Or we might fail to recognize that the solution we had in
mind does not work. For example, the job we expected to get might not now be
available to us. If your problem is the need to write a term paper, you must first
identify a question that your paper will address.
2. Problem definition and representation: Once we identify the existence off a
problem, we still have to define and represent the problem well enough to
understand how to solve it. Consider, for example, preparing to write your term
paper. You must define your topic well enough to determine the reseárch you wil
gather and your overall strategy for writing your paper. The problem-definition
step is crucial. If you inaccurately define and represent the problem, you are much
s able to solve it (Funke, 1991; Hegarty, 1991). In fact, for the solution of the
problem shown in Figure 11.1, this step is crucial to your finding the answer. That
is, in solving the two-string problem, are you constraining your answer in ways
that are limiting your ability to solve the problem?
3. Strategy formulation: Once the problem has been defined effectively, the next
step is to plan a strategy for solving it. The strategy may involve analysis-breaking
down the whole of a complex problem into manageable elements. Instead, or
perhaps in addition, it may involve the complementary process of synthesis-putting
together various elements to arrange them into something useful. In writing your
term paper, you must analyze the components of your topic, research the various
components, and then synthesize the topics into a rough draft of your paper. in
most dichotomies, one must be careful of drawing too much of a distinction
As
(Kotovsky, 2003 ). People use analysis to help in synthesizing information. They
also may use synthesis to help in analysis. Another pair of complementary
strategies involves divergent and convergent thinking. In divergent thinking. you
try to generate a diverse assortment of possible alternative solutions to a problem.
Once you have considered a variety of possibilities, however, you must engage in
on a
onvergent hinking tonarrow down the multiple possibilities to converge
single best answer. Sometimes, you merely find what you believe to be the most
likely solution, which you will try first. When you came up with the topic for your
You then
paper, you first used divergent thinking to generate many possible topics.
used convergent thinking to select the most suitable topic that interested you. In

solving real-life problems, you may need both analysis and synthesis and both
divergent and convergent thinking. There is no single ideal strategy for addressing
on both the problem and the
every problem. Instead, the optimal strategy depends
problem solvers' personal preferences in problem-solving methods.
all the
[Link] of information: In this stage, you try to integrate
information that you believe you will need to effectively do the task at hand. It
This stage is
might involve collecting references or even collecting your own ideas.
critical to good problem solving. Sometimes, people fail to solve a problem not
because they cannot solve it, but because they do not realize what information they
been
have or how it fits together. Once a strategy (at least a tentative strategy) has
formulated, you are ready to organize the available information in a way that
enables you to implement the strategy. Of course, throughout the problem-solving
the available information. At
cycle you constantly are organizing and reorganizing
this step, however, you organize the information strategically, finding
a

representationthat best enables you to implement your strategy. For example, if

the information for your term paper, you may use an
your problem is to organize
need
outline to organize your ideas. If your problem is to find a location, you may
to organize and represent the available information in the form of a map. If your
problem is to earn a particular amount of money by a particular date, you may
representthe available information in the form ofa timetable for intervening dates
by which you must have earneda particular portion of the total amount.
5. Resource allocation: In addition to our other problems, most of us face the
problem of having limited resources. These resources include time, money,
lot of time and other resources.
equipment, and space. Some problems are worth a
Others are worth very few resources. Moreover, we need to know when to allocate
which resources. Studies show that expert problem solvers (and better students)
tend to devote more of their mental resources to global (big-picture) planning than
 tend to allocate more
do novice problem solvers. Novices (and poorer students)
1 980;
time to local (detail-oriented) planning than do experts (Larkin & associates,
are more likely than poorer
Sternberg. 198 T ) .For example, better students
students to spend more time in the initial phase, deciding how to solve a problem,

