Closing the gap: connecting sudden representational change to the subjective Aha! experience in insightful problem solving

Danek, Amory H.; Williams, Joshua; Wiley, Jennifer

doi:10.1007/s00426-018-0977-8

Cited by 67 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(i.e., less Suddenness, Surprise, and Pleasure) than those who had to restructure. This finding is in accordance with a recent study by Danek et al () that offers the first empirical support for a close relationship between patterns of restructuring and the Aha! experience.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

When the Solution Is on the Doorstep: Better Solving Performance, but Diminished Aha! Experience for Chess Experts on the Mutilated Checkerboard Problem

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insight problems are difficult because the initially activated knowledge hinders successful solving. The crucial information needed for a solution is often so far removed that gaining access to it through restructuring leads to the subjective experience of “Aha!”. Although this assumption is shared by most insight theories, there is little empirical evidence for the connection between the necessity of restructuring an incorrect problem representation and the Aha! experience. Here, we demonstrate a rare case where previous knowledge facilitates the solving of insight problems but reduces the accompanying Aha! experience. Chess players were more successful than non‐chess players at solving the mutilated checkerboard insight problem, which requires retrieval of chess‐related information about the color of the squares. Their success came at a price, since they reported a diminished Aha! experience compared to controls. Chess players’ problem‐solving ability was confined to that particular problem, since they struggled to a similar degree to non‐chess players to solve another insight problem (the eight‐coin problem), which does not require chess‐related information for a solution. Here, chess players and non‐chess players experienced the same degree of insight.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…An exception is a recent study which demonstrated the difference in the subjective Aha! ratings of solutions arising from objectively sudden or incremental changes in solvers' problem representations (Danek, Williams, & Wiley, 2018). Sudden changes produced stronger subjective Aha!…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When the Solution Is on the Doorstep: Better Solving Performance, but Diminished Aha! Experience for Chess Experts on the Mutilated Checkerboard Problem

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, the heuristic "If I feel Aha, then I have had a good idea" spilled over to a temporally coincident (but irrelevant) fact. The results of the present study align well with both Danek and Wiley (2018) and the more comprehensive Eureka Heuristic account of .…”

Section: Insights Are Accurate But How?supporting

confidence: 87%

Getting a grip on insight: An embodied measure of Aha! and metacognition during problem solving

Laukkonen¹,

Ingledew²,

Tangen³

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A challenge unique to psychology is objectively capturing ephemeral subjective states during controlled experiments. Large bodies of literature use metacognitive probes and self-reports in order to measure states of knowing, perceived progress, as well as the onset of phenomenologies such as surprise or insight. Here we evaluate the usefulness of a visceral measure—the dynamometer—in a problem solving context to detect feelings of progress and insight experiences. The continuous measure of hand grip strength provides multiple data points per second and effectively captures the onset of insight experiences in real-time, and maps onto other measures showing convergent validity. Our results highlight the importance of viewing metacognitions during problem solving and insight moments as dissociable events that show different behavioural outcomes. We also found evidence that the participants were embodying the intensity of the insight experience, despite not being instructed to do so. The dynamometer may be a useful tool in any context where metacognitions are monitored continuously, and is particularly well suited for research in problem solving and insight.

show abstract

“…experience) is caused by prior restructuring and evidence from classical insight tasks suggests that an AHA! experience follows successful restructuring (Duncker, 1945;Ohlsson, 1984;Danek et al, 2016;Öllinger, Jones & Knoblich, 2014;Thevenot & Oakhill, 2008;Danek et al, 2020;Öllinger et al, 2014). However, recent research suggests that restructuring and the AHA!…”

Section: Relationship Between the Aha! Experience And Restructuringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verbal insight revisited — dissociable neurocognitive processes underlying solutions accompanied by an AHA! experience with and without prior restructuring

Becker

Kühn

Sommer

2020

Journal of Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we investigate insight problem solving by exploring the subjective AHA! experience as a function of restructuring of a problem. It has long been assumed that the AHA! experience is the direct consequence of restructuring. However, is this assumption justified? We will argue that a) the AHA! experience does not always result from prior restructuring and that b) solutions with accompanied AHA! do not underlie a single neurocognitive process. In this regard, we use a modified compound remote associates (CRA) paradigm designed to experimentally dissociate restructuring from the AHA! experience. Results indicate that solutions accompanied by an AHA! are often found also in absence of restructuring. This finding is explained by proposing distinct CRA solution processes that differentiate between AHA! solutions with and without restructuring. We predict that solutions with accompanied AHA! experience differ in their behavioral, neural and eye-tracking related signature as a function of restructuring. The results mostly support these predictions. These findings have implications for insight research: First, by only measuring the subjective AHA! experience especially using CRAs it cannot be implied anymore that restructuring has occurred. Second, it is vital to experimentally separate the different components of insight to better understand its underlying diverse neurocognitive processes.

show abstract

Closing the gap: connecting sudden representational change to the subjective Aha! experience in insightful problem solving

Abstract: This offers the first empirical support for a close relationship between two theoretical constructs that have traditionally been assumed to be related to insightful problem solving.

Cited by 67 publications

References 23 publications

When the Solution Is on the Doorstep: Better Solving Performance, but Diminished Aha! Experience for Chess Experts on the Mutilated Checkerboard Problem

When the Solution Is on the Doorstep: Better Solving Performance, but Diminished Aha! Experience for Chess Experts on the Mutilated Checkerboard Problem

Getting a grip on insight: An embodied measure of Aha! and metacognition during problem solving

Verbal insight revisited — dissociable neurocognitive processes underlying solutions accompanied by an AHA! experience with and without prior restructuring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About