Abstract
Attempts to estimate the contribution made by motor activity to insight problem solving is hindered by a lack of detailed description of motor behavior. The goal of this study was to develop and put to the test a novel method for studying the dynamics of insight problem solving based on a quantitative analysis of ongoing motor activity. As a proper problem model, we chose the nine-dot problem (Maier, 1930), in which solvers had to draw a sequence of connected line segments. Instead of using the traditional pen-and-paper way of solving the nine-dot problem we asked participants to use their index finger to draw line segments on the surface of a tablet computer. We are arguing that successful studying of the role of motor activity during problem solving requires the distinction between its instrumental and functional role. We considered the functional role on the motor activity as closely related to the on-line mode of motor planning. The goal of Experiment 1 was to explore the potential power of the method and, at the same time, to assay the patterns of motor activity related to on-line and off-line modes of motor planning. Experiments 2 and 3 were designed to uncover the potential impact of preliminary motor training on the motor output of successful and unsuccessful problem solvers. In these experiments, we tested hypotheses on how preliminary motor training, which presumably played a functional role in Experiment 2 and an instrumental role in Experiment 3, affects the motor activity of a problem solver and hence their effectiveness in solving the problem. The three experiments showed consistent results. They suggest that successful solving of the nine-dot problem relies upon the functional role of motor activity and requires both off-line and on-line modes of motor planning, with the latter helping to overcome the perceptual constraints imposed by a spatial arrangement of the nine dots. The method that we applied allows for systematic comparison between successful and unsuccessful problem solvers based on the quantitative parameters of their motor activity. Through it, we found new specific patterns of motor activity that differentiate successful and unsuccessful solvers.
Highlights
The concept of insight has remained in focus of researchers since its introduction in 1917 by Köhler (1921)
A 2 × 3 repeated measures ANOVA with SUCCESS as a between-subjects factor and STAGE as a within-subjects factor revealed no significant main effect of SUCCESS (p = 0.55), STAGE (p = 0.18) or interaction of SUCCESS and STAGE (p = 0.13). These results show that the way off-line planning mode was used did not change across successive stages of the process of solving the nine-dot problem either in successful or in unsuccessful problem solvers
Similar differences between successful and unsuccessful problem solvers were found using eye tracking during the final stage of the problem solving (Knoblich et al, 2001). They found that it was the third stage of the solving process in which the average duration of long fixations spent on crucial elements in matchstick arithmetic problems was significantly longer in successful than in unsuccessful problem solvers
Summary
The concept of insight has remained in focus of researchers since its introduction in 1917 by Köhler (1921). The most popular theoretical models usually do not consider the solver’s own motor activities which emerge while solving insight problems as a factor contributing to their solutions (Ohlsson, 1984; Kaplan and Simon, 1990; Knoblich et al, 1999; Ormerod et al, 2002). At odds with this view, data accumulated through a number of studies have shown that the motor activity of the solver is intimately woven into the fabric of the solving process. These and similar results are clearly not in line with existing models of insight and beg for an explanation
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
