THINKING

Sometimes people are seen talking to themselves. What are they actually doing?
Others infer that they are thinking. If we question such a person, he might say that he
was thinking ‘about something’, may be his wife, child, a friend, his job or anything
he has experienced or would like to experience. All of us keep thinking most of the
time, but normally, we do not talk out loud to ourselves while thinking. This means
that something is going on in our ‘minds’ most of the time, which can only be
experienced and not necessarily be observed by others.

Thought is sometimes regarded as evolution’s highest achievement and, indeed, as

defining the essence of human existence. It is the fascinating capacity to reason, to
solve problems, to create new ideas and concepts, which enable man to rise above the
demands of mere survival; to ponder what might be, as well as, to understand what is.

Thinking is a complex multifaceted human phenomenon, and so the word “think” is

used to express different meanings. For example, ‘Can you think (remember) the
name of that boy’? ‘I think (believe or decide) I should not go to the party’, ‘To think
of (expect or anticipate) taking a bribe is shameful’, ‘I cannot think (imagine) that he
could be so naughty’, ‘He thinks (judges) very high of me’. All such uses if the word
“think” captures most of our cognitive functions.

Thinking is closely linked to other mental activities especially perception and

memory. Psychologists refer to these interrelated processes as cognition. The term
cognition is derived from a Latin word, which in English means “to get to know”. It
is an active word implying that the brain is more than just a clay tablet or a mere three
pounds of tissue matter which receives the marks of experience. The human mind is
almost constantly in action, solving problems, organising our ideas and thoughts, and
converting them into our normal spoken language. All these activities are aspects of
cognition, of knowledge in action. Thus, the study of cognition focuses on processes
people use to transform, reduce, elaborate, store, recover, and put to sensory input.

Like learning and memory, cognition too cannot be directly observed. So, we have to
depend on indirect sources which help in inferring cognition. For example, if a person
is able to solve a problem quickly, has good reasoning capacity with some creative
and inventive aptitude, he is said to be intelligent. Much of the credit we give to a
person for being intelligent is based on the effectiveness with which that person is
able to apply cognitive processes in various situations. Once we have learned certain
facts or skills for that matter, we are able to apply them to various new tasks.

Cognition is essentially a process of knowing. It encompasses thinking, decision

making, judging, imagining, problem solving, categorising, and reasoning, i.e., all the
higher mental processes of human beings. These diverse mental activities may seem
to be a jumble of various odd topics without any common elements. But a common
ground underlies them all, that is, they all depend on knowledge derived from
learning and memory.

Thinking is the crown jewel of cognition. It is spectacularly brilliant, in some people;

even sublime, among average folks; and, the fact that it happens at all, one of the
great wonders of our species. Thinking about thinking, what some call metathinking,
may seem an insurmountable task, since it seems to engage all of the themes
mentioned previously – the detection of external energy, neurophysiology, perception,
memory, language, imagery, and the developing person. Advances in cognitive
psychology, particularly within the last twenty years, have led to a formidable arsenal
of research techniques and theoretical models capable of disclosing some of the facts
about the thought and casting them in a plausible framework of sound psychological
theory.

The process of thinking consists of manipulation and interplay of symbolic elements

such as images, words and concepts to represent aspects of reality. Sometimes, this
interplay of symbolic elements may be directed and actively controlled by the person,
as in a specific problem solving situation. This is called Realistic thinking. Here, the
constraints of logic, evidence, and reality play a major role, and the whole course of
thinking is guided by the requirements of the situation. Another type of thinking is the
Autistic thinking. This is an extreme kind of wishful thinking wholly dominated by
one’s wants and feelings, with little or no regard for reality. It is more a case of
fantasy and imagination or day dreaming.

Many of the problems we face in our daily life require mere reproduction of the
solutions, which we have learned to arrive at in the past, under similar circumstances.
This is called Reproductive thinking, which is largely understandable in terms of the
processes of learning, memory and transfer. But, the matter of the thinking process is
most clearly revealed when we get to solve a problem. The process of problem
solving occurs whenever we encounter a barrier or a gap between our present
situation and a desired goal, but find that the mere repetition of a preciously learned
method does not enable us to reach that goal. Such a kind of thinking is known as
Productive thinking or creativity, which requires the production of a new and
original solution. An individual’s own problem solving may be called creativity,
whether or not that particular solution has been produced previously by someone else.
What matters more is, whether the problem and its solution is novel for the individual.
Problem solving represents a large portion of those activities usually referred to as
‘thinking’, and indeed, the two terms may be made synonyms by defining thinking as
something which occurs when an individual writes, talks, recognises or solves a
problem. 

1. BASIC ELEMENTS OF THOUGHT

• UNITS OF THOUGHT
Images, words and concepts are the three most significant building blocks of our
thoughts.
(a) Images
Normally, we think of images as being visual or pictorial, but they can also be in the
forms of taste, touch, smell and sound. When we think of a friend, we get auditory
image of the voice or visual image of the gait1 . Albeit, we use more than one of our
senses in forming images, but images associated with different senses are not recalled
with equal intensities (Lindsay & Norman, 1977). It has been found that visual, spatial
and moving images are experienced most strongly, while images of sounds, taste,
touch and smell, touch and smell are not experienced clearly or frequently. Roe (1951)
found that physical scientists are more apt to think in visual images (pictures,
diagrams), while social scientists think more in auditory (words, sounds). Similarly,
images in black and white are frequently experienced, but coloured images are only
sometimes reported: Thus, it is clear that an image is our recollection or
reconstruction of sensory experience. However, it may not contain the recall of actual
objects or sensations. We have heard people recalling dreams or hallucinations.
Images could be concrete or abstract, vivid or dim, may fade with time or grow
stronger. Vividness of images is largely governed by the variables of persons and 1
Gait – Body movement as in the way of walking situations. The most explicit and
elaborate of all images is the eidetic image (photographic memory).

