Definition[edit]

The term problem solving is used in many disciplines, sometimes with different perspectives, and
often with different terminologies. For instance, it is a mental process in psychology and a
computerized process in computer science. Problems can also be classified into two different types
(ill-defined and well-defined) from which appropriate solutions are to be made. Ill-defined problems
are those that do not have clear goals, solution paths, or expected solution. Well-defined problems
have specific goals, clearly defined solution paths, and clear expected solutions. These problems
also allow for more initial planning than ill-defined problems.[1] Being able to solve problems
sometimes involves dealing with pragmatics (logic) and semantics (interpretation of the problem).
The ability to understand what the goal of the problem is and what rules could be applied represent
the key to solving the problem. Sometimes the problem requires some abstract thinking and coming
up with a creative solution.

Problem-solving strategies[edit]
Problem-solving strategies are the steps that one would use to find the problem(s) that are in the
way to getting to one's own goal. Firend's problem solving model (PSM) is practical in application
and incorporates the conventional 5WH approach, with a systematic process of investigation,
implementation and assessment cycle.[19][non-primary source needed] Some would refer to this as the "problem-
solving cycle" (Bransford & Stein, 1993). In this cycle one will recognize the problem, define the
problem, develop a strategy to fix the problem, organize the knowledge of the problem cycle, figure
out the resources at the user's disposal, monitor one's progress, and evaluate the solution for
accuracy. The reason it is called a cycle is that once one is completed with a problem another
usually will pop up.
Blanchard-Fields (2007) looks at problem solving from one of two facets. The first looking at those
problems that only have one solution (like mathematical problems, or fact-based questions) which
are grounded in psychometric intelligence. The other that is socioemotional in nature and are
unpredictable with answers that are constantly changing (like what's your favorite color or what you
should get someone for Christmas).
The following techniques are usually called problem-solving strategies'[20]

Abstraction: solving the problem in a model of the system before applying it to the real system
Analogy: using a solution that solves an analogous problem
Brainstorming: (especially among groups of people) suggesting a large number of solutions or
ideas and combining and developing them until an optimum solution is found
Divide and conquer: breaking down a large, complex problem into smaller, solvable problems
Hypothesis testing: assuming a possible explanation to the problem and trying to prove (or, in
some contexts, disprove) the assumption
Lateral thinking: approaching solutions indirectly and creatively
Means-ends analysis: choosing an action at each step to move closer to the goal
Method of focal objects: synthesizing seemingly non-matching characteristics of different objects
into something new
Morphological analysis: assessing the output and interactions of an entire system
Proof: try to prove that the problem cannot be solved. The point where the proof fails will be the
starting point for solving it
Reduction: transforming the problem into another problem for which solutions exist
Research: employing existing ideas or adapting existing solutions to similar problems
Root cause analysis: identifying the cause of a problem
 Trial-and-error: testing possible solutions until the right one is found

Problem-solving methods[edit]
Eight Disciplines Problem Solving
GROW model
How to Solve It
OODA loop (observe, orient, decide, and act)
PDCA (plandocheckact)
Root cause analysis
RPR problem diagnosis (rapid problem resolution)
TRIZ (in Russian: Teoriya Resheniya Izobretatelskikh Zadatch, "theory of solving inventor's
problems")
A3 problem solving
System dynamics
Hive mind

Common barriers to problem solving[edit]

Common barriers to problem solving are mental constructs that impede our ability to correctly solve
problems. These barriers prevent people from solving problems in the most efficient manner
possible. Five of the most common processes and factors that researchers have identified as
barriers to problem solving are confirmation bias, mental set, functional fixedness, unnecessary
constraints, and irrelevant information.

Confirmation bias[edit]
Main article: Confirmation bias
Within the field of science there exists a set of fundamental standards, the scientific method, which
outlines the process of discovering facts or truths about the world through unbiased consideration of
all pertinent information and through impartial observation of and/or experimentation with that
information. According to this method, one is able to most accurately find a solution to a perceived
problem by performing the aforementioned steps. The scientific method does not prescribe a
process that is limited to scientists, but rather one that all people can practice in their respective
fields of work as well as in their personal lives. Confirmation bias can be described as one's
unconscious or unintentional corruption of the scientific method. Thus when one demonstrates
confirmation bias, one is formally or informally collecting data and then subsequently observing and
experimenting with that data in such a way that favors a preconceived notion that may or may not
have motivation.[21]Research has found that professionals within scientific fields of study also
experience confirmation bias. Andreas Hergovich, Reinhard Schott, and Christoph Burger's
experiment conducted online, for instance, suggested that professionals within the field of
psychological research are likely to view scientific studies that are congruent with their preconceived
understandings more favorably than studies that are incongruent with their established beliefs.[22]
Motivation refers to one's desire to defend or find substantiation for beliefs (e.g., religious beliefs)
that are important to one.[23]According to Raymond Nickerson, one can see the consequences of
confirmation bias in real-life situations, which range in severity from inefficient government policies to
genocide. With respect to the latter and most severe ramification of this cognitive barrier, Nickerson
argued that those involved in committing genocide of persons accused of witchcraft, an atrocity that
occurred from the 15th to 17th centuries, demonstrated confirmation bias with motivation.
Researcher Michael Allen found evidence for confirmation bias with motivation in school children
who worked to manipulate their science experiments in such a way that would produce their hoped
for results.[24] However, confirmation bias does not necessarily require motivation. In 1960, Peter
Cathcart Wason conducted an experiment in which participants first viewed three numbers and then
created a hypothesis that proposed a rule that could have been used to create that triplet of
numbers. When testing their hypotheses, participants tended to only create additional triplets of
numbers that would confirm their hypotheses, and tended not to create triplets that would negate or
disprove their hypotheses. Thus research also shows that people can and do work to confirm
theories or ideas that do not support or engage personally significant beliefs.[25]

Mental set[edit]
Main article: Mental set
Mental set was first articulated by Abraham Luchins in the 1940s and demonstrated in his well-
known water jug experiments.[26] In these experiments, participants were asked to fill one jug with a
specific amount of water using only other jugs (typically three) with different maximum capacities as
tools. After Luchins gave his participants a set of water jug problems that could all be solved by
employing a single technique, he would then give them a problem that could either be solved using
that same technique or a novel and simpler method. Luchins discovered that his participants tended
to use the same technique that they had become accustomed to despite the possibility of using a
simpler alternative.[27] Thus mental set describes one's inclination to attempt to solve problems in
such a way that has proved successful in previous experiences. However, as Luchins' work
revealed, such methods for finding a solution that have worked in the past may not be adequate or
optimal for certain new but similar problems. Therefore, it is often necessary for people to move
beyond their mental sets in order to find solutions. This was again demonstrated in Norman Maier's
1931 experiment, which challenged participants to solve a problem by using a household object
(pliers) in an unconventional manner. Maier observed that participants were often unable to view the
object in a way that strayed from its typical use, a phenomenon regarded as a particular form of
mental set (more specifically known as functional fixedness, which is the topic of the following
section). When people cling rigidly to their mental sets, they are said to be experiencing fixation, a
seeming obsession or preoccupation with attempted strategies that are repeatedly
unsuccessful.[28] In the late 1990s, researcher Jennifer Wiley worked to reveal that expertise can
work to create a mental set in persons considered to be experts in certain fields, and she
furthermore gained evidence that the mental set created by expertise could lead to the development
of fixation.[29]

