Research Agenda for the Future: What We Need to Learn About Complex, Scientific Problem Solving

Learning to Solve Complex Scientific Problems

Volumn , Issue , 2017, Pages 341-362

  Jonassen, David H ^a   Engle, Randall W ^b   Cheng, Peter C H ^c   Salas, Eduardo ^d  

^a University of Missouri   (United States)

^b GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860130955     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Editorial

References (102)

1. Angeli, C. M. (1999). Examining the effects of context-free and context situated instructional strategies on learners' critical thinking. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60 (5A), 1447.
2. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
3. Barrouillet, P. (1996). Transitive inferences from set-inclusion relations and working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1408-1422.
4. Baxter-Magolda, M. B. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college: Gender related patterns in students’ intellectual development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5. Beckman, J. F., & Guthke, J. (1995). Complex problem solving, intelligence, and learning ability. In P. A. Frensch & J. Funcke (Eds.), Complex problem solving: The European perspective (pp. 177-200). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Belenky, M. F., Cinchy, B. M., Coldberger, N., & Tarule, J. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.
7. Benton, S. L., Kraft, R. G., Glover, J. A., & Plake, B. S. (1984). Cognitive capacity differences among writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 820-834.
8. Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
9. Bransford, J., & Stein, B. S. (1984). The IDEAL problem solver: A guide for improving thinking, learning, and creativity. New York: Freeman.
10. Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 61-100). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
11. Brewin, C. R., & Beaton, A. (2002). Thought suppression, intelligence, and working memory capacity. Behavior Research and Therapy, 40, 923-930.
12. Bryan, W. L., & Harter, N. (1899). Studies on the telegraphic language. The acquisition of a hierarchy of habits. Psychological Review, 6, 345-375.
13. Card, S., MacKinlay, J., & Shneiderman, B. (Eds.). (1999). Readings in information visualization: Using vision to think. Mahwah, NJ: Morgan Kaufmann.
14. Cheng, P. C.-H. (1999). Interactive law encoding diagrams for learning and instruction. Learning and Instruction, 9, 309-326.
15. Cheng, P. C.-H. (2002). Electrifying diagrams for learning: principles for effective representational systems. Cognitive Science, 26, 685-736.
16. Cheng, P. C.-H., & Simon, H. A. (1995). Scientific discovery and creative reasoning with diagrams. In S. Smith, T. Ward, & R. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 205-228). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems y experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
18. Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Reese, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp. 7-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19. Clarkson-Smith, L., & Hartley, A. A. (1990). The game of bridge as an exercise in working memory and reasoning. Journal of Gerontology, 45, P233-P238.
20. Cohen, E. G., & Lotan, R. A. (1995). Producing equal-status interaction in the heterogeneous classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 99-120.
21. Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wlhelm, O., & Engle, R. W. (2005). Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(5), 769-786.
22. Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1983). Individual differences in integrating information between and within sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 561-584.
23. Daneman, M., & Green, I. (1986). Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 1-18.
24. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: Rochester University Press.
25. Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer New York: Free Press.
26. Dunbar, K. (1998). Problem solving. In W. Bechtel & B. Grahamn (Eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 289-298). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
27. Engle, R. W., Carullo, J. J., & Collins, K. W. (1991). Individual differences in working memory for comprehension and following directions. Journal of Educational Research, 84, 253-262.
28. Engle, R. W., & Kane, M. J. (2004). Executive attention, working memory capacity, and a two-factor theory of cognitive control. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 44, pp. 145-199). New York: Elsevier.
29. Engle, R. W., Kane, M. J., & Tuholski, S. W. (1999). Individual differences in working memory capacity and what they tell us about controlled attention, general fluid intelligence and functions of the prefrontal cortex. In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 102-134). New York: Cambridge University Press.
30. Ericsson, K. A. (1996). The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports, and games. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
31. Ericsson, K. A. (2003). The acquisition of expert performance as problem solving: Construction and modification of mediating mechanisms through deliberate practice. In J- E. Davidson & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Problem solving (pp. 31-83). New York: Cambridge University Press.
