How non-experts fail where experts do not : implications of expertise for resistance to cognitive rigidity

2012
journal article
article
dc.abstract.enExperts’ resistance to cognitive rigidity is discussed with reference to two aspects of the phenomenon of mental inflexibility: inter-domain rigidity and intra-domain rigidity. Although there are reasons to expect increased rigidity of experts outside the domain of their expertise, we hypothesized that they would be less prone to mental set within their domain of specialization. In two experiments (N = 72, N = 82), Experts, Intermediates and Novices solved tasks fostering mental set. Their goal was to solve a series of tasks of the same kind and then work on a task that was similar to the previous ones at the superficial level, while being substantially changed at the deep level of analysis. As a result, the effect of mental set (Einstellung) was expected to appear. The experiments were conducted in two different domains: management (Experiment 1) and English grammar (Experiment 2). Experts proved more resistant to intra-domain rigidity in both domains. In addition, they were faster and more accurate, thus replicating classic effects of expertise. The results regarding the role of anxiety in resistance to rigidity were unclear. The results suggest that, with reference to rigidity of experts, it is justifiable to distinguish between inter-domain and intra-domain rigidity. Experts, as compared to non-experts, should be regarded as more resistant to the phenomenon of intra-domain rigidity.pl
dc.affiliationWydział Filozoficzny : Instytut Psychologiipl
dc.contributor.authorNęcka, Edward - 130920 pl
dc.contributor.authorKubik, Tomaszpl
dc.date.accession2018-02-12pl
dc.date.accessioned2015-02-19T17:39:22Z
dc.date.available2015-02-19T17:39:22Z
dc.date.issued2012pl
dc.date.openaccess0
dc.description.accesstimew momencie opublikowania
dc.description.number1pl
dc.description.physical3-14pl
dc.description.versionostateczna wersja wydawcy
dc.description.volume54pl
dc.identifier.issn0039-3320pl
dc.identifier.urihttp://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/handle/item/3221
dc.identifier.weblinkhttp://www.studiapsychologica.com/index.php/view-articles/pl
dc.languageengpl
dc.language.containerengpl
dc.participationNęcka, Edward: 40%;pl
dc.rights.licenceOTHER
dc.share.typeinne
dc.subject.enexpertisepl
dc.subject.enrigiditypl
dc.subject.encognitive rigiditypl
dc.subject.enexpertpl
dc.subtypeArticlepl
dc.titleHow non-experts fail where experts do not : implications of expertise for resistance to cognitive rigiditypl
dc.title.journalStudia Psychologicapl
dc.typeJournalArticlepl
dspace.entity.typePublication
dc.abstract.enpl
Experts’ resistance to cognitive rigidity is discussed with reference to two aspects of the phenomenon of mental inflexibility: inter-domain rigidity and intra-domain rigidity. Although there are reasons to expect increased rigidity of experts outside the domain of their expertise, we hypothesized that they would be less prone to mental set within their domain of specialization. In two experiments (N = 72, N = 82), Experts, Intermediates and Novices solved tasks fostering mental set. Their goal was to solve a series of tasks of the same kind and then work on a task that was similar to the previous ones at the superficial level, while being substantially changed at the deep level of analysis. As a result, the effect of mental set (Einstellung) was expected to appear. The experiments were conducted in two different domains: management (Experiment 1) and English grammar (Experiment 2). Experts proved more resistant to intra-domain rigidity in both domains. In addition, they were faster and more accurate, thus replicating classic effects of expertise. The results regarding the role of anxiety in resistance to rigidity were unclear. The results suggest that, with reference to rigidity of experts, it is justifiable to distinguish between inter-domain and intra-domain rigidity. Experts, as compared to non-experts, should be regarded as more resistant to the phenomenon of intra-domain rigidity.
dc.affiliationpl
Wydział Filozoficzny : Instytut Psychologii
dc.contributor.authorpl
Nęcka, Edward - 130920
dc.contributor.authorpl
Kubik, Tomasz
dc.date.accessionpl
2018-02-12
dc.date.accessioned
2015-02-19T17:39:22Z
dc.date.available
2015-02-19T17:39:22Z
dc.date.issuedpl
2012
dc.date.openaccess
0
dc.description.accesstime
w momencie opublikowania
dc.description.numberpl
1
dc.description.physicalpl
3-14
dc.description.version
ostateczna wersja wydawcy
dc.description.volumepl
54
dc.identifier.issnpl
0039-3320
dc.identifier.uri
http://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/handle/item/3221
dc.identifier.weblinkpl
http://www.studiapsychologica.com/index.php/view-articles/
dc.languagepl
eng
dc.language.containerpl
eng
dc.participationpl
Nęcka, Edward: 40%;
dc.rights.licence
OTHER
dc.share.type
inne
dc.subject.enpl
expertise
dc.subject.enpl
rigidity
dc.subject.enpl
cognitive rigidity
dc.subject.enpl
expert
dc.subtypepl
Article
dc.titlepl
How non-experts fail where experts do not : implications of expertise for resistance to cognitive rigidity
dc.title.journalpl
Studia Psychologica
dc.typepl
JournalArticle
dspace.entity.type
Publication
Affiliations

* The migration of download and view statistics prior to the date of April 8, 2024 is in progress.

Views
0
Views per month

No access

No Thumbnail Available