a major obstacle to problem solving is functional fixedness which is a(n)

Functional Fixedness (Definition + Examples)

If you're here, you are probably researching functional fixedness to help you solve a problem or write a paper. Have no fear since this page aims to give you everything you need to know, including a few functional fixedness examples!

What is Functional Fixedness?

Functional fixedness is a mental obstacle that makes us see objects exclusively functioning traditionally. We cannot get past these fixed functions of objects or tools. This stunts our creativity and may hold us back from seeing an object's full potential.

Why Do We Experience Functional Fixedness?

Functional fixedness, like other biases and heuristics, streamlines our cognitive processes, aiding us in rapidly understanding the world around us. By learning from previous knowledge and experiences, we can navigate situations more efficiently. For instance, consider the teacup you encounter every morning. Instead of pondering its potential uses each day, you intuitively recognize it as a vessel for your tea. This immediate association, a sort of "mental shortcut," ensures you don't waste precious morning minutes deliberating its function.

These mental shortcuts, termed heuristics in psychology, are invaluable. They save time and effort by enabling us to know how to interact with familiar objects instantly. However, herein lies a double-edged sword. While it's undoubtedly helpful to identify a teacup primarily for tea drinking, being trapped within this singular perspective can be limiting. Recognizing an object's primary purpose is vital, but an inability to think beyond that predefined context can pose distinct disadvantages.

Heuristics and Functional Fixedness: Cognitive Pathways in Decision-Making

In cognitive psychology, understanding how humans make decisions and solve problems is central to comprehending the complex nature of the human mind. Heuristics and functional fixedness are two concepts that illustrate the shortcuts and potential pitfalls our minds take in this process. Let's delve into these concepts and explore their relationship.

Heuristics: Mental Shortcuts to Quicker Decisions

Heuristics are mental shortcuts that our brain uses to simplify complex decision-making processes. Instead of analyzing all available data when deciding, the brain uses heuristics to quickly arrive at a solution based on patterns and previous experiences. While these shortcuts can be incredibly efficient, they can sometimes lead to errors or biases.

For instance, the availability heuristic suggests that people base the likelihood of an event on how easily they can recall similar events from memory. This might lead someone to overestimate the risk of shark attacks after seeing a news story on one, even if such events are rare statistically.

Functional Fixedness: Stuck in Established Patterns

On the other hand, functional fixedness is a cognitive bias that limits our ability to see alternative uses for objects or methods beyond their traditional or known functions. It is the tendency to be "fixed" in our understanding of how something should function, based largely on prior experiences and knowledge.

For example, viewing a newspaper strictly as a medium for reading news might prevent someone from considering its use as a tool for cleaning windows, packing material, or even craftwork.

Comparing the Two

While both heuristics and functional fixedness relate to cognitive shortcuts and biases, they manifest differently:

• Nature of the Process : Heuristics are general decision-making shortcuts that can apply to various situations and help us navigate the world more efficiently. In contrast, functional fixedness is about seeing objects or methods in a limited scope based on their familiar functions.
• Outcome : Heuristics can often lead to reasonably accurate outcomes due to their basis in frequent experiences. However, they can also result in cognitive biases and errors. Functional fixedness, meanwhile, typically leads to limited problem-solving abilities and curtails creativity.
• Advantages & Pitfalls : Heuristics help speed up decision-making in a world brimming with information. They're essential for daily function. However, their reliance on past patterns can sometimes misguide us. On the other hand, functional fixedness primarily presents as an obstacle to innovative thinking and creative problem-solving.

Interrelation in Cognitive Processes

Despite their differences, heuristics and functional fixedness can sometimes intersect. For instance, one might use a heuristic to quickly decide how to use an object based on its most familiar function, leading to functional fixedness. Conversely, functional fixedness might cause someone to default to a heuristic way of problem-solving, relying on established patterns rather than seeking innovative solutions.

While both heuristics and functional fixedness highlight the brain's propensity for simplification and efficiency, they also underscore the importance of awareness in our cognitive processes. We can foster more thoughtful, creative, and informed decision-making by recognizing when we might be relying too heavily on mental shortcuts or getting stuck in established patterns.