and less time actually it ( Bloom & Broder, 1950). By spending more time
solving
to fall prey to
in advance deciding what to do, effective students are less likely
allocates more
false starts, winding paths, and all kinds of errors. When a person
to save time and
mental resources to planning on a large scale, he or she is able
when writing your term paper, you
energy and to avoid frustration later on. Thus,
probably will spend much of your time conducting your research, organizing your
notes, and planning your paper.
of
[Link]: A prudent expenditure of time includes monitoring the process
solving the problem. Effective problem solvers do not set out on a path to a
check where
solution and then wait until they have reached the end of the path to
the
they are (Schoenfeld, 1 98 1). Rather, they check up on themselves all along
closer to their goal. If they are not, they
way to make sure that they are getting
reassess what they are doing. They may conclude
that they made a false start, that
that they see a more
they got off track somewhere along the way, or even
a term paper, you
promising path if they take a new direction. If you are writing
will want to be monitoring whether you are making good progress. If you
are not

making good progress, you will want to figure out why.

[Link]: Just as you need to monitor a problem while you are in the process
Some of
of solving it, you need to evaluate your solution after you have finished.
the evaluation may occur right away. The rest may occur a bit later or even much
will evaluate your
later. For example, after drafting your term paper, you probably
draft. You will want to revise and edit it quite a few times before turning in your
paper. Often key advances occur through the evaluation process. Through
be
evaluation, new problems may be recognized. Moreover, the problem may
redefined, and new strategies may come to light. New resources may also become
is
available, or existing ones may be used more efficiently. Hence, the cycle
completed when it leads to new insights and begins anew.

Types of Problems
Problems can be categorized according to whether they have clear paths to a
solution (Davidson & Sternberg, 2003). Well-structured problems have clear paths
to solutions. These problems also are termed well-defined problems. An example
would be "How do you find the area of a parallelogram?" [Link]
lack clear paths to solutions. These problems are also termed ill-defined problems.
An example would be "How do you tie together two suspended strings, when
neither string is long enough to allow you to reach the other string while holding
either of the strings!" Of course, in the real world of problems, these two categories
may represent a continuum of clarity in problem solving rather than two discrete
classes with a clear boundary between the two. Nonetheless, the categories are
useful in understanding how people solve problems. We next consider each of
these kinds of problems in turn.
Well-Structured Problems
On tests in school. your teachers have asked you to tackle countless well-structured
problems in specific content areas (e.g., math, history, geography). These problems
had clear paths, if not necessarily easy paths, to their solutions-in particular, the
application of a formula. In psychological research, cognitive psychologists might
ask you to solve less content-specific kinds of well-structured problems. For
example, cognitive psyechologists often have studied a particular type of well-
structured problem:
the class of move problems, so termed because such problems require a series of
moves to reach a final goal state. Perhaps the most well known of the move
problems is one involving two antagonistic parties, whom we call "hobbits" and
"orcs" in the "Investigating Cognitive Psychology" box.

According to those who have studied the problem, people seem to make three main
kinds of errors (Greeno, 1 974; Simon & Reed, 1 976; Thomas, 1974). They are
(1) inadvertently moving backward, ( 2 ) making illegal moves, and ( 3 ) not
realizing the nature of the next legal move. The first type of error is to revert to a
state that is further from the end goal, for instance, moving all of the "orcs" and
"hobbits" back to the first side of the river. The second kind of error is to make an
illegal move-that is, a move that is not permitted according to the terms of the
problem. For example, a move that resulted in having more than two individuals in
the boat would be illegal. The third type of error involves becoming "stuck"-not
knowing what to do next, given the current stage of the problem. An example
would be realizing that you must bring one "are" or "hobbit" back across the river
to its starting point before you can move any of the remaining characters. One
method for studying how to solve well-defined problems is to develop computer
simulations. Here, the researcher's task is to create a computer program that can
solve these problems. By developing the instructions a computer must execute to
solve problems, the researcher may better understand how humans solve similar
kinds of problems. According to one model of problem solving (Newell & Simon,
1972), the problem solver (which may be using human o r artificial intelligence)
must view problem for which they could not immediately see an answer, effective
problem solvers used the heuristic of means-ends analysis. In this strategy, the
problem solver continually compares the current state and the goal state and takes
steps to minimize the differences between the two states. Various other problem-
solving heuristics include working forward, working backward, and generate and
test. Table 11.1 illustrates how a problem solver might apply these heuristics to
the aforementioned move problem (Greeno & Simon, 1988) and to a more
common everyday problem ( Hunt, 1 994 ) . Figure 1 14 shows a rudimentaryy
problem space for the move problem. It illustrates that there may be any number of
possible strategies for solving it. You enter a bookstore seeking out a certain book,
Hortense Hortigan's Make a Million in a Month. You are not sure where in the
bookstore, if anywhere, you can find the book. What would be an algorithm for
solving this problem? How about a heuristic ?

