The Impact of Goal Specificity on Strategy Use and the Acquisition of Problem Structure
Theories of skill acquisition have made radically different predictions about the role of general problem‐solving methods in acquiring rules that promote effective transfer to new problems. Under one view, methods that focus on reaching specific goals, such as means‐ends analysis, are assumed to pro...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Cognitive science 1996-01, Vol.20 (1), p.75-100 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 100 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 75 |
container_title | Cognitive science |
container_volume | 20 |
creator | Vollmeyer, Regina Burns, Bruce D. Holyoak, Keith J. |
description | Theories of skill acquisition have made radically different predictions about the role of general problem‐solving methods in acquiring rules that promote effective transfer to new problems. Under one view, methods that focus on reaching specific goals, such as means‐ends analysis, are assumed to provide the basis for efficient knowledge compilation (Anderson, 1987), whereas under an alternative view such methods are believed to disrupt rule induction (Sweller, 1988). We suggest that the role of general methods in learning varies with both the specificity of the problem solver's goal and the systematicity of the strategies used for testing hypotheses about rules. In the absence of a specific goal people are more likely to use a rule‐induction learning strategy, whereas provision of a specific goal fosters use of difference reduction, which tends to be a non‐rule‐induction strategy. We performed two experiments to investigate the impact of goal specificity and systematicity of rule‐induction strategies in learning and transfer within a complex dynamic system. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that during free exploration of a problem space, greater learning occurred if participants adopted more systematic strategies for rule induction, and that participants come to favor such strategies. Experiment 2 revealed that participants who were provided with a specific goal performed well on the initial problem but were impaired on a transfer test using a similar problem with a different goal. Instruction on a systematic rule‐induction strategy facilitated solution for both the initial and transfer problems, but participants' use of this strategy declined if they had a specific goal. Our results support Sweller's (1988) proposal that general problemsolving methods applied to a specific goal foster acquisition of knowledge about an isolated solution path but do not provide an effective way of learning the overall structure of a problem space. We interpret these results in terms of dualspace theories of search through problem space. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1207/s15516709cog2001_3 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_215414888</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>9663924</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4071-33fafa6579d387d80117c231e355b9c517ec7aacfb0fc2fe4a4f704f79b8ecd93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkNFKwzAUhoMoOKcv4FVQb6vnJE3TXo6hUxhM2IaXJUuTmdG1W9Iie3tbNrwRwYvDgcP3_Qd-Qm4RHpGBfAooBCYSMl2vGQDm_IwM-lvUH8_JAHgSR8CQX5KrEDYAkCQ8G5CPxaehb9ud0g2tLZ3UqqTzndHOOu2aA60rOm-8asz6QJfBUFUVtOmUkd63LrjGdUDnvft6VZptz7a6ab25JhdWlcHcnPaQLF-eF-PXaDqbvI1H00jHIDHi3CqrEiGzgqeySAFRasbRcCFWmRYojZZKabsCq5k1sYqthG6yVWp0kfEhuTvm7ny9b01o8k3d-qp7mTMUMcZpmnbQ_V8QplKijEH0FDtS2tcheGPznXdb5Q85Qt63nP9uuZMeTtEqaFVaryrtwo_JkXEhocPkEftypTn8IzgfzyZzliH_BhkUjSo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1877174058</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Impact of Goal Specificity on Strategy Use and the Acquisition of Problem Structure</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><creator>Vollmeyer, Regina ; Burns, Bruce D. ; Holyoak, Keith J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Vollmeyer, Regina ; Burns, Bruce D. ; Holyoak, Keith J.</creatorcontrib><description>Theories of skill acquisition have made radically different predictions about the role of general problem‐solving methods in acquiring rules that promote effective transfer to new problems. Under one view, methods that focus on reaching specific goals, such as means‐ends analysis, are assumed to provide the basis for efficient knowledge compilation (Anderson, 1987), whereas under an alternative view such methods are believed to disrupt rule induction (Sweller, 1988). We suggest that the role of general methods in learning varies with both the specificity of the problem solver's goal and the systematicity of the strategies used for testing hypotheses about rules. In the absence of a specific goal people are more likely to use a rule‐induction learning strategy, whereas provision of a specific goal fosters use of difference reduction, which tends to be a non‐rule‐induction strategy. We performed two experiments to investigate the impact of goal specificity and systematicity of rule‐induction strategies in learning and transfer within a complex dynamic system. