Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T10:00:48.818Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 5 - How Impasse Leads to Insight

The Prepared Mind Perspective

from II - Fixation and Insight

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 May 2024

By
Colleen M. Seifert
Edited by
Carola Salvi ,
Jennifer Wiley  and
Steven M. Smith
Carola Salvi
Affiliation:
John Cabot University, Rome
Jennifer Wiley
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Chicago
Steven M. Smith
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Get access

Summary

This chapter posits a prepared mind as key to later insight experiences. Following Wallas's (1926) four-stage model, preparation through failures experienced during initial solution attempts anticipates opportunities. At the time of impasse, solvers can predict necessary solution qualities by thinking through failed attempts at a more abstract level. These predictive features (Johnson & Seifert, 1994) describe needed resources, missing information, and solution characteristics, and are “seeded” into memory with the unsolved problem. Later, during incubation, attended features in the current context spontaneously retrieve the unsolved problem from memory, called opportunistic assimilation. This conscious reminding of the unsolved problem is the experience of sudden insight (Aha!). The surprised solver must then puzzle through why the current contextual features brought the problem back to mind and, in the process, restructure the old and new representational pieces into a novel solution. In this account, the insight process depends on effortful thinking during both preparation and illumination, but the incubation stage involves the simple process of associative memory as the source of insight experiences.

