The late parietal event-related potential component is hierarchically sensitive to chunk tightness during chunk decomposition

The current study analyzed event-related potentials (ERPs) associated with visuo-spatial transformation in order to examine how “chunk tightness” affects the difficulty of chunk decomposition problems. Participants completed a Chinese character decomposition task in three conditions according to the tightness of the to-be-decomposed chunk (tight vs. medium vs. loose). Behavioral data showed that performance became worse (longer reaction time, lower accuracy) as chunk tightness increased. ERP data showed that, as chunk tightness increased, the LPC exhibited a significant decrease at posterior electrode sites. The results indicate that chunk tightness might exert its primary effect on chunk decomposition difficulty by increasing the difficulty of visuo-spatial transformation, a process linked to the parietal LPC.

[1]  Trina C. Kershaw,et al.  Multiple causes of difficulty in insight: the case of the nine-dot problem. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[2]  Yi Lei,et al.  The influence of element type and crossed relation on the difficulty of chunk decomposition , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[3]  Jarrod Moss,et al.  Is Insight Always the Same? A Protocol Analysis of Insight in Compound Remote Associate Problems , 2012, J. Probl. Solving.

[4]  Jing Luo,et al.  The role of chunk tightness and chunk familiarity in problem solving: Evidence from ERPs and fMRI , 2013, Human brain mapping.

[5]  Michael A. Pitts,et al.  Neural generators of ERPs linked with Necker cube reversals. , 2009, Psychophysiology.

[6]  M. Kutas,et al.  Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. , 1980, Science.

[7]  Hong Li,et al.  Identification and transformation difficulty in problem solving: Electrophysiological evidence from chunk decomposition , 2019, Biological Psychology.

[8]  Wied Ruijssenaars,et al.  Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning , 2012 .

[9]  J. Metcalfe Feeling of knowing in memory and problem solving. , 1986 .

[10]  J. Pine,et al.  Chunking mechanisms in human learning , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[11]  P. Fox,et al.  The Neural System Underlying Chinese Logograph Reading , 2001, NeuroImage.

[12]  P. Fox,et al.  Neuroanatomical correlates of phonological processing of Chinese characters and alphabetic words: A meta‐analysis , 2005, Human brain mapping.

[13]  A. D. D. Groot Thought and Choice in Chess , 1978 .

[14]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[15]  Kazuhisa Niki,et al.  Perceptual contributions to problem solving: Chunk decomposition of Chinese characters , 2006, Brain Research Bulletin.

[16]  P. Holcomb,et al.  Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly , 1992 .

[17]  A. Luchins Mechanization in problem solving: The effect of Einstellung. , 1942 .

[18]  Gary E. Raney,et al.  An eye movement study of insight problem solving , 2001, Memory & cognition.

[19]  Bahador Makkiabadi,et al.  Computer-aided classifying and characterizing of methamphetamine use disorder using resting-state EEG , 2019, Cognitive Neurodynamics.

[20]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[21]  Steven M. Smith,et al.  Getting into and out of mental ruts: A theory of fixation, incubation, and insight. , 1995 .

[22]  Yasar Dasdemir,et al.  Analysis of functional brain connections for positive–negative emotions using phase locking value , 2017, Cognitive Neurodynamics.

[23]  H. Simon,et al.  Perception in chess , 1973 .

[24]  Carlo Miniussi,et al.  Parietal Lobe Contribution to Mental Rotation Demonstrated with rTMS , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[25]  Pamala R. Peay Eye movement study , 1976 .

[26]  Michael Öllinger,et al.  Cognitive mechanisms of insight: the role of heuristics and representational change in solving the eight-coin problem. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[27]  T. Demiralp,et al.  Measurement of cognitive dynamics during video watching through event-related potentials (ERPs) and oscillations (EROs) , 2019, Cognitive Neurodynamics.

[28]  Jing Luo,et al.  How perceptual processes help to generate new meaning: An EEG study of chunk decomposition in Chinese characters , 2009, Brain Research.

[29]  Yiping Chen,et al.  Effects of Word Form on Brain Processing of Written Chinese , 2002, NeuroImage.

[30]  Jin Fan,et al.  The neural basis of novelty and appropriateness in processing of creative chunk decomposition , 2015, NeuroImage.

[31]  Pei Sun,et al.  Neural correlates of novelty and appropriateness processing in externally induced constraint relaxation , 2018, NeuroImage.

[32]  A. Graybiel The Basal Ganglia and Chunking of Action Repertoires , 1998, Neurobiology of Learning and Memory.

[33]  I. M. Harris,et al.  Selective right parietal lobe activation during mental rotation: a parametric PET study. , 2000, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[34]  K. Duncker,et al.  On problem-solving , 1945 .

[35]  S. Ohlsson,et al.  Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving , 1999 .

[36]  Jing Luo,et al.  Probing the Cognitive Mechanism of Mental Representational Change During Chunk Decomposition: A Parametric fMRI Study. , 2016, Cerebral cortex.

[37]  R Kakigi,et al.  [Event-related brain potentials]. , 1997, Nihon rinsho. Japanese journal of clinical medicine.

[38]  John Kounios,et al.  The Aha! Moment , 2009, Annual review of psychology.

[39]  Edward M. Bowden,et al.  Insight solutions are correct more often than analytic solutions , 2016, Thinking & reasoning.

[40]  James N. MacGregor,et al.  The Effects of Number and Level of Restructuring in Insight Problem Solving , 2009, J. Probl. Solving.