The process of thinking, whether directed or undirected, frequently involves a

continuous flow, manipulations, or interplay of images and other symbolic elements.
Organisations of elements are combined, constructed, destroyed and reassembled.
Such organisations and reconstructions of elements permit us to discover new
solutions to puzzling problems. There was controversy as to whether people could
think without images (imageless thoughts). A positive role of imagery in thinking has
been established with the argument that people do have images in thinking, but there
may be lapses in proper reporting that creates the doubt expressed in the controversy
mentioned above. Some people find a graph or a schematic diagram helpful while
trying to understand a difficult concept or relation. But for a few others, the visual
information provided by a graph has to be converted into verbal information to be
meaningful to them. All the people having these two very different views are capable
of understanding the data or the problem given, but they code the data differently.
One group uses the code of visual elements, while the other uses the non-visual code.
This difference in the usage of symbolic elements may have significant consequences
in the thinking and problem solving behaviour of these people.

(b) Concepts
A concept is a general idea that stands for a general class and represents the common
characteristics of all objects or events of this general class. Concept, as a tool,
economize the efforts in thinking, for example, when we hear the word ‘elephant’ we
are at once reminded not only about the nature and qualities of elephant as a class but
also our own experiences and understanding of them come to the surface in our
consciousness to stimulate our thinking at that time.

CONCEPT FORMATION
If we ask a student in the class, what different objects does he/she notice in the room,
his probable answer may be ‘chairs’, ‘books’, ‘blackboard’ etc. The nature of his
response illustrates an important ingredient of human cognition. Although the world
consists of a spectrum of objects and events, we tend to simplify and organise our
surrounding by classifying together things which exhibit common features. The
mental constructs which enable us to make such classifications are called concepts
(Anglin, 1977). In other words, we simplify things by organising specific items into
general cognitive categories and these mental groupings are called concepts. The
mind reduces its work by grouping similar events and objects under the heading of
a single concept. For example, an object having a trunk, branches and leaves is called
a ‘tree’.

Concepts provide much information with a minimum of cognitive effort. And this is
why we consider concepts as the basic building blocks of thought. Organising
concepts into hierarchies further simplifies the process. The earliest naturalists sought
to simplify and put into order the overwhelming complexity of some five million
species of living organisms by clustering them into two basic categories namely the
‘Plant’ and ‘Animal’ kingdoms, and then further subdividing them into smaller
categories in order to make the world easier to deal with by grouping similar kinds of
information into manageable units.

Concept formation (or concept learning) refers to the discernment of the properties
common to a class of objects or ideas. Concept formation is more limited in scope
than thinking and seems readily susceptible to experimental analysis. The early
definition of concept was “mental images, ideas, or processes”. For our purposes a
concept may be defined in terms of certain critical features and the rules that relate
those features. Features, as used here, are characteristics of an object or event that are
also characteristic of other objects or events. A distinction between features can be
made on the quantitative basis as well as on the qualitative basis. Mobility is a
qualitative feature that can also be measured quantitatively. Your Ford Escort
automobile may have mobility (a qualitative statement) but may not have as much
mobility as someone else’s Honda City. Thus both dimensional (quantitative) features
and attributional (qualitative) features enter into conceptual formation; both kinds are
investigated.

Learning Concepts:
No human is born with a readymade stock of concepts. All of us acquire them
gradually, and these reflect our knowledge about the world. Concepts are learned by
direct teaching or by observation. In either of these processes, we learn things because
our elders describe, narrate or portray them before us. A young child learns to
recognise a dog and further differentiate it from a cat. The baby builds up an internal
schema of the features which accompany the category ‘dog’ and gradually learn to
apply the term dog correctly for the animals belonging to the same family and also to
distinguish from a cat or cow or horse. These steps accomplished the baby abstracts
(draws out) the relevant features of the concept ‘dog’ from the various instances and
non-instances of that concept. The child now has learned the concept because of the
suggestions and the information we provided.

Mostly we construct our own concepts by observing the instances (and noninstances)
and not by having others to explain or narrate the concept to us. It is also possible that
a baby who finds a cat intriguing learns to differentiate it from a dog all by himself,
recognising all the salient features in size and structures (may be also differentiating
the distinct sounds produced by the two). Thus, in thinking concepts can serve to
generalise, to differentiate, or to abstract. Experience and awareness contribute
significantly to the process of concept formation.

(c) Language
Language is the most efficient and developed vehicle used for carrying out the
process of thinking. When a person reads, writes or hears words or sentences or
observes gesture in any language one is stimulated to think. Thus reading and writing
of documents and literature also help in stimulating and promoting the thinking
process.

(d) Symbols and signs

Symbols and signs represent and stand for substitute of the actual objects, experiences
and activities. For example, traffic lights, railway signals, school bells, badges, songs,
flags and slogans all are symbolic expressions, they stimulate and motivate resultant
thinking because they tell us what to do or how to act.

(e) Muscular activities

Thinking in one way or the other shows the evidence of the involvement of some
incipient movements of groups of our muscles. A high positive relation has been
found to exist for the thinking and muscular activities of an individual. The more we
engage ourselves in thought, the greater is the general muscular tension and
conversely as we moved towards muscular relation, our thought processes gradually
diminish.

(f) Brain functions

Whatever may be the role of the muscles, thinking is primarily a function of the brain.
Our mind is said to be the chief instrument of the thinking process. The experiences
registered by our sense organs have no meaning, and thus cannot serve as stimulating
agents, or instruments for thinking unless these impressions are received by our brain
cells and properly interpreted to derive some meaning.
The mental pictures or images can be stored, reconstructed or put to use only on being
processed by the brain. What happens in our thought process is simply the function or
product of the activities of our brain.

 ASSOCIATION
The oldest and most influential theory in learning is the principle of association –
associationism. In its most succinct form, the principle holds that a bond will be
formed between two events as those events are repeatedly presented together.
Reinforcement, or a reward system, facilitates formation of the bond. The basic model
of the principle postulates that the learning of a concept is a result of:
1. Reinforcing the correct pairing of a stimulus (for example, red boxes) with the
response of identifying it as a concept;
2. Non-reinforcement (a form of punishment) the incorrect pairing of a stimulus
(for example, red circles) with a response of identifying it as a concept.
(Such mechanistic viewpoints leave little room for the concept – prevalent among
modern cognitive theorists – of internal structures that select, organise, and
transform information.)

 HYPOTHESIS TESTING
The general notion, that people sometimes solve problems and form concepts by
formulating and testing hypotheses has long been held in experimental psychology.
The direct application of a hypothesis-testing model to concept learning by Bruner,
Goodnow, and Austin (1956) in their book, A Study of Thinking, introduced a
thorough methodological analysis of performance.

The initial stage in concept attainment is the selection of hypothesis or a strategy

that is consistent with the objectives of our inquiry. The prime question is “What
us to be gained by choosing one order as compared to another order of testing
instances?” The first thing to be gained is, of course, an opportunity to obtain
information appropriate to the objectives of one’s inquiry. One may wish to choose
an instance at any given point in concept attainment that can tell one the most
about what the concept might be. To sum up, controlling the order of instances
 tested is to increase or decrease the cognitive strain involved in assimilating
information. A well-contrived order of choice – a good “selection strategy” –
makes it easier to keep track of what hypotheses have been found tenable or
untenable on the basis of information encountered. A third advantage is not at first
obvious. By following a certain order of selecting instances for testing one controls
the degree of risk involved....

In a typical experiment, Bruner and his associates presented an entire concept

universe (that is, all possible variations on a number of dimensions and attributes)
to subjects and indicated one instance of an exemplar of the concept that the
subjects were to attain. The subjects would pick one of the other instances, be told
whether it was a positive or negative instance, then pick another instance, and so
on until they attained the criterion (identified the concept).

The strategies subjects may select in concept formation include scanning and
focusing each of which has its subtypes as follows:
Simultaneous Scanning – subjects start with all possible hypotheses and eliminate
the untenable ones.

Successive Scanning – subjects begin with a single hypothesis, maintain it if

successful, and, where it is unsuccessful, may change it to another that is based on
all previous experience.

Conservative Focusing – subjects formulate a hypothesis, select a positive

instance of it as a focus, and then make a sequence of reformulations (each of
which changes only one feature), noting each time which turns out to be positive
and which negative.

Focus Gambling is characterised by changing more than one feature at a time.

Although the conservative-focusing technique is methodological and likely to lead
to a valid concept, subjects may opt for a gamble in the expectation that they may
determine the concept more quickly.
Of the strategies defined above, conservative focusing tends to be the most
effective (Bourne, 1963); scanning techniques give only a marginal success. A
difficulty with the Bruner model is that it assumes that subjects hold to a single
strategy, when, in actuality, some vacillate, shifting from strategy to strategy
throughout the task. 

TYPES OF THINKING

Thinking can be classified as follows:

1. Perceptual or Concrete Thinking: This is the simplest form of thinking the basis
of this type is perception, i.e. interpretation of sensation according to one’s experience.
It is also called concrete thinking as it is carried out on the perception of actual or
concrete objects and events.

2. Conceptual or Abstract Thinking: Here one makes use of concepts, the

generalized objects and languages, it is regarded as being superior to perceptual
thinking as it economizes efforts in understanding and problem-solving.
3. Reflective Thinking: This type of thinking aims in solving complex problems,
thus it requires reorganization of all the relevant experiences to a situation or
removing obstacles instead of relating with that experiences or ideas.

This is an insightful cognitive approach in reflective thinking as the mental activity

here does not involve the mechanical trial and error type of efforts. In this type,
thinking processes take all the relevant facts arranged in a logical order into an
account in order to arrive at a solution of the problem.

4. Creative Thinking: This type of thinking is associated with one’s ability to create
or construct something new, novel or unusual. It looks for new relationships and
associations to describe and interpret the nature of things, events and situations. Here
the individual himself usually formulates the evidences and tools for its solution.
For example; scientists, artists or inventors. Skinner, the famous psychologist says
creative thinking means that the prediction and inferences for the individual are new,
original, ingenious and unusual. The creative thinker is one who expresses new ideas
and makes new observations, new predictions and new inferences.

