Working Memory Facilitates Insight Instead of Hindering It: Comment on DeCaro, Van Stockum, and Wieth (2016)

The "nothing-special" account of insight predicts positive correlations of insight problem solving and working memory capacity (WMC), whereas the "special-process" account expects no, or even negative, correlations. In the latter vein, DeCaro, Van Stockum Jr., and Wieth (2016) ha...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition memory, and cognition, 2017-12, Vol.43 (12), p.1993-2004
Hauptverfasser: Chuderski, Adam, Jastrzębski, Jan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The "nothing-special" account of insight predicts positive correlations of insight problem solving and working memory capacity (WMC), whereas the "special-process" account expects no, or even negative, correlations. In the latter vein, DeCaro, Van Stockum Jr., and Wieth (2016) have recently reported weak negative WMC correlations with 2 constraint relaxation matchstick problems and 3 insight problems, and thus they claim that WM hinders insight. Here, we report on 3 studies that investigated WMC and various matchstick and classical problems (including 1 study that precisely replicated DeCaro et al.'s procedure). All 3 studies yielded moderate positive correlations of WMC with both the constraint relaxation and the classical problems. WMC explained 10% variance in problem solving, no matter what problems were used or how they were applied. Thus, DeCaro et al.'s claim that WM hinders insight is unwarranted. The opposite is true: WM facilitates insight.
ISSN:0278-7393
1939-1285
DOI:10.1037/xlm0000409