The only algorithm that guarantees your discovering whether the book is in the
bookstore is to check each book in the store. Eventually, you will either have found
Hortigan's book or searched unsuccessfully through all titles. There are many
possible heuristics you could apply, however. One is to ask a clerk for help. A
second is to look through an index of books in the store, if one is available. A third
is to start your search in more plausible sections (financial or self-help), only then
moving to less plausible sections; and so on. Notice, however, that if you use the
heuristics and do not find the book, you cannot be certain the book is not there. For
example, it may be misplaced or not yet in the index.
Isomorphic Problems
Sometimes, two problems are isomorphic; that is, their formal structure is the
same, and only their content differs. Sometimes, as in the case of the hobbits and
orcs problem and a similar missionaries and cannibals problem, in which cannibals
eat missionaries when they outnumber them, the isomorphism is obvious.
Similarly, you can readily detect the isomorphism of many games that involve
constructing words from jumbled or scrambled letters. Figure 1 1 .5 also shows a
different set of isomorphic problems. They illustrate some of the puzzles
associated with isomorphic problems. It often is extremely difficult to observe the
underlying structural isomorphism of problems (Reed, 1987; Reed, Dempster, &
Ettinger, 1985) . It is also difficult to be able to apply problem-solving strategies
from one problem to another. For example, it may not be clear how an example
from a textbook applies to another problem (e.g., one on a test). Problem solvers
are particularly unlikely to detect isomorphisms when two problems are similar but
not identical in structure. Further, when the content or the surface characteristics of
the problems differ sharply, detecting the isomorphism of the structure of problems
is harder. For example, school-aged children may find it difficult to see the
structural similarity between various word problems that are framed within
different story situations. Similarly, physics students may have difficulty seeing the
structural similarities among various physics problems when different kinds of
misdefining problems from time to time, as the case of the two-string problem
shows.

ll1-Structured Problems and the Role of Insight

The two-string problem is an example of an ill-structured problem. In fact,
although we occasionally may misrepresent well-structured problems, we are much
more likely to have difficulty representing ill-structured problems. Before we
explain the nature of ill-structured problems, try to solve a couple more such
problems. The following problems illustrate some of the diffieulties created by the
representation of ill-structured problems (after Stermberg, 1986). Be sure to try all
three problems before you read about their solutions.