Characteristics of Creative Thinking:

a. Creative thinking, in all its shapes and forms is absolutely an internal mental
process and hence should be considered as an important component of one’s cognitive
behaviour.
b. Every one of us is capable of creative thinking and hence it is a universal
phenomenon.
c. Creative thinking results in the production of something new or novel including a
new form of arrangement of old elements.
d. Creative thinking in all its dimensions involve divergent thinking instead of the
routine and final types of convergent thinking. The mind must have complete freedom
to wander around to create a new idea.
e. The field of creative thinking and its out part is quite comprehensive and built wide.
It covers all the aspects of human accomplishments belonging to an individual’s life.

5. Critical Thinking: It is a type of thinking that helps a person in stepping aside

from his own personal beliefs, prejudices and opinions to sort out the faiths and
discover the truth, even at the expense of his basic belief system.
Here one resorts to set higher cognitive abilities and skills for the proper interpretation,
analysis, evaluation and inference, as well as explanation of the gathered or
communicated information resulting in a purposeful unbiased and self-regulatory
judgement.

An ideal thinker is habitually inquisitive, well-informed, open-minded, flexible, fair-

minded in evaluation, free from personal bias and prejudices, honest in seeking
relevant information, skilled in the proper use of the abilities like interpretation,
analysis, synthesis, evaluation and drawing conclusion and inferences, etc.
The critical thinking is of a higher order well-disciplined thought process which
involves the use of cognitive skills like conceptualization, interpretation, analysis,
synthesis and evaluation for arriving at an unbiased, valid and reliable judgment of the
gathered or communicated information or data as a guide to one’s belief and action.
6. Non-directed or Associative Thinking: There are times when we find ourselves
engaged in a unique type of thinking which is non-directed and without goal. It is
reflected through dreaming and other free-flowing uncontrolled activities.
Psychologically these forms of thought are termed as associative thinking.

Here day-dreaming, fantasy and delusions all fall in the category of withdrawal
behaviour that helps an individual to escape from the demands of the real world by
making his thinking face non-directed and floating, placing him somewhere,
ordering something unconnected with his environme

REASONING

LOGIC
Thought or thinking refers to the general process of considering an issue in the mind,
while logic is the science of thinking. Although two people may think about the same
thing, their conclusions – both reached through thought – may differ, one being
logical, the other illogical.

Thinking and logic has been the subject of speculation for a long time. More than two
thousand years ago, Aristotle introduced a system of reasoning or of validating
arguments that is called the syllogism. A syllogism has three steps – a major premise,
a minor premise, and a conclusion, in that order.

Major Premise All men Middle term (M) are mortal Predicate (P) .

Minor Premise Socrates Subject(S) is a man.

Conclusion Therefore, Socrates Subject(S) is mortal.

A conclusion reached by means of syllogistic reasoning is considered valid, or true, if

the premises are accurate and the form is correct. It is therefore possible to use
syllogistic logic for the validation of arguments. Illogical conclusions can be
determined and their cause isolated. This is a succinct statement of the theoretical
basis of much current research on thinking and logic.

INDUCTION AND DEDUCTION

Induction – induction, in logic, the process of reasoning from the particular to the
general. Francis Bacon proposed induction as the logic of scientific discovery and
deduction as the logic of argumentation.

Deduction – in logic:
1. Traditionally, it is the process of drawing, by reasoning, particular
conclusions from more general principles assumed to be true. The Aristotelian
Syllogism is the classic example of deductive logic in the tradition.
2. In contemporary logic, any statement derived by a transformed rule upon
an axiom; more generally, the term now refers to a process of deriving theorems
from axioms, or conclusions from premises, by formal rules (transformational
rules).
• INFERENCES AND DEDUCTIVE REASONING

If Bill is taller than Jeff and Jeff is shorter than Ryan, then is Bill taller than Ryan?
Take a moment and figure this out. Some people work out this problem (which, of
course, has no definitive conclusion) by drawing little figures in which the relative
height of the Bill, Jeff and Ryan are depicted.

Your conclusion was reached through a process of reasoning called deductive

reasoning which is the logical technique in which particular conclusions are drawn
from more general principles. Johnson-Laird (1995) has identified four main issues in
the cognitive study of deductive logic.

a. Relational inferences based on the logical properties of such relations as greater

than, on the right of, and after. (In the case of Bill et al. you had to use a “greater
than” logic.)
b. Propositional inferences based on negation and on such connectives as if, or, and
and. (for example, you might rephrase the above problem as “If Bill is taller....”.)
c. Syllogisms based on pairs of premises that each contains a single qualifier, such
as all or some. (in the next section we will study syllogisms that have such
qualifiers, such as, “All psychologists are brilliant; some psychologists wear
glasses....”.)
d. Multiplying of quantified inferences based on premises containing more than one
qualifier, such as Some French poodles are more expensive than any other type of
dog.

These four models, or contingencies involved in decision making, have been

formalised by logicians into a type of predicate calcus (viz. that branch of symbolic
logic that deals with relations between propositions and their internal structure –
symbols are used to represent the subject and predicate of a proposition).

• SYLLOGISTIC REASONING

Syllogistic reasoning is a form of deductive reasoning in which a conclusion is

reached from two premises. The structure of a syllogism includes a major premise, a
minor premise, and a conclusion, where the two premises are assumed to be true. If
the premises are logically sound and true, the conclusion must also be true.

