Goldstein chp11-1

Chapter 11 Part 1
Problem Solving
Cognitive Psychology: Mind, Research, and Everyday Experience by Bruce Goldstein. Copyright 2005 by Wadsworth Publishing, a division of Thomson Learning. All rights reserved.
Figure 11.1 (p. 389)

Flow diagram for this chapter.
Part 1
Part 2
Problem Solving
Problem solving is defined: a goal to accomplish, with an initial state and goal state, with obstacles to overcome which are not obvious how to get around Richard Feynman: You write down the problem. You think very hard. Then you write down the answer. Examples: puzzles and real-world problems
Salient differences between puzzle problems and real-world problems

Puzzles
unfamiliar involve no prior knowledge all necessary information is present in the problem statement requirements are unambiguous
Real-world problems
familiar require prior knowledge necessary information not present what is the goal?
Greenos problem types

Types of problems (Greeno, 1978): Inducing structure (e.g., analogies) Discovery of a pattern relating elements of a problem to each other. Transformation (e.g., Towers of Hanoi, water jar problem) Manipulation of objects or symbols while following certain rules. Arrangement (e.g., anagrams, seating guests) All the elements are given, and the task is to re-arrange them. Any problem could be in more than one category.
Gestalt Viewpoint
Koehler study with primates in 1910s Problem solving use of mental representation Problem-solving is both reproductive and productive Reproductive Problem Solving involves re-use of previous experience (can be beneficial or detrimental) Productive problem-solving is characterized by restructuring and insight Insight accompanied by subjective ah-ha Problem-solving: trial-and-error or otherwise? Problem-solving cycle
Koehlers primate studies
The Problem-Solving Cycle Problem Solving Cycle
Problem Examples
Circle problem F 11.2 Triangle F 11.3 Cheap necklace F 11.3 Runckers Candle-wall problem F 11.5 Maiers Two-string problem F 11.7 Luchins Water jug problem F 11.8 Tower of Hanoi F 11.10, F 11.11 Hobbits-and-Orcs F 11.12 Mutilated checkerboard F 11.13 Monk and the mountain F 11.15 Many others handout
Figure 11.2 (p. 390)

The circle problem. Seen end of chapter for the solution.
Figure 11.3 (p. 391)

(a) Triangle problem and (b) chain problem for two insight problems demonstration. See end of chapter for solutions.
Insight and Non-insight Problems

Insight: problem-solvers poor at predicting success; cant monitor closeness to solution Non-insight or Routine: problem-solvers good at predicting their success; monitor accurately how close they are to solution Metcalfe studies
Made a distinction between insight and non-insight problems. In non-insight problems solvers are accurate to predict success to a solution where for insight problem poor prediction of success to a solution. Used warmth rating every 15 seconds while solving a problem. The results shown in F 11.4, p. 393 comparing insight and noninsight problems. For non-sight problems when solvers were closer to the solution the warmth rating went up but not for the insight problems. This was support for the Gestalt view of problem solving.
Sudden understanding of what is needed for the solution. Combining information in new ways
Figure 11.4 (p. 393)
Results of Metcalfe and Wiebes (1987) experiment showing how participants judged how close they were to solving algebra problems (left column) and insight problems (right column). For the algebra problem, warmth ratings move slowly towards the hot end of the scale during the minute before the problem is solved. For the insight problems, the solution is sudden.
Figure 11.24 (p. 424)

Solution to the circle problem.
Figure 11.25 (p. 424)
Solution to the triangle problem. Arrows indicate movement; colored circles indicate new positions.
Figure 11.26 (p. 424)
Solution to the chain problem. All the links in one chain are cut and separated (3 cuts @ 2 cents = 6 cents). Then each separated link is used to connect the other three pieces and are then closed (3 closings @ 3 cents = 9 cents). Total = 15 cents. Cognitive Psychology: Mind, Research, and Everyday Experience by Bruce Goldstein.
Copyright 2005 by Wadsworth Publishing, a division of Thomson Learning. All rights reserved.
Obstacles to Problem Solving

Duncker (1945) candle-wall problem F 11.5, p. 394
A A A A table candle box of matches box of tacks.
Functional fixedness fix a candle to the wall Participants are better at this task if the matches and the tacks are on the table, not in the box. Adamson (1952) investigate effects of problem presentation and found if the box was empty, problem solving was more successful F. 11.6, p. 394 It is easier to think of empty boxes as something other than containers to overcome functional fixedness.
Figure 11.5 (p. 394)
Objects for Runckers (1945) candle problem.

Figure 11.6 (p. 394)
Results of Adamsons (1952) replication of Dunckers candle problem.

Figure 11.27 (p. 425)

Solution to the candle problem.

Functional fixedness fixed on the use of certain objects Another example is Maiers (1931) two-string problem F 11.7, p. 395
Two strings A chair A pair of scissors or pliers
Participants did not do well in solving the problem, 60% fail to solve. If the participants have not solve the problem after 10 minutes, the strings are set in motion. It has been found that 23/37 participants who have not solved the problem solve it within 10 second! Other examples: panty-hose can be used to make a fan belt water in a car radiator can be drunk
Figure 11.7 (p. 395)
Maiers (1931) two-string problem. As hard as Sebastian tries, he cant grab the second string. How can he tie the two strings together?