Keywords

insightproblem solvingmemory retrievalopportunistic assimilationpredictive featuresaha! experiencerestructuringmental effort
Type
Chapter
Information
The Emergence of Insight , pp. 84 - 112
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, J. L. (1974). Conceptual blockbusting. Freeman.Google Scholar
Adams, L. T., Kasserman, J. E., Yearwood, A. A., et al. (1988). Memory access: The effects of fact-oriented versus problem-oriented acquisition. Memory & Cognition, 16, 167–175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ash, I. K., & Wiley, J. (2006). The nature of restructuring in insight: An individual-differences approach. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 66–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baird, B., Smallwood, J., Mrazek, M. D., et al. (2012). Inspired by distraction: Mind wandering facilitates creative incubation. Psychological Science, 23(10), 1117–1122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612446024.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Silvia, P. J., & Schacter, D. L. (2016). Creative cognition and brain network dynamics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(2), 87–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowden, E. M. (1997). The effect of reportable and unreportable hints on anagram solution and the aha! experience. Consciousness and Cognition, 6, 545–573. https://doi.org/10.1006/ccog.1997.0325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowden, E. M., & Beeman, M. J. (1998). Getting the right idea: Semantic activation in the right hemisphere may help solve insight problems. Psychological Science, 9(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowden, E. M., & Jung-Beeman, M. (2003a). Aha! Insight experience correlates with solution activation in the right hemisphere. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10(3), 730–737. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196539CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowden, E. M., & Jung-Beeman, M. (2003). Normative data for 144 compound remote associate problems. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 35, 634–639. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowden, E. M., Jung-Beeman, M., Fleck, J., & Kounios, J. (2005). New approaches to demystifying insight. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 322–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowers, K. S., Regehr, G., Balthazard, C., & Parker, K. (1990). Intuition in the context of discovery. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 72–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandimonte, M. A., & Passolunghi, M. C. (1994). The effect of cue-familiarity, cue-distinctiveness, and retention interval on prospective remembering. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47(3), 565–587.Google ScholarPubMed
Burnham, C. A., & Davis, K. G. (1969). The nine-dot problem: Beyond perceptual organization. Psychonomic Science, 17(6), 321–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2005). Spontaneous access and analogical incubation effects. Creativity Research Journal, 17(2--3), 207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Getzels, J. W. (1971). Discovery-oriented behavior and the originality of creative products: A study with artists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 19(1), 47–52. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031106CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Getzels, J. W. (1988.) Creativity and problem finding. In Farley, F. H. & Neperud, R. W. (Eds.), The foundations of aesthetics, art, and art education (pp. 91–106). Praeger.Google Scholar
Danek, A. H., & Salvi, C. (2020). Moment of truth: Why aha! experiences are correct. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 54(2), 484–486. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danek, A. H., & Wiley, J. (2017). What about false insights? Deconstructing the Aha! experience along its multiple dimensions for correct and incorrect solutions separately. Frontiers in Psychology, 7:2077. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02077.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dodds, R. A., Smith, S. M., & Ward, T. B. (2002). The use of environmental clues during incubation. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 287–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1434_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorfman, J., Shames, V. A., & Kihlstrom, J. F. (1996). Intuition, incubation, and insight: Implicit cognition in problem solving. Implicit cognition, 257–296.Google Scholar
Duncker, K. (1945). On problem-solving (L. S. Lees, Trans.). Psychological Monographs, 58(5), i–113. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Getzels, J. W. (1975). Problem-finding and the inventiveness of solutions. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 9(1), 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1975.tb00552.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Getzels, J. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding in art. Wiley.Google Scholar
Gilhooly, K. J., & Murphy, P. (2005). Differentiating insight from non-insight problems. Thinking & Reasoning, 11(3), 279–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54(7), 493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1940). Human abilities. Psychological Review, 47(5), 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hammond, K. J., & Seifert, C. M. (1993). A cognitive science approach to casebased planning. In Chipman, S. & Meyrowitz, A. L. (Eds.), Foundations of knowledge acquisition: Cognitive models of complex learning (pp. 245–267). Kluwer Academic Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, K. J., Converse, T. M., Marks, M., & Seifert, C. M. (1993). Opportunism and learning. Journal of Machine Learning, 10, 279–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, K. J., Seifert, C. M., & Gray, K. C. (1991). Functionality in analogical transfer: A hard match is good to find. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 111–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jansson, D. G., & Smith, S. M. (1991). Design fixation. Design Studies, 12(1), 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarman, M. S. (2014). Quantifying the qualitative: Measuring the insight experience. Creativity Research Journal, 26(3), 276–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, H. M., & Seifert, C. M. (1992). The role of predictive features in retrieving analogical cases. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 648–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jung-Beeman, M., Bowden, E. M., Haberman, J., et al. (2004). Neural activity when people solve verbal problems with insight. PLoS Biology, 2(4), e97. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020097.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaplan, C. A., & Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight. Cognitive Psychology, 22(3), 374–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(90)90008-R.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., Haider, H., & Rhenius, D. (1999). Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25(6), 1534–1555. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.6.1534.Google Scholar
Köhler, W. (1917). Intelligenzprüfungen an Anthropoiden. Treatises of the Prussian Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Köhler, W. (1925/1976). The mentality of apes. Liveright.Google Scholar
Lachman, J., Lachman, R., Taylor, D., & Fowler, R. (1979). Question Answering-Updating Semantic Memory. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 14(4), 244–244).Google Scholar
Laukkonen, R., Schooler, J., & Tangen, J. M. (2023, July 8). The Eureka Heuristic: Relying on insight to appraise the quality of ideas. osf.io/pz3rh.Google Scholar
