The Grounded Expertise Components Approach in the Novel Area of Cryptic Crossword Solving

Abstract

This paper presents a relatively unexplored area of expertise research which focuses on the solving of British-style cryptic crossword puzzles. Unlike its American “straight-definition” counterparts, which are primarily semantically-cued retrieval tasks, the British cryptic crossword is an exercise in code-cracking detection work. Solvers learn to ignore the superficial “surface reading” of the clue, which is phrased to be deliberately misleading, and look instead for a grammatical set of coded instructions which, if executed precisely, will lead to the correct (and only) answer. Sample clues are set out to illustrate the task requirements and demands. Hypothesized aptitudes for the field might include high fluid intelligence, skill at quasi-algebraic puzzles, pattern matching, visuospatial manipulation, divergent thinking and breaking frame abilities. These skills are additional to the crystallized knowledge and word-retrieval demands which are also a feature of American crossword puzzles. The authors present results from an exploratory survey intended to identify the characteristics of the cryptic crossword solving population, and outline the impact of these results on the direction of their subsequent research. Survey results were strongly supportive of a number of hypothesized skill-sets and guided the selection of appropriate test content and research paradigms which formed the basis of an extensive research program to be reported elsewhere. The paper concludes by arguing the case for a more grounded approach to expertise studies, termed the Grounded Expertise Components Approach. In this, the design and scope of the empirical program flows from a detailed and objectively-based characterization of the research population at the very onset of the program.

Catch that word: interactivity, serendipity and verbal fluency in a word production task

“…Correlations between Scrabble expertise (on a national rating scale) and anagram skills have been previously reported (Tuffiash, Roring & Ericsson, 2007) so it seems likely individual differences in this regard may moderate performance on the word production task. Indeed, Friedlander and Fine (2016) suggested that cryptic crossword solvers have naturally good anagramming skills which have a strong parallel with the current study given that these solvers tend to deliberately restructure letters. Twelve anagrams were selected from the set used in Webb, Little and Cropper (2018) which were in turn drawn from Novick and Sherman (2003).…”

Connect 4: A Novel Paradigm to Elicit Positive and Negative Insight and Search Problem Solving

“…Maryam Mirzakhani, winner of the Field’s medal demonstrates this when asked about mathematics, “the most rewarding part is the ‘Aha’ moment, the excitement of discovery and enjoyment of understanding something new, the feeling of being on top of a hill, and having a clear view" ( CMI, 2008 , p. 12). A similar rewarding aspect to insight moments has recently been demonstrated by Friedlander and Fine (2016) whose Cryptic Crossword solving sample identified the Penny Dropping Moment (the Crossword solver community’s term for insight moments) as the main motivation for pursuing their hobby. In both these examples the insight experience is a positive one, something that can be seen as a tacit assumption in the historical approach to insight research ( Gick and Lockhart, 1995 ).…”

“The Penny Drops”: Investigating Insight Through the Medium of Cryptic Crosswords

“…The nature of the cryptic crossword has been described in some detail in an earlier paper (Friedlander and Fine, 2016 ), but key aspects are highlighted again below. Example cryptic crossword clues, together with an explanation of the cryptic instructions for achieving the required solution, are set out in Boxes 1 , 2 , 4 – 6 .…”

“…Unlike their “straight definition” American cousins, the challenge of the British-style cryptic crossword lies not in the obscurity of the vocabulary to be retrieved, but in the quasi-algebraic coded instructions which must be executed precisely in order to achieve the correct answer to the clue (Friedlander and Fine, 2016 ): see Box 1 . Cryptic crossword clues usually comprise two elements: a straight definition, plus the cryptic instructions for assembling the required solution—the “wordplay” (Friedlander and Fine, 2016 ; Pham, 2016 ). It is not always obvious which part of the clue is fulfilling what role, and there is often no clear division between the two parts (Friedlander and Fine, 2016 ).…”

“…Cryptic crossword clues usually comprise two elements: a straight definition, plus the cryptic instructions for assembling the required solution—the “wordplay” (Friedlander and Fine, 2016 ; Pham, 2016 ). It is not always obvious which part of the clue is fulfilling what role, and there is often no clear division between the two parts (Friedlander and Fine, 2016 ). Even the “definitional” element of the clue might be obliquely or whimsically referenced, consciously exploiting ambiguities such as grammatical form, phrasal semantics, homophones, synonyms, and roundabout expressions (Cleary, 1996 ; Aarons, 2015 ; Friedlander and Fine, 2016 ).…”