Cross-national gender differences in complex problem solving and their determinants

Learning and Individual Differences

Volumn 29, Issue , 2014, Pages 18-29

  Wüstenberg, Sascha ^a   Greiff, Samuel ^a   Molnár, Gyöngyvér ^b   Funke, Joachim ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG   (Luxembourg)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SZEGED   (Hungary)

^c UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Complex problem solving; Gender differences; Measurement invariance; MicroDYN; Nationality differences

Indexed keywords

EID: 84887389668     PISSN: 10416080     EISSN: 18733425     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.10.006     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Adam M.J. Thinking skills curricula: Their promise and progress. Educational Psychologist 1989, 24:25-77.
2. Bollen K.A. Structural equations with latent variables 1989, Wiley, New York.
3. Bowden S.C., Saklofske D.H., Weiss L.G. Invariance of the measurement model underlying the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV in the United States and Canada. Educational and Psychological Measurement 2011, 71(1):186-199.
4. Bransford J.D., Brown A.L., Cocking R.R. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school 1999, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
5. Brown T. CFA with equality constraints, multiple groups, and mean structures. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research 2006, 236-319. Guildford Press, New York, NY. T. Brown (Ed.).
6. Brunner M., Krauss S., Kunter M. Gender differences in mathematics: Does the story need to be rewritten?. Intelligence 2008, 36(5):403-421.
7. Buchner A. Basic topics and approaches to the study of complex problem solving. Complex problem solving: The European perspective 1995, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. P.A. Frensch, J. Funke (Eds.).
8. Bühner M., Kröner S., Ziegler M. Working memory, visual-spatial intelligence and their relationship to problem-solving. Intelligence 2008, 36(4):672-680.
9. Byrne B.M., Stewart S.M. The MACS approach to testing for multigroup invariance of a second-order structure: A walk through the process. Structural Equation Modeling 2006, 13(2):287-321.
10. Chen H. What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2008, 95(5):1005-1018.
11. Chen H. Measurement invariance of WISC-IV across normative and clinical samples. Personality and Individual Differences 2012, 52(2):161-166.
12. Chen H., Keith T.Z., Weiss L., Zhu J., Li Y. Testing for multigroup invariance of second-order WISC-IV structure across China, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan. Personality and Individual Differences 2010, 49:677-682.
13. Chen Z., Klahr D. All other things being equal: Acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy. Child Development 1999, 70(5):1098-1120.
14. Chen H., Zhu J. Factor invariance between genders of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fourth edition. Personality and Individual Differences 2008, 45(3):260-266.
15. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences 1988, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. 2nd ed.
16. Danner D., Hagemann D., Schankin A., Hager M., Funke J. Beyond IQ. A latent state trait analysis of general intelligence, dynamic decision making, and implicit learning. Intelligence 2011, 39(5):323-334.
17. Dörner D. Diagnostik der operativen Intelligenz. Diagnostica 1986, 32(4):290-308.
18. Dörner D. The logic of failure. Human factors in hazardous situations 1990, 15-36. Oxford University Press, New York, NY. D.E. Broadbent, J.T. Reason, A.D. Baddeley (Eds.).
19. Else-Quest N.M., Hyde J.S., Linn M.C. Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 2010, 136(1):103-127.
20. Fischer A., Greiff S., Funke J. The process of solving complex problems. Journal of Problem Solving 2012, 4(1):19-41.
21. Funke J. Dynamic systems as tools for analysing human judgement. Thinking and Reasoning 2001, 7:69-89.
22. Funke J. Complex problem solving: A case for complex cognition?. Cognitive Processing 2010, 11:133-142.
23. Funke J. Complex problem solving. Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning 2012, 682-685. Springer, Heidelberg. N.M. Seel (Ed.).
24. Funke J., Frensch P.A. Complex problem solving: The European perspective - 10years after. Learning to solve complex scientific problems 2007, 25-47. Lawrence Erlbaum, New York. D.H. Jonassen (Ed.).
25. Gardner K.J., Qualter P. Factor structure, measurement invariance and structural invariance of the MSCEIT v2.0. Personality and Individual Differences 2011, 51(4):492-496.
26. Greiff S. Individualdiagnostik der Problemlösefähigkeit 2012, Waxmann, Münster.
27. Greiff S., Fischer A. Der Nutzen einer Komplexen Problemlösekompetenz: Theoretische Überlegungen und empirische Befunde. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie 2013, 27(1):27-39.
28. Greiff S., Wüstenberg S., Funke J. Dynamic problem solving: A new measurement perspective. Applied Psychological Measurement 2012, 36(3):189-213.
29. Greiff S., Wüstenberg S., Molnár G., Fischer A., Funke J., Csapó B. Complex problem solving in educational settings - Something beyond g: Concept, assessment, measurement invariance, and construct validity. Journal of Educational Psychology 2013, 105:364-379.
30. Güss C.D., Tuason M.T., Gerhard C. Cross-national comparisons of complex problem-solving strategies in two microworlds. Cognitive Science 2010, 34:489-520.
31. Hair J.F., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L., Black W. Multivariate data analysis 1998, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
32. Halpern D.F., Benbow C., Geary D.C., Gur R.C., Hyde J.S., Gernsbacher M.A. The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 2007, 8:1-51.
33. Halpern D.F., LaMay M.L. The smarter sex: A critical review of sex differences in intelligence. Educational Psychology Review 2000, 12:229-246.
34. Hu L., Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 1999, 6:1-55.
