Effect of problem solving support and cognitive styles on idea generation: Implications for technology-enhanced learning

Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 49-63

  Stoyanov, Slavi ^a   Kirschner, Paul ^a,b  

^a OPEN UNIVERSITY OF THE NETHERLANDS   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cognitive styles; Conceptual design; Learning to solve problems; Paradox of knowledge structure; Problem solving support

Indexed keywords

EID: 85008827364     PISSN: 15391523     EISSN: 19450818     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2007.10782496     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Amabile, T. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview.
2. Anderson, J. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3. Bower, G., & Mann, T. (1992). Improving recall by recording interfering material at the time of retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, Cognition, 18, 1310-1320.
4. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29.
5. Cho, K., & Jonassen, D. (2002). The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving. Educational Technology Research & Development, 50(3), 5-22.
6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence, Erlbaum Associates.
7. Constantine, L. (2001). The peopleware papers. Notes on the human side of software. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
8. Davidson, J. (2003). Insights about insightful problem solving. In J. Davidson & R. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 149-175). New York: Cambridge University Press.
9. De Bono, E. (1990). Lateral thinking for management. London: Penguin Books.
10. Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102, 211-245.
11. Ge, X., & Land, S. (2004). A conceptual framework for scaffolding ill-structured problem-solving process using question prompts and peer interaction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 5-22.
12. Gick, M., & Holyoak, K. (1983). Schema induction in analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1-38.
13. Giora, R. (1993). On the function of analogies in informative text. Discourse Processes, 16, 591-596.
14. Guastello, S., Shissler, J., Driscoll, J, & Hide, T. (1998). Are some cognitive styles more creatively productive than others? Journal of Creative Behavior, 32(2), 77-91.
15. Halpern, D., Hanson, C., & Riefer, D. (1990). Analogies as an aid to under-standing and memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 298-305.
16. Hambrick, D., & Engle, R. (2003). The role of working memory in problem solving. In J. Davidson & R. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 207-229). New York: Cambridge University Press.
17. Holtzblatt, K., Wendell, J., & Wood, S. (2005). Rapid contextual design. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
18. Holyoak, K. (1991). Symbolic connectionism: Toward third-generation theories of expertise. In A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise (pp. 301-335). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
19. Hong, N., Jonassen, D., & McGee, S. (2003). Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 6-33.
20. Jonassen, D.H. (2004). Learning to solve problems. An instructional design guide. San Francisco, CA: Pffeifer.
21. Jones, G. (1982). Test of the dual mechanism theory of recall. Acta Psychologica, 50, 61-72.
22. Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction, 4, 251-262.
23. Kirton, M. (1999). Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory. Manual. 3rd edition. Berkhamsted, UK: Occupational Research Centre.
24. Kirton, M. (2003). Adaption—Innovation in the context of diversity and change. London: Routledge.
25. Kuniavsky, M. (2003). Observing the user experience. A practitioners guide to user research. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
26. Lubart, T., & Mouchiroud, C. (2003). Creativity: a source of difficulty in problem solving. In J. Davidson & R. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 127-148). New York: Cambridge University Press.
27. Lubart, T., & Sternberg, R. (1995). An investment approach of creativity: theory and data. In S. Smith, T. Ward, & R. Finke (Eds.), The creative conditions approach (pp. 271-302). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Martinsen, O. (1995). Cognitive styles and experience in solving insight problems: replication and extension. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 291-298.
29. Martinsen, O., & Kaufmann, G. (1991). Effect of imagery, strategy, and in-dividual differences in solving insight problems. Scandinavian Journal of Educa-tional Research, 35, 69-76.
30. Martinsen, O., & Kaufmann, G. (1999). Cognitive style and creativity. In M. Runco & S. Pritsker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity, (Vol 1, pp. 273-282). New York: Academic Press.
31. Meneely, J., & Portillo, M. (2005). The adaptable mind in design: relating personality, cognitive style, and creative performance. Creativity Research Jour-nal, 17, 155-166.
32. Merrill, D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research & Development, 50(3), 43-59.
33. Michalko, M. (1998). Cracking creativity: the secrets of creative genius. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press.
34. Myers, I. B. (1962). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: CPP, Ins.
35. Noppe, L. (1996). Progression in the service of the ego, cognitive styles, and creative thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 369-383.
36. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2004). Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 1-8.
37. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
38. Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS Survival manual. (2nd ed). Berkshire, UK: Open Uni-versity Press.
39. Pretz, E., Naples, A., & Sternberg, R. (2003). Recognizing, defining, and representing problems. In J. Davidson & R. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 3-30). New York: Cambridge University Press.
40. Quillian, M. (1988). Semantic memory. In A. Collins & E. Smith (Eds.), Reading in cognitive science. A Perspective from psychology and artificial intelligence (pp. 80-101). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman Publishers.
41. Raaijmakers, J., & Shiffrin, R. (1981). SAM: Search of associative memory. Psychological Review, 88, 93-144.
42. Raidl, M. H., & Lubart, T. (2001). An empirical study of intuition and cre-ativity. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 20, 217-230.
43. Robertson, S. (2001). Problem solving. Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
44. Runco, M., & Sakamoto, S. (2003). Experimental studies of creativity. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 62-92). New York: Cambridge University Press.
45. Russell, T. (2001). The no significant difference phenomenon: A comparative research annotated bibliography on technology for distance education (5th ed.). Montgomery, AL: IDECC.
46. Schon, D. (1996). The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. London: Arena.
47. Simonton, K. (2003). Creativity from a historiometric perspective. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 116-133). Cambridge, MA: Cam-bridge University Press.
48. Sternberg, R. (1994). Thinking styles: Theory and assessment at the interface between intelligence and personality. In R. Sternberg & R. Ruzgis (Eds.), Personality and Intelligence (pp. 56-89). New York: Cambridge University Press.
49. Sternberg, R. & O’Hara, L. (2003). Creativity and intelligence. In J. Da-vidson & R. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 251-272). New York: Cambridge University Press.
50. Stoyanov, S., & Kommers, P. (2006). WWW-intensive concept mapping for metacognition in solving ill-structured problems. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning, 16, 297-315.
51. Tabanchick, B., & Fidell, L. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
52. Van Gundy, A. (1997). Techniques of structured problem solving. New York: Van Nostrand.
53. Van Merrienboer, J., & Kirschner, P. (2007). Ten steps to complex learning. A systematic approach to four-component instructional design. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
54. Wagner, R. (1992). Managerial problem solving. In R. Sternberg & P. Frensch (Eds.), Complex problem solving (pp. 159-184). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
55. Weisberg, R. (2003). Creativity and knowledge. In J. Davidson & R. Stern-berg (Eds.), The Psychology of problem solving (pp. 226-250). New York: Cambridge University Press.
56. Wenke, D., & Frensch, P. (2003). Is success or failure at solving complex problems related to intellectual ability? In J. Davidson & R. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 87-126). New York: Cambridge University Press.