The role of the “history effect” in the formation of the expected result in the problem-solving process

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

The article presents the results of a study of the development of mental regulation of students’ psychological states during their studies at a university. This work is based on authors’ conceptual model of the structural and functional organization of psychological states’ mental regulation. The study was carried out at the initial and final stages of students’ education in everyday and stressful situations of academic activity covering the period from 2019 to 2023. Methods and effectiveness of psychological state self-regulation were studied using well-known valid methods and specially designed questionnaires. Mental structures such as reflection, life meaning orientation, and self-system, as well as individual regulatory properties studied outside educational situations in first (2018) and fourth years (2022) of study were investigated. As a result of the study, it was established, that, regardless of the situation of educational activity, psychological states acquire greater stability (equilibrium) by the senior year of study, which is associated with the effectiveness of states’ self-regulation. Changes in mental structures from the initial course to the final of study are revealed in an increase in the intensity of their manifestations in all main indicators. It has been established that in both situations, during the learning process, students experience an increase in the involvement of mental structures (primarily reflexive) and regulatory properties in the regulation of psychological states. In each situation of educational activity and at each stage of training, there were identified the leading structures of consciousness, determining the choice of self-regulation methods, which, in turn, are associated with the substructures of psychological states. It has been also stablished that from the initial stage of study to the final one, there is an increase in the number of methods used for states’ self-regulation, as well as their relationships with mental structures and regulatory properties of the personality, which indicates the development of a system of mental regulation of students’ psychological states.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

А. А. Medyntsev

Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences

Author for correspondence.
Email: medintseff@yandex.ru

PhD (Psychology), Researcher of laboratory of psychology and psychophysiology of creativity