Luchins (1942) water jar problem F 11.8, p. 397. Note that the strategy for solution changes after problem 6. There are more efficient solutions. Mental set is the obstacle to problem solving. Set is a preference for certain operators (things you can do, actions you can take to solve a problem). Participants who began the water jar problem with problem 7 used the shorter more efficient version F 11.9, p. 397. The Gestaltist called these obstacles Einstellung (mechanization of thought) people kept using a strategy that worked even when a better one was available. Summary of problems in Table 1.1, p. 396
Figure 11.8 (p. 397)
Luchins (1942) water-jug problem. Each problem specifies the capacities of jugs A, B, and C, and a final desired quantity. The task is to use the jugs to measure out the final quantity. The solution to problem 1 is shown. All of the other problems can be solved using the same pattern of pourings, but there are more efficient solutions to problems 7 and 8.
Figure 11.9 (p. 397)

All of the participants who began the Luchins water-jug problem with problem 7 used the shorter solution (right bar), but less than a quarter who had established a mental set by beginning with problem 1 used the shorter solution to solve problem 7 (left bar).
Figure 11.28 (p. 425)
Solution to problem 7 of the Luchins water-jug problem. Problem 8 can also be solved using just jugs A and C.
Table 11.1 (p. 396)
Gestalt Restructuring Summary

Modern Approaches to Problem Solving

Problem-Space Theory Newell and Simon view problem solving as a search process GPS computer program
solving a problem involves negotiating alternative paths to a solution initial state is linked to goal state F 11.10, p. 399
Problem-space refers to the abstract structure of a problem slide 30 Operators are specific knowledge structures that transform data Algorithms vs. Heuristics Heuristics:

knowledge states are produced by the application of mental operators
Algorithms a step-by-step procedure that guarantees a solution to a problem if followed correctly Heuristics a general approach (rule of thumb) to problem solving that does not guarantee a solution.
Subgoal structure slide 33 limited processing resources Move problems Towers of Hanoi, Hobbits-and-Orcs F 11.12, p. 401, slide 35 Other Heuristics: working forward, working backwards, generate and test, hill climbing strategy
means-end analysis: calculate difference between current state and goal; create a subgoal to reduce that difference; select an operator that will solve this subgoal initial and goal states and operators slide 31 and F 11.11, p. 400
Figure 11.10 (p. 399)
(a) Initial and goal states for the Tower of Hanoi problem. (b) Operators that govern the Tower of Hanoi problem.
Problem Space
Slide 30
Means-Ends analysis
Slide 31
Figure 11.11 (p. 400)
Initial steps in solving the Tower of Hanoi problem, showing how the problem can be broken down into subgoals.
Problem space Towers of Hanoi
Slide 33
Figure 11.12 (p. 401)
Initial and goal states for the hobbits-and-orcs problem. See end of chapter for the solution (but try doing it first).
Problem space a version of hobbits-andorcs: missionaries and cannibals
Slide 35
Figure 11.29 (p. 426)
Solution to the hobbitsand-orcs problem. Each trip indication on the left (trip 1, trip 2, etc.) indicates the number of hobbits and orcs that remain after the trip. The hobbits and orcs in the next row down indicate how many hobbits and orcs there are each time the boat comes back.
Representations of the Problem

Some problems are more easily understood and solved if they are represented in concrete terms (e.g. a mental image), others are more easily solved in abstract terms. Mutilated checkerboard problem F 11.13, p. 401 Finding the right representation of a problem can be crucial for finding the solution. Kaplan and Simon (1990) used four version of the mutilated checkerboard F 11.14, p. 403. The key to problem solving was to arrive a parity representation take into account that each square has a neighbor. Most Ps started by thinking about the number of squares: 64-2=62, there is room for 31 dominos. When the various board emphasized the difference between adjoining squares the problem was found to be easier.
Bread and Butter average on 1 hint Bland board average of 3.18 hints The color and black/pink boards somewhere between. There are other ways to arrive at parity representation, see p. 405 example
Monk and Mountain problem
Use of image representation to solve problem F 11.15, p. 406

Figure 11.13 (p. 402)
Mutilated-checkerboard problem. See demonstration for instructions.

Figure 11.14 (p. 403)
Conditions in Kaplan and Simons (1990) study of the mutilated-checkerboard problem.

