Creativity in problem solving: integrating two different views of insight

被引:0
作者
Per Øystein Haavold
Bharath Sriraman
机构
[1] UiT The Arctic University of Norway,
[2] University of Montana,undefined
来源
ZDM – Mathematics Education | 2022年 / 54卷
关键词
Experts; Novices; Insight; Creativity; Problem solving;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Even after many decades of productive research, problem solving instruction is still considered ineffective. In this study we address some limitations of extant problem solving models related to the phenomenon of insight during problem solving. Currently, there are two main views on the source of insight during problem solving. Proponents of the first view argue that insight is the consequence of analytic thinking and a sequence of conscious and stepwise steps. The second view suggests that insight is the result of unconscious processes that come about only after an impasse has occurred. Extant models of problem solving within mathematics education tend to highlight the first view of insight, while Gestalt inspired creativity research tends to emphasize the second view of insight. In this study, we explore how the two views of insight—and the corresponding set of models—can describe and explain different aspects of the problem solving process. Our aim is to integrate the two different views on insight, and demonstrate how they complement each other, each highlighting different, but important, aspects of the problem solving process. We pursue this aim by studying how expert and novice mathematics students worked on two ill-defined mathematical problems. We apply both a problem solving model and a creativity model in analyzing students’ work on the two problems, in order to compare and contrast aspects of insight during the students’ work. The results of this study indicate that sudden and unconscious insight seems to be crucial to the problem solving process, and the occurrence of such insight cannot be fully explained by problem solving models and analytic views of insight. We therefore propose that extant problem solving models should adopt aspects of the Gestalt inspired views of insight.
引用
收藏
页码:83 / 96
页数:13
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]  
Bilalic M(2008)Inflexibility of experts—Reality or myth? Quantifying the Einstellung effect in chess masters Cognitive Psychology 56 73-102
[2]  
McLeod P(2016)Potential originality and effectiveness: The dynamic definition of creativity Creativity Research Journal 28 258-267
[3]  
Gobet F(2005)Peripheral vision: Expertise in real world contexts Organization Studies 26 779-792
[4]  
Corazza GE(1996)Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints Annual Review of Psychology 47 273-305
[5]  
Dreyfus HL(1987)A framework for assessing mathematical creativity in school children Educational Studies in Mathematics 18 59-74
[6]  
Dreyfus SE(2012)Exploring the nature of cognitive flexibility New Ideas in Psychology 30 190-200
[7]  
Ericsson KA(1983)Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition: A three-level model of cognitive processing Human Development 4 222-232
[8]  
Lehmann AC(2013)Thoughts about research on mathematical problem-solving instruction The Mathematics Enthusiast 10 245-278
[9]  
Haylock DW(2010)The dual pathway to creativity model: Creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence European Review of Social Psychology 21 34-77
[10]  
Ionescu T(1985)Making sense of “out loud” problem-solving protocols The Journal of Mathematical Behavior 4 171-191