Working Memory, Fluid Reasoning, and Complex Problem Solving: Different Results Explained by the Brunswik Symmetry

Abstract

In order to investigate the nature of complex problem solving (CPS) within the nomological network of cognitive abilities, few studies have simultantiously considered working memory and intelligence, and results are inconsistent. The Brunswik symmetry principle was recently discussed as a possible explanation for the inconsistent findings because the operationalizations differed greatly between the studies. Following this assumption, 16 different combinations of operationalizations of working memory and fluid reasoning were examined in the present study (N = 152). Based on structural equation modeling with single-indicator latent variables (i.e., corrected for measurement error), it was found that working memory incrementally explained CPS variance above and beyond fluid reasoning in only 2 of 16 conditions. However, according to the Brunswik symmetry principle, both conditions can be interpreted as an asymmetrical (unfair) comparison, in which working memory was artificially favored over fluid reasoning. We conclude that there is little evidence that working memory plays a unique role in solving complex problems independent of fluid reasoning. Furthermore, the impact of the Brunswik symmetry principle was clearly demonstrated as the explained variance in CPS varied between 4 and 31%, depending on which operationalizations of working memory and fluid reasoning were considered. We argue that future studies investigating the interplay of cognitive abilities will benefit if the Brunswik principle is taken into account.

A three-dimensional taxonomy of achievement emotions.

“…In contrast, achievement emotions relate to a specific type of settings. Given different specificity, general traits and context-specific emotions such as achievement emotions are not conceptually symmetric, which may explain the modest size of their links (see Kretzschmar et al, 2018; Kretzschmar & Nebe, 2021, for the importance of construct symmetry in explaining relations between personality and other variables). An exception is conscientiousness.…”

Character strengths and fluid intelligence

“…In addition, the hierarchical structure of intelligence (for crystallized intelligence, see, e.g., Schroeders et al., 2021 ; Steger et al., 2019 ) should also be taken into account, as previous research has shown that personality‐intelligence relations vary significantly depending on which hierarchical level of cognitive and noncognitive personality traits are being considered (Kretzschmar et al., 2018 ). Therefore, future studies investigating the correlations between character strengths and intelligence relations will benefit from considering broader operationalizations of intelligence that can also be used to examine abilities with different breadths and contents (see, e.g., Kretzschmar et al., 2017 ; Kretzschmar & Nebe, 2021 ).…”

Character Strengths and Fluid Intelligence

“…Previous research has provided evidence that verbal abilities are more strongly related to noncognitive personality traits (Kretzschmar et al, 2018). Therefore, future studies investigating the correlations between character strengths and intelligence relations will benefit from considering broad operationalizations of intelligence that can also be used to examine more specific abilities (see, e.g., Kretzschmar et al, , 2018Kretzschmar & Nebe, 2021).…”