Monk and Mountain Problem
Figure 11.15 (p. 406)
Progress of Charlie, who starts climbing up the mountain in the morning, and Susan, who starts climbing down at the same time, showing that at some point in time they are both at the same place on the mountain, just as the monk, in the monk and the mountain problem is, during his ascent and descent.
Heuristics for problem solving

Other Heuristics
Working forward
Working backward Generate and test
Start at the beginning and try to solve the problem from the start to the finish The problem-solver start at the end and tries to work backward from there The problem-solver generates a list of alternative ways of action, not necessarily in systematic way, and then notices in turn whether each course of action will work For any particular state, carry out the operation that moves you closest to the final goal state. (often not a good strategy)
Hill climbing strategy
Working backwards Heuristic: Example
One (painful) way to solve the water lilies problem

Initial number of water lilies = 1 double the initial value 90 times Record each of these values Find the value that is 1/2 of the 90th day value.
1 1 31 1073741824 2 2 32 2147483648 3 4 33 4294967296 4 8 34 8589934592 5 16 35 17179869184 6 32 36 34359738368 7 64 37 68719476736 8 128 38 137438953472 9 256 39 274877906944 10 512 40 549755813888 11 1024 41 1099511627776 12 2048 42 2199023255552 13 4096 43 4398046511104 14 8192 44 8796093022208 15 16384 45 17592186044416 16 32768 46 35184372088832 17 65536 47 70368744177664 18 131072 48 140737488355328 19 262144 49 281474976710656 20 524288 50 562949953421312 21 1048576 51 1125899906842620 22 2097152 52 2251799813685250 23 4194304 53 4503599627370500 24 8388608 54 9007199254740990 25 16777216 55 18014398509482000 26 33554432 56 36028797018964000 27 67108864 57 72057594037927900 28 134217728 58 144115188075856000 29 268435456 59 288230376151712000 30 536870912 60 576460752303423000 61 1152921504606850000 62 2305843009213690000 63 4611686018427390000 64 9223372036854780000 65 18446744073709600000 66 36893488147419100000 67 73786976294838200000 68 147573952589676000000 69 295147905179353000000 70 590295810358706000000 71 1180591620717410000000 72 2361183241434820000000 73 4722366482869650000000 74 9444732965739290000000 75 18889465931478600000000 76 37778931862957200000000 77 75557863725914300000000 78 151115727451829000000000 79 302231454903657000000000 80 604462909807315000000000 81 1208925819614630000000000 82 2417851639229260000000000 83 4835703278458520000000000 84 9671406556917030000000000 85 19342813113834100000000000 86 38685626227668100000000000 87 77371252455336300000000000 88 154742504910673000000000000 89 309485009821345000000000000 90 618970019642690000000000000
Working backwards:
- value doubling every day is equivalent to say that the value is halved each preceding day - the field was full Day 90th - the field was half full on day 89th
Possible or Impossible?
Starting in the square marked by the circle, draw a line through all the squares without picking up your pencil, without passing through a square more than once, without diagonal lines and without leaving the checkerboard.
Crytarithmetic
DONALD + GERALD = ROBERT SEND + MORE = MONEY EAT + THAT = APPLE CROSS + ROADS = DANGER
COUNT COIN = SNUB

With each crytarithmetic problems find a number to substitute for a letter. Only one number can be used for any given letter and once a number is use for a letter it cannot be used for another letter. If the letter appears more than once in a problem the same number can be used again. Note: Newell & Simons GPS was able to solve these problems

Goldstein chp11-1

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Goldstein chp11-1

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Chapter 11 Part 1

Figure 11.1 (p. 389)

Salient differences between puzzle problems and real-world problems

Greenos problem types

Koehlers primate studies

The Problem-Solving Cycle Problem Solving Cycle

Figure 11.2 (p. 390)

Figure 11.3 (p. 391)

Insight and Non-insight Problems

Figure 11.4 (p. 393)

Figure 11.24 (p. 424)

Figure 11.25 (p. 424)

Figure 11.26 (p. 424)

Obstacles to Problem Solving

Figure 11.5 (p. 394)

Objects for Runckers (1945) candle problem.

Figure 11.6 (p. 394)

Results of Adamsons (1952) replication of Dunckers candle problem.

Figure 11.27 (p. 425)

Obstacles to Problem Solving

Figure 11.7 (p. 395)

Obstacles to Problem Solving

Figure 11.8 (p. 397)

Figure 11.9 (p. 397)

Figure 11.28 (p. 425)

Table 11.1 (p. 396)

Gestalt Restructuring Summary

Modern Approaches to Problem Solving

knowledge states are produced by the application of mental operators

Figure 11.10 (p. 399)

Figure 11.11 (p. 400)

Problem space Towers of Hanoi

Figure 11.12 (p. 401)

Problem space a version of hobbits-andorcs: missionaries and cannibals

Figure 11.29 (p. 426)

Representations of the Problem

Monk and Mountain problem

Use of image representation to solve problem F 11.15, p. 406

Figure 11.13 (p. 402)

Mutilated-checkerboard problem. See demonstration for instructions.

Figure 11.14 (p. 403)

Conditions in Kaplan and Simons (1990) study of the mutilated-checkerboard problem.

Monk and Mountain Problem

Figure 11.15 (p. 406)

Heuristics for problem solving

Working backward Generate and test

Hill climbing strategy

Working backwards Heuristic: Example

One (painful) way to solve the water lilies problem

COUNT COIN = SNUB

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen