No indication that the ego depletion manipulation can affect insight: a comment on DeCaro and Van Stockum (2018)

Drążyk, Dominika; Kumka, Martyna; Zarzycka, Katarzyna; Zguda, Paulina; Chuderski, Adam

doi:10.1080/13546783.2019.1649191

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, they did not contrast these results with data from analytic problems to see whether these ratings specifically predict insight problems, or correlate with correct solutions generally. Drążyk et al (2019) applied Danek and Wiley's four-dimensional scale of subjective experience, and found that only suddenness clearly distinguished insight from analytic problems (the former problems yielded a double mean rating, as compared to the latter problems). The three remaining ratings were comparable between the two problem categories (for a similar pattern of data, see Table 1 in Webb et al, 2016).…”

Section: Subjective Experience In Insight Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metacognitive experience on Raven’s matrices versus insight problems

Chuderski

Jastrzębski

Kroczek

et al. 2020

Metacognition Learning

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participants rated Intuition, Suddenness, Pleasure, and Certainty accompanying their solutions to items of a popular fluid intelligence test – Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices (RAPM) – that varied from easy (around 80% correct) to difficult (around 20% correct). The same ratings were collected from four insight problems interleaved with RAPM. Suddenness and Certainty substantially decreased from easy to difficult matrices (Pleasure strongly overlapped with Certainty). In easy matrices, subjective experience matched that observed during insight problems, suggesting the highly fluent processing resulting in vivid and univocal solutions. By contrast, processing difficult matrices seemed to involve effortful incremental combination of complex information that yielded uncertain outcomes, resembling full-blown analytic problems. Only Intuition, generally rated low, was unaffected by RAPM difficulty. These results suggest that RAPM constitutes a heterogeneous test, with easy vs. difficult items involving relatively distinct types of processing. This novel knowledge can help in understanding the processes underlying solving Raven’s matrices. The study also contributes to the understanding of the validity of subjective ratings as measures of metacognition.

show abstract

Section: Subjective Experience In Insight Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%