l. Haughty Harry and several other job seekers were looking for work as
carpenters. The site supervisor handed each applicant two sticks ( a I" X 2" X 60"
stick and a l" X 2" X 43" stick) and a 2" C-clamp. This situation is represented in
Figure 1 1.8. The opening of the clamp is wide enough so that both sticks can be
inserted and held together securely when the clamp is tightened. The supervisor
ushered the job applicants into a room 12'3" X 13' 5", with an 8 ceiling. Mounted
on the ceiling were two l'xl' beams, dividing the ceiling into thirds lengthwise. She
told the applicants that she would hire the first applicant who could build a hat rack
capable of supporting her hard hat, using just the two sticks and the C-clamp. She
could hire only one person, So she recommended that the applicants not try to help
one another. What should Harry do?
2. A woman who lived in a small town married 20 different men in that same town.
All of them are still living, and she never divorced any of them. Yet she broke no
laws. How could she do this ?
3. You have loose black and brown socks in a drawer, mixed in a ratio of five
black socks for every brown one. How many socks do you have to take out of that
drawer to be assured of having a pair of the same color? Both the two-string
problem and each of the three preceding problems are illstructured problems.
There are no clear, readily available paths to solution. By definition, ill-structured
problems do not have well-defined problem spaces. Problem solvers have
difficulty constructing appropriate mental representations for modeling these
problems and their solutions. For such problems, much of the difficulty is in
constructing a plan for sequentially following a series of steps that inch ever closer
to their solution. In one study, both domain knowledge and justification skills
proved to be important for solving both ill- and well-structured problems (Shin,
Jonassen, & McGee, 2003 ). However, additional cognitive and affective factors,
including attitudes toward science and regulation of cognition, are also impor
for the solving of ill-structured problems (Shin, Jonassen, & McGee, 2003 ). These
the one shown in Figure 11.9. To solve the problem, Sally had to redefine her view
of the materials in a way that allowed her to conceive of a C-clamp as a hat holder.
The woman who was involved in multiple marriages is a minister. The
critical
element for solving this problem is to recognize that the word married may be used
to describe the performance of the marriage ceremony. So the minister married the
20 men but did not herself become wedded to any of them. To solve this problem,
you had to redefine your interpretation of the term maried. Others have suggested
yet additional possibilities. For example, perhaps the woman was an actress and
only married the men in her role as an actress. Or perhaps the woman's multiple
for
marriages were annulled so she never technically divorced any of the men. As
the socks, you need only to take out three socks to be assured of having a pair of
the same color. The ratio information is irrelevant. Whether the first two socks you
withdraw match in color, the third certainly will match at least one of the first two.

