Abstract
The insightful problem-solving process has been proposed to involve three main phases: an initial representation phase, in which the solver inappropriately represents the problem; an initial search through the faulty problem space that may lead to impasse; and a postimpasse restructuring phase. Some theories propose that the restructuring phase involves controlled search processes, whereas other theories propose that restructuring is achieved through the automatic redistribution of activation in long-term memory. In this study, we used correlations between working memory (WM) span measures and problemsolving success to test the predictions of these different theories. One group of participants received a set of insight problems that allowed for a large initial faulty search space, whereas another group received a matched set that constrained the initial faulty search space in order to isolate the restructuring phase of the insightful process. The results suggest that increased ability to control attention (as measured by WM span tasks) predicts an individual’s ability to successfully solve problems that involve both the initial search phase and the restructuring phase. However, individual differences in ability to control attention do not predict success on problems that isolate the restructuring phase. These results are interpreted as supporting an automatic-redistribution-of-activation account of restructuring.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ashcraft, M. H. (1994).Human memory and cognition (2nd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
Baddeley, A. D., &Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47–90). New York: Academic Press.
Conway, A. R. A., &Engle, R. W. (1994). Working memory and retrieval: A resource-dependent inhibition model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,123, 354–373.
Conway, A. R. A., &Kane, M. J. (2001). Capacity, control, and conflict: An individual differences perspective on attentional capture. In C. L. Folk & B. S. Gibson (Eds.),Attraction, distraction, and action: Multiple perspectives on attentional capture (pp. 349–372). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Davidson, J. E. (1995). The suddenness of insight. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.),The nature of insight (pp. 125–155). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hambrick, D. Z., &Engle, R. W. (2003). The role of working memory in problem solving. In J. E. Davidson & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.),The psychology of problem solving (pp. 176–206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hitch, G. J. (1978). The role of short-term working memory in mental arithmetic.Cognitive Psychology,10, 302–323.
Kane, M. J., Bleckley, M. K., Conway, A. R. A., &Engle, R. W. (2001). A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,130, 169–183.
Kane, M. J., &Engle, R. W. (2003). Working memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,132, 47–70.
Kane, M. J., Hambrick, D. Z., Tuholski, S. W., Wilhelm, O., Payne, T. W., &Engle, R. W. (2004). The generality of working memory capacity: A latent-variable approach to verbal and visuospatial memory span and reasoning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,133, 189–217.
Kaplan, C. A., &Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight.Cognitive Psychology,22, 374–419.
Katona, G. (1940).Organizing and memorizing: Studies in the psychology of learning and teaching. New York: Columbia University Press.
Kline, R. B. (1998).Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford.
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, 1534–1555.
Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., &Raney, G. E. (2001). An eye movement study of insight problem solving.Memory & Cognition,29, 1000–1009.
Metcalfe, J., &Wiebe, D. (1987). Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving.Memory & Cognition,15, 238–246.
Newell, A., &Simon, H. A. (1972).Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
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 (pp. 1–44). London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Ormerod, T. C., MacGregor, J. N., &Chronicle, E. P. (2002). Dynamics and constraints in insight problem solving.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 791–799.
Schooler, J. W., Ohlsson, S., &Brooks, K. (1993). Thoughts beyond words: When language overshadows insight.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,122, 166–183.
Seifert, C. M., Meyer, D. E., Davidson, N., Patalano, A. L., &Yaniv, I. (1995). Demystification of cognitive insight: Opportunistic assimilation and the prepared-mind perspective. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.),The nature of insight (pp. 65–124). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by a grant from the UIC Campus Research Board and by National Science Foundation Grant 0347887 to the second author. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of either institution.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ash, I.K., Wiley, J. The nature of restructuring in insight: An individual-differences approach. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 13, 66–73 (2006). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193814
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193814