ABSTRACT

CRA problems can be solved with an Aha! experience in at least two different ways: via pop-out solutions (without overcoming an impasse) and true insight (with overcoming an impasse). The purpose of the present research was to test whether these solution types can be discriminated in CRA. We modified the CRA problems and added two priming conditions: relevant (decreases the probability of an impasse) and irrelevant (increases it). In Experiment 1 (N = 20), CRA problems were followed by reports on the Global Aha! rating and 6 subjective self-reports. In Experiment 2 (N = 40), a visual report on the solving process was introduced. Irrelevant priming trials were followed by lower success rates. The subjective self-reports and visual reports were different for correct and incorrect solutions but not for the two priming conditions. Thus, there is a dissociation in performance (affected by priming) and self-reports (affected by performance but not priming).

摘要

CRA 问题可以用 Aha! 解决！至少以两种不同的方式体验：通过弹出式解决方案（不克服僵局）和真正的洞察力（克服僵局）。本研究的目的是测试这些解决方案类型是否可以在 CRA 中区分。我们修改了 CRA 问题并添加了两个启动条件：相关（降低陷入僵局的可能性）和不相关（增加僵局）。在实验 1 ( N = 20) 中，CRA 问题之后是关于 Global Aha! 评分和 6 份主观自我报告。在实验 2 ( N= 40），介绍了求解过程的可视化报告。不相关的启动试验之后的成功率较低。正确和不正确的解决方案的主观自我报告和视觉报告不同，但两种启动条件没有。因此，绩效（受启动影响）和自我报告（受绩效影响但不受启动影响）之间存在分离。