Early Gestaltist Views

Gestalt psychologists emphasized the importance of the whole as more than a
collection of parts. In regard to problem solving, Gestalt psychologists held that
insight problems require problem solvers to perceive the problem as a whole.
Gestalt psychologist Max Wertheimer ( 1 945/1959) wrote about productive
thinking, which involves insights that_go beyond the bounds of existing
associations. He distinguished it from reproductive thinking, which is based on
existing associations involving what is already known. According to Wertheimer,
insightful (productive) thinking differs fundamentally from reproductive thinking.
In solving the insight problems given in this chapter, you had to break away from
your existing associations and see each problem in an entirely new light.
Productive thinking also can be applied to wellstructured problems. Wertheimer's
colleague Wolfgang Kohler ( 1 927) studied insight in nonhuman primates,
particularly a caged chimpanzee named Sultan (Figure 1 1.10). In Kohler's view,
the ape's behavior illustrated insight. To Kohler and other Gestaltists, insight is a
special process. It involves thinking that differs from normal, linear information
processing. Gestalt psychologists described examples of insight. They speculated
on a few ways in which the special process of insightmight occur: It might result
from ( ) extended unconscious leaps in thinking, (2) greatly accelerated mental
processing, or ( 3) Some kind of short-circuiting of normal reasoning processes
(Perkins, 1981).Unfortunately, the early Gestaltists did not provide convincing
evidence for any of these mechanisms. Nor did they specify exactly what insight is.
Therefore, we need to consider alternative views as well.
The Nothing-Special View
According to the nothing-special view, insight is merely an extension of ordinary
perceiving, recognizing, learning, and
Perkins, 1981; Weisberg, 1986, 1995 ). conceiving (Langley & associates, 1987;
failed to pin down They suggested that Gestalt psychologists
insight because there is no special thinking process called
"insight." Additionally, sometimes people seem to have solved so-called
problems without insight
experiencing any sudden mental restructuring of the problem. At
other times. people
seem to show sudden mental
restructuring of so-called routine
problems (Weisberg, 1995 ). Insights are merely significant products
thinking processes. of ordinary
The Neo-Gestaltist View
Some researchers have found that
from
insightful problem solving can be distinguished
noninsightful problem solving in two ways (Metcalfe, 1986; Metcalfe &
Wiebe, 1987). For one thing, when given routine
solvers show remarkable accuracy in their
problems to solve, problem
a
ability to predict their own success in
solving problem prior to any attempt to solve it. In contrast, when
given insight
problems, problem solvers show poor ability to predict their own sucess prior to
trying to solve the problems. Not only were successful problem solvers
about their ability to solve pessimistic
insight problems, but unsuccessful problem solvers
were often
optimistic about their ability to solve them. In addition, the
investigators used a clever methodology to observe the problem solving process
while participants were solving routine versus
insight problems. At I S -second
intervals, participants paused briefly to rate how close ("warm'") versus far
they felt they were to reaching a solution. Consider first what happened for("cold")
routine
problems, such as algebra, Tower of Hanoi, and deductive reasoning problems.
Participants showed incremental increases in their feelings of warmth as they drew
closer to
reaching a correct solution. For insight problems, however, participants
showed no such incremental increases. Figure 1 1.11 shows a comparison of
participants' reported feelings of warmth for solving algebra problems versus
insight problems. In solving insight problems, participants showed no increasing
feelings of warmth until moments before abruptly realizing the solution and
correctly solving the problem. Metcalfe's findings certainly seem to support the
as
Gestaltist view that there is something special about
insightful problem solving,
distinct from noninsightful, routine problem solving. The specific nature and
underlying mechanisms of insightful problem solving have yet to be addressed by
this research, however.
The Three-Process View
Yet another view of insight has focused specifically on the
possible mechanisms
for insightful problem solving (Davidson, 1 995, 2003; Davidson &
Sternberg, 1
984). According to this view, insights are of three kinds. The three kinds
correspond to three different processes: selective encoding, selective
 either with
comparison, and selective combination. These processes may be used
insight or with little insight.
relevant from irrelevant
[Link] encoding insights involve distinguishing
information. Recall from earlier chapters that encoding involves representing
than we
information in memory. All of us
have available much more information
that is important
possibly can handle. Thus, each of us must select the information
irrelevant
for our must filter out the unimportant or
purposes. At the same time, we For
information. Selective encoding is the process by which this filtering is done. encode
are taking notes
during a lecture, you must selectively
example, when you and
which points are crucial. You need to identify which points are supportive

explanatory and which are not necessary. of how new

novel perceptions
[Link] comparison insights involve
information selectivve
use of analogies is a form of
relates to old information. The creative
we almost always need
to call on
comparison. When solving important problems, with our new
that information
our existingknowledge. We then need to compare
of selective comparison are the basis
knowledge of the current problem. Insights new
that you must master a whole list of
for this relating. For example, suppose
be able
some of the terms, you may
terms for your cognitive psychology class. For
new terms with synonymouswords that you already know. For
to compare the
on and elaborate words you already know to
others, you may be able to expand
define the new terms.
[Link]-combination insights involve taking
selectively encoded and
and combining that information in a
compared snippets of relevant information to
novel, productive way. Often, for us just identify analytically the important
We also must figure out how to
information for solving a problem is not enough.
pessimistic
synthesize the problems. Not only were successful problem solvers
but unsuccessful problem solvers
about their ability to solve insight problems,
to solve them.
addition, In the
were often optimistic about their abilityobserve the process
clever methodology to problem solving
investigators used a
while participants were solving routine versus insight problems. At I S -second

how close ("warm") versus far ("cold")