Functional fixedness[edit]
Main article: Functional fixedness
Functional fixedness is a specific form of mental set and fixation, which was alluded to earlier in the
Maier experiment, and furthermore it is another way in which cognitive bias can be seen throughout
daily life. Tim German and Clark Barrett describe this barrier as the fixed design of an object
hindering the individual's ability to see it serving other functions. In more technical terms, these
researchers explained that "[s]ubjects become "fixed" on the design function of the objects, and
problem solving suffers relative to control conditions in which the object's function is not
demonstrated."[30] Functional fixedness is defined as only having that primary function of the object
itself hinder the ability of it serving another purpose other than its original function. In research that
highlighted the primary reasons that young children are immune to functional fixedness, it was stated
that "functional fixedness...[is when]subjects are hindered in reaching the solution to a problem by
their knowledge of an object's conventional function."[31] Furthermore, it is important to note that
functional fixedness can be easily expressed in commonplace situations. For instance, imagine the
following situation: a man sees a bug on the floor that he wants to kill, but the only thing in his hand
at the moment is a can of air freshener. If the man starts looking around for something in the house
to kill the bug with instead of realizing that the can of air freshener could in fact be used not only as
having its main function as to freshen the air, he is said to be experiencing functional fixedness. The
man's knowledge of the can being served as purely an air freshener hindered his ability to realize
that it too could have been used to serve another purpose, which in this instance was as an
instrument to kill the bug. Functional fixedness can happen on multiple occasions and can cause us
to have certain cognitive biases. If we only see an object as serving one primary focus than we fail to
realize that the object can be used in various ways other than its intended purpose. This can in turn
cause many issues with regards to problem solving. Common sense seems to be a plausible answer
to functional fixedness. One could make this argument because it seems rather simple to consider
possible alternative uses for an object. Perhaps using common sense to solve this issue could be
the most accurate answer within this context. With the previous stated example, it seems as if it
would make perfect sense to use the can of air freshener to kill the bug rather than to search for
something else to serve that function but, as research shows, this is often not the case.
Functional fixedness limits the ability for people to solve problems accurately by causing one to have
a very narrow way of thinking. Functional fixedness can be seen in other types of learning behaviors
as well. For instance, research has discovered the presence of functional fixedness in many
educational instances. Researchers Furio, Calatayud, Baracenas, and Padilla stated that "...
functional fixedness may be found in learning concepts as well as in solving chemistry
problems."[32] There was more emphasis on this function being seen in this type of subject and
others.
There are several hypotheses in regards to how functional fixedness relates to problem
solving.[33] There are also many ways in which a person can run into problems while thinking of a
particular object with having this function. If there is one way in which a person usually thinks of
something rather than multiple ways then this can lead to a constraint in how the person thinks of
that particular object. This can be seen as narrow minded thinking, which is defined as a way in
which one is not able to see or accept certain ideas in a particular context. Functional fixedness is
very closely related to this as previously mentioned. This can be done intentionally and or
unintentionally, but for the most part it seems as if this process to problem solving is done in an
unintentional way.
Functional fixedness can affect problem solvers in at least two particular ways. The first is with
regards to time, as functional fixedness causes people to use more time than necessary to solve any
given problem. Secondly, functional fixedness often causes solvers to make more attempts to solve
a problem than they would have made if they were not experiencing this cognitive barrier. In the
worst case, functional fixedness can completely prevent a person from realizing a solution to a
problem. Functional fixedness is a commonplace occurrence, which affects the lives of many people.

Unnecessary constraints[edit]
Unnecessary constraints are another very common barrier that people face while attempting to
problem-solve. This particular phenomenon occurs when the subject, trying to solve the problem
subconsciously, places boundaries on the task at hand, which in turn forces him or her to strain to be
more innovative in their thinking. The solver hits a barrier when they become fixated on only one way
to solve their problem, and it becomes increasingly difficult to see anything but the method they have
chosen. Typically, the solver experiences this when attempting to use a method they have already
experienced success from, and they can not help but try to make it work in the present
circumstances as well, even if they see that it is counterproductive.[34]
Groupthink, or taking on the mindset of the rest of the group members, can also act as an
unnecessary constraint while trying to solve problems.[35] This is due to the fact that with everybody
thinking the same thing, stopping on the same conclusions, and inhibiting themselves to think
beyond this. This is very common, but the most well-known example of this barrier making itself
present is in the famous example of the dot problem. In this example, there are nine dots lying in a
square- three dots across, and three dots running up and down. The solver is then asked to draw no
more than four lines, without lifting their pen or pencil from the paper. This series of lines should
connect all of the dots on the paper. Then, what typically happens is the subject creates an
assumption in their mind that they must connect the dots without letting his or her pen or pencil go
outside of the square of dots. Standardized procedures like this can often bring mentally invented
constraints of this kind,[36] and researchers have found a 0% correct solution rate in the time allotted
for the task to be completed.[37] The imposed constraint inhibits the solver to think beyond the bounds
of the dots. It is from this phenomenon that the expression "think outside the box" is derived.[38]
This problem can be quickly solved with a dawning of realization, or insight. A few minutes of
struggling over a problem can bring these sudden insights, where the solver quickly sees the
solution clearly. Problems such as this are most typically solved via insight and can be very difficult
for the subject depending on either how they have structured the problem in their minds, how they
draw on their past experiences, and how much they juggle this information in their working
memories[38] In the case of the nine-dot example, the solver has already been structured incorrectly
in their minds because of the constraint that they have placed upon the solution. In addition to this,
people experience struggles when they try to compare the problem to their prior knowledge, and
they think they must keep their lines within the dots and not go beyond. They do this because trying
to envision the dots connected outside of the basic square puts a strain on their working memory.[38]
Luckily, the solution to the problem becomes obvious as insight occurs following incremental
movements made toward the solution. These tiny movements happen without the solver knowing.
Then when the insight is realized fully, the "aha" moment happens for the subject.[39] These moments
of insight can take a long while to manifest or not so long at other times, but the way that the solution
is arrived at after toiling over these barriers stays the same.

Irrelevant information[edit]
Irrelevant information is information presented within a problem that is unrelated or unimportant to
the specific problem.[34]Within the specific context of the problem, irrelevant information would serve
no purpose in helping solve that particular problem. Often irrelevant information is detrimental to the
problem solving process. It is a common barrier that many people have trouble getting through,
especially if they are not aware of it. Irrelevant information makes solving otherwise relatively simple
problems much harder.[40]
For example: "Fifteen percent of the people in Topeka have unlisted telephone numbers. You select
200 names at random from the Topeka phone book. How many of these people have unlisted phone
numbers?"[41]
The people that are not listed in the phone book would not be among the 200 names you selected.
The individuals looking at this task would have naturally wanted to use the 15% given to them in the
problem. They see that there is information present and they immediately think that it needs to be
used. This of course is not true. These kinds of questions are often used to test students taking
aptitude tests or cognitive evaluations.[42] They aren't meant to be difficult but they are meant to
require thinking that is not necessarily common. Irrelevant Information is commonly represented in
math problems, word problems specifically, where numerical information is put for the purpose of
challenging the individual.
One reason irrelevant information is so effective at keeping a person off topic and away from the
relevant information, is in how it is represented.[42] The way information is represented can make a
vast difference in how difficult the problem is to be overcome. Whether a problem is represented
visually, verbally, spatially, or mathematically, irrelevant information can have a profound effect on
how long a problem takes to be solved; or if it's even possible. The Buddhist monk problem is a
classic example of irrelevant information and how it can be represented in different ways:
A Buddhist monk begins at dawn one day walking up a mountain, reaches the top at sunset,
meditates at the top for several days until one dawn when he begins to walk back to the foot
of the mountain, which he reaches at sunset. Making no assumptions about his starting or
stopping or about his pace during the trips, prove that there is a place on the path which he
occupies at the same hour of the day on the two separate journeys.
 This problem is near impossible to solve because of how the information is represented.
Because it is written out in a way that represents the information verbally, it causes us to try and
create a mental image of the paragraph. This is often very difficult to do especially with all
the irrelevant information involved in the question. This example is made much easier to
understand when the paragraph is represented visually. Now if the same problem was asked,
but it was also accompanied by a corresponding graph, it would be far easier to answer this
question; irrelevant information no longer serves as a road block. By representing the problem
visually, there are no difficult words to understand or scenarios to imagine. The visual
representation of this problem has removed the difficulty of solving it.
These types of representations are often used to make difficult problems easier.[43] They can be
used on tests as a strategy to remove Irrelevant Information, which is one of the most common
forms of barriers when discussing the issues of problem solving.[34] Identifying crucial information
presented in a problem and then being able to correctly identify its usefulness is essential. Being
aware of irrelevant information is the first step in overcoming this common barrier.

Characteristics of complex problems[edit]

As elucidated by Dietrich Drner and later expanded upon by Joachim Funke, complex problems
have some typical characteristics that can be summarized as follows:[citation needed]

Complexity (large numbers of items, interrelations and decisions)

enumerability
heterogeneity
connectivity (hierarchy relation, communication relation, allocation relation)
Dynamics (time considerations)
temporal constraints
temporal sensitivity
phase effects
dynamic unpredictability
Intransparency (lack of clarity of the situation)
commencement opacity
continuation opacity
Polytely (multiple goals)
inexpressiveness
opposition
transience

Collective problem solving[edit]

See also: Crowdsolving, Collective action, Collaborative intelligence, Mass collaboration, Collective
wisdom, The Wisdom of Crowds, Distributed knowledge, Online participation, and Group decision-
making
Problem solving is applied on many different levels from the individual to the civilizational.
Collective problem solving refers to problem solving performed collectively.
Social issues and global issues can typically only be solved collectively.
It has been noted that the complexity of contemporary problems has exceeded the cognitive
capacity of any individual and requires different but complementary expertise and collective problem
solving ability.[44]
 Collective intelligence is shared or group intelligence that emerges from the collaboration, collective
efforts, and competition of many individuals.
In a 1962 research report, Douglas Engelbart linked collective intelligence to organizational
effectiveness, and predicted that pro-actively 'augmenting human intellect' would yield a multiplier
effect in group problem solving: "Three people working together in this augmented mode [would]
seem to be more than three times as effective in solving a complex problem as is one augmented
person working alone".[45]
Henry Jenkins, a key theorist of new media and media convergence draws on the theory that
collective intelligence can be attributed to media convergence and participatory culture.[46] He
criticizes contemporary education for failing to incorporate online trends of collective problem solving
into the classroom, stating "whereas a collective intelligence community encourages ownership of
work as a group, schools grade individuals". Jenkins argues that interaction within a knowledge
community builds vital skills for young people, and teamwork through collective intelligence
communities contribute to the development of such skills.[47]
Collective impact is the commitment of a group of actors from different sectors to a common agenda
for solving a specific social problem, using a structured form of collaboration.
After World War II the UN, the Bretton Woods organization and the WTO were created and collective
problem solving on the international level crystallized since the 1980s around these 3 types of
organizations. As these global institutions remain state-like or state-centric it has been called
unsurprising that these continue state-like or state-centric approaches to collective problem-solving
rather than alternative ones.[48]
It has been observed that models of liberal democracy provide neither adequate designs for
collective problem solving nor handling the substantive challenges in society such as crime, war,
economic decline, illness and environmental degradation to produce satisfying outcomes.[49]
Crowdsourcing is a process of accumulating the ideas, thoughts or information from many
independent participants, with aim to find the best solution for a given challenge. Modern information
technologies allow for massive number of subjects to be involved as well as systems of managing
these suggestions that provide good results.[50] With the Internet a new capacity for collective,
including planetary-scale, problem solving was created.[51]

See also[edit]

Thinking portal

Analytical skill
Creative problem-solving
Collective intelligence
Divergent thinking
Grey problem
Innovation
Instrumentalism
Problem statement
Problem structuring methods
Psychedelics in problem-solving experiment
Structural fix
Subgoal labeling
Troubleshooting
 Wicked problem