Confirmatory factor analysis on separability of planning and insight constructs

Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 7-23

  Cinan, Sevtap ^a   Özen, Gaye ^a   Hampshire, Adam ^b  

^a ISTANBUL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Confirmatory factor analysis; Insight problem solving; Metacognitive awareness; Planning

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; HUMAN; PLANNING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBLEM SOLVING; TASK PERFORMANCE; ADULT; AWARENESS; FEMALE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; SELF REPORT;

EID: 84874400822     PISSN: 20445911     EISSN: 2044592X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/20445911.2012.729035     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Akin, A., Abaci, R., and, Çetin, B. 2007. The validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory. Educational Science: Theory and Practice, 7: 655-680.
2. Berardi-Coletta, B., Buyer, L. S., Dominowski, R. L., and, Rellinger, E. R. 1995. Metacognition and problem solving: A process-oriented approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21: 205-223. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.21.1.205
3. Bowden, E. M., and, Jung-Beeman, M. 1998. Getting the right idea: Semantic activation in the right hemisphere may help solve insight problems. Psychological Science, 9: 435-440. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00082
4. Bowden, E. M., and, Jung-Beeman, M. 2003a. Aha! Insight experience correlates with solution activation in the right hemisphere. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10: 730-737. doi: 10.3758/BF03196539
5. Bowden, E. M., and, Jung-Beeman, M. 2003b. Normative data for 144 compound remote associate problems. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 35: 634-639. doi: 10.3758/BF03195543
6. Bowden, E. M., and, Jung-Beeman, M. 2007. Methods for investigating the neural components of insight. Methods, 42: 87-99. doi: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2006.11. 007
7. Bowden, E. M., Jung-Beeman, M., Fleck, J., and, Kounios, J. 2005. New approaches to demystifying insight. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9: 323-328. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.012
8. Chronicle, E. P., Ormerod, T. C., and, MacGregor, J. N. 2001. When insight just won't come: The failure of visual clues in the nine-dot problem. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A: 903-919.
9. Cinan, S., &, Doǧan, A. 2012. Working memory, mental prospection, time orientation and cognitive insight. Manuscript submitted for publication.
10. Cinan, S., Doǧan, A., &, Özen, G. 2012. Uzak baǧlantilar testi: Türkçe norm çalişmasi [Remote associate test: A Turkish norm study]. Manuscript in preparation.
11. Croskerry, P. 2009. A universal model of diagnostic reasoning. Academic Medicine, 84: 1022-1028. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181ace703
12. Davies, S. P. 2000. Move evaluation as a predictor and moderator of success in solutions to well-structured problems. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A: 1186-1201.
13. Davies, S. P. 2005. " Planning and problem solving in well-defined domains ". In The cognitive psychology of planning, Edited by: Morris, R. and Ward, G. 33-51. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
14. Deary, I. J., Johnson, W., and, Houlihan, L. M. 2009. Genetic foundations of human intelligence. Human Genetics, 126: 215-232. doi: 10.1007/s00439-009- 0655-4
15. Dow, G. T., and, Mayer, R. E. 2004. Teaching students to solve insight problems: Evidence for domain specificity in creativity training. Creativity Research Journal, 16: 389-402. doi: 10.1080/10400410409534550
16. Evans, J. St. B. T. 2003. In two minds: Dual process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7: 454-459. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2003. 08.012
17. Field, A. 2009. Discovering statistics using SPSS, 3rd ed, London, UK: Sage.
18. Fleming, S. M., Weil, R. S., Nagy, Z., Dolan, R. J., and, Rees, G. 2010. Relating introspective accuracy to individual differences in brain structure. Science, 329: 1541-1543. doi: 10.1126/science.1191883
19. Gilhooly, K. J., and, Fioratou, E. 2009. Executive functions in insight versus non-insight problem solving: An individual differences approach. Thinking and Reasoning, 15: 355-376. doi: 10.1080/13546780903178615
20. Gilhooly, K. J., and, Murphy, P. 2005. Differentiating insight from non-insight problems. Thinking and Reasoning, 11: 279-302. doi: 10.1080/13546780442000187
21. Hampshire, A., Highfield, R., Parkin, B., &, Owen, A. M. (in press). Fractionating human intelligence. Neuron.
22. Jöreskog, K. G., and, Sörbom, D. 2006. LISREL 8.80 for Windows [Computer software], Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
23. Kahana, M. J. 2002. Associative symmetry and memory theory. Memory and Cognition, 30: 823-840. doi: 10.3758/BF03195769
24. Kershaw, T. C., and, Ohlsson, S. 2004. Multiple causes of difficulty in insight: The case of the nine-dot problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30: 3-13. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.30.1.3
