The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.
The Impact of Goal Specificity on Strategy Use and the Acquisition of Problem Structure
Abstract
Theories of skill acquisition have made radically different predictions about the role of general problem-solving methods in acquiring rules that promote effective transfer to new problems. Under one view, methods that focus on reaching specific goals, such as means-ends analysis, are assumed to provide the basis for efficient knowledge compilation (Anderson, 1987), whereas under an alternative view such methods are believed to disrupt rule induction (Sweller, 1988). We suggest that the role of general methods in learning varies with both the specificity of the problem solver's goal and the systematicity of the strategies used for testing hypotheses about rules. In the absence of a specific goal people are more likely to use a rule-induction learning strategy, whereas provision of a specific goal fosters use of difference reduction, which tends to be a non-rule-induction strategy. We performed two experiments to investigate the impact of goal specificity and systematicity of rule-induction strategies in learning and transfer within a complex dynamic system. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that during free exploration of a problem space, greater learning occurred if participants adopted more systematic strategies for rule induction, and that participants come to favor such strategies. Experiment 2 revealed that participants who were provided with a specific goal performed well on the initial problem but were impaired on a transfer test using a similar problem with a diff…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The benefits of prior knowledge activation are contingent on the relevance of the activation.
“Research on goal specificity (e.g., Miller etal., 1999; Vollmeyer etal., 1996), mechanisms of errorful generation (Cyr & Anderson, 2015), as well as prior PS-I work (e.g., Kapur, 2015; Schwartz etal., 2011) has suggested that the benefits of prior knowledge activation such as noticing inconsistencies across multiple problem instances, encoding critical features from instruction, and so on, are”
From When Problem Solving Followed by Instruction Works: Evidence for Productive Failure (2021) · cites this paper as Vollmeyer et al., 1996
Citations
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 24 · Cited by 224
Research works printed but not linked: 25
- 10.1037/0033-295X.94.2.192 · DOI
- 10.1080/14640748408402156 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF00309197 · DOI
- Branke S., 1991, Die Interaktion von Personen‐und Aufgabenmerkmalen beim komplexen Problemlösen
- DeJong G.F., 1986, Machine learning: An artificial intelligence approach
- 10.1207/s15516709cog1703_3 · DOI
- Funke J., 1991, Complex problem solving: Principles and mechanisms
- Funke J., 1988, Eingreifen and Prognostizieren als Determinanten von System‐identifikation und Systemsteuerung [Intervention and prediction as determinants of systems identification and system control, Sprache & Kognition, 7, 176
- Holyoak K.J., 1991, Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits
- 10.1207/s15516709cog1201_1 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1006/cogp.1993.1003 · DOI
- Larkin J.H., 1981, Cognitive skills and their acquisition.
- 10.1037/0278-7393.8.3.252 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF00116250 · DOI · Paper page
- Putz‐Osterloh W., 1993, The cognitive psychology of knowledge.
- Simon H.A., 1974, Knowledge and cognition.
- 10.3758/BF03197659 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0278-7393.8.5.463 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/1422136 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0096-3445.112.4.639 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/1129583 · DOI
- 10.1080/00335558008248237 · DOI
- 10.1080/17470216008416717 · DOI
- Woodworth R.S., 1954, Experimental psychology
Metadata
- Authors
- Vollmeyer, R., Burns, B. D., & Holyoak, K. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Potsdam (DE)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Corresponding author
- Vollmeyer, Regina
- Venue
- Cognitive Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1996-01
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 75-100
- ISSN
- 0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
- 1551-6709
- OpenAlex
- W2130805603
- Cited by
- 224
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 6.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cognitive Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- goal specificity, problem-solving strategies, rule induction, means-ends analysis, transfer of learning, problem space, skill acquisition, knowledge compilation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review