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that during free exploration of a problem space, greater learning occurred if participants adopted more systematic strategies for rule induction, and that participants come to favor such strategies. Experiment 2 revealed that participants who were provided with a specific goal performed well on the initial problem but were impaired on a transfer test using a similar problem with a different goal. Instruction on a systematic rule‐induction strategy facilitated solution for both the initial and transfer problems, but participants' use of this strategy declined if they had a specific goal. Our results support Sweller's (1988) proposal that general problemsolving methods applied to a specific goal foster acquisition of knowledge about an isolated solution path but do not provide an effective way of learning the overall structure of a problem space. We interpret these results in terms of dualspace theories of search through problem space.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0364-0213</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1551-6709</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog2001_3</identifier><identifier>CODEN: COGSD5</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>10 Industrial Avenue, Mahwah, NJ 07430‐2262, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Cognition & reasoning ; Cognition. Intelligence ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Learning ; Problem solving ; Psychology ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Reasoning. Problem solving</subject><ispartof>Cognitive science, 1996-01, Vol.20 (1), p.75-100</ispartof><rights>1996 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.</rights><rights>1996 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Ablex Publishing Corporation Jan 1996</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4071-33fafa6579d387d80117c231e355b9c517ec7aacfb0fc2fe4a4f704f79b8ecd93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4071-33fafa6579d387d80117c231e355b9c517ec7aacfb0fc2fe4a4f704f79b8ecd93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1207%2Fs15516709cog2001_3$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1207%2Fs15516709cog2001_3$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,4010,27846,27900,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=3123570$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Vollmeyer, Regina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burns, Bruce D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holyoak, Keith J.</creatorcontrib><title>The Impact of Goal Specificity on Strategy Use and the Acquisition of Problem Structure</title><title>Cognitive science</title><description>Theories of skill acquisition have made radically different predictions about the role of general problem‐solving methods in acquiring rules that promote effective transfer to new problems. Under one view, methods that focus on reaching specific goals, such as means‐ends analysis, are assumed to provide the basis for efficient knowledge compilation (Anderson, 1987), whereas under an alternative view such methods are believed to disrupt rule induction (Sweller, 1988). We suggest that the role of general methods in learning varies with both the specificity of the problem solver's goal and the systematicity of the strategies used for testing hypotheses about rules. In the absence of a specific goal people are more likely to use a rule‐induction learning strategy, whereas provision of a specific goal fosters use of difference reduction, which tends to be a non‐rule‐induction strategy. We performed two experiments to investigate the impact of goal specificity and systematicity of rule‐induction strategies in learning and transfer within a complex dynamic system. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that during free exploration of a problem space, greater learning occurred if participants adopted more systematic strategies for rule induction, and that participants come to favor such strategies. Experiment 2 revealed that participants who were provided with a specific goal performed well on the initial problem but were impaired on a transfer test using a similar problem with a different goal. Instruction on a systematic rule‐induction strategy facilitated solution for both the initial and transfer problems, but participants' use of this strategy declined if they had a specific goal. Our results support Sweller's (1988) proposal that general problemsolving methods applied to a specific goal foster acquisition of knowledge about an isolated solution path but do not provide an effective way of learning the overall structure of a problem space. We interpret these results in terms of dualspace theories of search through problem space.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cognition & reasoning</subject><subject>Cognition. Intelligence</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Problem solving</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Reasoning. Problem solving</subject><issn>0364-0213</issn><issn>1551-6709</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1996</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkNFKwzAUhoMoOKcv4FVQb6vnJE3TXo6hUxhM2IaXJUuTmdG1W9Iie3tbNrwRwYvDgcP3_Qd-Qm4RHpGBfAooBCYSMl2vGQDm_IwM-lvUH8_JAHgSR8CQX5KrEDYAkCQ8G5CPxaehb9ud0g2tLZ3UqqTzndHOOu2aA60rOm-8asz6QJfBUFUVtOmUkd63LrjGdUDnvft6VZptz7a6ab25JhdWlcHcnPaQLF-eF-PXaDqbvI1H00jHIDHi3CqrEiGzgqeySAFRasbRcCFWmRYojZZKabsCq5k1sYqthG6yVWp0kfEhuTvm7ny9b01o8k3d-qp7mTMUMcZpmnbQ_V8QplKijEH0FDtS2tcheGPznXdb5Q85Qt63nP9uuZMeTtEqaFVaryrtwo_JkXEhocPkEftypTn8IzgfzyZzliH_BhkUjSo</recordid><startdate>199601</startdate><enddate>199601</enddate><creator>Vollmeyer, Regina</creator><creator>Burns, Bruce D.