Laukkonen, R., Webb, M. E., Salvi, C., Tangen, J. M., & Schooler, J. (2018). Eureka Heuristics: How feelings of insight signal the quality of a new idea [preprint]. PsyArXiv, February 24. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ez3tn.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laukkonen, R., Webb, M. E., Salvi, C., Tangen, J. M., Slagter, H. A., & Schooler, J. (2023). Insight and the selection of ideas. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 153, 105363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, S. (2016). Broaden the mind before ideation: The effect of conceptual attention scope on creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 190–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockhart, R., Lamon, M., & Gick, M. L. (1988). Conceptual transfer in simple insight problems. Memory & Cognition, 16(1), 36–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lu, J. G., Akinola, M., & Mason, M. F. (2017). “Switching On” creativity: Task switching can increase creativity by reducing cognitive fixation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 139, 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.01.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubart, T. I. (2001). Models of the creative process: Past, present and future. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3–4), 295–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacGregor, J. N., Ormerod, T. C., & Chronicle, E. P. (2001). Information processing and insight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 176–201.Google ScholarPubMed
Madjar, N., & Shalley, C. E. (2008). Multiple tasks’ and multiple goals’ effect on creativity: Forced incubation or just a distraction?. Journal of Management, 34(4), 786–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madjar, N., Shalley, C. E., & Herndon, B. (2019). Taking time to incubate: The moderating role of “what you do” and “when you do it” on creative performance. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 53(3), 377–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maier, N. R. F. (1930). Reasoning in humans: I. On direction. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 10, 115–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maier, N. R. F. (1931). Reasoning in humans: II. The solution of a problem and its appearance in consciousness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 12, 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0071361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., & Landau, J. D. (1998). An investigation of everyday prospective memory. Memory & Cognition, 26(4), 633–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1992). Thinking, problem solving, cognition. WH Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1995). The search for insight: Grappling with Gestalt Psychology’s unanswered questions. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 3–32). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mednick, S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative problem solving process. Psychological Review, 69(3), 200–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, J., Kotovsky, K., & Cagan, J. (2007). The influence of open goals on the acquisition of problem-relevant information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(5), 876–891. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.5.876.Google ScholarPubMed
Moss, J., Kotovsky, K., & Cagan, J. (2011). The effect of incidental hints when problems are suspended before, during, or after an impasse. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(1), 140–148. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021206.Google ScholarPubMed
Murray, J. K., Studer, J. A., Daly, S. R., McKilligan, S., & Seifert, C. M. (2019). Design by taking perspectives: How engineers explore problems. Journal of Engineering Education, 108, 248–275. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jee.20263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Needham, D. R., & Begg, I. M. (1991). Problem-oriented training promotes spontaneous analogical transfer: Memory-oriented training promotes memory for training. Memory & Cognition, 19, 543–557.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nisbett, R. E. (2015). Mindware: Tools for smart thinking. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Ohlsson, S. (1984a). Restructuring revisited: I. A summary and critique of the Gestalt theory of problem solving. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.1984.tb01001.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohlsson, S. (1984b). Restructuring revisited: II. An information processing theory of restructuring and insight. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 25, 117–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.1984.tb01005.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohlsson, S. (1992). Information processing explanations of insight and related phenomena. In Keane, M. and Gilhooly, K. (Eds.), Advances in the Psychology of Thinking (Vol.1, pp. 1–44). Harvester-Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Ovington, L. A., Saliba, A. J., Moran, C. C., Goldring, J., & MacDonald, J. B. (2018). Do people really have insights in the shower? The when, where and who of the Aha! moment. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 52(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patalano, A. L., & Seifert, C. M. (1994). Memory for impasses in problem solving. Memory and Cognition, 22(2), 234–242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patalano, A. L., & Seifert, C. M. (1997). Opportunistic planning: Being reminded of pending goals. Cognitive Psychology, 34, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1997.0655.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patalano, A. L., Seifert, C. M., & Hammond, K. J. (1993). Predictive encoding: Planning for opportunities. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1936). Origins of intelligence in the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Poincaré, H. (1908/2000). Mathematical creation. Resonance, 5(2), 85–94. [Reprinted from Poincare, H. (1908). Science et Methode. Paris: Flammarion.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, S. M., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2014). Creativity – the unconscious foundations of the incubation period. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sadler-Smith, E. (2015). Wallas’ four-stage model of the creative process: More than meets the eye? Creativity Research Journal, 27(4), 342–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savic, M. (2016). Mathematical problem-solving via Wallas’ four stages of creativity: Implications for the undergraduate classroom. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 13(3), 255–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schank, R. C. (1982). Dynamic memory: A theory of reminding and learning in computers and people. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schank, R. C. (1999). Dynamic memory revisited. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schank, , R., & Abelson, , R. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Scheerer, M. (1963). Problem-solving. Scientific American, 208(4), 118–131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schooler, J. W., & Melcher, J. (1995). The ineffability of insight. In Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 97–133). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Segal, E. (2004). Incubation in insight problem solving. Creativity Research Journal, 16(1), 141–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seifert, C. M., & Patalano, A. L. (1991). Memory for incomplete tasks: A Re-examination of the Zeigarnik effect. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Cognitive Science Society (pp. 114–119). Chicago.Google Scholar