35. Jensen A.R. The g factor. The science of mental ability 1998, Praeger, Westport.
36. Jensen E., Brehmer B. Understanding and control of a simple dynamic system. System Dynamics Review 2003, 19(2):119-137.
37. Kimura D. Sex hormones influence human cognitive pattern. Neuroendocrinology Letters Special Issue Supplement 2002, 4(23):67-77.
38. Klahr D. Exploring science: The cognition and development of discovery processes 2000, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
39. Klahr D., Triona L.M., Williams C. Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering project by middle school children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2007, 44:183-203.
40. Kluge A. Performance assessment with microworlds and their difficulty. Applied Psychological Measurement 2008, 32:156-180.
41. Kröner S., Plass J.L., Leutner D. Intelligence assessment with computer simulations. Intelligence 2005, 33(4):347-368.
42. Kuhn D. Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2000, 9(5):178-181.
43. Kuhn D., Black J., Keselman A., Kaplan D. The development of cognitive skills to support inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction 2000, 18(4):495-523.
44. Kuhn J.T., Holling H. Gender, reasoning ability, and scholastic achievement: A multilevel mediation analysis. Learning and Individual Differences 2009, 19(2):229-233.
45. Lakin J.M. Multidimensional ability tests and culturally and linguistically diverse students: Evidence of measurement invariance. Learning and Individual Differences 2012, 22(3):397-403.
46. Lindberg S.M., Hyde J.S., Petersen J.L., Linn M.C. New trends in gender and mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 2010, 136(6):1123-1135.
47. Mayer R.E. Learning and instruction 2003, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
48. Mullis I.V.S., Martin M.O., Foy P. TIMSS 2007 international mathematics report: Findings from IEA's Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the fourth and eighth grades 2008, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA.
49. Mullis I.V.S., Martin M.O., Gonzalez E.J., Chrostowski S.J. Findings from IEA's Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the fourth and eighth grades 2003, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA.
50. Muthén B.O., Muthén L.K. MPlus 2007, Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CA.
51. Muthén L.K., Muthén B.O. Mplus user's guide 2010, Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CA. 6th ed.
52. Neuschmidt O., Barth J., Hastedt D. Trends in gender differences in mathematics and science (TIMSS 1995-2003). Studies in Educational Evaluation 2008, 34(2):56-72.
53. Novick L.R., Bassok M. Problem solving. The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning 2005, 321-349. University Press, Cambridge, NY. K.J. Holyoak, R.G. Morrison (Eds.).
54. OECD Problem solving for tomorrow's world: First measures of cross-curricular competencies from PISA 2003 2004, OECD Publishing, Paris.
55. OECD PISA 2012 problem solving framework 2010, OECD Publishing, Paris.
56. Perkins D.N., Salomon G. Are cognitive skills context-bound?. Educational Researcher 1989, 18(10):16-25.
57. Rigas G., Carling E., Brehmer B. Reliability and validity of performance measures in microworlds. Intelligence 2002, 30:463-480.
58. Sass Testing measurement invariance and comparing latent factor means within a confirmatory factor analysis framework. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 2011, 29(4):347-363.
59. Schoppek W. Teaching structural knowledge in the control of dynamic systems: Direction of causality makes a difference. Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society 2004, 1219-1224. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. K.D. Forbus, D. Gentner, T. Regier (Eds.).
60. Schweizer F., Wüstenberg S., Greiff S. Validity of the MicroDYN approach: Complex problem solving predicts school grades beyond working memory capacity. Learning & Individual Differences 2013, 24:42-52.
61. Sonnleitner P., Brunner M., Greiff S., Funke J., Keller U., Martin R., et al. The genetics lab. Acceptance and psychometric characteristics of a computer-based microworld to assess complex problem solving. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling 2012, 54(1):54-72.
62. Strohschneider S., Güss D. The fate of the Moros: A cross-cultural exploration of strategies in complex and dynamic decision making. International Journal of Psychology 1999, 34(4):235-252.
63. Süß H.-M. Intelligenz, Wissen und Problemlösen: Kognitive Voraussetzungen für erfolgreiches Handeln bei computersimulierten Problemen 1996, Hogrefe, Göttingen.
64. Tschirgi J.E. Sensible reasoning: A hypothesis about hypotheses. Child Development 1980, 51:1-10.
65. Vári P., Tuska A., Krolopp J. Change of emphasis in the Mathematics assessment in Hungary. Educational Research and Evaluation 2002, 8(1):109-127.
66. Vollmeyer R., Burns B.D., Holyoak K.J. The impact of goal specificity on strategy use and the acquisition of problem structure. Cognitive Science 1996, 20:75-100.
67. Wernstedt R., John-Ohnesorg M. Bildungsstandards als Instrument schulischer Qualitätsentwicklung 2009, Bonner Universitäts-Buchdruckerei, Bonn.
68. Wirth J., Klieme E. Computer-based assessment of problem solving competence. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 2003, 10(3):329-345.
69. Wittmann W., Hattrup K. The relationship between performance in dynamic systems and intelligence. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 2004, 21:393-440.
70. Wittmann W., Süß H.-M. Investigating the paths between working memory, intelligence, knowledge, and complex problem-solving performances via Brunswik symmetry. Learning and individual differences: Process, traits, and content determinants 1999, 77-108. APA, Washington, DC. P.L. Ackerman, P.C. Kyllonen, R.D. Roberts (Eds.).
71. Wüstenberg S., Greiff S., Funke J. Complex problem solving - More than reasoning?. Intelligence 2012, 40:1-14.