</creator><creator>Holyoak, Keith J.</creator><general>Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</general><general>Taylor & Francis</general><general>Ablex Pub. Corp</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>SAAPM</scope><scope>7TK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199601</creationdate><title>The Impact of Goal Specificity on Strategy Use and the Acquisition of Problem Structure</title><author>Vollmeyer, Regina ; Burns, Bruce D. ; Holyoak, Keith J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4071-33fafa6579d387d80117c231e355b9c517ec7aacfb0fc2fe4a4f704f79b8ecd93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1996</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cognition & reasoning</topic><topic>Cognition. Intelligence</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Problem solving</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Reasoning. Problem solving</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Vollmeyer, Regina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burns, Bruce D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holyoak, Keith J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 42</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Cognitive science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Vollmeyer, Regina</au><au>Burns, Bruce D.</au><au>Holyoak, Keith J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Impact of Goal Specificity on Strategy Use and the Acquisition of Problem Structure</atitle><jtitle>Cognitive science</jtitle><date>1996-01</date><risdate>1996</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>75</spage><epage>100</epage><pages>75-100</pages><issn>0364-0213</issn><eissn>1551-6709</eissn><coden>COGSD5</coden><abstract>Theories of skill acquisition have made radically different predictions about the role of general problem‐solving methods in acquiring rules that promote effective transfer to new problems. Under one view, methods that focus on reaching specific goals, such as means‐ends analysis, are assumed to provide the basis for efficient knowledge compilation (Anderson, 1987), whereas under an alternative view such methods are believed to disrupt rule induction (Sweller, 1988). We suggest that the role of general methods in learning varies with both the specificity of the problem solver's goal and the systematicity of the strategies used for testing hypotheses about rules. In the absence of a specific goal people are more likely to use a rule‐induction learning strategy, whereas provision of a specific goal fosters use of difference reduction, which tends to be a non‐rule‐induction strategy. We performed two experiments to investigate the impact of goal specificity and systematicity of rule‐induction strategies in learning and transfer within a complex dynamic system. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that during free exploration of a problem space, greater learning occurred if participants adopted more systematic strategies for rule induction, and that participants come to favor such strategies. Experiment 2 revealed that participants who were provided with a specific goal performed well on the initial problem but were impaired on a transfer test using a similar problem with a different goal. Instruction on a systematic rule‐induction strategy facilitated solution for both the initial and transfer problems, but participants' use of this strategy declined if they had a specific goal. Our results support Sweller's (1988) proposal that general problemsolving methods applied to a specific goal foster acquisition of knowledge about an isolated solution path but do not provide an effective way of learning the overall structure of a problem space. We interpret these results in terms of dualspace theories of search through problem space.</abstract><cop>10 Industrial Avenue, Mahwah, NJ 07430‐2262, USA</cop><pub>Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</pub><doi>10.1207/s15516709cog2001_3</doi><tpages>26</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0364-0213 |
ispartof | Cognitive science, 1996-01, Vol.20 (1), p.75-100 |
issn | 0364-0213 1551-6709 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_215414888 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Periodicals Index Online |
subjects | Biological and medical sciences Cognition & reasoning Cognition. Intelligence Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Learning Problem solving Psychology Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Reasoning. Problem solving |
title | The Impact of Goal Specificity on Strategy Use and the Acquisition of Problem Structure |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T01%3A22%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Impact%20of%20Goal%20Specificity%20on%20Strategy%20Use%20and%20the%20Acquisition%20of%20Problem%20Structure&rft.jtitle=Cognitive%20science&rft.au=Vollmeyer,%20Regina&rft.date=1996-01&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=75&rft.epage=100&rft.pages=75-100&rft.issn=0364-0213&rft.eissn=1551-6709&rft.coden=COGSD5&rft_id=info:doi/10.1207/s15516709cog2001_3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E9663924%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1877174058&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |