1 / 24

Something for Nothing? Increasing Insight in Groups

Something for Nothing? Increasing Insight in Groups. Matthew A. Cronin. Motivation. Increase the likelihood of innovation and creativity when people work.

kaemon
Download Presentation

Something for Nothing? Increasing Insight in Groups

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Something for Nothing? Increasing Insight in Groups Matthew A. Cronin

  2. Motivation • Increase the likelihood of innovation and creativity when people work. • Creativity/innovation: improvements to the way a problem is solved that come from changing the problem conceptualization (e.g., cost reduction vs. increased sales) • Work: iterated problem solving

  3. Outline of talk • Review the basic individual level cognitive theory that is foundation for my work • Explain my model • Show simulation • Show individual level corroborative data • Show group level corroborative data

  4. Problem solving processes (Re)Conceptualize Problem Solve Problem GOAL

  5. Problem solving processes (Re)Conceptualize Problem Solve Problem GOAL Conscious

  6. Problem solving processes (Re)Conceptualize Problem Solve Problem GOAL Conscious Unconscious

  7. Conscious/ incremental DONALD + GERALD ROBERT D = 5

  8. Unconscious/ radical • A woman who did not have her driver’s license on her went through a stop sign without stopping, then traveled 3 blocks the wrong way down a one way street. A cop saw all of this and did nothing, why?

  9. My model

  10. Simulation • Corroborate intuition by comparing to established pattern (preparation-impasse-illumination) • Mechanics • Mental Energy (ME) = thinking capacity per unit time • CSdemand = unexplored PS/Visible PS • UCSinflow = ME – (CSdemand – ε)

  11. Simulation of the model

  12. Further validation of basic concept • Can we demonstrate that doing simultaneous conscious activity increases time to insight? • Experiment • Have subjects answer insight questions • Ss either simultaneously trace a picture, look at picture, or do nothing • 131 Undergraduates, 80% male

  13. Results Difference is significant (p<.05)

  14. Can we use this knowledge to make groups more creative? • Divide cognitive labor (some do insight, some do incremental) • Will this lead to more insights and better performance?

  15. Imbalance between incremental/insight processes • Preference for incremental thinking (even when not productive) • Potential for much redundancy and half starts in thinking • Redundancy – I think through ideas you already have • Half starts – not thinking an insight through • Switching costs

  16. Experiment 1 • Build 3 different types of products from common household materials • Products send eggs to a target • “Type” is defined by delivery method • 90 undergraduates, 50% female, same sex groups of 3 • Performance = eggs thrown to target • Insights – coded via standard categories (functional fixedness, constraint relaxation, re-encoding)

  17. Unpartitioned Partitioned Group Structure Group Structure Cognitive Functions Cognitive Functions Think of new approaches Think of new approaches And Build Products Build Products

  18. Removing the conscious demands increased insight, did nothing for performance Unpartitioned M(perf)= 5.9 M(insite) = 9.4 Partitioned M(perf) = 5.5 M(insite) = 12.3 Group Structure Group Structure Mean Insights Mean Insights 6.6 3.1 2.9

  19. Follow up experiment • Performance was equal, but did we get something for nothing? • Is the “insight” process generalizable to pattern recognition

  20. Experiment 2 • Generate words from given letters and then sentences from words (Root Words: DULL, BEN, IAMBIC) • Word generation (in, mine, bib, club, I, am, climb, a) is mostly UCS • Sentence generation (I climb in a club) is mostly CS • 156 undergraduates, 50% female, same sex groups of 3 • DVs: Words, sentences, total performance

  21. Unpartitioned Partitioned Group Structure Group Structure Cognitive Functions Cognitive Functions Think of sentences Think of words And Think of sentences Think of words

  22. Removing the conscious demands increased word production Unpartitioned M(sent) = 15.5 M(Zperf) = .07 Partitioned M(sent) = 12.0 M(Zperf) = -.07 Group Structure Group Structure Mean Words Mean Words 28.4 39.5

  23. Future research • Model validity • Interference in both directions? • Unconscious “pull”? • Group issues • What happens between idea generation and implementation? • Effect of interpersonal processes • Integrating cognition

  24. The big question • How to position this story so I can publish it in a top tier journal, get tenure, get fame, demand high consulting wages, ignore student complaints that I am a hard teacher, and live happily ever after.

More Related