In the 1930s, psychologist Karl Duncker did a famous “candle experiment”. He gave participants a candle, a box of thumbtacks, and a pile of matches, and asked everyone to use these tools to fix the candles. On the wall behind the candle, and make sure that the wax oil on the candle does not drip on the table. In the beginning, many experiment participants were racking their brains and trying their best to fix the candle on the wall as much as possible, either using pushpins, or using the wax oil after the candle was melted, but they all failed without exception. After 5-10 minutes, the participants gradually “cracked” the mystery-that is, first use the thumbtacks to fix the cartons containing the thumbtacks on the wall, and then place the candles in it, which can perfectly solve this problem. This is not a difficult question, but in the beginning, many participants paid too much attention to the precondition of “fixing the candle to the wall”. In the subconscious mind, the thumbtack box can only be used to hold thumbtacks, thus ignoring the other role that the thumbtack box can play-candle loading. And this is what we call a kind of Functional Fixedness, that is, overemphasizing the original function and meaning of things, thus falling into a deadlock of linear thinking. At this time, the easiest way to crack is to jump out of the inherent thinking mode and creatively solve this problem.
Function fixedness refers to the preparation for a specific activity. It can make us quite proficient in certain activities, and even realize automation, which can save a lot of time and energy; however, the existence of psychological stereotypes will also limit our thinking and make us only use conventional methods to solve problems. Seek other “shortcut” breakthroughs, which will also bring some negative effects on solving the problem. It will not only have a certain impact when thinking and solving problems but also will be affected by psychological stereotypes in the process of understanding and communicating with others. In general, the formation of functional fixation should be said to be a good thing. For example, at work, you can immediately judge the method to deal with this matter according to your work experience. It will be handy and work efficiency will be greatly improved. Psychologist Meyer studied the role of sets in problem-solving in 1930.  In his experiment, some participants got directional cues through the use of guidance, while others did not get directional cues. Therefore, most subjects in the former can solve problems, while almost none of the subjects in the latter can solve problems. This can be said to be the help of set to solve the problem. Another example is to practice piano from the age of six and perform on stage until the age of sixteen. The purpose is to form a powerful combination. He started practicing violin at the age of ten and standardized his fingering at the age of twenty one. Ten years is to form a standardized set. In this sense, the set is the subject’s pre-psychological preparation for a certain activity. It is not only the person’s local psychological activity but also the subject’s perfect personality state. Only those who form the most complete and comprehensive set will be lucky to become a performer. Therefore, when you work smoothly, when everyone loves you, and when money comes in a flood, it shows that you have a good set and don’t move. But in the long run, our thinking mode has also been unconsciously imprisoned, our work has become mechanical and numb, unconsciously developing a kind of inertia, lack of a sense of innovative thinking, and our work has become stagnant. Therefore, stereotype also hinders the solution of problems, which can be realized in many practical events. In the study, work and teaching, we should consciously overcome the thinking set and make our thinking more open, deeper, more flexible, and more agile. When talking about his scientific research experience, Nobel Prize winner and Chinese scientist Ding Zhaozhong said: “In the 1970s, people already knew that all elementary particles were composed of three quarks. My query is, why are there solely three quarks? Quark? To locate new quarks, I determined to construct a high-sensitivity detector. At that time, everybody concept that there have been solely three quarks. Because three quarks may want to explain all phenomena, this test used to be performed employing Fermi National Laboratory and Western Europe Nuclear The core refused, questioning it used to be impossible. From 1972 to 1974, we did this scan with an enormously low-energy accelerator at Brookhaven National Laboratory and sooner or later located a new quark. This ability that the preceding thought of solely three quarks is wrong. If there is a fourth quark, there may additionally be a fifth and a sixth, which has modified the preceding idea 。”
Therefore, we must not only give full play to the role of fixed fixedness, maximize our strengths and avoid weaknesses but also use our brains and think backward. If other methods work, can I try this method? If necessary, we must break our psychological stereotypes. In this way, our ideas will be expanded, and it may get twice the result with half the effort.