Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in
Menu
Find a journal Publish with us Track your research
Search
Cart
  1. Home
  2. Memory & Cognition
  3. Article

Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving

  • Published: May 1987
  • Volume 15, pages 238–246, (1987)
  • Cite this article
Download PDF
Memory & Cognition Aims and scope Submit manuscript
Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving
Download PDF
  • Janet Metcalfe1 &
  • David Wiebe2 
  • 10k Accesses

  • 577 Citations

  • 16 Altmetric

  • 1 Mention

  • Explore all metrics

Abstract

People’s metacognitions, both before and during problem solving, may be of importance in motivating and guiding problem-solving behavior. These metacognitions could also be diagnostic for distinguishing among different classes of problems, each perhaps controlled by different cognitive processes. In the present experiments, intuitions on classic insight problems were compared with those on noninsight and algebra problems. The findings were as follows: (1) subjective feeling of knowing predicted performance on algebra problems but not on insight problems; (2) subjects’ expectations of performance greatly exceeded their actual performance, especially on insight problems; (3) normative predictions provided a better estimate of individual performance than did subjects’ own predictions, especially on the insight problems; and, most importantly, (4) the patterns-of-warmth ratings, which reflect subjects’ feelings of approaching solution, differed for insight and noninsight problems. Algebra problems and noninsight problems showed a more incremental pattern over the course of solving than did insight problems. In general, then, the data indicated that noninsight problems were open to accurate predictions of performance, whereas insight problems were opaque to such predictions. Also, the phenomenology of insight-problem solution was characterized by a sudden, unforeseen flash of illumination. We propose that the difference in phenomenology accompanying insight and noninsight problem solving, as empirically demonstrated here, be used to define insight.

Article PDF

Download to read the full article text

Similar content being viewed by others

Modelling Insight as a Creative Domain: Process or Phenomenology?

Chapter © 2024

Creativity in problem solving: integrating two different views of insight

Article Open access 02 September 2021

Insight

Chapter © 2020

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.
  • Analytical Psychology
  • Cognition
  • Cognitivism
  • Intelligence
  • Metacognition
  • Problem Solving
Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

References

  • Adams, J. L. (1979).Conceptual blockbusting. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arieti, S. (1976).Creativity: The magic synthesis. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergson, H. (1902).An introduction to metaphysics. New York: Putnam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. (1966).On knowing: Essays for the left hand. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, J. E., &Sternberg, R. J. (1984). The role of insight in intellectual giftedness.Gifted Child Quarterly,28, 58–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBono, E. (1967).The use of lateral thinking. New York: Penguin

    Google Scholar 

  • DeBono, E. (1969).The mechanism of mind. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dominowski, R. L. (1981). Comment on an examination of the alleged role of ’fixation’ in the solution of ’insight’ problems.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,110, 199–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncker, K. (1945). On problem solving.Psychological Monographs,58(5, Whole No. 270).

  • Ellen, P. (1982). Direction, past experience, and hints in creative problem solving: Reply to Weisberg and Alba.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,111, 316–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fixx, J. F. (1972).More games for the superintelligent. New York: Popular Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, M. (1978).Aha! Insight. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruneberg, M. M., &Monks, J. (1974). Feeling of knowing In cued recall.Acta Psychologica,38, 257–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, J. T. (1967). Memory and the memory-monitoring process.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,6, 685–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, D. R. (1980).Gödel, Escher, Bach: An eternal golden braid. New York: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karat, J. (1982). A model of problem solving with incomplete constraint knowledge.Cognitive Psychology,14, 538–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koestler, A. (1977).The act of creation. London: Picadoo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, M. (1986).Principles of effective problem solving. Unpublished manuscript, State University of New York at Stonybrook.

