A Case for Cognitive Entrenchment: To Achieve Optimal Best, Taking Into Account the Importance of Perceived Optimal Efficiency and Cognitive Load Imposition

Abstract

One interesting observation that we may all concur with is that many experts, or those who are extremely knowledgeable and well-versed in their respective domains of functioning, become “mediocre” and lose their “touch of invincibility” over time. For example, in the world of professional football, it has been argued that an elite football coach would lose his/her air of invincibility and demise after 10–15 years at the top. Why is this the case? There are different reasons and contrasting viewpoints that have been offered to account for this observed demise. One notable concept, recently introduced to explain this decline, is known as cognitive entrenchment, which is concerned with a high level of stability in one's domain schemas (Dane, 2010). This entrenchment or “situated fixation,” from our proposition, may act to deter the flexibility and/or willingness of a person to adapt to a new context or situation. Some writers, on this basis, have argued that cognitive entrenchment would help explain the demise of some experts and/or why some students have difficulties adapting to new situations. An initial inspection would seem to indicate that cognitive entrenchment is detrimental, potentially imparting evidence of inflexibility, difficulty, and/or the unwillingness of a person to adapt to new contexts (Dane, 2010). This premise importantly connotes that expertise may constrain a person from being flexible, innovative, and/or creative to ongoing changes. In this analysis, an expert may experience a cognitive state of entrenchment, facilitated in this case by his/her own experience, knowledge, and/or theoretical understanding of a subject matter. Having said this, however, it is also a plausibility that cognitive entrenchment in itself espouses some form of positivity, giving rise to improvement and/or achievement of different types of adaptive outcomes. Drawing from our existing research development, we propose in this conceptual analysis article that personal “entrenchment” to a particular context (e.g., the situated fixation of a football coach to a particular training methodology) may closely relate to three major elements: self-cognizance of cognitive load imposition, a need for efficiency, and the quest for stability and comfort. As we explore later, there is credence to accept the “positivity” of cognitive entrenchment—that by nature, for example, a person would purposively choose the status quo in order to minimize cognitive load imposition, optimize efficiency, and/or to achieve minimum disruption and a high level of comfort, which could then “optimize” his/her learning experiences. We strongly believe that our propositions, which consider eight in this article, are of significance and may, importantly, provide grounding for further research development into the validity of cognitive entrenchment.

Is the inverse method more effective than the balance method on learning linear equations? A cross-cultural experimental study between Australia and Malaysia

“…Central to this advocation, we contend, is the inclusion of cognitive load theory (Sweller et al, 2011; Sweller et al, 2019), which may help to provide a theoretical framework for the design of different instructional methods for usage. Over the past several years, researchers have situated cognitive load theory (Sweller et al, 2011; Sweller et al, 2019) within other theoretical concepts, inquiries, and contexts—for example, the importance of cognitive load theory and “achievement of optimal best” (Phan et al, 2017), “the negative impact of cognitive entrenchment” (Phan & Ngu, 2021a), and “the relevance of perceived optimal efficiency” (Phan & Ngu, 2021b). As such, researchers may wish to use cognitive load theory as a basis to conceptualize other instructional methods for future inquiries—for example, how does one's cognizance of a need to maximize optimal efficiency (Phan & Ngu, 2021b) influence his design of appropriate instructional methods for usage, which take into account the relevance of cognitive load theory?…”

Applied educational practice and research development of ‘goals of best practice’ (GsBP): philosophical inquiries and conceptual analysis for consideration

“…From the preceding, we firmly believe that it would be a noteworthy endeavor to focus on one potential line of inquiry – namely, a person's point of reference in relation to their setting of a GOB or GsOB. This potential line of inquiry, we contend, emphasizes the interrelatedness between three major concepts: (i) level of complexity of a GOB, (ii) a person's state of personal resolve ( Phan and Ngu, 2021c ; Phan et al., 2017 , 2019a ), and (iii) a person's perceived sense of cognitive certainty or uncertainty ( Phan and Ngu, 2021a ; 2021e ). In this section of the article, we explore and discuss in detail an interesting proposition: the complexity of a GOB (i.e., denoted along the Y axis in Figure 2 ) and the continuous spectrum of a person's state of personal resolve (i.e., denoted along the X axis in Figure 2 ).…”

“…Personal resolve, which emphasizes a heightened state of decisiveness and unwaivered, optimistic focus, would motivate a person to purposively act with the intent to succeed, regardless of any obstacles, difficulties, and/or hardships that may arise ( Phan and Ngu, 2021c ; Phan, Ngu, Shih, Lin, Shi and Wang, 2020c ; Phan et al., 2018c ). As such, personal resolve may also instill and/or encourage a perception of cognitive certainty that one is on course to succeed ( Phan and Ngu, 2021a ; 2021d ). With this in mind, we speculate that: a student's personal resolve (e.g., a person is decisive and unwaivered in his focus) would closely associate with his self-belief and conviction of certainty of success.…”

A Perceived Zone of Certainty and Uncertainty: Propositions for Research Development

“…We argue that, in this analysis, it is more desirable to have a case where the accomplished outcome is more or greater than the expenditure of time, effort, etc. Our theorization of perceived optimal efficiency (Phan and Ngu, 2021a , b ) considers a desirable state of a maximum outcome (i.e., efficiency) and an undesirable state of maximum expenditure (i.e., inefficiency), both of which require and emphasize the importance of personal assessment, judgment, and decision-making. Moreover, of course, we contend that the possibility of a maximum outcome is favored and may, in fact, coincide with a state of comfort.…”