A number of findings suggest that there are important differences between functional fixedness (FF) and Einstellung (E), though the significance of these findings seems to have gone unrecognized. The results of the present study suggest that FF and E (a) display different forgetting curves (p < .001) and (b) respond differently to distribution of practice (p < .05). Interpretations of the results are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsonR. W.TaylorD. W.Functional fixedness as related to elapsed time and to set. J. exp. Psychol., 1954, 47, 122–126.
2.
BirchH. G.RabinowitzH. S.The negative effect of previous experience on productive thinking. J. exp. Psychol., 1951, 41, 121–125.
GuetzkowH.An analysis of the operation of set in problem-solving behavior. J. gen. Psychol., 1951, 45, 219–244.
5.
JensenJ.On functional fixedness, some critical remarks. Scand. J. Psychol., 1960, 1, 157–162. (a)
6.
JensenJ.On the Einstellung effect in problem solving: some critical remarks. Scand. J. Psychol., 1960, 1, 163–168. (b)
7.
KendlerH. H.GreenbergA.RichmanH.The influence of massed and distributed practice on the development of mental set. J. exp. Psychol., 1952, 43, 21–25.
8.
KurtzK. H.HovlandC. I.The effect of verbalization during observation of stimulus objects upon accuracy of recognition and recall. J. exp. Psychol., 1953, 45, 157–164.
9.
LuchinsA. S.Mechanization in problem solving. Psychol. Monogr., 1942, 54, No. 6 (Whole No. 248).
10.
LuchinsA. S.The Einstellung test of rigidity: its relation to concreteness of thinking. J. consult. Psychol., 1951, 15, 303–310.
11.
MaierN. R. F.Reasoning in humans: II. The solution of a problem and its appearance in consciousness. J. comp. Psychol., 1931, 12, 181–194.
12.
McNemarO. W.Word association, methods of deduction and induction, and reactions to set in good and poor reasoners. Rep. No 2, Contract Nonr 225–02, Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Univer. Press, 1954.
