The role of chunk tightness and chunk familiarity in problem solving: Evidence from ERPs and fMRI

Multiple factors of task difficulty keep problem solvers from finding the crucial thinking steps required to solve insight problems. In this study, we distinguished two difficulty factors, chunk familiarity and chunk tightness, and investigated their effects on chunk decomposition—a specific type of insight that depends on the process of breaking up perceptual patterns or chunks into elements so that they can be reorganized to form a new meaning. Subjects solved problems that required decomposing Chinese characters that differed in chunk familiarity and chunk tightness. Brain activity was recorded using the electroencephalogram and functional magnetic resonance imaging. The results showed that chunk familiarity could be overcome through an inhibition of familiar meanings, whereas overcoming chunk tightness required visual‐spatial processing. Furthermore, chunk familiarity posed an additional difficulty when chunk tightness was high. This result demonstrates that the difficulty sources in a problem do not always simply add up. Rather, the difficulty of a problem can reside in the interaction of particular sources of difficulty. Hum Brain Mapp, 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[1]  R. Adamson.  Functional fixedness as related to problem solving; a repetition of three experiments. , 1952, Journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  Edward M. Bowden,et al.  The origins of insight in resting-state brain activity , 2008, Neuropsychologia.

[3]  Robert W. Weisberg,et al.  An examination of the alleged role of "fixation" in the solution of several "insight" problems. , 1981 .

[4]  Yaoda Xu,et al.  Visual grouping in human parietal cortex , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

[6]  M. Botvinick,et al.  Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. , 2001, Psychological review.

[7]  A. Kekulé,et al.  Ueber einige Condensationsproducte des Aldehyds , 1872 .

[8]  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.

[9]  Robert J. Barry,et al.  The auditory-evoked N2 and P3 components in the stop-signal task: Indices of inhibition, response-conflict or error-detection? , 2006, Brain and Cognition.

[10]  R. Barry,et al.  Effects of pre-stimulus processing on subsequent events in a warned Go/NoGo paradigm: response preparation, execution and inhibition. , 2006, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[11]  Günther Knoblich,et al.  Investigating the effect of mental set on insight problem solving. , 2008, Experimental psychology.

[12]  Daniel Strüber,et al.  EEG gamma-band response during the perception of Necker cube reversals , 2001 .

[13]  Jon M Fincham,et al.  Role of prefrontal and parietal cortices in associative learning. , 2008, Cerebral cortex.

[14]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A unified statistical approach for determining significant signals in images of cerebral activation , 1996, Human brain mapping.

[15]  Ahmet Ademoglu,et al.  Analysis of the electroencephalographic activity during the Necker cube reversals by means of the wavelet transform , 1998, Biological Cybernetics.

[16]  X. Mai,et al.  “Aha!” effects in a guessing riddle task: An event‐related potential study , 2004, Human brain mapping.

[17]  S. Ohlsson.  Information-processing explanations of insight and related phenomena , 1992 .

[18]  S. Ohlsson.  Restructuring revisited: I. Summary and critique of the Gestalt theory of problem solving. , 1984 .

[19]  Edward M. Bowden,et al.  Neural Activity When People Solve Verbal Problems with Insight , 2004, PLoS biology.

[20]  F. Crick,et al.  Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids: A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid , 1953, Nature.

[21]  J. Grafman,et al.  Dissociating the roles of the rostral anterior cingulate and the lateral prefrontal cortices in performing two tasks simultaneously or successively. , 2003, Cerebral cortex.

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

[23]  C. Reverberi,et al.  Better without (lateral) frontal cortex? Insight problems solved by frontal patients. , 2005, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[24]  Kevin M. Brooks,et al.  Thoughts beyond words : When language overshadows insight , 1993 .

[25]  T C Ormerod,et al.  When Insight Just Won't Come: The Failure of Visual Cues in the Nine-Dot Problem , 2001, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[26]  Jing Luo,et al.  Studying insight problem solving with neuroscientific methods. , 2007, Methods.

[27]  T C Ormerod,et al.  Information processing and insight: a process model of performance on the nine-dot and related problems. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[28]  R. Fraser.  The structure of deoxyribose nucleic acid. , 2004, Journal of structural biology.

