Individual differences: A third component in problem‐solving instruction

Ronning, Royce R.; McCurdy, Donald W.; Ballinger, Ruth

doi:10.1002/tea.3660210109

Cited by 40 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some research has supported this belief. For example, field independents are better problem solvers than field dependents (Davis & Haueisen, 1976;Heller, 1982;Maloney, 1981;Ronning, McCurdy, & Ballinger, 1984) because of their ability to attend to salient cues. Learners with higher cognitive flexibility and cognitive complexity should be better problem solvers than cognitive simplistic learners because they consider more alternatives (Stewin & Anderson, 1974) and they are more analytical.…”

Section: Cognitive Controlsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Toward a design theory of problem solving

Jonassen

2000

ETR&D

1,487

985

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Cognitive Controlsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Toward a design theory of problem solving

Jonassen

2000

ETR&D

1,487

985

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Garrett's study illustrates their specific influence in Natural Sciences. Another study, by Ronning et al (1984) is equally representative. They investigated scientific problem solving by high-school students.…”

Section: Fdi and Achievement In Natural Sciencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field dependence-independence cognitive style and academic achievement: A review of research and theory

Tinajero

Páramo

1998

Eur J Psychol Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field dependence-independence was originally conceived as a neutral style dimension, in that field-dependent subjects were considered to be as well-adapted to their environment as field--independent subjects. Subsequent authors, however, questioned this assumption ofneutrality, on the grounds thatfield-independent subjects generally perform better in certain intellectual tasks. Such findings provoked interest in the possible repercussions offield dependenceindependencefor education. Here, we review research into the possible effects of FDI on achievement at school. In general, field-independent subjects perform better than field-dependent subjects, whether assessment is of specific disciplines or across the board. We discuss possible explanationsfor this difference in performance.The earliest research into cognitive styles was carried out by members of the "New Look" movement, a group of psychologists who were concerned that traditional models of perception placed insufficient emphasis on the individual. In the course of research into the contribution o:fvisual and postural cues to perception of the vertical, Asch (1948a, 1948b) found that some subjects consistently tended to use only one or another type of cue. Subjects who used visual cues were designated "field-dependent", while those who used postural (i.e., vestibular, tactile and kinesthetic) cues were designated "field-independent". In its earliest formulation, field dependence-independence (FDI) was conceived as a visual--postural dimension specifically relating to perception of the vertical.More general interpretations were soon to follow. The task developed by Witkin began to be viewed as a measure of the subject's ability to perceive individual elements within an organized perceptual field: according to this point of view, field-independent subjects are those with a greater capacity to break perceptual information down into its component parts and to focus attention on those parts which are relevant, without being distracted by the context. In contrast, field-dependent subjects are those with a greater difficulty to disembed parts from This review was supported by a grant from the Xunta de Galicia, XUGA 21106A91.

show abstract

“…Non-analytical people (field dependents) find it difficult to locate the information they are seeking because the surrounding field masks what they are looking for. Analytical reasoners (field independents) are more adept at disambiguating information from its surrounding field, and therefore are better problem solvers because they are better able to isolate task-relevant information (Heller, 1982;Ronning et al, 1984). In a study of Irish apprentice electricians, Moran (1986) found that among several individual difference variables, field independence was most highly correlated with fault diagnosis and its strongest predictor.…”

Section: Analytical Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 97%

Learning to Troubleshoot: A New Theory-Based Design Architecture

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Troubleshooting is a common form of problem solving. Technicians (e.g., automotive mechanics, electricians) and professionals (physician, therapists, ombudspersons) diagnose faulty systems and take direct, corrective action to eliminate any faults in order to return the systems to their normal states. Traditional approaches to troubleshooting instruction have emphasized either theoretical or domain knowledge about the system or specific troubleshooting procedures. These methods have failed to develop transferable troubleshooting skills in learners. In this article, we propose an architecture for designing learning environments for troubleshooting. The architecture integrates experiential, domain, and device knowledge in a learning system that enables learners to generate and test hypotheses for every action they take, relate every action to a conceptual model of the system, and query experienced troubleshooters about what they would do. The architecture includes three essential components: A multi-layered conceptual model of the system that includes topographic, function, strategic, and procedural representations; a simulator that requires the learner to generate hypotheses, reconcile the hypotheses to the system mode, test the hypotheses, and interpret the results from the test; and a case library that uses a case-based reasoning engine to access relevant stories of troubleshooting experiences as advice for the learner. This novel architecture can be used to develop learning environments for different kinds of troubleshooting. 78 Jonassen and Hung WHAT IS TROUBLESHOOTING?Troubleshooting is among the most common types of problem solving. Whether troubleshooting a faulty modem, a multiplexed refrigeration system in a modern supermarket, or communication problems in an advertising agency, troubleshooting attempts to isolate fault states in a system and repair or replace the faulty components in order to reinstate the system to normal functioning. Troubleshooting is normally associated with the repair of physical, mechanical, or electronic systems. However, organizational ombudsmen, such as employee relations managers, customer relation specialists, consumer advocates, public relations specialists, and human resource directors are also troubleshooters. These people are responsible for handling complaints that represent fault states that must be repaired in customer relations systems. Individuals in their everyday lives engage in personal troubleshooting associated with self-change, especially when related to addictive behaviors (Prochaska et al., 1992). Medical and psychological diagnoses also involve troubleshooting.On the continuum of problems from well-structured (algorithms, story problems) to ill-structured (systems analysis, design), troubleshooting problems are in the middle (Jonassen, 2000). Troubleshooting problems:• appear ill-defined because the troubleshooter must determine what information is needed for problem diagnosis (which data about the electrical and fuel systems are needed in troubleshooting...

show abstract

Individual differences: A third component in problem‐solving instruction

Cited by 40 publications

References 9 publications

Toward a design theory of problem solving

Toward a design theory of problem solving

Field dependence-independence cognitive style and academic achievement: A review of research and theory

Learning to Troubleshoot: A New Theory-Based Design Architecture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About