Heigh-Ho: CPS and the seven questions – some thoughts on contemporary Complex Problem Solving research
Identifiers (Article)
Identifiers (Files)
Abstract
Research on complex problem solving (CPS) has reached a stage where certain standards have been achieved, whereas the future development is quite ambiguous. In this situation, the editors of the Journal of Dynamic Decision Making asked a number of representative authors to share their point of view with respect to seven questions about the relevance of (complex) problem solving as a research area, about the contribution of laboratory-based CPS research to solving real life problems, about the roles of knowledge, strategies, and intuition in CPS, and about the existence of expertise in CPS.
Statistics
References
Beckmann, J.F. (2010). Taming a beast of burden – On some issues with the conceptualization and operationalisation of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 20, 250-264. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.024
Beckmann, J.F., & Goode, N. (2014). The benefit of being naïve and knowing it: The unfavourable impact of perceived context familiarity on learning in complex problem solving tasks. Instructional Science, 42(2), 271-290. doi: 10.1007/s11251-013-9280-7
Beckmann, J.F., & Guthke, J. (1995). Complex problem solving, intelligence, and learning ability. In P. A. Frensch & J. Funke (Eds.), Complex problem solving: The European Perspective (pp. 177–200). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. doi: 10.4324/9781315806723
Beckmann, J.F. (2018). Deferential trespassing: Looking through and at an intersectional lens. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 161, 119-123. doi: 10.1002/cad.20243
Beckmann, J.F., & Goode, N. (2017). Missing the wood for the wrong trees: On the difficulty of defining the complexity of complex problem solving scenarios. Journal of Intelligence, 5,15. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence5020015
Beckmann, J.F., Birney, D.P. & Goode, N. (2017). Beyond Psychometrics: The difference between difficult problem solving and complex problem solving. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1739. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01739
Birney, D.P., Beckmann, J.F., & Seah, Y.Z. (2016). More than the eye of the beholder: The interplay of person, task and situation factors in evaluative judgments of creativity. Learning and Individual Differences, 51, 400-408. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2015.07.007
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G.J., & Van Heerden, J. (2004). The concept of validity. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1061-1071. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.111.4.1061
Dörner, D. & Funke, J. (2017). Complex Problem Solving: What It Is and What It Is Not. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1153. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01153
Gadenne, V. (1976). Die Gültigkeit psychologicher Untersuchungen [The validity of psychological inquiry]. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Lewin, K. (1927). Gesetz und Experiment in der Psychologie [Law and experiment in psychology]. Symposium, 1, 375-421.
Lewin, K. (1992). Law and Experiment in Psychology. Science in Context, 5, 385-416. doi:10.1017/s0269889700001241
Mencken, H.L. (1921). Prejudices. Second Series. London: Jonathan Cape.
Wood, R.E., Cogin, J., & Beckmann, J.F. (2009) Managerial Problem Solving: Frameworks, Tools & Techniques. McGraw Hill Australia.
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