Examples of Functional Fixedness Holding Us Back

Say you have a blunt kitchen knife that you need to sharpen. However, you don’t own a knife sharpener. Would you think of using the unglazed ring around the bottom of your teacup? After all, it has the same surface as a sharpening stone. Coming up with this alternative use for a teacup would quickly solve your problem. Otherwise, you would have to look for a “real” knife sharpener while using your cup only for drinking tea.

The moment we see an object, the motor cortex in our brains activates in anticipation of using it in a standard way. That means we don’t need to hesitate about reaching for a teacup when we feel like having tea. But that also means when you're looking for a knife sharpener, you're likely to glaze over that teacup because you don't take a mental shortcut from teacups to knife sharpeners. (Well, now you might!)

Being aware of functional fixedness is important because overcoming it could be the key to solving a problem.

Schemas, Prior Knowledge, and Functional Fixedness in Psychology

In the vast landscape of cognitive psychology, understanding how humans process information and navigate their world is paramount. Schemas and prior knowledge play pivotal roles in shaping our perceptions and responses to various situations, and their influence on cognitive biases like functional fixedness cannot be understated.

Schemas: Blueprint of Our Understanding

A schema is a mental framework or structure that organizes and interprets information in our brains. It's like a blueprint for categorizing and understanding the world around us. Schemas are created from accumulated experiences, cultural background, and learned knowledge. For instance, we have schemas about what constitutes a typical "bird" or how a usual "restaurant" operates. When we encounter information or experiences that fit into our existing schemas, it reinforces them. Conversely, when we encounter anomalies, we adjust our schema (accommodation) or try to fit this new information into our existing schemas (assimilation), as posited by Jean Piaget, a renowned developmental psychologist.

The Role of Prior Knowledge

Our past experiences significantly shape our present and future actions. Prior knowledge serves as a foundation upon which we build new knowledge. When faced with a situation, our brain quickly taps into the repository of prior experiences to find a suitable response or solution. This prior knowledge is a guidepost, helping us navigate familiar situations swiftly and efficiently.

Linking to Functional Fixedness

However, the reliance on schemas and prior knowledge can sometimes limit our cognitive flexibility, leading to functional fixedness. When too deeply entrenched in our pre-existing understanding of an object's function, we can become "fixed" in our approach, hindering our ability to see alternative uses or solutions. Our brain defaults to follow the well-trodden path of past experiences and established schemas. This is where functional fixedness comes into play. For example, if our schema of a "book" is strictly an object for reading, we might overlook its potential use as a doorstop or a makeshift monitor stand.

Functional fixedness, in many ways, is a byproduct of reliance on schemas and prior knowledge. While these cognitive structures help us process information efficiently, they can sometimes act as blinders, narrowing our field of vision and restricting creative problem-solving.

In the Broader Context of Cognitive Psychology

In psychology, schemas, prior knowledge, and functional fixedness are intertwined. They are all part of the broader cognitive structures and processes that dictate how we perceive, think, and act. Recognizing their interconnectedness can help us understand why we sometimes get stuck in particular patterns of thought and how we can potentially break free to foster innovation and creativity. By challenging our established schemas and being open to new experiences, we can mitigate the effects of functional fixedness and open the doors to a more flexible and adaptive way of thinking.

Examples of Overcoming Functional Fixedness in Everyday Life

You might identify these examples as "life hacks," but they are all forms of pushing past functional fixedness and seeing uses for everyday objects in new lights.

• Want to keep your door open? Tie a rubber band around it!
• Need to prop up your phone? Use upside-down sunglasses.
• Place a pool noodle under your child's fitted sheet to prevent them from rolling out of bed.
• Worried about your gear stick getting too hot in your car? Put a koozie over it!
• Need a last-minute speaker? Cups (plastic and glass) and toilet paper rolls are great alternatives.
• Preparing to serve condiments at a party but don't want to waste dishes? Place your condiments or sauces in a cupcake tin!
• Use a shoe rack to hang cleaning supplies.
• Clothespins are a great way to hold onto nails before you start hammering!
• Did your flip-flop fall apart because the hole is too big? Use a bread clip to keep the strap in place. (Bread clips are also a great way to organize and separate cords.)
• Looking for tiny things within your carpet? Roll some pantyhose or spandex over your vacuum to attract them without sucking them into your vacuum!
• Use your seat warmer to keep food warm after you pick it up from a restaurant!
• Hair straighteners make great collar irons in a pinch.
•  Don't have a juicer? Use tongs to get everything out of lemons or limes!

