Rules and Problem Solving: Another Look

Abstract

College students were trained on problems similar to the water jar problems developed by Luchins (1942). Some students were instructed that a particular rule would solve all the problems, others had the same problems but were not instructed about the rule, and a third set of students had a series of novel problems in which no single rule operated throughout. In two experiments students in the instructed rule group not only performed best in training but also performed best when transferred to a condition in which a single novel rule was appropriate. Although results from the set of conditions most similar to those of Luchins suggested that students sometimes inappropriately persisted in rule usage, the overall results suggest that rigidity is not a necessary outcome of instructed problem solving. Indeed, many of the results were consistent with the notion that instructed problem solving is flexible problem solving.

From poor performance to success under stress: Working memory, strategy selection, and mathematical problem solving under pressure.

“…Because the use of less effort to produce a correct answer is generally better, and individuals were instructed to solve the problems using the simplest strategy possible, the tendency to break mental set is considered success on this task (Gasper, 2003; cf. Fantino, Jaworski, Case, & Stolarz-Fantino, 2003). It is important to point out that although one might assume that continued use of the same demanding formula on every problem would render instantiation of that formula effortless, this is not necessarily the case.…”

The logic and illogic of human reasoning.

“…Overall, these results suggest that rule-based problem solving (whether instructed or induced) need not be inflexible, but that induced rule learning may be especially effective in promoting flexible problem solving in children. The Kanevsky (2006) and Sasada studies measured accuracy of subsequent problem solving rather than efficiency (the measure used by Fantino, Jaworski, et al, 2003). The effect of the dependent measure and the possibility of developmental differences in the utility of instructed rules are subjects of current investigation.…”

Behavior-analytic approaches to decision making

“…We are trying to assess the applicability of the rule-governed versus contingencygoverned distinction to transfer from learning on one set of problems to another (e.g., Fantino, Jaworski, Case, and Stolarz-Fantino, 2003) and to do so in more applied and naturalistic settings. Thus, we are exploring the extent to which rule use allows flexibility of problem solving (and transfer to new problem types) in school children of different ages.…”