顿悟问题解决的心理机制的验证性研究

心理与行为研究 ›› 2005, Vol. 3 ›› Issue (3): 188-193.

顿悟问题解决的心理机制的验证性研究

姚海娟,沈德立

天津师范大学心理与行为研究中心,天津,300074

收稿日期:2005-06-18 出版日期:2005-09-20 发布日期:2015-01-21
通讯作者: 沈德立,男,天津师范大学心理与行为研究中心教授,博士生导师。
作者简介:姚海娟,女,天津师范大学心理与行为研究中心硕士生。Email: yhjrenfei@163.com。
基金资助:
本研究得到国家社科基金ABA010011项目、天津市科委重大项目和教育部“新世纪优秀人才支持计划”的资助

RESEARCH ON THE MECHANISM OF THE INSIGHT PROBLEM SOLVING

Yao Haijuan,Shen Deli

Research Center of Psychology and Behavior in Tianjin Normal University, Tianjin 300074

Received:2005-06-18 Online:2005-09-20 Published:2015-01-21

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目前顿悟问题解决的心理机制主要存在两个有争议性的理论：进程监控理论和表征变化理论。现以非限制性的停车场问题为实验材料,检验顿悟问题解决的这两个心理机制。结果发现：（1）进程监控理论可解释顿悟被试的成绩优劣;（2）表征变化理论可对顿悟问题能否解决做出解释。

关键词: 顿悟, 非限制性问题, 进程监控, 表征变化

Abstract: At present, psychologists often discuss about two theories of the mechanism on insight problem solving: progress monitoring theory and representational change theory. The purpose of this study was to investigate the mechanism of insight problem solving. Now we used unlimited move problems(the car park game),The results were as follows:(1)The progress monitoring theory could explain why the performance of some problem solvers are better than the others.(2)The representational change theory could explain why problems were solved.

Key words: Key Words:insight, unlimited problem, progress monitoring, representational change

中图分类号:

B842.5

姚海娟,沈德立. 顿悟问题解决的心理机制的验证性研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2005, 3(3): 188-193.

Yao Haijuan,Shen Deli. RESEARCH ON THE MECHANISM OF THE INSIGHT PROBLEM SOLVING[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2005, 3(3): 188-193.

参考文献

[1] Scheerer M. Problem solving. Scientific American, 1963, 208(4): 118~128
[2] Newell A, Simon H A.Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1972
[3] Weisberg R W, Alba J W. An examination of the alleged role of ″fixation″ in the solution of several ″insight″ problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1981, 110(2): 169~192
[4] MacGregor J N, Ormerod T C, Chronicle E P. Information processing and insight: A process model of performance on the nine-dot and related problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 2001, 27(1): 176~201
[5] Knoblich G, Ohlsson S, Haider H, et al. Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 1999, 25(6): 1534~1555
[6] Ohlsson S. Information-processing explanation of insight and related phenomena. In: Keane M T, Gilhooly K J, Advances In Psychology of Thinking. London: Harvester, 1992: 1~203
[7] Keane M. On adaptation in analogy: Tests of pragmatic importance and adaptability in analogical problem solving. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1996, 49A(4): 1062~1085
[8] Ormerod T, MacGregor J N, Chronicle E P. Dynamics and constraints in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 2002, 28(4): 791~799
[9] Knoblich G, Ohlsson S, Raney G E. An eye movement study of insight problem solving. Memory and Cognition, 2001, 29(7): 1000~1009
[10] Jones G. Testing two cognitive theories of insight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2003, 29(5): 1017~1027
[11] 罗劲. 顿悟的大脑机制. 心理学报, 2004, 36(2): 219~234
[12] Martinsen. Insight problems revisited: The influence of cognitive styles and experience on creative problem solving. Creativity Research Journal, 1993, 6(4): 435~447
[13] 李红, 高山, 王乃戈. 执行功能研究方法评述. 心理科学进展, 2004, 12(5): 693~705
[14] Mayer R E. The search for insight: Grappling with Gestalt psychology′s unanswered questions. In: Sternberg R, Davidson J (Ed.), The nature of insight. Cambridge, MA: MIT press, 1995: 3~32
[15] Kaplan C A, Simon H A. In search of insight. Cognitive Psychology, 1990, 22(3): 374~419