When I first returned to college, I took an online chemistry course. A lab science taken in my kitchen was nothing if not interesting, but one of my first tasks was to construct a balance scale. I was to use this scale for all my measurements that semester, so it was important that I got it right. There was a prescribed way to do it, of course, but, for the life of me, I could not make it work. That is where my other half came in, my problem solver, or, for those of you old enough to appreciate the reference, my real-life MacGyver. It is always fascinating to watch him work. Within an hour, I had a fully functional, and, might I add, incredibly accurate, balance scale. I have included a photo below, because I simply cannot do it justice, but it involved a broom handle, a skirt hanger, and some string. This was nothing new. He has a knack for seeing the answer in his head and figuring out what he needs to get there, often using ordinary items he finds lying around the house.
Functional fixedness refers to the inability to recognize the use of a particular object beyond its most familiar function (Goldstein, 2011). This cognitive bias keeps us from noticing the problem-solving potential in the ordinary. So, where one might only see a hanger, someone else sees the arms of a scale. Simply put, we tend to grow so used to viewing things a certain way, and attributing to them a particular function, that we no longer recognize the actual details that comprise them. The most effective problem solvers, however, are not limited to a particular mental set, or preconceived notion about how to approach a problem (Goldstein, 2011). They are not bound by the literal, and can think more broadly in order to arrive at a solution.
What makes an effective problem solver is how he/she is able to perceive a particular problem, and how that problem is represented in his/her mind. Sometimes, that representation needs to be altered, looked at from another angle, or, what Gestalt psychologists refer to as, restructured (Goldstein, 2011). This restructuring, essentially turning something over and looking at it another way, is believed to lead to what many refer to as insight, the sudden realization of a problem’s solution, or what some call the “a-ha moment.” While it has been debated whether insight, in the sense that we have come to understand it, actually exists, what seems clear is that problems often cannot be solved without some sort of mental restructuring. If we fail to find a way around the mental block that keeps us from looking beyond what is expected, the answer may never come.
One way to look at problems more effectively, and perhaps overcome functional fixedness in the process, is to break them down into simpler parts (McCaffrey, 2012). One means of doing this is what psychologists refer to as means-end analysis, a problem-solving strategy that involves comparing the initial state (the problem) to the goal state (the solution) and determining the best way to bridge the distance between the two (Goldstein, 2011). This is often accomplished with a series of subgoals, or intermediate stages. By reducing a larger problem to a series of steps, and focusing on each step individually, we can open our minds to a wider array of possible solutions and, in turn, render the larger problem less daunting. Instead of trying to figure out how to build a balance scale from scratch, just start with what you might use for the base. Step by step, you find your answer.
Functional fixedness, much like any bias, is learned over time. That suggests that we can unlearn it, and cultivate a more creative way of thinking. We can step outside the lines, and open ourselves up to innovation. Having spent some time working informally as the apprentice to my own effective problem solver, I can say it gets easier with practice to broaden your interpretation of things and see them in an entirely new way. And just imagine the possibilities.
(There is a tiny level attached to that hanger, and this scale worked like a champ!)
Resources
Goldstein, E. B. (2011). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research, and everyday experience (3rd edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
McCaffrey, T. (2012). Why we can’t see what’s right in front of us. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2012/05/overcoming-functional-fixedness
Problem Solving
Being a person that fixes things regularly, I appreciated your post on problem solving and functional fixedness. I fix cars, things around the house, computers, kid’s glasses, toys, and just about anything you can fathom. Growing up in the country with little resources, avoiding functional fixedness was a requirement. Goldstein states that according to Gestalt psychologists, fixation is people’s tendency to focus on a specific characteristic of the problem that keeps them from arriving at a solution (Goldstein, 2011).
The most recent situation that comes to mind was when my parents had a problem with their screen door. There was a lock that fell out and left a hole open where bugs were coming into the house. I rummaged around the garage looking for potential solutions. I found a little cork that I modified slightly to act as a plug for the hole. The cork was originally designed for a bottle not a door hole. So, if I was focused on the original intended use for the cork, I would have never thought to use it to repair the door.
