Strategy switch costs in arithmetic problem solving

Abstract

Three experiments tested whether switching between strategies involves a cost. In three experiments, participants had to give approximate products to two-digit multiplication problems (e.g., 47 x 76). They were told which strategy to use (Experiments 1 and 2) or could choose among strategies (Experiment 3). The participants showed poorer performance when they used different strategies on two consecutive trials than when they used the same strategy. They also used the same strategy over two consecutive problems more often than they used different strategies. These effects, termed strategy switch costs, were found when the participants executed the easiest strategy and when they solved easy problems. We discuss possible processes underlying these strategy switch costs and the implications of these strategy switch costs for models of strategy choices.

The Effect of Single Versus Repeated Previous Strategy Use on Individuals' Subsequent Strategy Choice

“…This perseveration effect has been demonstrated both after a repeated use of the previous strategy (e.g., Schillemans, Luwel, Bulté, Onghena, & Verschaffel, 2009), but also after a single use of the previous strategy (Lemaire & Lecacheur, 2010). In the present study, we tested whether this perseveration effect would be stronger after a repeated than after a single previous strategy application.…”

“…Indeed, participants chose on the test items more often the strategy they had used on the previous items. Second, this experiment generalised the perseveration effect after a single strategy application, as found by Lemaire and Lecacheur (2010) for two-digit addition problems, to a numerosity judgment task. Third, we did not find much evidence for a differential perseveration effect after a single or a repeated application of the previous strategy.…”

“…Lemaire and Lecacheur (2010) as well as Luwel, Schillemans, Onghena, and Verschaffel (2009a) have recently shown that switching from one strategy to another leads to longer response times (and higher error rates) on the item immediately after a strategy switch than when one repeats the previous strategy. This phenomenon is called the strategy switch cost.…”

“…The paradigm used by Lemaire and Lecacheur (2010) differs in two important ways from the one used by Schillemans et al (2009). First, Lemaire and Lecacheur cued the intended strategy on the preceding items instead of having it being evoked by the specific nature of the preceding trials as was done by Schillemans et al Second, and most important for the current study, Lemaire and Lecacheur (2010) let the test item precede by only one strategy application while the test items in the Schillemans et al study were always preceded by several strategy applications.…”

The influence of training and experience on memory strategy

“…In most tasks, different strategies are available to achieve the same goal and there are various well documented factors that affect choice of strategy, including degree of cognitive processing (e.g., Lemaire & Lecacheur, 2010;Luwel, Lemaire, & Verschaffel, 2005;Luwel, Schillemans, Onghena, & Verschaffel, 2009), history of success using a strategy (e.g., Lovett & Anderson, 1996;Siegler & Shipley, 1995), the similarity of the task to other tasks (e.g., Gick & Holyoak, 1987;Thorndike & Woodworth, 1901), and individual factors such as level of skill and working memory capacity (e.g., Campbell & Xue, 2001;LeFevre, Bisanz, Daley, Buffone, Greenham, & Sadesky, 1996). An important perspective on strategy selection comes from ACT-R theorists (e.g., Anderson & Lebiere, 1998) who emphasize that cognition is adaptive to the environment and strategy selection involves a cost-benefit tradeoff.…”