• SOME SOURCES OF ERROR

If human reasoning was based on logic, then it would be an entirely domain

independent process. However, that is not to say that we would expect no influence of
problem content or context. Logicist authors have argued that there is an interpretative
process in which the particular problem content must be translated into an underlying
abstract form before logical processes can be applied. If participants in the experiment
represent the premises of an argument in a different manner to that expected by the
experimenter, then they may be classified as making errors even though the process of
reasoning was logical. For example, someone given the statement “Some students live
in hostel accommodation” might draw the conclusion that “Some students do not live
in hostel accommodation”. This could be classified as a logical fallacy because “some”
does not exclude “all.” It is perfectly reasonable for people to represent “some” as
meaning “some but not all,” as indeed they do. 

The role of Mood States

Research on how moods alter both judgement and processing informs research on
how moods alter information seeking. For instance, research on mood and judgements
sheds light on how mood might alter the acquisition of competency- assessment
information. When individuals judge whether they have the competency to do a task,
sad moods confer more negative information about one’s competency than do happy
moods. 

The role of Beliefs

Over the years, however, the role of knowledge and belief in deductive reasoning
tasks has proved so influential hat many researchers have abandoned logic as both a
descriptive and a normative theory of human reasoning. For example, it has been
suggested that: 
 People may reason using heuristics that help to maximise information gain 
 People treat reasoning problems as decision-making tasks in which personal goals
and utilities come into play 
 Reasoning is governed by principles of pragmatic relevance 
 People reason using domain-specific processes resulting from innate reasoning
modules.

The influence of prior knowledge considers some the arguments on:

- Influence of pragmatic factors in conditional reasoning
- Belief-bias effect in syllogistic reasoning 

The Confirmation Bias: Searching for Positive Evidence

One of the most pervasive topics in the cognitive psychology of science has been the
tendency to selectively look for and latch onto evidence that confirms our theory and
to deny, distort, or dismiss evidence that contradicts it. One the first to put
confirmation bias on the front burner of the cognitive psychology was Peter Wason.

PROBLEM SOLVING

The process of thinking consists of the manipulation and interplay of symbolic

elements, such as, images, words and concepts to represent various aspects of reality.
In such realistic thinking, the constraints of logic, evidence, and reality play as a
major role and the whole course of thinking is guided by the requirements of the
objective situation. This type of directed thinking is obviously useful and adaptive.
Viewed in this adaptive context, we should expect the nature of the thinking process
to be most clearly revealed when we set about to solve a problem. Problem solving
occurs whenever we encounter a barrier or a gap between the present situation and a
desired goal, but find that the mere repetition of a previously learned method does not
enable us to reach the goal. Many of the problems we face in our daily life
conveniently require nothing more than reproducing what we have learned to do in
the past in similar situations. Such reproductive thinking can be explained in terms of
the processes of learning, memory and transfer.

Problem solving differs from reasoning. Whereas reasoning requires us to follow one
particular logical chain to answer a question problem solving depends, to a great
extent, on the nature of the problem. But productive thinking requires the production
of original and new solutions. Here, the problem solving involves those skills that can
cope with novel situations for which there is no well learned response. All of us are
continuously involved in problem solving. Some problems are simple and
unstructured, but others may be complex and difficult. In cases of ill-defined
problems such as writing a good story or designing a beautiful house, there are no
agreed-on steps or rules that will produce a product generally accepted as a solution.

By contrast well defined problems such as of mathematics or logic, have a clear

structure; there is always a clear standard for deciding whether the problem has been
solved or not. In laboratories, psychologists generally study how people solve well
defined problems because such problems have built-in criteria by which the solution
can be evaluated. Psychologists also try to understand how people solve problems and
what are the elementary reasoning strategies used in solving problems.

PREPARATION

For the purpose of analysis, psychologists sometimes divide the solutions of well
defined, low knowledge problems into four partly overlapping stages:

1. Understanding the problem

No single aspect of problem solving has a greater impact on the speed and likelihood
of a correct solution than how the problem is initially interpreted. The same problem
can often be represented in several different ways, and some representations bring a
solution to the minds more readily than others. The game of numbers, scrabbles, tic-
tac-toe (Xs and Os), where we try to connect all elements in a row, column or the
diagonal arm may be the examples.

2. & 3. Solution plan and Strategies

Several different strategies can be used for solving problems. A person’s conception
of the possible moves is known as the problem space. Problem spaces can
characterise people’s behaviour in solving such problems as proving theorems in logic,
making mathematical derivations, and playing games like chess or checkers. Each
time a move is made, the person is seen as moving from one “problem state” to
another. 

 Kinds of Problems 
 Representing and Organising the Problem

PRODUCTION: GENERATING SOLUTIONS

1. Trial & Error – when the possible solutions to a problem are few, we may solve it
through trial and error. Whenever we are out in a new situation, we try to understand
it only through trial and error. For example, a new TV set, we tend to play around
with the buttons. Trial and error is the most basic problem solving strategy. It usually
involves a more or less random series of different actions when there is no way of
knowing what substances would work as a light bulb filament.

2. Hypothesis testing – closely related to the above method is hypothesis testing.

Example, very close to our experience is power failure, suppose we enter our home
and find no current, we shall check the main switch and if no fault is found we might
check with the neighbours if they have, we shall check our main switch again to
rectify the probable fault with the fuse wire. What we do here is that we try many
possible alternatives. We entertain a series of hypotheses about the problem in a
systematic and structured way. We eliminate each hypothesis using this testing
method of possible hypotheses, stored in the memory, each of which could account
for the situation. We should also be able to take appropriate action to test and
eliminate the hypothesis.