32. Ericsson, K. A., & Smith, J. (1991). Prospects and limits in the empirical study of expertise: An introduction. In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 1-38). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
33. Feldman-Barrett, L., Tugade, M. M., & Engle, R. W. (2004). Individual differences in working memory capacity and dual-process theories of the mind. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 553-573.
34. Fleishman, E. A., & Zaccaro, S. J. (1992). Toward a taxonomy of team performance functions. In R. W. Swezey & E. Salas (Eds.), Teams: Their training and performance (pp. 31-56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
35. Funke, J. (2003). Problemldsendes Denken [Problem-solving thinking]. Stuttgart, Germany: Kohlhammer.
36. Glaser, R. (1992). Expert knowledge and processes of thinking. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Enhancing thinking skills in the sciences and mathematics (pp. 63-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. Goldinger, S. D., Kleider H. M., Azuma, T., Beike, D. R. (2003). “Blaming the victim” under memory load. Psychological Science, 14, 81-85.
38. Greeno, J. (1978). Natures of problem-solving abilities. In W. Estes (Ed.), Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (pp. 239-270). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
39. Guzzo, R. A., & Salas, E. (Eds.). (1995). Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
40. Hackman, J. R. (1990). Groups that work (and those that don’t): Creating conditions for effective teamwork. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
41. Hackman, J. R. (1998). Why teams don’t work. In R. S. Tindale (Ed.), Theory and research on small groups: Social psychological applications to social issues, Vol. 4 (pp. 245-267). New York: Plenum.
42. Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, volume 8 (pp. 45-99). New York: Academic Press.
43. Haider, H., & Frensch, P. A. (2002). Why aggregated learning follows the power law of practice when individual learning does not: Comment on Rickard (1997, 1999), Delaney et al. (1998), and Palmeri (1999). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 391-406.
44. Hardiman, P.T., Dufresne, R.J. & Mestre, J. P. (1989). The relation between problem categorization and problem solving among experts and novices. Memory & Cognition, 17, 627-638.
45. Hofer, B. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemol-ogy. Cotemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 379-405.
46. Huang, G., Taddese, N., & Walter, E. (2000) Entry and persistence ofwomen and minorities in college science and engineering education. Education Statistics Quarterly, 2(3). Retrieved fromhttp://nces.ed.gov/programs/quarterly/vol_2/2_3/
47. Hunt, E., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2002). Issues, examples, and challenges in formative assessment. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 89, 73-85.
48. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology: Research & Development, 48(4), 63-85.
49. Jonassen, D. H., & Grabowski, B. L. (1993). Handbook of individual differences, learning and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
50. Jonassen, D. H., Strobel, J., & Gottdenker, J. (2005). Model building for conceptual change. Interactive Learning Environments, 13(1-2), 15-37.
51. Kaplan, C. A., & Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 374-419.
52. Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high performance organization. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
53. Kiewra, K. A., & Benton, S. L. (1988). The relationship between information processing ability and notetaking. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13, 33-44.
54. King, J., & Just, M. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 580-602.
55. King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
56. Klahr, D., & Simon, H. A. (1999). Studies in scientific discovery: complementary approaches and convergent findings. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 524-543.
57. Kotovsky, K., Hayes, J. R., & Simon, H. A. (1985). Why are some problems hard? Cognitive Psychology, 17, 248-294.
58. Kruschke, L K. (2003). Attention in learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 171-175.
59. Kyllonen, P. C., & Christal, R. E. (1990). Reasoning ability is (little more than) working-memory capacity?! Intelligence, 14, 389-433.
60. Kyllonen, P. C., & Stephens, D. L. (1990). Cognitive abilities as determinants of success in acquiring logic skill. Learning and Individual Differences, 2, 129-160.
61. Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. Science, 208, 1335-1342.
62. Larkin, J. H. (1983). The role of problem representation in physics. In D. Gentner & A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 75-98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
63. Larson, J. R., & Christensen, C. (1993). Groups as problem-solving units: Toward a new meaning of social cognition. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 5-30.
64. Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492-527.
65. Logan, G. D. (1992). Shapes of reaction-time distributions and shapes of learning curves: A test of the instance theory of automatization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 883-914.
66. Marra, R. M., Palmer, B., & Litzinger, T. A. (2000). The effects of a first-year engineering design course on student intellectual development as measured by the Perry scheme. Journal of Engineering Education, 89, 39-46.
67. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
68. Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1992). Problem identification by groups. In S. Worchel Wood &J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Group processes and productivity (pp. 17-47). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
69. Newell, A., & Simon, H. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
70. Ohlsson, S. (1992). Information-processing explanations of insight and related phenomena. In M. T. Keane & K. Gilhooly (Eds.), Advances in the psychology of thinking (Vol. 1, pp. 1-44). Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, England: Har-vester-Wheatsheaf.
71. Orasanu, J. (1994). Shared problem models and flight crew performance. In N. Johnston, N. McDonald, & R. Fuller (Eds.), Aviation psychology in practice (pp. 255-285). Brookfield, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company.
72. Pavelich, M. J., & Moore, W. S. (1993, November). Measuring maturing rates of engineering students using the Perry Model. In Proceedings of Frontiers in Education Conference, 23rd Annual Conference (pp. 451-455). Washington, DC: IEEE.
73. Perry, W. G. (1970). Intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
74. Ploetzner, R., Fehse, E., Kneser, C., & Spada, H. (1999). Learning to relate qualitative and quantitative problem representations in a model-based setting for collaborative problem solving. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 177-214.
75. Ploetzner, R., & Spada, H. (1998). Constructing quantitative problem representations on the basis of qualitative reasoning. Interactive Learning Environments, 5, 95-107.
76. Rebello, N. S., Zollman, D. A., Allbaugh, A. R., Engelhardt, R V., Gray, K. E., Hrepic, Z., et al. (2005). Dynamic transfer: A perspective from physics education research. In J. P. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 217-250). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing Inc.
77. Richeson, J. A., & Shelton, J. N. (2003). When prejudice does not pay: Effects of interracial contact on executive function. Psychological Science, 14, 287-291.
78. Salas, E., & Fiore, S. (2004). Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
79. Schmader, T., & Johns, M. (2003). Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 440-452.
80. 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.
81. Schraw, G., Dunkle, M. E., & Bendixen, L. D. (1995). Cognitive processes in well-defined and ill-defined problem solving. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 523-538.
82. Schultz, K., & Lochhead, J. (1988, April). Toward a unified theory of problem solving: A view from physics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
83. Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview.
84. Shute, V. J. (1991). Who is likely to acquire programming skills? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7, 1-24.
85. Simon, H. A. (1978). Information processing theory of human problem solving. In D. Estes (Ed.), Handbook of learning and cognitive process (pp. 271-295). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
86. Sternberg, R. J., & Frensch, P.A. (Eds.). (1991). Complex problem solving: Principles and mechanisms. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
87. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteurs quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
88. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G.J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L. H. T West & A. L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change (pp. 211-231). New York: Academic.
89. Sugrue, B. (1995). A theory-based framework for assessing domain-specific problem-solving ability. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(3), 2935.
90. Sweller, J. (1989). Cognitive technology: Some procedures for facilitating learning and problem solving in mathematics and science. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 457-466.
91. Tanskanen, T., Buhanist, P., & Kostama, H. (1998). Exploring the diversity of teams. International Journal of Production Economics, 56-51, 611-619.
92. Tasa, K., & Whyte, G. (2005). Collective efficacy and vigilant problem solving in group decision making: A non-linear model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96, 119-129.
93. Theall, M., & Franklin, J. (2001). Using technology to facilitate evaluation. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 88, 41-50.
94. van Heuvelen, A. (1991). Overview, case study physics. American Journal of Physics, 59, 898.
95. Van Someren, M. W., Reimann, R, Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Jong, T. D. (1998). Learning with multiple representations. Oxford, England: Pergamon.
96. Vosniadou, S. (1992). Knowledge acquisition and conceptual change. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 41, 347-357.
97. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45-70.
98. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
99. Windschitl, M., & Andre, T. (1998). Using computer simulations to enhance conceptual change: The roles of constructivist instruction and student epistemological beliefs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 145-160.
100. Wittenbaum, G. M., Stasser, G., & Merry, C. J. (1996). Tacit coordination in anticipation of small group task completion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 129-152.
101. Zhang, J. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21, 179-217.
102. Zhang, J., & Norman, D. (1994). Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science, 18, 87-122.