USING SUBJECTIVE REPORT RATING SCALES TO REVEAL BASIC PROCESSES UNDERLYING INSIGHT SOLUTIONS IN ANAGRAM TASKS

IF 0.5 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Alexey A. Medyntsev
{"title":"USING SUBJECTIVE REPORT RATING SCALES TO REVEAL BASIC PROCESSES UNDERLYING INSIGHT SOLUTIONS IN ANAGRAM TASKS","authors":"Alexey A. Medyntsev","doi":"10.17323/1813-8918-2023-3-445-460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The research attempted to evaluate the informativeness of subjective rating scales in order to reveal the processes underlying insightful solving of anagrams. Subjects divided into two groups solved anagrams evaluating their own solutions using rating scales of subjective characteristics taken from similar insight study (Danek et al., 2014): solution happiness, solution surprise, solution suddenness, solution certainty, and experience of an impasse. The subjects in the first group (the “Insight” group) solved regular anagrams. The second group (the “Implicit” group) solved anagrams based on a single pattern, which led to an implicit learning effect. It was expected that the values of the subjective rating scales would make it possible to separate insightful solutions of anagrams based on the realization of implicit knowledge from ordinary insightful solutions. The obtained results confirmed the validity of the assumption. The predictors of belonging to different groups were the scales of solution happiness, solution certainty and experience of an impasse. The study has demonstrated that it is possible to use subjective rating scales to separate insightful anagram solutions on the basis of processes that caused them. This indicates that such a subjective reporting technique is an informative method. The results of this study provide new possibilities for improving the self-reporting procedure in insight research.","PeriodicalId":44468,"journal":{"name":"Psychology-Journal of the Higher School of Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology-Journal of the Higher School of Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2023-3-445-460","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The research attempted to evaluate the informativeness of subjective rating scales in order to reveal the processes underlying insightful solving of anagrams. Subjects divided into two groups solved anagrams evaluating their own solutions using rating scales of subjective characteristics taken from similar insight study (Danek et al., 2014): solution happiness, solution surprise, solution suddenness, solution certainty, and experience of an impasse. The subjects in the first group (the “Insight” group) solved regular anagrams. The second group (the “Implicit” group) solved anagrams based on a single pattern, which led to an implicit learning effect. It was expected that the values of the subjective rating scales would make it possible to separate insightful solutions of anagrams based on the realization of implicit knowledge from ordinary insightful solutions. The obtained results confirmed the validity of the assumption. The predictors of belonging to different groups were the scales of solution happiness, solution certainty and experience of an impasse. The study has demonstrated that it is possible to use subjective rating scales to separate insightful anagram solutions on the basis of processes that caused them. This indicates that such a subjective reporting technique is an informative method. The results of this study provide new possibilities for improving the self-reporting procedure in insight research.
运用主观报告评定量表揭示字谜任务中潜在洞察力解决方案的基本过程
本研究试图评估主观评定量表的信息量,以揭示深刻解决字谜的潜在过程。受试者分为两组,通过使用来自类似洞察力研究(Danek et al., 2014)的主观特征评分量表来解决字谜,评估他们自己的解决方案:解决快乐、解决惊喜、解决突然性、解决确定性和僵局体验。第一组(“洞察力”组)的受试者解决了规则的字谜。第二组(“内隐”组)基于单一模式解决字谜,这导致了内隐学习效应。期望主观评定量表的值能够将基于内隐知识实现的字谜深刻解与普通深刻解分离开来。所得结果证实了假设的有效性。不同群体归属的预测因子分别是解决方案幸福感、解决方案确定性和陷入僵局的经历。该研究表明,可以使用主观评分量表,根据产生这些问题的过程来区分有洞察力的变位词解决方案。这表明这种主观报告技术是一种信息丰富的方法。本研究结果为改进内观研究中的自我报告程序提供了新的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics was established by the National Research University — Higher School of Economics (HSE) in 2004 and is administered by the School of Psychology of HSE. The Journal publishes articles written by Russian and foreign researchers presenting original positions in academic and applied psychology, analytical reviews, short reports focused on empirical studies, and information about current scientific events in Russia and the rest of the world. Principal themes of the journal include: -Methodology, history, and theory of psychology -Research approaches and methods in psychology -New tools for psychological assessment -Interdisciplinary studies connecting psychology with economics, sociology, cultural anthropology, and other sciences -New achievements and trends in cognitive psychology, social psychology, organizational psychology, neuroscience -Models and methods of practice in organizations and individual work -Studies in personological approach, combining theoretical, empirical, hermeneutic, and counselling work on personality -Bridging the gap between science and practice, psychological problems associated with innovations -Discussions on pressing issues in fundamental and applied research within psychology and related sciences The primary audience of the journal includes researchers and practitioners specializing in psychology, sociology, cultural studies, education, neuroscience, and management, as well as teachers and students of higher education institutions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信