Expert performance in solving word puzzles: From retrieval cues to crossword clues

Abstract

Crossword enthusiasts were first classified as expert or intermediate on the basis of their performance with a previously unseen set of clues, and then participated in five laboratory experiments designed to capture different aspects of their skilled performance: experiment 1 required the generation of words from a fixed set of letters; experiment 2 monitored the solution of anagrams; experiment 3 required the comipletion of a word of given meaning with only three letters presented; experiment 4 was a lexical decision task with suffixed and pseudosuffixed words and non-words; and experiment 5 was a synonym judgement task with prefixed and suffixed words. Subjects also completed psychometric tests of reasoning and vocabulary. A discriminant function analysis successfully predicted the crossword ability of all subjects on the basis of measures of the generation of words from given letters, the number of anagrams solved, sensitivity to a suffix in a non-word (lexical decision task), sensitivity to a pseudosuffix in a word (synonym judgement task), arid vocabulary score. Cryptic crossword puzzles are solved by a combination of component subskills, including lexical retrieval, clue recognition, and the manipulation of components of words.Crossword puzzles provide us with a potentially productive domain for the investigation of verbal reasoning, but have received very little attention. Simple crossword puzzles have been discussed by Nickerson (I 977) as a tool for the investigation of retrieval cues used to access lexical memory. Clues in these crosswords require the generation of synonyms, antonyms, and associates, as well as phrase completion. A crossword clue of this form might be a single word, to which the puzzler is required to find a synonym, or may contain two words, requiring the puzzler to find a common associate. In each case the solution will be constrained by letter length and by knowledge of adjoining words with shared letters. Nickerson's analysis provides a description of the lexical retrieval routes necessary for generation of candidate words, and of the criteria for acceptance of a candidate as a solution. There are numerous reports of the processes involved in word generation and lexical retrieval similarWe are grateful to

Five down, Absquatulated: Crossword puzzle clues to how the mind works

“…How effective one is likely to be at solving crossword puzzles can be predicted to a considerable degree from scores on tests of vocabulary and of word generation (Underwood, Diehim, & Batt, 1994). Not surprisingly, proficiency at solving crossword puzzles also correlates positively with skill at anagrams (Underwood et al, 1994;Witte & Freund, 1995).…”

“…Not surprisingly, proficiency at solving crossword puzzles also correlates positively with skill at anagrams (Underwood et al, 1994;Witte & Freund, 1995).…”

Puzzling Thoughts for H. M.: Can New Semantic Information Be Anchored to Old Semantic Memories?

“…Nickerson (1977) observed that crossword puzzles are cued retrieval tasks, and other studies have further suggested that crossword proficiency depends more on the manipulation of letters and word fragments than on knowledge of a large number of words (Underwood, Diehim, & Batt, 1994). Goldblum and Frost (1988) showed that any cluster of three adjacent letters facilitated retrieval better than did dispersed letters.…”

“…In addition, syllabic clusters facilitated more recall than did nonsyllabic clusters or unpronounceable clusters. For expert crossword solvers, puzzle proficiency could be predicted by word generation from a string of letters, performance on anagrams, sensitivity to a suffix of a word, sensitivity to a pseudosuffix in a word, and vocabulary scores (Underwood et al, 1994). Witte and Freund (1995) further showed that performance on anagramsanother independent test of word retrieval skills-was positively correlated with previous crossword puzzle experience.…”

H.M.'s personal crossword puzzles: Understanding memory and language

“…Correlation analysis revealed that the three major predictors of crossword success were general knowledge, previous crossword puzzle experience, and word-retrieval skills. Underwood, Diehim, and Batt (1994) found that expert crossword solvers' puzzle proficiency was predicted by word generation from a string of letters, performance on anagrams, sensitivity to the suffix of a word, sensitivity to the pseudosuffix of a word, and vocabulary scores.…”