I am trying to derive a formula to express logic or verbal problem solving as a function of relevant knowledge plus experience with the kind of problem plus metacognitive factors in an inverse relationship with "difficult" of the problem. I have a flow diagram about the process and I am interested in formalize it. I think the Rasch Model may be an important inspiration source.
brilliant
when you reach to the result, please, publish the research
really excellent
wish i could help but i am not good in working with rasch model
There is a very large bibliography on "Problem solving", some of them are:
▪ Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Polya’s Problem solving Techniques: https://math.berkeley.edu/~gmelvin/polya.pdf, http://math.hawaii.edu/home/pdf/putnam/PolyaHowToSolveIt.pdf
• In his book Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field, Hadamard uses introspection to describe mathematical thought processes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Hadamard
• Alan H. Schoenfeld, LEARNING TO THINK MATHEMATICALLY: PROBLEM SOLVING, METACOGNITION, AND SENSE-MAKING IN MATHEMATICS http://hplengr.engr.wisc.edu/Math_Schoenfeld.pdf
One should note that "Problem Solving" is a non-Analytic activity. As such holistic models are needed. It seems to me that the Rasch Model, is rather an analytic one, See: [David_Andrich]_Rasch_Models_for_Measurement.
Bond, Trevor G.; Fox, Christine M. Applying the Rasch Model:Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences.
I think the project you are proposing is essentially, how to combine an analytic and a non-analytic model, taking into account all the above sources.
Thank you both Neeven and Costas, it helps a lot. Dear Costas, may you explain a little more the holistic view on PS process? Because literature on the issue use to see as a context dependent process sith analitycal and particular capacities.
I think that Carlos means the Gestalt approach when he mentioned; the holistic view??
I mean the idea of Costas about anaytical vs non-analytical, because I think problem solving is analytical necessarily, but maybe I am missong something that Costas see.
Oh, yes got it., and when I read Carlos's comment I could see that is does not support the idea that problem solving is analytical process , although I can see that he is specializing in mathmatic and mathmatic problem solving are more easy to analyze
anyway, good luck to all of you, i will keep tracking you till you reach your point
Dear Carlos,
To oversimplify the matter, the right hemisphere is essentially holistic and structural. In right hemisphere also reside, intuition, phantasy, etc. When we try to solve a problem, there are of course some recipes like Polya's, essentially the right hemisphere examines the structure of the problem, unconsciously, and when find some common elements with a problem you have solved before, the solution come like thunder in the blue sky! some colleague mentions Gestalt. This is structural, non-set theoretic holistic structure.
The analytic approach to problem solving, we can have a good example in "theorem provers". Thus the correct approach to problem solving is to put both hemispheres, left-analytic and right-holistic to work!
Ok. Thank you Costas. I suggest to read my article El proceso de solución de problemas, (here in Research Gate) where I present my diagram of the process, notincluding any unconcious process in problem solving.
