Does solving insight-based problems differ from solving learning-based problems? Some evidence from an ERP study

Invited Lectures from the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education

“…moment. Thus, in Leikin et al (2016) we raised a hypothesis that our findings on increased activation at the PO4-PO8 electrode site associated with solving insight-based problems indicate that mathematical insight is a specific characteristic unique to generally gifted students. Moreover, our findings expanded upon the previous findings by Jung-Beeman et al (2004) by showing that students who excel in school mathematics exhibit increased activation of the PO4-PO8 electrode site when they are presented with learning-based mathematical tasks.…”

How Can Cognitive Neuroscience Contribute to Mathematics Education? Bridging the Two Research Areas

“…The distinction between learning-based and insight-based problems led to additional surprising results (Leikin et al 2016): behavioral and neurocognitive measures led to somewhat contradictory findings, and thus neurocognitive characteristics provided essential information that was hidden in the behavioral analysis. We found that, contrary to our research hypothesis, expertise in school mathematics affected behavioral measures associated with the insight-based test only, while general giftedness affected accuracy of the responses on both tests.…”

The 15-Minute Audition: Translating a Proof of Concept Into a Domain-Specific Screening Device for Mathematical Talent

“…Is there a literature regarding short-term predictors of achievement in the domain that can assist with conceptualizing items for a prescreen? Is there literature on long-term predictors of achievement/creativity in careers, and any discussion of predictors that differentiate between creative products and achievement outcomes (Leikin & Lev, 2013; Leikin, Waisman, & Leikin, 2016)?…”

“…Leikin and Lev (2013) conducted a study successfully applying multiple solution tasks to help them differentiate mathematical creativity. Mathematical insight problems, according to Leikin et al (2016), clearly require high cognitive efforts despite the existing knowledge base required for the solution. Probably because of the exceptional cognitive effort, school mathematics teaching is often directed at developing students’ expertise in applying algorithms and strategies, which rarely demand mathematical insight from the students.…”

“…Is there a literature regarding short-term predictors of achievement in the domain that can assist with conceptualizing items for a prescreen? Is there literature on long-term predictors of achievement/creativity in careers, and any discussion of predictors that differentiate between creative products and achievement outcomes (Leikin & Lev, 2013;Leikin, Waisman, & Leikin, 2016)? Mathematics is one of the domains where potential may be developed during the primary grades (Clements & Sarama, 2011;Louis, Feiring, & Lewis, 1992;Robinson, Abbott, Berninger, & Busse, 1996; see Figure 1), and therefore, those with propensities for mathematics can benefit from opportunities to build on their talent even in elementary school.…”