25. Kline, R. B. 2011. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 3rd ed, New York, NY: Guilford Press.
26. Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., Haider, H., and, Rhenius, D. 1999. Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25: 1534-1555. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.25.6.1534
27. Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., and, Raney, G. E. 2001. An eye movement study of problem solving. Memory and Cognition, 29: 1000-1009. doi: 10.3758/BF03195762
28. MacGregor, J. N., Ormerod, T. C., and, Chronicle, E. P. 2001. Information-processing and insight: A process model of performance on the nine-dot and related problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27: 176-201. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.176
29. Magno, C. 2009. Assessing grade school students' metacognition in solving mathematical problem. Assessment Handbook, 2: 1-22.
30. Mayer, R. E. 1994. " Problem solving ". In The Blackwell dictionary of cognitive psychology, Edited by: Eysenck, M. W. 284-288. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
31. Meijer, J., Veenman, M. V. J., &, Van Hout-Wolters, B. 2011. Multi-domain, multi-method measures of metacognitive activity: What is all the fuss about metacognition. indeed? Research Papers in Education. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1080/02671522.2010.550011
32. Metallidou, P. 2009. Pre-service and in-service teachers' metacognitive knowledge about problem-solving strategies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25: 76-82. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2008.07.002
33. Metcalfe, J. 1986. Feeling of knowing and problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12: 288-294. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.12.2.288
34. Metcalfe, J., and, Wiebe, D. 1987. Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving. Memory and Cognition, 15: 238-246. doi: 10.3758/BF03197722
35. Newell, A., Shaw, J. C., and, Simon, H. A. 1958. Elements of a theory of human problem solving. Psychological Review, 65: 151-166. doi: 10.1037/h0048495
36. Ormerod, T. C. 2005. " Planning and ill-defined problems ". In The cognitive psychology of planning, Edited by: Morris, R. and Ward, G. 53-70. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
37. Osborne, J. 2002. Notes on the use of data transformations. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 8 6. Retrieved 10 June 2011 from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=6
38. Owen, A. M., Sahakian, B. J., Hodges, J. R., Summers, B. A., and, Polkey, C. E. 1995. Dopamin dependent fronto-striatal planning deficits in early Parkinson's disease. Neuropsychology, 9: 126-140. doi: 10.1037/0894-4105.9.1.126
39. Pennequin, V., Sorel, O., Nanty, I., and, Fontaine, R. 2010. Metacognition and low achievement in mathematics: The effect of training in the use of metacognitive skills to solve mathematical problems. Thinking and Reasoning, 16: 198-220. doi: 10.1080/13546783.2010.509052
40. Rehani, M., and, Caplan, J. B. 2011. Interference and the representation of order within associations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64: 1409-1429. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2010.549945
41. Reverberi, C., Toraldo, A., D'Agostini, S., &, Skrap, M. 2005. Better without (lateral) frontal cortex? Insight problems solved by frontal patients. Brain, 128, 2882-2890. doi: 10.1093/brain/awh577
42. Rizzuto, D. S., and, Kahana, M. J. 2000. Associative symmetry vs. independent associations. Neurocomputing, 32-33: 973-978. doi: 10.1016/S0925-2312(00)00268-X
43. Schraw, G., and, Dennison, R. S. 1994. Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19: 460-475. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
44. Shallice, T. 1982. Specific impairments of planning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 298B: 199-209. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1982.0082
45. Sperling, R. A., Howard, B. C., Staley, R., and, DuBois, N. 2004. Metacognition and self-regulated learning constructs. Educational Research and Evaluation, 10: 117-139. doi: 10.1076/edre.10.2.117.27905
46. Şimşek, Ö. F. 2007. Yapisal Eşitlik Modellemesine Giriş: Temel İlkeler ve LISREL Uygulamalari, Ankara, Turkey: Ekinoks.
47. Ward, G., and, Morris, R. 2005. " Introduction to the psychology of planning ". In The cognitive psychology of planning, Edited by: Morris, R. and Ward, G. 1-34. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
48. Welsh, M. C., and, Huizinga, M. 2001. The development and preliminary validation of the Tower of Hanoi-Revised. Assessment, 8: 167-176. doi: 10.1177/107319110100800205
49. Welsh, M. C., and, Huizinga, M. 2005. Tower of Hanoi disk-transfer task: Influences of strategy knowledge and learning on performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 15: 283-298. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2005.05.002
50. Wieth, M., and, Burns, B. D. 2006. Incentives improve performance on both incremental and insight problem solving. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59: 1378-1394. doi: 10.1080/17470210500234026