intervals, participants paused briefly to rate
Consider first what happened for routine
they felt they were to reaching a solution.
and deductive reasoning problems.
problems, such as algebra, Tower of Hanoi,
increases in their feelings of warmth as they drew
Participants showed incremental
closer to reaching a correct solution. For insight problems, however, participants
showed no such incremental increases. Figure 1 1.11 shows a comparison of
participants' reported feelings of warmth for solving algebra problems versus
insight problems. In solving insight problems, participants showed no increasing
feelings of warmth until moments before abruptly realizing the solution and
 seem to support the
correctly solving the problem. Metcalfe's findings certainly solving, as
Gestaltist view that there is something special about insightful problem
distinct from noninsightful, routine problem solving. The specific nature and
to be addressed by
underlying mechanisms of insightful problem solving have yet hat-rack
example,to solve either the
this research, however, information. For the
had to find a way to put together
problem or the two-string problem, you
available materials in a novel way. To
write a term paper, you must synthesize
in paper.
that addresses the central question your
your research notes in a way

Additional Insights into Insight 1

routine versus insightful problem solving (Smith,
There is yet another view of
between the
insight experience and E
insight. ALanp
995a). One can distinguish
is a special process involving an abruptmental restructuring,
insight experience insight
that may involve eiher the special
Insight is an understanding occur
rather than
that incrementally,
experience or normal cognitive processes demand insight, but they may
not require
Suddenly. Thus, routine problems may however, require the insight experience.
the insight experience. Insight problems, "ah-ha"
insights need not be sudden time.
According to Smith, therefore,
often do occur gradually and incrementally over
experiences. They may and produce
needed but not forthcoming, sleep may help
When an insightful solution is solution of a task that
mathematical problem solving and
a solution. In both
been shown to increase the
rules, sleep has
requires understanding underlying & Walker, 2004; Wagner &
likelihood that an insight will be produced
(Stickgold
many other aspects of human
associates, 2004). Unfortunately, insights-like fall into
brilliant and dead wrong. How do we
thinking-can be both startlingly solutions?
mental traps that lead us down false paths as we try to reach

Obstacles and Aids to Problem Solvingg Mental Sets, Entrenchment, and

Several factors can hinder problem solving.
is mental set-a frame of mind
Fixation,One factor that can hinder problem solving or a
for representing a problem, a problem context,
involving an existing model is entrenchment: When
set
procedure for problem solving. Another term for mental fixate on a strategy that
solvers have an entrenched mental set, they
problem but that does not work well in
normally works well in solving many problems in the
For example, two-string problem, you may
solving this particular problem. toward
fixate on strategies that involve moving yourself the string, rather than

the string toward you. In the oft-marrying minister problem, you may
moving
fixate on the notion that to marry someone is to become wedded to the person.
rather routine problems. For
Mental sets also can influence the solution of
example, consider "water-jar" problems (Luchins, 1 942 ). In water-jar problems,

teril epiy
 three
participants are
asked how to measure out a certain amount of water using
1.2 shows the
different jars. Each jar holds a different amount of water. Table 1
these problems,
problems used by Luchins. If you are like many people solving You fill
formula that works for all the remaining problems.
you will have found a Jar A. Then
amount of water you can put
into
up Jar B. Then you pour out of it the e. The formula,
water you can put into Jar
you twice pour out of it the amount of in a much
-
- Problems 7 through 1 1 can be solved
therefore, is B A 2e. However,
Problem 7 can be
the jars. For example,
Simpler way. One need use just two of on.
+ C, and so People who are
-
solved by A - e. Problem 8 can be solved by A
continue to use the B A 20
given Problems 1 through 6 to solve generally in Luchins's original
formula in solving Problems 7 through
11. Consider,
set of problems. Between 64%
solved the first
experiment, those participants who less simple
and 83% of them went on to solve the last set of problems by using the
first
the control participants, who were not given the
strategy. What happened to to the last set
set of problems ? Only 1% to 5%
failed to apply the simpler solutions
mental set that interfered with their seeing
of problems. They had no established
things in a new and simpler way.
an
Another type of mental set involves fixation on a particular use (function) for
fixedness is the inability to realize that something
object. Specifically, functional be used for performing other
functions
known to have a particular use may also
us from solving new
.