I also have to overcome what Goldstein refers to as mental set, a preconceived notion about how to approach a problem (Goldstein, 2011). When working on cars, I often do not have the exact tool one would want. The tools are designed for specific use. So, given my limited tool selection, I often have to look at the tools from a different perspective to see if there is one that can serve as an appropriate substitute. I also restructure problems in the kitchen by using different utensils in manners for which they were never intended.
Two last aspects of problem solving that I find particularly fascinating are, the incubation effect, putting a problem aside and coming back to it later (Dodds, Smith & Ward, 2002), and the concept of sleeping on it (Wagner, Gais, Haider, Verleger & Born, 2004). I have experienced both of these tactics to be very effective, especially when it comes to completing difficult astronomy labs. I get stuck on how to approach a research question, I leave it for a day and then come back to it and the answer becomes clear. Sara Mednick, PhD, from UC San Diego published a study showing that REM directly enhances creative processing more than any other sleep or wake state (Kain, 2009). So, I should go to bed instead of staying up late to do homework!
References
Dodds, R. A., Smith, S. M., & Ward, T. B. (2002). The use of environmental cues during incubation. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 287-304.
Goldstein, E. B. (2011). Cognitive Psychology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Kain, Debra. (2009). Let Me Sleep on It: Creative Problem Solving Enhanced by REM Sleep. UC San Diego News Center. Retrieved from http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/archive/newsrel/health/06-09Mednick.asp
Wagner, U., Gais, S., Haider, H., Verleger, R., & Born, J. (2004). Sleep inspires insight. Nature, 427, 352-355.
I can completely relate to how you feel Ms.Clavin. I used to have problems overcoming functional fixedness. I could follow directions perfectly, however, when it came to abstract problems I always ended up stuck. For most of my life I was raised as an only child. Living with my mother, and having a grandmother who was very influential in my upbringing, I was always reared to do exactly as I was told. Previous to living with my father, everything was always spelled out and presented to me in easy-to-follow steps. It wasn’t until I moved in with my dad, and began spending more time with my brothers, that I had to sort of, figure stuff out on my own.For lack of a better example, in my childhood I was taught things like, “This is a box. We put things inside of them and close them.” That sounds like something miscellaneous to teach a child, however once I moved in with my dad things changed. Tight for space in my already small room, i was forced to turn boxes into organizers, and as a way to create more space. I used some boxes conventionally, as jewelry boxes, and to hold papers. However, in order to maximize the small space in my room I was forced to think outside of the box. I began flipping the boxes over to create storage space underneath with display space on top. I even went to the extreme of pinning the bottom of the box to the wall so I could store things in them on the walls. I also converted sheets into curtains, and a rug into wall art since moving into my dads house. If it wasnt for the move from my moms to my dads i would probably have less flexibility in my thinking.
As I read your description of your husband as a think-outside-of-the-box guy I could relate to that feeling of knowing you have someone on your team that can look at a problem from a different angle, or even inside out, in order to get at the way the thing in question really works… as I too married a ‘MacGyver’ type. It has me thinking about why people are inclined to develop functional fixedness – how could it be beneficial? That led me to wonder if cultural advancement of tools and technology might encourage that development tendency. I mean, with the internet at our fingers, how creative do we need to be anymore? Interestingly I came across a research report by German and Barrett that studied functional fixedness among the Shuar of Ecuadorian Amazonia. They found that even in this technologically sparse culture, with limited access to highly specialized tools, problem solving was inefficient when a solution required creative, atypical function of an object for which use has previously been primed. They believe their results suggest that “design function may universally be the core property of artifact concepts.” While the report doesn’t address my query about the possible evolutionary benefits of functional fixedness, (we’ll save that for another blog perhaps) it at least implies a certain commonality across cultures, despite levels of advancement, from which to start that query. One thing is certain; our MacGyvers remain unique and interesting problem solvers. I believe another term you and I would both use for them is “keepers.”
German, Tim & H. Clark Barrett. ‘Functional Fixedness in a Technologically Sparse Culture.’ Psychological Science. Retrieved from http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/anthro/faculty/barrett/german-barrett-PS.pdf