  • Lichtenstein, S., Fischoff, B., &Phillips, L. D. (1982). Calibration of probabilities: The state to the art to 1980. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.),Judgment under uncertainty. Heuristitcs and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovelace, E. A. (1984). Metamemory: Monitoring future recallability during study.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,10, 756–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luchins, A. S. (1942). Mechanizataon in problem solving.Psychological Monographs,54(6, Whole No. 248).

  • Maier, N. R. F. (1931). Reasoning in humans. II. The solution of a problem and its appearance in consciousness.Journal of Campara-tive Psychology,12, 181–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1983).Thinking, problem solving, cognition. New York: Freeman

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, J. (1986a). Feeling of knowing in memory and problem solving.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory. & Cognition,12, 288–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, J. (1986b). Premonitions of insight predict impending error.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,12, 623–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling of knowing prediction.Psychological Bulletin,95, 109–133.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O. (1986). ROC curves and measures of discrimination accuracy: A reply to Swets.Psychologtcal Bulletin,100, 128–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O., Leonesio, R. J., Landwehr, R. S., &Narens, L. (1986). A comparison of three predictors of an individual’s memory performance: The individual’s feeling of knowing vs. the normative feeling of knowing vs. base-rate item difficulty.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,12, 279–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O., Leonesio, R. J., Shimamura, A. P., Landwehr, R. F., &Narens, L. (1982). Overlearning and the feeling of knowing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,8, 279–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O., &Narens, L. (1980). Norms of 300 general-information questions: Accuracy of recall, latency of recall, and feeling-of-knowing ratings.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 338–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M. (1958).Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polya, G. (1957),How to solve it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Restle, F., &Davis, J. H. (1962). Success and speed of problem solwng by ~ndividuals and groups.Psychological Review,69, 520–536.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schacter, D. L. (1983). Feeling of knowing in episodic memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,9, 39–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1977).Models of discovery. Dordrecht, The Netherlands. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1979).Models of thought. New Haven Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H., Newell, A., &Shaw, J. C. (1979). The process of creative thinking. In H. Simon (Ed),Models of thought (pp. 144–174). New Haven: Yale University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (1985).Beyond IQ. Cambridge, MA. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (1986).Intelligence applied. San Diego: Harcourt, Brace, Javonovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J., &Davidson, J. E. (1982, June). The nund of the puzzler.Psychology Today,16, 37–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Travers, K. J., Dalton, L. C., Bruner, V. F., &Taylor, A. R. (1976).Using advanced algebra. Toronto: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallas, G. (1926).The art of thought. New York. Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, R. W., &Alba, J. W. (1981a). An examination of the alleged role of “fixation” in the solution of several “insight” problems.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,110, 169–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, R. W., &Alba, J. W. (1981b). Gestalt theory, insight and past experience: Reply to Dominowski.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,110, 193–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, R. W., &Alba, J. W. (1982). Problem solwng is not like perception: More on gestalt theory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,111, 326–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Indiana Umversgy, 47405, Bloomington, IN

    Janet Metcalfe

  2. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

    David Wiebe

Authors
  1. Janet Metcalfe
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Wiebe
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This research was supported by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Grant A-0505 to the first author.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Metcalfe, J., Wiebe, D. Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving. Memory & Cognition 15, 238–246 (1987). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197722

Download citation

  • Received: 19 May 1986

  • Accepted: 25 September 1986

  • Issue Date: May 1987

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197722

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Journal ofExperimental Psychology
  • Normative Prediction
  • Insight Problem
  • Water Lily
  • Dividual Performance
Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Advertisement

Search

Navigation

  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Books A-Z

Publish with us

  • Journal finder
  • Publish your research
  • Language editing
  • Open access publishing

Products and services

  • Our products
  • Librarians
  • Societies
  • Partners and advertisers

Our brands

  • Springer
  • Nature Portfolio
  • BMC
  • Palgrave Macmillan
  • Apress
  • Discover
  • Your US state privacy rights
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms and conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Help and support
  • Legal notice
  • Cancel contracts here

18.191.201.210

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2025 Springer Nature