See how much you might have been missing out on? If all these hacks are within our grasp, what other uses could you consider for everyday items?

Who Discovered Functional Fixedness?

The term “functional fixedness” was coined in 1935 by German Gestalt therapist Karl Duncker who contributed to psychology with his extensive work on understanding cognition and problem-solving.

Duncker’s Candle Experiment

Duncker conducted a famous cognitive bias experiment that measured the influence of functional fixedness on our problem-solving abilities.

He handed the participants a box of thumbtacks, a candle, and matches. He then asked them to find a way to attach the lit candle to a wall so the wax wouldn’t drip on the floor. The solution consisted of removing the tacks from the box, tacking the box to the wall, and placing the candle upright in the box.

Pretty simple, right?

But most participants couldn’t solve this problem. They saw the box only as something that was used for holding tacks. Duncker observed a "mental block against using an object in a new way that is required to solve a problem" in these participants. To find a solution, they would first need to overcome the tendency towards the psychological obstacle holding them back—functional fixedness.

Functional Fixedness and Problem Solving

Functional fixedness is practical in everyday life and crucial in building expertise and specialization in fields where it’s important to come up with quick solutions. But as we saw in Duncker’s experiment, this cognitive constraint is the enemy of creativity. Functional fixedness stops us from seeing alternative solutions and makes problem-solving more difficult. 

Functional fixedness can become a genuine problem among professionals. Research shows that functional fixedness is one of large organizations' most significant barriers to innovation. If your job is to produce innovative solutions, being able to think “outside the box” is a must.

So why do we become limited when it comes to using objects?

Children, especially those under 5, are not as biased as adults. As we know only too well, toddlers won’t hesitate to turn a wall into a blank canvas for their works of art. But because they are constantly being corrected, children become more functionally fixed over time. Eventually, they realize that paper is the only acceptable support to draw on.

As we gain more experience and knowledge, we become increasingly fixated on the predetermined use of objects and tools. And the more we practice using them in certain ways, the harder it is to see other alternatives.

Knowledge and experience replace imagination and our ability to see an object for anything other than its original purpose.

How to Overcome Functional Fixedness?

The good news is that functional fixedness is not a psychological disorder that needs therapeutic intervention. We can train our minds to overcome the mental set, a problem-solving approach based on past experiences.

There are a few methods that can help break down functional fixedness and develop creative thinking:

Practicing creative thinking

The more often you try to see novel uses for everyday objects, the easier the process will eventually become. Let’s go back to the teacup. What other usages except for drinking tea (and sharpening knives) can you think of? With a bit of imagination, the same cup can become a paperweight, candle holder, cookie-cutter, bird feeder, and even a phone sound amplifier.

Practicing helps develop our ability to think creatively. It encourages something called divergent thinking, a term defined in 1967 by the American psychologist J. P. Guilford.

Contrary to convergent thinking , which focuses on finding a single solution, divergent thinking is a creative process where a problem is solved using strategies that deviate from commonly used ones.

Changing the context

Getting a fresh perspective is often useful when considering alternate approaches to a task. In a professional setting, this can mean brainstorming in a group or involving individuals from other disciplines to share their points of view.

Considering a problem from a different angle prompts us to think creatively.

Focusing on features instead of function

Another way of breaking away from habitual ways of looking at objects is to consider what they are made of instead of concentrating on their function. List an item's different characteristics, and you might come up with its alternative uses. A teacup is made of ceramic, which can be broken down into pieces to create a mosaic.

This approach helps combat functional fixedness by focusing on the object itself while distancing ourselves from the mechanics of its intended use.

Other Biases and Heuristics That Hold Us Back

Functional fixedness is not the only "mental shortcut" holding us back. If we allow ourselves to think beyond what appears to be the "obvious answer," we may do more than we could have ever imagined!

Bandwagon Effect

It's easy to agree with what other people think. Meetings go much faster when everyone agrees right away. Plus, if one person likes the idea, it's probably not so bad, right? Well, this isn't always the case. Sometimes, the bandwagon effect encourages us to go along with what everyone else is doing. (It's easy for us to "hop on the bandwagon," as they say." Will you and your colleagues find a better solution if you debate a few more options? Are you just agreeing to something because everyone else is?