(German & Barrett, 2005 ) Functional fixedness prevents

novel Becoming free of functional fixedness
problems by using old tools in ways.
car.
coat hanger to get into a locked
is what first allowed people to use a reshaped
door locks with a credit
It is also what first allowed thieves to pick simple spring
considered an aspect of social cognition.
card. Another type of mental set is
a social group tend more or less uniformly
Stereotypes are beliefs that members of
characteristics. We seem to learn many stereotypes
to have particular types of
during childhood. For example, crosS-cultural studies of children show their
about-and use stereotypes across the childhood
of-gender
increasing knowledge
& Widner, 1 99 1 ; Seguino, 2007). Stereotype awareness,
years (Neto, Williams,
children between the ages of 6 and 10
for a variety of groups, develops in most
often arise in the same way that other
(McKown & Weinstein, 2003 ). Stereotypes
We observe a particular instance or set of instances
kinds of mental sets develop.
We then may overgeneralize from those limited observations. We
of some pattern.
that all future instances similarly will demonstrate that pattern. Of
may assume
when the are used to target particular scapegoats for societal
course, stereotypes
The
mistreatment, grave social consequences result for the targets of stereotypes.
are not the ones to suffer from stereotypes, however. Like other kinds
targets only
 individuals
of mental sets, stereotypes hinder the problem-solving abilities of the
who used them. These people limit their thinking by using set stereotypes.

Negative and Positive Transfer on one aspect

Often, people have particular mental sets that prompt them to fixate
of a problem or one strategy for problem solving to the exclusion of other possibe

relevant ones. They are carrying knowledge and strategies

for solving one kind of
of knowledge or
of problem. Transfer is any carryover
problem to a different kindsituation to another ( Detterman & Sternberg, I 993
skills from one problem
Gentile, 2000). Transfer can be either negative or positive.
Negative transter
harder to solve a later one.
Occurs when solving an earlier problem
makes it
track. For example,
Sometimes an early problem gets an individual on a wrong so
crime because such a crime differs
police may have difficulty solving a political with
deal with. Or when presented
much from the kinds of crime that they typically
or she
a way similar to the way in which he
a new tool, a person may operate it in
was already familiar (
Besnard & Cacitti,
operated a tool with which he or she it
o c c u r s when the solution of an earlier problem makes
2005). Positive transfer transfer of a mental set can
sometimes the
easier to solve a new problem. That is,
such
be an aid to problem solving. For instance, one may transfer early math skills,

of the kinds found in algebra or physics

as addition, to advanced math problems
From a broad perspective,
(Bassok & Holyoak, 1989; Chen & Daehler, 1989).
be considered to involve the transfer of factual knowledge or
positive transfer may
skills from one setting to another. For example, you may apply your general
skills acquired during a lifetime of
knowledge about psychology and your study
of studying for an examination in cognitive
studying for tests to the problem
psychology. More narrowly, however, during positive transfer, you effectively
a strategy or atype of solution that worked well for one particular problem
apply
or set of problems when you are trying to solve an analogous problem. How do
people realize that particular problems are analogous and can be solved through
positive transfer of strategies or even of solutions ?
Transfer of Analogies
Researchers designed some elegant studies of positive transfer involving analogies
Gick&Holyoak, 1980, 1983) . To appreciate their results, you need to become
familiar with a problem first used by Karl Duncker (1 945), often called the
"radiation problem." It is described in the "Investigating Cognitive Psychology"
box. Duncker had in mind a particular insightful solution as the optimal one for
this problem. Figure 1 1 . 1 2 shows the solution pictorially. Prior to presenting
Duncker's radiation problem, participants received another, easier problem. This
particular problem was called the "military problem" (Holyoak, 1 984, p. 205).It