Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya • ISSN 2075-7999
peer-reviewed • open access journal
      

 

2021 Vol. 14 Issue 76

Korovkin S.Y. The role of anticipation and expectations in insight problem solving

Full text in Russian: Коровкин С.Ю. Роль антиципации и ожиданий в инсайтном решении

P.G. Demidov Yaroslavl State University, Yaroslavl, Russia

About author
Suggested citation

The current review describes the role of anticipation and expectations in insight problem solving. According to the literature, search of an insight solution represents a directed process determined by both past experience and the goal representation or the satisfactory progress. Two types of anticipation are identified: data-driven anticipation is based on the constraint of possible outcomes by performing automated processes; task-driven anticipation is based on the formation of a problem representation that includes an expected result. Both types of anticipation define the direction of insight problem solving, but at different stages. It is suggested that accessibility of expectations in case of task-driven anticipation allows for conscious analysis of the representation of a target state and progress.

Keywords: insight, anticipation, expectations, goal representation, problem solving, predictive coding

Full text in Russian >>

Funding
The study was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project 18-013-01056-а.

References
Cyrillic letters are transliterated according to BSI standards. The titles are given in author’s translation.

Anderson J. Kognitivnaya psikhologiya. SPb.: Piter, 2002. 496 p. (in Russian)

Bruner J. Psikhologiya poznaniya. Za predelami neposredstvennoi informatsii. M.: Progress, 1977. 413 p. (in Russian)

Brushlinskii A.V. Myshlenie i prognozirovanie. M.: Mysl', 1979. 232 p. (in Russian)

Duncker K. Psikhologiya produktivnogo (tvorcheskogo) myshleniya // Psikhologiya myshleniya. M.: Progress, 1965. P. 86–234. (in Russian)

Korovkin S. Myslytel’nye schemy v insaytnom reshenii zadach. Doctoral dissertation. М., 2020, 331 p. (in Russian)

Matyushkin A.M. Problemnye situatsii v myshlenii i obuchenii. M.: Pedagogika, 1972. 168 p.

Naisser U. Poznanie i real'nost'. M.: Progress, 1981. 230 p. (in Russian)

Sergienko E.A. Antitsipatsiya v rannem ontogeneze cheloveka. M.: Nauka, 1992. 138 p. (in Russian)

Vladimirov I.Yu., Karpov A.V., Lazareva N.Yu. Rol' upravlyayushchego kontrolya i podchinennykh sistem rabochei pamyati v formirovanii ehffekta serii // Ehksperimental'naya psikhologiya, 2018. V. 11. No. 3. P. 36–50. (in Russian)

Ach N. Über die Willenstätigkeit und das Denken. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Rubprecht, 1905.

Airenti G. Playing with expectations: A contextual view of humor development // Frontiers in Psychology, 2016. No. 7, Article 1392. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01392.

Attardo S., Raskin V. Script theory revis(it)ed: joke similarity and joke representation model // Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 1991. V. 4. No. 3–4. P. 293–347. https://doi.org/10.1515/ humr.1991.4.3–4.293.

Baillargeon R. Young infants’ expectations about hidden objects: A reply to three challenges // Developmental Science, 1999. V. 2. No. 2. P. 115–132.

Birch H.G., Rabinowitz H.S. The negative effect of previous experience on productive thinking // Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1951. V. 41. No. 2. P. 121–125. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0062635.

Chetverikov A., Kristjánsson Á. On the joys of perceiving: affect as feedback for perceptual predictions // Acta Psychologica, 2016. V. 169. P. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.05.005.

Clark A. Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science // The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2013. V. 36. No. 3. P. 181–204. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1017/S0140525X12000477.

Danek A.H., Wiley J. What about false insights? Deconstructing the Aha! experience along its multiple dimensions for correct and incorrect solutions separately // Frontiers in Psychology, 2017. V. 7. Article 2077. P. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02077.

Danek A.H., Öllinger M., Fraps T., Grothe B., Flanagin V.L. An fMRI investigation of expectation violation in magic tricks // Frontiers in Psychology, 2015. V. 6. Article 84. P. 1–11.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00084.

Danek A.H., Wiley J., Öllinger M. Solving classical insight problems without Aha! experience: 9 Dot, 8 Coin, and matchstick arithmetic problems // The Journal of Problem Solving, 2016. V. 9. No. 1. P. 47–57. https://doi.org/10.7771/1932-6246.1183.

Dubois D.M. Review of incursive, hyperincursive and anticipatory systems – foundation of anticipation in electromagnetism // Computing Anticipatory Systems: CASYS'99 – Third International Conference, D.M. Dubois (Ed.), AIP Conference Proceedings 517, The American Institute of Physics, Woodbury, 2000. pp. 3–30.

Fedor A., Szathmáry E., Öllinger M. Problem solving stages in the five square problem // Frontiers in Psychology, 2015. V. 6. Article 1050. P. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01050.

Fedor A., Zachar I., Szilágyi A., Öllinger M., de Vladar H.P., Szathmáry E. Cognitive architecture with evolutionary dynamics solves insight problem // Frontiers in Psychology, 2017. V. 8. Article 427. P. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00427.

Friston K. The free-energy principle: a unified brain theory? // Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2010. V. 11 No. 2. P. 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2787.

Gick M.L., Holyoak K.J. Schema induction and analogical transfer // Cognitive Psychology, 1983. V. 15. No. 1. P. 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(83)90002-6.

Hedne M.R., Norman E., Metcalfe J. Intuitive feelings of warmth and confidence in insight and noninsight problem solving of magic tricks // Frontiers in Psychology, 2016. V. 7. Article 1314. P. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01314.