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

[30]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Behavioral equivalence, but not neural equivalence—neural evidence of alternative strategies in mathematical thinking , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[31]  T. Robbins,et al.  Stop-signal inhibition disrupted by damage to right inferior frontal gyrus in humans , 2003, Nature Neuroscience.

[32]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  A Parametric Study of Mental Spatial Transformations of Bodies , 2002, NeuroImage.

[33]  E. Donchin,et al.  The influence of stimulus deviance and novelty on the P300 and novelty P3. , 2002, Psychophysiology.

[34]  C. Curtis.  Prefrontal and parietal contributions to spatial working memory , 2006, Neuroscience.

[35]  R. Poldrack,et al.  Cortical and Subcortical Contributions to Stop Signal Response Inhibition: Role of the Subthalamic Nucleus , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

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

[38]  H. Birch,et al.  The negative effect of previous experience on productive thinking. , 1951, Journal of experimental psychology.

[39]  M. Iacoboni,et al.  “Aha!”: The neural correlates of verbal insight solutions , 2009, Human brain mapping.

[40]  John R Anderson,et al.  An integrated theory of the mind. , 2004, Psychological review.

[41]  John R. Anderson.  How Can the Human Mind Occur in the Physical Universe , 2007 .

[42]  Allen Newell,et al.  Human Problem Solving. , 1973 .

[43]  Edward M. Bowden.  The Effect of Reportable and Unreportable Hints on Anagram Solution and the Aha! Experience , 1997, Consciousness and Cognition.

[44]  Kazuhisa Niki,et al.  Function of hippocampus in “insight” of problem solving , 2003, Hippocampus.

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

[46]  N. Maier,et al.  Functional Values as AIDS and Distractors in Problem Solving , 1968, Psychological reports.

[47]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Conflict monitoring versus selection-for-action in anterior cingulate cortex , 1999, Nature.

[48]  Benjamin J. Shannon,et al.  Functional-Anatomic Correlates of Memory Retrieval That Suggest Nontraditional Processing Roles for Multiple Distinct Regions within Posterior Parietal Cortex , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[49]  Stellan Ohlsson,et al.  Deep Learning - How the Mind Overrides Experience , 2011 .

[50]  S. Glucksberg,et al.  The influence of strength of drive on functional fixedness and perceptual recognition. , 1962, Journal of experimental psychology.

[51]  A. Turken,et al.  Left inferior frontal gyrus is critical for response inhibition , 2008, BMC Neuroscience.

[52]  K Richard Ridderinkhof,et al.  ERP components associated with successful and unsuccessful stopping in a stop-signal task. , 2004, Psychophysiology.

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

[54]  E. Spelke,et al.  Sources of mathematical thinking: behavioral and brain-imaging evidence. , 1999, Science.

[55]  T. Robbins,et al.  Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[56]  J. Jonides,et al.  Inhibition in verbal working memory revealed by brain activation. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[58]  H. Semlitsch,et al.  A solution for reliable and valid reduction of ocular artifacts, applied to the P300 ERP. , 1986, Psychophysiology.

[59]  R W Smith,et al.  Sudden insight: all-or-none processing revealed by speed-accuracy decomposition. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[60]  C. Degueldre,et al.  The Functional Anatomy of Inhibition Processes Investigated with the Hayling Task , 2001, NeuroImage.

[61]  J. Cohen,et al.  Dissociating the role of the dorsolateral prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortex in cognitive control. , 2000, Science.

[62]  Stefan Everling,et al.  Isolation of saccade inhibition processes: Rapid event-related fMRI of saccades and nogo trials , 2008, NeuroImage.

[63]  Steven Phillips,et al.  Neural correlates of the ‘Aha! reaction’ , 2004, Neuroreport.

[64]  T. Ormerod,et al.  Dynamics and constraints in insight problem solving. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[65]  Robert T. Knight,et al.  Think differently: a brain orienting response to task novelty , 2002, Neuroreport.

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

[67]  T. Shallice,et al.  Effects of focal frontal lesions on response inhibition. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[68]  Jean-Luc Anton,et al.  Region of interest analysis using an SPM toolbox , 2010 .

[69]  P T Fox,et al.  An fMRI study with written Chinese , 2001, Neuroreport.