The effects of superficial and structural information on online problem solving for good versus poor anagram solvers

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 61, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 1098-1120

  Novick, Laura R ^a,c   Sherman, Steven J ^b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COGNITION; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; PROBLEM SOLVING; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS;

COGNITION; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; PROBLEM SOLVING; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS;

EID: 45849097168     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470210701449936     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Adelson, B. (1981). Problem solving and the development of abstract categories in programming languages. Memory & Cognition, 9, 422-433.
2. Arnold, H., & Lee, B. (1973). Jumble #7. New York: The Berkeley Publishing Group.
3. Beilin, H., & Horn, R. (1962). Transition probability effects in anagram problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 514-518.
4. Blessing, S. B., & Ross, B. H. (1996). Content effects in problem categorization and problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 792-810.
5. Chambers, S. M., & Forster, K. I. (1975). Evidence for lexical access in a simultaneous matching task. Memory & Cognition, 3, 549-559.
6. Chateau, D., & Jared, D. (2003). Spelling-sound consistency effects in disyllabic word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 255-280.
7. Chi, M. T. H. (2006). Two approaches to the study of experts' characteristics. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 21-30). New York: Cambridge University Press.
8. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
9. Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 25, 257-271.
10. Deakin, J. M., & Allard, F. (1991). Skilled memory in expert figure skaters. Memory & Cognition, 19, 79-86.
11. Dominowski, R. L. (1967). Anagram solving as a function of bigram rank and word frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75, 299-306.
12. Dominowski, R. L. (1969). The effect of pronunciation practice on anagram difficulty. Psychonomic Science, 16, 99-100.
13. Dominowski, R. L., & Duncan, C. P. (1964). Anagram solving as a function of bigram frequency. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 3, 321-325.
14. Dunbar, K. (2001). The analogical paradox: Why analogy is so easy in naturalistic settings yet so difficult in the psychological laboratory. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 313-334). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Feltovich, P. J., Prietula, M. J., & Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Studies of expertise from psychological perspectives. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 41-67). New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Gavurin, E. I., & DeVito, C. (1973). Correlation of anagram solving to transition probability and word frequency. Journal of General Psychology, 88, 135-140.
17. Gavurin, E. I., & Zangrillo, R. L. (1975). Effect of bigram cues on the solution of monosyllabic and bisyllabic solution-word anagrams. Journal of General Psychology, 92, 225-229.
18. Gentner, D. R. (1988). Expertise in typewriting. In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 1-21). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19. Gilhooly, K. J., & Johnson, C. E. (1978). Effects of solution word attributes on anagram difficulty: A regression analysis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 30, 57-70.
20. Goldblum, N., & Frost, R. (1988). The crossword puzzle paradigm: The effectiveness of different word fragments as cues for the retrieval of words. Memory & Cognition, 16, 158-166.
21. Hardiman, P. T., Dufresne, R., & Mestre, J. P. (1989). The relation between problem categorization and problem solving among experts and novices. Memory & Cognition, 17, 627-638.
22. Hebert, J. A., & Rogers, C. A., Jr. (1966). Anagram solution as a function of pronounceability and difficulty. Psychonomic Science, 4, 359-360.
23. Holyoak, K. J. (1991). Symbolic connectionism: Toward third-generation theories of expertise. In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 301-335). New York: Cambridge University Press.
24. Humphreys, G. W., Evett, L. J., & Quinlan, P. T. (1990). Orthographic processing in visual word identification. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 517-560.
25. Keil, F. C., Smith, W. C., Simons, D. J., & Levin, D. T. (1998). Two dogmas of conceptual empiricism: Implications for hybrid models of the structure of knowledge. Cognition, 65, 103-135.
26. Kucera, H., & Francis, W. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
27. Lesgold, A., Rubinson, H., Feltovich, P., Glaser, R., Klopfer, D., & Wang, Y. (1988). Expertise in a complex skill: Diagnosing x-ray pictures. In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 311-342). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28. Manelis, L. (1974). The effect of meaningfulness in tachistoscopic word perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 182-192.
29. Mayzner, M. S., & Tresselt, M. E. (1962). Anagram solution times: A function of word transition probabilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 510-513.
30. Mayzner, M. S., & Tresselt, M. E. (1963). Anagram solution times: A function of word length and letter position variables. The Journal of Psychology, 55, 469-475.
31. Mayzner, M. S., & Tresselt, M. E. (1966). Anagram solution times: A function of multiple-solution anagrams. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 66-73.
32. Mayzner, M. S., Tresselt, M. E., & Helbock, H. (1964). An exploratory study of mediational responses in anagram problem solving. The Journal of Psychology, 57, 263-274.
33. McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
34. McKeithen, K. B., Reitman, J. S., Rueter, H. H., & Hirtle, S. C. (1981). Knowledge organization and skill differences in computer programmers. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 307-325.
35. Mendelsohn, G. A. (1976). An hypothesis approach to the solution of anagrams. Memory & Cognition, 4, 637-642.
36. Mendelsohn, G. A., & O'Brien, A. T. (1974). The solution of anagrams: A reexamination of the effects of transition letter probabilities, letter moves, and word frequency on anagram difficulty. Memory & Cognition, 2, 566-574.
37. Norman, G. R., Trott, A. D., Brooks, L. R., & Smith, E. K. M. (1994). Cognitive differences in clinical reasoning related to postgraduate training. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 6, 114-120.
38. Novick, L. R. (1988). Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 510-520.
39. Novick, L. R. (2001). Spatial diagrams: Key instruments in the toolbox for thought. In D. L. Medin (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 40, pp. 279-325). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
40. Novick, L. R., & Coté, N. (1992). The nature of expertise in anagram solution. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 450-455). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
41. Novick, L. R., & Sherman, S. J. (2003). On the nature of insight solutions: Evidence from skill differences in anagram solution. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 351-382.
42. Novick, L. R., & Sherman, S. J. (2004). Type-based bigram frequencies for five-letter words. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 397-401.
43. Rice, G. A., & Robinson, D. O. (1975). The role of bigram frequency in the perception of words and nonwords. Memory & Cognition, 3, 513-518.
44. Ronning, R. R. (1965). Anagram solution times: A function of the "ruleout" factor. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 35-39.
45. Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. (1982). Simulating a skilled typist: A study of skilled cognitive-motor performance. Cognitive Science, 6, 1-36.
46. Salthouse, T. A. (1991). Expertise as the circumvention of human processing limitations. In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 286-300). New York: Cambridge University Press.
47. Schiano, D., Cooper, L. A., Glaser, R., & Zhang, H. C. (1989). Highs are to lows as experts are to novices: Individual differences in the representation and solution of standardized figural analogies. Human Performance, 2, 225-248.
48. Schneider, W. (1990). Micro Experimental Laboratory. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
49. Schoenfeld, A. H., & Herrmann, D. J. (1982). Problem perception and knowledge structure in expert and novice mathematical problem solvers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8, 484-494.
50. Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96, 523-568.
51. Silver, E. A. (1981). Recall of mathematical problem information: Solving related problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 12, 54-64.
52. Spoehr, K. T., & Smith, E. E. (1973). The role of syllables in perceptual processing. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 71-89.
53. Tresselt, M. E., & Mayzner, M. S. (1965). Anagram solution times: A function of individual differences in stored digram frequencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70, 606-610.
54. Warren, M. W., & Thomson, W. J. (1969). Anagram solution as a function of transition probabilities and solution word frequency. Psychonomic Science, 17, 333-334.