Seifert, C. M., & Patalano, A. L. (2001). Opportunism in memory: Preparing for chance encounters. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(6), 198–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seifert, C. M., Hammond, K. J., Johnson, H. M., et al. (1994). Case-based learning: Predictive features in indexing. Machine Learning, 16, 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seifert, C. M., Meyer, D. E., Davidson, N., Patalano, A. L., & Yaniv, I. (1995). Demystification of cognitive insight: Opportunistic assimilation and the prepared-mind hypothesis. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 65–124). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Seifert, C. M., Patalano, A. L., Hammond, K. J., & Converse, T. M. (1997). Experience and expertise: The role of memory in planning for opportunities. In Feltovich, P. J., Ford, K. M. & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.), Expertise in context: Human and machine (pp. 101–123). AAAI Press/MIT Press.Google Scholar
Silveira, J. M. (1971). Incubation: The effect of timing and length on problem solution and quality of problem processing. Unpublished thesis, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1966). Scientific discovery and the psychology of problem solving. In Colodny, R. G. (Ed.), Mind and cosmos (pp. 22–41). University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Sio, U. N., & Ormerod, T. C. (2009). Does incubation enhance problem solving? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135(1), 94–120. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sio, U. N., & Ormerod, T. C. (2015). Incubation and cueing effects in problem-solving: Set aside the difficult problems but focus on the easy ones. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(1), 113–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sio, U. N., & Ormerod, T. C. (2019). Incubation and cueing effects in problem-solving: Set aside the difficult problems but focus on the easy ones. In Gilhooly, K. J. (Eds), Insight and creativity in problem solving (pp. 113–129). Routledge.Google Scholar
Sio, U. N., & Rudowicz, E. (2007). The role of an incubation period in creative problem solving. Creativity Research Journal, 19(2–3), 307–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2015). The science of mind wandering: Empirically navigating the stream of consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 487–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. M. (1995a). Fixation, incubation, and insight in memory, problem solving, and creativity. In Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B. & Finke, R. A. (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 135–155). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S. M. (1995b). Getting into and out of mental ruts: A theory of fixation, incubation, and insight. In Sternberg, R. & Davidson, J. (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 121–149). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S. M., & Beda, Z. (2019). Old problems in new contexts: The context-dependent fixation hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(1), 192–197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, S. M., & Blankenship, S. E. (1989). Incubation effects. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 27(4), 311–314. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03334612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. M., & Blankenship, S. E. (1991). Incubation and the persistence of fixation in problem solving. The American Journal of Psychology, 104(1), 61–87. https://doi.org/10.2307/1422851.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, S. M., Gerkens, D. R., & Angello, G. (2017). Alternating incubation effects in the generation of category exemplars. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(2), 95–106 https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. M., Sifonis, C. M., & Angello, G. (2012). Clue insensitivity in remote associates test problem solving. The Journal of Problem Solving, 4(2), 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storm, B. C., & Patel, T. N. (2014). Forgetting as a consequence and enabler of creative thinking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 6, 1594–609. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000006.Google Scholar
Studer, J. A., Daly, S. R., McKilligan, S., & Seifert, C. M. (2018). Evidence of problem exploration in creative designs. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis, and Manufacturing, Special Issue on Design Creativity, 32(4), 415–430. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060418000124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tulving, E., & Thomson, D.M., (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80(3), 352–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Lehn, K. (1988). Toward a theory of impasse-driven learning. In Mandl, H. & Lesgold, A. (Eds.), Learning: Issues for intelligent tutor systems (pp. 19–41). Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. J. Cape.Google Scholar
Webb, M. E., Cropper, S. J., & Little, D. R. (2019). “Aha!” is stronger when preceded by a “huh?”: Presentation of a solution affects ratings of aha experience conditional on accuracy. Thinking & Reasoning, 25(3), 324–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2018.1523807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (1992). Metacognition and insight during problem solving: Comment on Metcalfe. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 426–431.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. (1995). Prolegomena to theories of insight in problem solving: A taxonomy of problems. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), The nature of insight (pp. 157–196). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W., & Alba, J. W. (1981a). An examination of the alleged role of “fixation” in the solution of several “insight” problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 169–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisberg, R. W., & Alba, J. W. (1981b). Gestalt theory, insight, and past experience: Reply to Dominowski. Jousssrnal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110(2), 199–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.110.2.199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisberg, R. W., & Alba, J. W. (1982). Problem solving is not like perception: More on Gestalt theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111(3). https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-3445.111.3.326.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R., & Suls, J. M. (1973). An information processing model of Duncker’s candle problem. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 255–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertheimer, M. (1959). Productive thinking. University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1945.)Google Scholar
Yaniv, I., & Meyer, D. E. (1987). Activation and metacognition of inaccessible stored information: Potential bases of incubation effects in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 187–205.Google ScholarPubMed
Yaniv, I., Meyer, D. E., & Davidson, N. S. (1995). Dynamic memory processes in retrieving answers to questions: Recall failures, judgments of knowing, and acquisition of information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(6), 1509–1521.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, S., Daly, S. R., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2016). Evidence-based design heuristics for idea generation. Design studies, 46, 95–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeigarnik, B. (1927). Über das Behalten von erledigten und unerledigten Handlungen. Psychologisches Forschung, 9, 1–85.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×