3. Algorithms – some problems can be solved by a strategy called algorithm, a

precisely stated set of rules which usually works for solving problems of a particular
type. This strategy too, was proposed by the problem solving experts, Newell &
Simon (1972). This is a logical, methodological, stepwise procedure. Actually it
originated in the field of mathematics, such as routines for subtraction, for long
division, for solving sets of linear equations and so on. This concept has since been
applied to other types of problems also.

The difficulty with the ‘generate-and-test’ algorithm is that for any reasonably
interesting problem, the number of moves that must be considered is astronomically
large. In chess, for example, it is estimated that the problem space of all possible
sequences of moves has close to 10120 branches; obviously no one could begin to
examine more than the barest fraction of such an enormous problem space
possibilities. Therefore, the use of algorithms is not always practical. Suppose we are
given a task to arrange the letters koknc to form an English word. An algorithmic
solution would be to arrange the letters systematically in all possible ways until a
menaningful combination appears, obviously it would be a time consuming procedure,
because there can be 120 possible combinations of these five letters. Most people
therefore, would follow a short cut strategy. They would focus on the letter
combinations likely to appear in English, such as Kn at the beginning of a word or ck
at the end. Using this approach, they would probably discover the word __________
quite quickly (Dominoski & Loftus, 1979).

4. Heuristics – algorithms are not suitable for most of our problems primarily because
we do not have the time required in such techniques. A rule of the thumb, short cut
problem solving strategy, as already mentioned for ‘knock’; can be called heuristic
method – search method that relies on plausible guesses about likely solution paths.
Normally, we use it in complex situations. Though it does not guarantee solution in all
cases, it is certainly very useful in reaching a solution. The heuristics used for solving
anagrams (scrambled word problem) or coded messages are very specific to such
problems. All of us have a repertoire of these strategies based on bits of knowledge
we have picked up, rules we have learned, or hypotheses which have worked for us
in the past. We come across people saying “I am reminded of a similar problem” or
“it might be done the way I did for so and so”, while solving a problem. Another
heuristic, often very useful, is to break a larger problem into sub goals. Sub goal
analysis, of course, is not the only problem solving strategy people adopt.

Another general heuristic, often applied to problems with a very specific goal, is often
means-end analysis. It involves comparing one’s current position with a desired end
position and then trying to find a means of closing the gap between the two. For
example, suppose the vehicle on which a student goes to the college develops some
trouble and he has very little time left to reach the college. The means-end analysis
method will tell him what would be the right decision to cover the distance left,
considering the time in hand – walking, running or hiring some other vehicle. He
“searches through the problem space” some solution by considering other means of
transportation.

A special form of means-end analysis consists of devising a plan by working

backward from the goal state. Suppose someone wants to buy a house. He does not
have enough money, but the need is so pressing that unless he acquires one he would
be on the streets. He plans to do a part-time job (a first step towards the fulfilment of
the goal) for six months to add the remuneration from it to his present salary and meet
the cost of the house. It is a common reasoning strategy to work backwards for
reducing the difference between the goal and the current position. By reasoning
backward from a distant goal, the solver can reach the first step to be taken
immediately.

Another good strategy may be in the form of problem reduction. We break a large
problem into a number of smaller problems, easier to handle or within our power to
solve. Architects use this strategy in designing building. The standard way to proceed
is by progressive deepening; planning at a general level (no. of rooms) before
planning at a level of greater details (no. and locations of tiles or marbles).

Sometimes a good strategy for attacking a large problem is to begin by solving a

similar but smaller problem within called simplification, in order to generalise the
method of solution for the larger original problem. Anderson (1980) has suggested a
good example of problems simplification. If one has to plan a party for one hundred
people, he should first plan on a small group successfully and then enlarge it on a
desired number.

5. Analogy – another very significant and powerful strategy frequently used in

problem solving is one in which the solver draws an analogy between the current
problem and a problem from a different but familiar domain having a similar logical
structure (Glass, Holyoak & Santa, 1979). In an analogy, a parallel is drawn between
the two systems whose parts are interrelated in a similar way. For example, the flow
of electric current through a circuit is somewhat analogous to the flow of water
through pipes in a house. The motion of electrons around the nucleus of an atom is
somewhat analogous to the motion of planets revolving round the sun. Textbooks
often give an incomprehensive abstract description of the concept of a new concept
and then follow it with several worked out problems as examples.

6. Insight – all problems are not necessarily solved by systematic step by step ways
like those described above. Often a crucial insight is needed to solve a problem. It is a
vision of how all parts fit together, or how to represent the problem differently. In
other words, insights are sudden (flashes of inspiration) that allows us to solve a
problem, often in novel ways. ‘Eureka’ or ‘Aha’ is indicative of the feeling of insight
when all the different elements of a problem suddenly come together. This experience
can come at the end of a directed process of hypothesis testing, or seemingly, all at
once. The insight is usually visual and seems to consist of a simultaneous vision of the
total problem. •

JUDGMENT

The last component of problem solving is evaluating the quality of the proposed
solution. While solving a well-defined problem, we often come to know immediately
whether our answer is correct or not. For these problems, verifying the solution is a
trivial and obvious procedure. But with the ill-defined problems having no strict
criteria for a good solution, evaluation of a proposed solution may be a major task.
Not all problem solving efforts result in achieving successful solutions. If the problem
has not been fully grasped and no clue has been found to eliminate various
alternatives, the solution attempts become chaotic. A satisfactory solution is one in
which the problem solver successfully combines experience and imagination to come
up with a workable idea. After our assessment of the situation, we begin to form a
number of hypotheses about the possible causes of the problem and then attempt to
evaluate the evidences supporting or contradicting these hypotheses.

At the end, it is essential to mention that the steps for problem solving do not always
require equal attention. Sometimes, they may run together. Often people trying to find
a solution begin suggesting options almost immediately. It has been observed quite
often that id someone talks about his trouble (may be a stomach disorder or any other
health problem) most of us will come up with some or other suggestion for treatment
confidently. Occasionally, the number of attractive options is small and the final step
is simple. Often, however, people encounter snags in reaching an effective solution.

IMPEDIMENTS TO SOLUTION or FACTORS AFFECTING PROBLEM

SOLVING

Problem solving is susceptible to many influences other than simply the problem itself.

1. Emotional and motivational factors

We have already understood individual differences in our entire functioning. Here, we
are not interested in giving an account of those factors which are in the shape of traits,
but are transitory or state factors. For example, anxiety, aggression or frustration
resulting from the problem solving process itself or from other sources in our life at
that time. If these emotions are present to any noticeable extent, they are sure to
hamper our solution process, severe anxiety is sometimes helpful in increasing the
performance, but it must not cross the desirable limit. Frustration and conflict of any
kind also negatively influence our performance.

2. Attention span
It also limits our ability to solve problems. Lindsay & Norman (1977) point out, if we
try to plan out our whole strategy ahead of time, we cannot even play the simple game
of tic-tact-toe. We shall find it impossible to keep in mind all the combinations of
possible moves and countermoves involved in the game. The problem solving
strategies we have discussed are in part designed to keep the problem down to
workable size. But, in addition, we rely on external aids, as well as memory aids.
Memory aids provide ways of structuring a large amount of knowledge, so that they
can be easily stored in the long-term memory and retrieved when needed.

3. Past experience
Past experiences have a powerful influence on problem solving. If the present
problem is identical or even similar to an earlier problem and the objects used to
achieve the goal in the earlier one are at hand, the past experience is cued from
memory and the old solution is simply repeated. This use of old knowledge in new
situations amounts to ‘positive transfer’ of learning. The example of power failure
cited earlier can be recalled here. Whatever we attempt to do is very much the
outcome of previous learning of the consequences of problem solving.

The transfer of relevant past experiences generally speeds up the solution of a current
problem. But the transfer is not always positive. Sometimes, our past training leads us
to such approaches to new problems that are actually detrimental. We may have false
presuppositions or hidden assumptions about the situation. When we automatically
apply an inappropriate strategy to a problem and cling rigidly to it, we are hampered
by fixation. Fixations can inhibit or prevent successful solutions.

4. Confirmation bias
One of the major obstacles to problem solving is our natural tendency to search for
information which confirms our hypothesis, a phenomenon known as the
confirmation bias.

5. Social factors
Sometimes it has been observed that if a problem is being solved in a social situation,
the situation itself militates against successful solution. Either the solution would be
in shape of conformity or complete withdrawal. The fear of looking by taking a risk,
usually goes with not wanting to be different. Many people hold back inventive ideas
because they are afraid that others may consider it outlandish or inappropriate.

There may be other factors also affecting problem solving, such as complexity of the
outcome, the degree to which the solution is conceptualised and the kind of resources
which are available.

CREATIVITY AND PROBLEM SOLVING

Creativity has been defined as the ability to produce ideas which are both novel
and valuable.

Wallas’s (1926) proposed a classification of stages involved in creativity. He

proposed that creativity involve four stages, as described below:
Stage I: Preparation
This is the stage of collecting raw material about the problem at hand. One needs to
familiarize oneself with the previous work, gaps, and problems of previous solutions
in order to understand the task at hand. This process motivates to work more on the
problem. In this stage, divergent thinking plays an important role.

Stage II: Incubation

During the process of finding the solution, the person may feel stuck as he is not able
to come up with the solution. During this stage, the person is not thinking about the
problem consciously, but his mental processes are involved in finding a solution
unconsciously. Studies show that many creative ideas come during the incubation
stage when the person is in an idle state and not working actively on the problem.

Stage III: Illumination

It is the stage of ‘Aha’ or ‘Eureka’ moment. This experience is the result of an
immediate solution or insight into the problem at hand. The famous story of
‘Archimedes and golden crown’ revolves around this illumination stage, where s/he
suddenly understands a previously unsolved puzzle.

Stage IV: Verification

Evaluation and Elaboration During this last stage, the worth or value of the insight is
judged by the person. It is a fully conscious stage, in which the person evaluates the
worth of the solution he comes across during the illumination stage. The creator banks
on his existing knowledge to verify the arrived solution. Studies on creativity have
suggested that it is not necessary that the creative insights will always be appealing in
reality, sometimes it may turn out to be bad ideas.

DECISION MAKING

In our day to day life, from choosing what to wear for the party to what novel to read,
we have to make priorities and choose among alternatives. The cognitive process that
you use to evaluate alternatives and make a choice is known as decision making. Thus,
we can say that decision making is a type of problemsolving behaviour where you are
already aware of all the possible solutions and have to choose between them.
Decision Making Process

What steps typically we follow, when we make a decision? According to

psychologists our decision-making process involves the following six steps:

Identifying the Problem: In order to make a decision, first you need to have a
problem. So, at this stage, a problem is first identified for which decision have to be
made. (For example: What shall I wear at my friend’s marriage ceremony?)

Generating Alternatives: After identifying the problem, all possible alternatives are
generated. (Either Saari, salwar-suit, or lehanga?)

Evaluating Alternatives: We evaluate all the generated alternatives with reference to

its costs and benefits. (Today’s weather is little chilly than other days. Even I am also
not feeling well. If I wear salwar-suit that would be best for me as it could protect me
more from cold waves better than lehanga or Saari.)

Choosing an Alternative: In this stage, the best possible alternative is selected.

(Salwaar-suit) Implementing the Decision: This is an action taking the stage, where
you implement your selected alternative. (Iron clothes and get dressed.)

Evaluating Decision Effectiveness: In this last stage, you evaluate your decision and
modify it according to requirement. (Look in the mirror, decide it looks good but
might need to change sandals.)

Identifying the problem

Generating alternatives Recycle

process as
necessary
Evaluating alternatives

Choosing an alternative

Implementing the decision

Evaluating decision effectiveness

Types of Decision Making in Psychology

Psychological decision-making encompasses a variety of techniques used by the
individual in picking between options to solve a problem. Knowledge of these types
will give insight into how cognitive processes, emotions, and other social influences
determine our decision-making processes. Different types of decision making have
been discussed below.

1. Rational Decision-Making

Rational decision-making involves defining the problem, identifying relevant

information, comparing alternatives, and choosing the most logical alternative. This
approach relies on rational thinking and objective analysis, but in the best possible
situations in terms of time and means, it often generates extremely good results.

2. Intuitive Decision-Making

Intuitive decision-making is the gut feeling and instinct rather than formal analysis. It
is going to occur in the familiar situations when people draw upon past experiences
and emotional cues to make quick decisions within fast-paced or high-pressure
environments.

3. Group Decision-Making

Group decision-making is when two or more people collaborate to find conclusions.

More importantly, one's own expertise becomes communal. Although this works to
maximize creativity and often yields more holistic solutions, this method has its
downsides too: groupthink develops when the desire to agree drowns out critical
reasoning.

4. Emotional Decision-Making

Emotional decision-making is focused on how emotions and moods drive and

influence choices. For many cases, people are influenced by their emotions when
choosing and make decisions in favor of short-term gratification or for personal needs,
bypassing sensible thinking and future consequences.

5. Heuristic Decision Making

Heuristic decision-making can be summed up in simple terms as the mental shortcuts

one uses in making simpler judgments about complex choices. Although so much
more efficient than cognitive decision-making, it creates errors and cognitive
biases because of its reliance on generalizations that might not apply to the specific
situation at all.

Cognitive Errors in Decision Making

Our brain receives countless information from the environment every single second,
leading to tremendous cognitive load on mental processes. Studies have suggested
that in order to manage this cognitive load we unconsciously use some mental
formulas. On the one hand, these mental formulas help us making the decision quick
whereas, on the other hand, it also leads to the incorrect conclusion, i.e., cognitive
error. The following read will help you understand the factors responsible for the
incorrect decision. Broadly, there are two sources of cognitive errors: heuristics and
biases.

Heuristics

It is a mental shortcut that helps us in taking a decision quickly by decreasing

cognitive load. Even though these heuristics are very helpful in making an everyday
decision but, it is always not a flawless process. Sometimes, it leads to an incorrect
decision. Following are some major types of heuristics/ mental shortcuts:

1) Representative Heuristic: We use this mental shortcut when we have to make a

judgment about probability. It helps us in deciding whether a stimulus belongs to a
particular category or not based on the degree of similarity in their characteristics.
2) Availability Heuristic: The availability heuristic suggests that the ease with which
an instance can be recalled or available to our mind is considered as more prevalent.
Thus, this heuristic judges the importance of an event based on its frequency of
availability to our mind.
3) Framing Effects: Out tendency to interpret the same message differently
depending upon how it has been presented or framed.
4) Anchoring and Adjusting Heuristic: According to this heuristic, to take a
decision we start with a reference point which acts like a anchor-and then we evaluate
and adjust our decision with new information.

Biases

Some common biases that frequently occur while making decisions:

1) Illusionary correlation: In statistics, correlation implies that two variables have a

statistically significant relationship. Thus, illusionary correlation refers to the situation
in which we unrealistically consider a significant relationship between two variables.
For instance, judging someone from prevalent stereotypes.
2) Overconfidence: Decision makers have a tendency to overestimate their skills and
ability, thus leading to poor judgment. Why, we tend to be overconfident in our
decision? Because we tend to ignore our previous actual performance and do not want
to be judged as wrong.
3) Hindsight Bias: Also known as “knew-it-all-along” effect, hindsight bias occurs
when retrospectively thinking about a problem situation people claim that they knew
beforehand about the outcome of the problem situation in the past.
4) Confirmation Bias: “This is the tendency to search only for information that will
confirm one’s initial hunch or hypothesis, and to overlook or ignore other information”
(Galotti, 2015).