Russian Federation, 129366, Moscow, Yaroslavskaya str., 13, bld. 1

References

  1. Aleksandrov Yu.I., Shevchenko D.G. Nauchnaya shkola “Sistemnaya psikhofiziologiya”. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal. 2004. V. 25. № 6. P. 93–100. (In Russian)
  2. Anokhin P.K. Uzlovye voprosy teorii funktsional’noi sistemy. Moscow: Nauka, 1980. 196 p. (In Russian)
  3. Asmolov A.G. Deyatel’nost’ i ustanovka. Moscow: Publ. MSU, 1979. 151 p. (In Russian)
  4. Vladimirov I.Yu., Karpov A.V., Lazareva N.Yu. Rol’ upravlyayushchego kontrolya i podchinennykh sistem rabochei pamyati v formirovanii effekta serii. Eksperimental’naya psikhologiya. 2018. V. 11. № 3. P. 36–50. doi: 10.17759/exppsy.2018110303 (In Russian)
  5. Deeva T.M., Kozlov D.D. Formirovanie abstraktnogo znaniya pri implitsitnom usvoenii skhemy resheniya anagram. Eksperimental’naya psikhologiya. 2021. V. 14. № 1. P. 95–107. doi: 10.17759/exppsy.2021140103 (In Russian)
  6. Dunker K. Psikhologiya produktivnogo (tvorcheskogo) myshleniya. In: Psikhologiya myshleniya. Ed. A.M. Matyushkin. Moscow: Progress, 1965. P. 86–234. (In Russian)
  7. Koifman A.Ya. Ustanovka i neosoznavaemyi semanticheskii praiming: raznye terminy ili raznye fenomeny? Rossiiskii zhurnal kognitivnoi nauki. 2016. V. 3. № 4. P. 45–62. URL: http://cogjournal.org/3/4/pdf/KoyfmanRJCS2016.pdf (In Russian)
  8. Korovkin S.Yu. Rol’ antitsipatsii i ozhidanii v insaitnom reshenii. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya. 2021. V. 14. № 76. P. 5. URL: http://psystudy.ru (In Russian)
  9. Kostandov E.A. Psikhofiziologiya soznaniya i bessoznatel’nogo. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2004. 166 p. (In Russian)
  10. Kudel’kina N.S., Agafonov A. Yu. Dinamicheskie praiming-effekty: issledovanie regulyatsii neosoznavaemoi semanticheskoi chuvstvitel’nosti. In: Po obe storony soznaniya. Eksperimental’nye issledovaniya po kognitivnoi psikhologii. Ed. A.Yu. Agafonov. Samara: Publ. house “Bakhrakh-M”, 2012. P. 63–94. (In Russian)
  11. Lapteva E.M. Dvizheniya glaz kak indikator znaniya otveta pri reshenii anagram. Eksperimental’naya psikhologiya. 2016. V. 9. № 3. P. 41–53. doi: 10.17759/exppsy.2016090304 (In Russian)
  12. Lyashevskaya O.N., Sharov S.A. Chastotnyi slovar’ sovremennogo russkogo yazyka. Moscow: Azbukovnik, 2009. 1087 p. (In Russian)
  13. Medyntsev A.A. Aktseptor budushchego resheniya kak mekhanizm reshenii zadach. Psikhologiya poznaniya: nizkourovnevye i vysokourovnevye protsessy: Materialy Vserossiiskoi nauchnoi konferentsii. Yaroslavl’: Filigran’, 2021. P. 145–154. (In Russian)
  14. Ponomarev Ya.A. Psikhologiya tvorchestva. Moscow: Nauka, 1976. 302 p. (In Russian)
  15. Spiridonov V.F. Praiming i ustanovka na materiale resheniya myslitel’nykh zadach. Rossiiskii zhurnal kognitivnoi nauki. 2017. V. 4. № 1. P. 44–51. URL: https:// cogjournal.org/4/1/pdf/SpiridonovRJCS2017.pdf (In Russian)
  16. Spiridonov V.F., Abisalova E.A. Izmenenie pokazatelei kreativnosti s pomoshch’yu semanticheskogo praiminga. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki. 2012. V. 9. № 3. P. 122–130. (In Russian)
  17. Tikhomirov O.K. Informatsionnaya i psikhologicheskaya teoriya myshleniya. Voprosy psikhologii. 1974. № 1. P. 40–48. (In Russian)
  18. Uznadze D.N. Psikhologiya ustanovki. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Piter, 2001. 414 p. (In Russian)
  19. Ammalainen A., Moroshkina N. The effect of true and false unreportable hints on anagram problem solving, restructuring, and the Aha!-experience. Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 2021. V. 33. № 6–7. P. 644–658. doi: 10.1080/20445911.2020.1844722
  20. Ammalainen A., Moroshkina N. Where does Eureka come from? The effect of unreportable hints on the phenomenology of insight. Journal of Intelligence. 2022. V. 10. № 4. P. 110. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence10040110
  21. Birch H.G., Rabinowitz H.S. The negative effect of previous experience on productive thinking. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1951. V. 41 (2). P. 121–125. doi: 10.1037/h0062635
  22. Bonin P., Boyer B., Méot A. et al. Psycholinguistic norms for action photographs in French and their relationships with spoken and written latencies. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers. 2004. V. 36 (1). P. 127–139.
  23. Grimmer H., Laukkonen R., Tangen J., Von Hippel W. Eliciting false insights with semantic priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2022. V. 29 (3). P. 954–970. doi: 10.3758/s13423-021-02049-x
  24. Helson H., Nash M.C. Anchor, contrast, and paradoxical distance effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1960. V. 59. P. 113–121. doi: 10.1037/h0048503
  25. Knoblich G., Ohlsson S., Haider H., Rhenius D. Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1999. V. 25 (6). P. 1534–1555. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.25.6.1534
  26. Liu D., Hao L., Han L. et al. The optimal balance of controlled and spontaneous processing in insight problem solving: fMRI evidence from Chinese idiom guessing. Psychophysiology. 2023. V. 60 (7). P. e14240. doi: 10.1111/psyp.14240
  27. Luchins A.S., Luchins E.H. Rigidity of behavior: A variational approach to the effect of Einstellung. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Books, 1959. 623 p.
  28. Öllinger M., Jones G., Faber A., Knoblich G. Cognitive mechanisms of insight: The role of heuristics and representational change in solving the eight-coin problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2013. V. 39 (3). P. 931–939. doi: 10.1037/a0029194
  29. Ormerod T.C., MacGregor J.N., Chronicle E.P. Dynamics and constraints in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2002. V. 28 (4). P. 791–799. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.28.4.791
  30. Savinova A., Padalka J., Makarov I., Korovkin S. Tracing executive functions in insight. The Journal of General Psychology. 2024. V. 151 (2). P. 87–111. doi: 10.1080/00221309.2023.2218636
  31. Siipola E.M. A group study of some effects of preparatory set. Psychological Monographs. 1935. V. 46 (6). P. 27–38. doi: 10.1037/h0093376
  32. Wiley J. Expertise as mental set: The effects of domain knowledge in creative problem solving. Memory & Cognition. 1998. V. 26 (4). P. 716–730. doi: 10.3758/bf03211392

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Experimental procedure for solving the problem in Experiment 1

Download (99KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Average values ​​of the index of solutions to problems of different types in the control series (N = 46) Note: Curly brackets indicate significant differences between problems of different types.

Download (93KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. Time values ​​for solving problems of different types in the control series (N = 46) Note: Curly brackets indicate significant differences between problems of different types.

Download (80KB)
Indexing metadata
5. Fig. 4. Average values ​​of the voluntary refusal index to solve problems of different types in the control series (N = 46) Note: Curly brackets indicate significant differences between problems of different types.

Download (88KB)
Indexing metadata

Note

The data were collected jointly with M.I. Levshina.


Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Academy of Sciences

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies