Conceptual Structures as a Basis for Expertise
Saint Petersburg State University Department of Psychology
International Society for Intelligence Research (ISIR) Annual Conference 2014 University of Graz, Austria 12 – 14th, December, 2014
Olga V. Shcherbakova 1, Daria N. Makarova1 Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russia Corresponding author's e-mail:
[email protected]
INTRODUCTION Expertise can be considered as one of the types of intellectual giftedness, since it provides high-efficiency reasoning, and the ability for successful problem solving within a specific subject field. One of the recent hot topics in this area revolves around asking the question concerning “What the origins of expertise acquisition are?” (Nature vs. Nurture, shared vs. non-shared environmental influences) (Friend et al., 2009; Plomin et al., 2014; Simonton, 2014; Wai, 2014). This question will remain unanswered until there is a clear theoretical framework for the “expertise” construct within psychology itself. We hypothesize that the mental substrate for expertise is conceptual ability, which provides the most abstract and highly generalized thinking operations, and also triggers creativity (Kholodnaya, 2012).
PARTICIPANTS
STATISTICAL METHODS AND RESULTS
Technical support department staff of one of Saint Petersburg Internet provider companies (N=16, aged 19-39).
In regression analysis the sum of the scores for solving cases was a dependent variable, and the scores for solving 4 other tasks were independent variables. We used a backwards method; where 3 out of 4 independent variables – the scores for solving "Generalization of Three Words”, "Problem Formulation" and J. Raven’s "Standard Progressive Matrices" test, – were excluded from the regression model. But one of them – score for solving "Concept Synthesis" – remained: (r = 0,648; r2 = 0,42; p = 0,007) and explained 42% of the variance for the scores for solving cases. Surprisingly, the score for solving J. Raven’s ‘Standard Progressive Matrices’ test which supposedly measures IQ does not correlate with the score for solving cases which we used to define the level of our participants' expertise.
PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS & TASKS Part I. CASES Participants solved 2 cases. Previously to the main part of the study, we asked several other experts to describe 2-3 most complicated cases they ever faced which were solved due to the high level of their expertise (and not by using knowledge of some particular facts); we chose 2 from the pool. One of them is presented below: Imagine a typical situation when a user calls and you answer the call. You check the info and see two personal accounts belonging to the same person (both accounts are for providing Internet access) and there are no leased devices registered. After checking the info you ask the client what his/her question is about. User says: I have a problem regarding the speed of my Internet connection. I have two computers connected directly to your switchboard with patch cords. If only one computer has Internet access, then the speed of my Internet connection is normal; but if both of them do, then the speed decreases at both of them. My computers are always in a safe mode while I am checking speed. Answer: the key idea which had to be figured out by an expert and which was necessary for solving the problem was as following. There was an issue with the switchboard's settings - because that's the only thing both computers are connected to. The results for solving of each case were scored 0, 1, 2 or 3, and let us define participants’ level of expertise. The maximum score for two cases was 6.
Figure 1. Distribution of the scores for two cases within different scores for “Concept Synthesis” task
Part II. STANDARD PSYCHOLOGICAL TASKS 1. “Generalization of Three Words”” (by M.A. Kholodnaya, 2012) (GW) The recipient was presented with 3 concrete words belonging to 3 different semantic fields and the task is to put them together into one more general concept. Ex.: trap – fence – plug: ? Answer: barrier. Altogether, there were 10 triads of concrete concepts. The answers were rated 0, 1 and 2 scores. 2. “Concept Synthesis” (by M.A. Kholodnaya, 2012) (CS) The recipient was presented with 3 concrete words belonging to 3 different semantic fields. The task is to find out as much sense bearing semantic links between these words as possible and to write them down in 1 or 2 sentences using all three words. Ex.: cockle-shell – paper clip – thermometer. Possible answers: On the table, there were a cockle-shell, a paper clip and a thermometer (scored 0). Different items run hot in a different manner: the properties of a cockle-shell differ from the properties of a paper clip; you can measure this difference using thermometer (scored 2). Altogether, there were 4 word triads. The time limit for each three words was 3 minutes. The answers were rated 0, 1 and 2 scores. Figure 2. Distribution of the scores for two cases within different scores for J. Raven’s “SPM” test
3. “Problem Formulation” (by M.A. Kholodnaya, 2012) (PF). The recipient was presented with 2 concepts: one emotionally neutral (“soil”) and one emotionally negative (“disease”). The task is to imagine him/her being a researcher studying these objects and to formulate the possible research problems concerning them. There were no time limits and the answers were rated 0, 1 or 2 scores. Possible answers: 1) for “soil”: are there any pests in the soil? (scored 0), how to extract the commercial minerals without doing any harm to the soil? (scored 2); 2) for “disease”: polyclinic (scored 0), elaboration of experimental anti-viruses based on the breakthroughs of gene engineering (scored 2). 4. J. Raven’s “Standard Progressive Matrices Test” (by J. Raven, 2012) (SPMT). The time limit for all 5 series was 20 minutes. Tasks 1,2 and 3 were used to test the level of participants’ conceptual abilities. Task 4 was aimed to measure both participants’ IQ and implicit learning ability.
CONCLUSIONS There is a correlation between the high level of expertise and the conceptual abilities diagnosed with the “Concept Synthesis” task which are: the capacity to reveal highly generalized, unobvious categorical links between different domains of experience. Based on the results shown here, it seems possible to generate new semantic context even on the basis of the lack of information. We considered that intellectual productivity and exceptional cognitive performance (which are not necessarily shown in IQ scores) are the result of the activation of conceptual schemes. Conceptual schemes have been formed with an environment and function, as generalized patterns for cognitive tasks solving even, in cases where tasks are new and cannot be solved using only specific knowledge or any concrete skills. The authors acknowledge President of Russian Federation Foundation for the research grant № MK-6069.2014.6
