Research on analogical problem solving has delineated several factors that impact one's ability to spontaneously generate a correct solution strategy to a target problem. These factors include, but are not limited to, type of analogy provided to subjects (i.e., partial versus complete), the level of isomorphism between analogies and target problems, and the solver's level of analogical problem-solving expertise Recently, researchers have begun to focus on providing solvers with direct instruction on analogical problem-solving processes and strategies in an effort to augment analogical problem-solving ability. The most common type of instruction (i.e., teacher-generated) involves providing direct instruction on problem-solving processes and strategies without input from the solver. A second type of instruction (i.e., learner-generated) that has gained some attention in the literature but has not yet been tested in the realm of analogical problem solving involves learners actively participating in developing analogical problem-solving strategies while being guided by the instructor. Using an experimental design. the present study examined the differential effects of type of analogue (i.e., partial versus complete), level of expertise (i.e., novice versus expert). and type of training (teacher-generated, learner-generated, or no training) on spontaneous generation of correct solution strategies to two target problems. Findings indicate that solvers. regardless of training group or ability level. were better able to solve the target problem to the complete analogies than the target problem to the partial analogies. x2 (1, N = 116) = 18, p < .001; d = .85. Moreover, there was no advantage for expert solvers to participate in problem-solving training. However. when examining novice solvers. findings indicate that direct instruction on problem-solving processes and strategies resulted in better performance when solving the partial analogy than did no instruction (d = .61). Also, active participation in the learning process resulted in better performance when solving the partial analogy than did no instruction (d = .80). Limitations of the study, implications for educators, and recommendations for future studies are provided.

Research on analogical problem solving has delineated several factors that impact one's ability to spontaneously generate a correct solution strategy to a target problem. These factors include, but are not limited to, type of analogy provided to subjects (i.e., partial versus complete), the level of analogical problem-solving expertise, and the absence of or type of analogical problem-solving training (i.e., teacher-generated or learner-generated) provided to learners. Recently, researchers have begun to focus on providing solvers with multiple practice opportunities and extending these opportunities over a systematically distributed period of time. When combined with analogical problem-solving training, these factors will augment the learner's ability to spontaneously generate a correct solution strategy to both complete and partial target problems. Using an experimental design, the present study examined the differential effects of type of analogue (partial versus complete), type of training (teacher-generated, learner-generated, or no training), and length of training (condensed versus extended) on novice learners' ability to spontaneously generate correct solution strategies to two target problems. Findings indicate that, on the complete target problem, regardless of training group membership, no effect over control group participants was found. Partial target problem results indicate a slight advantage for participating in the learner-generated extended training group over no training. Also on the partial target problem, a moderate advantage was found for participating in the learner-generated extended training group over the condensed training. Limitations of the study, implications for educators, and recommendations for future studies are provided.

Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Psychology / James C. Shanteau / A training protocol was developed to teach an implicit reasoning strategy to encourage the consideration of alternatives, specifically in behavioral trap decision environments. Engaging the strategy would thereby decrease the effect of focusing on traps, resulting in more rational behavior. In two studies, training was delivered in an instructor-less environment using paper-pencil and multimedia examples. The main training components consisted of analogical problem solving and counterfactual thinking. The potential moderators between training and performance outcomes consisted of an information processing disposition Need for Cognitive Closure, an individualized approach to decisions, Decision-Making Style, and a capacity to process information Working Memory Capacity. Arousal and mood were also measured before, during, and after the training as both have been linked with learning. In Study 1, participants engaged in analogical problem solving, additive counterfactual thinking, subtractive counterfactual thinking, or none of these (i.e., control group). Results revealed that the training was minimally effective, although some comparisons revealed a large shift from pre- to post-training in commitment score away from trap options. Likewise, the Need for Cognitive Closure was the best predictor of decision behavior revealing that a predisposition for amount of information processed during decision making is indicative of behavioral outcomes in this decision environment. Based on results from Study 1, the training was reformatted in Study 2 to obtain the maximum potential benefit. Analogical problem solving was coupled with each form of counterfactual thinking so participants engaged in both critical thinking processes. When training was effective, the two forms were differentially effective as related to behavioral trap problem type. Forward-looking training assisted problem types that force explicit cost recognition and immediate decision outcomes. Past-looking training assisted problem types that force little cost recognition and delayed decision outcomes. Results of this project could be used to enhance the acquisition of critical thinking as well as improve educational practices. Both information processing disposition and decision approach style predicted learning whereas capacity to process information and training manipulations did not. Future projects will examine how long the training effects last and if critical thinking training can be successfully applied to other decision environments.