Investigating Insight Using Compound Remote Associate Problems

Investigating Insight Using Compound Remote Associate Problems Edward A. Cranford (eac53@msstate.edu) Jarrod Moss (jarrod.moss@msstate.edu) Department of Psychology, Mississippi State University Mississippi State, MS 39762 USA Abstract Many new problems and paradigms have been developed to answer questions pertaining to insight problem solving. One problem type that may be useful to the study of insight is the Compound Remote Associate (CRA) problem, developed by Bowden & Jung-Beeman (2003). However, it is uncertain to what extent CRA problems are insight problems. We performed a protocol analysis of people solving CRA problems and found that CRA do exhibit some characteristics of insight. However, certain considerations should be taken into account. Particularly, problems solved when the solution is the ﬁrst thing considered are often judged to be insight by participants, but these problems do not exhibit any characteristics of insight aside from the ‘Aha’ experience. Keywords: Insight; Problem Solving; Restructuring; Impasse Introduction Problem solving enables us to discover solutions to problems. Sometimes, however, we reach an impasse, or road block, in the problem solving process. We may realize there is some ﬂaw in our efforts, and the solution may seem unattainable, but the source of our error remains hidden. We may contemplate for a long period of time until, all of the sudden, the answer seems obvious. This phenomenon has been termed insight, and is loosely deﬁned as achieving a solution without knowing where the solution came from. Some phenomenological features are unique to insight. Insight solutions often appear from nowhere and solvers experience an affective response of suddenness and surprise (Aha! experience), sometimes resulting after an impasse; insight solutions are obtained through processes known as restructuring, whereby an incorrect representation of the problem is changed, leading to the access of an insightful, correct representation of the problem (e.g., Bowden, Jung- Beeman, Fleck, & Kounios, 2005; Ohlsson, 1992; Schooler, Fallshore, & Fiore, 1995). The key components of insight are often described as impasse, restructuring, and ‘Aha! ’. Problems Used for Insight Research Many types of problems have been used to study insight. Classic insight problems have been used extensively, and sometimes the reason is solely based on the fact that they have previously been used to study insight (Weisberg, 1995). With the emergence of advanced neuroimaging techniques (e.g., functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging [fMRl], Electroencephalography [EEG], etc.), and the great amount of time it takes to solve (if at all) complex, classic insight problems, new problems and paradigms have been used to investigate insight (Bowden et al., 2005). One speciﬁc problem type that has been used is the compound remote associate (CRA) problem (Bowden & Jung-Beeman, 2007). CRA problems involve ﬁnding the one word that can form a compound word or phrase with each of three different words. For example, if three words—tree, sauce, and big—are presented, the solution is apple. CRA problems are solved much quicker than classic insight problems. They can be solved by insight or by noninsight, search processes (i.e., generate-and—test or trial-and—error), and individual problems can be solved with insight regardless of learning effects over multiple trials (Bowden & Jung-Beeman, 2007). Given these differences between classic insight problems and CRA problems, the question is to what extent CRA problems are insight problems. Are CRA problems Insight Problems? Though differences have been found between insight—CRA problems and noninsight—CRA problems (Bowden & Jung- Beeman, 2007; Bowden et al., 2005; Jung-Beeman et al., 2004; Kounios et al. 2006), we need more empirical evidence that CRA problems can be used to study insight. Speciﬁcally, evidence is needed to show that CRA problems exhibit properties characteristic of insight, and that there are differences between solving a CRA problem with insight and solving one without insight beyond the Aha experience. Bowden and Jung-Beeman (2003; 2007) and Bowden et al. (2005) claim CRA problems exhibit phenomenological features and components of insight found in classic insight problems and, therefore, should be used to study insight. The processing is often unreportable, the problems misdirect (or fail to direct) retrieval processes, and people experience the Aha! These are reasons to assume that CRA problems can be used to study insight. However, because CRA problems are hybrid problems, rated insight or noninsight by the solver on a forced choice scale, and are such short and simple problems, there is concern about their use to study insight. A critical component not listed above for CRA problems is the process of restructuring, and it is unclear to what extent CRA problems exhibit restructuring prior to insight solutions. We designed a study using concurrent verbal protocols of CRA problem solving to determine if CRA problems solved with insight exhibit more characteristics of insight, than CRA problems solved without insight. The characteristics of insight examined are impasse, restructuring, and verbal overshadowing. We expect higher rates of impasse and more restructuring processes in insight solutions than noninsight solutions. Concurrent verbalization of cognitive processing has been shown to inhibit solving a problem with 1768