Huron D. Sweet anticipation: Music and the psychology of expectation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006. 480 p.

Jones G. Testing two cognitive theories of insight // Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 2003. V. 29. No. 5. P. 1017–1027. https://doi.org/10.1037/02787393.29.5.1017.

Korovkin S., Savinova A., Padalka J., Zhelezova A. Beautiful mind: grouping of actions into mental schemes leads to a full insight Aha! experience // Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2020. P. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2020.1847124.

Kronfeldner M.E. Darwinian ‘blind’ hypothesis formation revisited // Synthese, 2010. V. 175, P. 193–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9498-8.

Kunde W., Elsner K., Kiesel A. No anticipation–no action: the role of anticipation in action and perception // Cognitive Processing, 2007. V. 8, P. 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-007-0162-2.

Libet B. Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will involuntary action // Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1985. V. 8. No. 4. P. 529–566 https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x00044903.

Luchins A.S., Luchins E.H. New experimental attempts at preventing mechanization in problem solving // Journal of General Psychology, 1950. V. 42. No. 2. P. 279–297.

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. V. 27. No. 1. P. 176–201. https://doi.org/10.1037//02787393.27.1.176.

Metcalfe J. Premonitions of insight predict impending error // Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1986. V. 12. No. 4. P. 623–634. https://doi.org/10.1037/02787393.12.4.623.

Metcalfe J., Wiebe D. Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving // Memory & Cognition, 1987. V. 15. No. 3. P. 238–246. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197722.

Mitchell A., Romano G., Groisman B., Yona A., Dekel E., Kupiec M., Dahan O., Pilpel Y. Adaptive prediction of environmental changes by microorganisms // Nature, 2009. V. 460. P. 220–224. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08112.

Mooneyham B.W., Schooler J.W. The costs and benefits of mind-wandering: a review // Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 2013. V. 67. No. 1. P. 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031569.

Ohlsson S. Deep Learning. How the mind overrides experience. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 540 p.

Öllinger M., Jones G., Knoblich G. Investigating the effect of mental set on insight problem solving // Experimental Psychology, 2008. V. 55. No. 4. P. 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1027/16183169.55.4.270.

Öllinger M., Jones G., Knoblich G. Heuristics and representational change in two-move matchstick arithmetic tasks // Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 2006. V. 2. No. 4. P. 239–253. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10053-008-0059-3.

Öllinger M., Jones G., Knoblich G. The dynamics of search, impasse, and representational change provide a coherent explanation of difficulty in the nine-dot problem // Psychological Research, 2014. V. 78. No. 2. P. 266–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-013-0494-8.

Ormerod T.C., MacGregor J.N., Chronicle E.P. Dynamics and constraints in insight problem solving // Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 2002. V. 28. No. 4. P. 791– 799. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.28.4.791.

Riegler A. The role of anticipation in cognition // Dubois D.M. (ed.) Computing Anticipatory Systems. Proceedings of the American Institute of Physics, vol. 573. American Institute of Physics, Melville, 2001. P. 534–541. http://pcp.vub.ac.be/riegler/papers/riegler01anticipation.pdf.

Rosen R. Anticipatory systems: Philosophical, mathematical and methodological foundations. Oxford: Pergamon, 1985.

Seifert C.M., Meyer D.E., Davidson N., Patalano A.L., Yaniv I. Demystification of cognitive insight: opportunistic assimilation and the prepared-mind perspective // R.J. Sternberg, J.E. Davidson (Eds.) The Nature of Insight. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995. P. 65–124. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4879.003.0007.

Selz O. Komplextheorie und Konstellationstheorie // Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 1920. V.83. P. 211234.

Simon H.A. Scientific discovery and the psychology of problem solving // Models of Discovery – and Other Topics in the Methods of Science. D. Reidel, 1977. P. 286–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-9521-1_16.

Simonton D.K. Foresight in insight? A Darwinian answer // R.J. Sternberg, J.E. Davidson (Eds.) The Nature of Insight. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995. P. 465–494.

Simonton D.K. Foresight, insight, oversight, and hindsight in scientific discovery: How sighted were Galileo’s telescopic sightings? // Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2012. V. 6. No. 3. P. 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027058.

Smith S.M., Beda Z. Old problems in new contexts: The context-dependent fixation hypothesis // Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2020. V. 149. No. 1. P. 192–197. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000615.

Trapp S. Commentary: On the joys of perceiving: Affect as feedback for perceptual predictions // Frontiers in Neuroscience, 2017. V. 11. Article 556. P. 1–3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2017.00556.

Wiley J. Expertise as mental set: the effects of domain knowledge in creative problem solving // Memory & Cognition, 1998. V. 26. No. 4. P. 716–730. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211392.

Zamani M., Richard J.-F. Object encoding, goal similarity, and analogical transfer // Memory & Cognition, 2000. V. 28. No. 5. P. 873–886. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198422.

Received: 24 October 2020. Date of publication: 07 May 2021.

About author

Korovkin Sergei Y. PhD (Psychology), Associate Professor at the Department of Psychology, P.G. Demidov Yaroslavl State University, proezd Matrosova, 9, 204, 150057 Yaroslavl, Russia.
E-mail: Этот адрес электронной почты защищен от спам-ботов. У вас должен быть включен JavaScript для просмотра.

Suggested citation

Korovkin S.Y. The role of anticipation and expectations in insight problem solving. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya, 2021, Vol. 14, No. 76, p. 5. http://psystudy.ru

Permanent URL: http://psystudy.ru/index.php/eng/2021v14n76e/1889-korovkin76e.html

Back to top >>

Related Articles