Dunning-Kruger Effect

Think you know a lot about a subject? Think again. The Dunning-Kruger Effect suggests that the less we know about a subject, the more confident we are in our abilities. Let's say you go to a rock climbing gym for the first time. You look at the wall and think, "I can get the hang of this quickly!" After a few sessions, you learn that there are different grips and ways of moving your body that you would have never thought of before! The initial false sense of confidence is a result of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

Confirmation Bias

Once we decide, we will likely search for "evidence" confirming that we are right. If you have decided to vote for a certain political candidate, for example, you may only seek out news articles and information that confirms that they are the best candidate for the job. If you decide to leave your job, you may start focusing on the worst parts of the job. Don't let the confirmation bias prevent you from seeing all sides of an argument!

Not all biases are inherently bad, but they can hold us back. When approaching a big decision or trying to solve a problem, evaluate how biases could influence your thinking. Can you push past them? Can you try something new and unexpected?

Related posts:

• Jean Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development
• The Psychology of Long Distance Relationships
• Operant Conditioning (Examples + Research)
• Beck’s Depression Inventory (BDI Test)
• Variable Interval Reinforcement Schedule (Examples)

Reference this article:

About The Author

PracticalPie.com is a participant in the Amazon Associates Program. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow Us On:

Youtube Facebook Instagram X/Twitter

Psychology Resources

Developmental

Personality

Relationships

Psychologists

Serial Killers

Psychology Tests

Personality Quiz

Memory Test

Depression test

Type A/B Personality Test

© PracticalPsychology. All rights reserved

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

• Media Center

Why do we have trouble thinking outside the box?

Functional fixedness, what is functional fixedness.

Functional fixedness describes why we're unable to use an object in ways beyond its traditional use. Functional fixedness is a phenomenon found in problem-solving psychology and affects an individual’s ability to innovate and be creative when solving challenges. 1

Where this bias occurs

Debias your organization.

Most of us work & live in environments that aren’t optimized for solid decision-making. We work with organizations of all kinds to identify sources of cognitive bias & develop tailored solutions.

Consider the term “thinking outside the box.” Functional fixedness describes the difficulty we experience when we attempt to be creative in our problem-solving and our outside of the box thinking. Commonly, functional fixedness is used to highlight this problem-solving barrier in instances such as when we strive to use an object for a purpose other than its traditional use.

As children, many people may remember the ease of being creative and using their imagination to transform objects and their intended uses into something more. What was once a chair or a cardboard box, children quickly turn into fortresses with pillows and blankets. As we age, though, this ease in innovation becomes more difficult for the average person. Imagine someone needs a paperweight but is unable to find one. Instead of using a heavy object they can easily find in the room, they are fixated on their need for a paperweight. They might not think of using an object like a hammer or a stapler, which is unconventional to its typical use.

Individual effects

Functional fixedness is a cognitive bias that negatively affects a person’s ability to problem-solve and innovate. The bias causes a person to look at a problem in only one specific way and it can prevent them from developing effective solutions to their challenge. Functional fixedness can impact all areas of one’s life, including their academic life, careers, and personal lives. A person’s inability to recognize alternative approaches constrains their creativity and limits their potential ideas when looking to solve a problem.

Systemic effects

Functional fixedness can prevent companies and societies from innovating and solving pressing challenges. Passiveness and familiarity stem from an individual’s need to maintain the status quo and do things as they have always been done. There is comfort in familiarity, and it’s a natural human tendency to do what is comfortable. 2

From a corporate level, functional fixedness has led to issues in developing breakthrough products and solutions for internal challenges. For nations, functional fixedness has resulted in a lack of innovative solutions to tackle more significant societal problems. Systemic issues arising from functional fixedness have real-world impacts and are a real pain point for societies, as leaders cannot look past traditional solutions to solve complex problems.

Why it happens

Functional fixedness occurs due to strong pre-conceived notions that people develop regarding objects and how they must solve challenges using those objects.

Researchers have found that functional fixedness is a bias that develops and strengthens as we age. When studying functional fixedness in children, a study done at the University of Essex found that 5-year-old children showed no initial signs of the bias in early development when problem-solving. Meanwhile, as early as the age of 7, children tended to treat objects as they were meant to be used, already developing the bias. 2 Younger participants present initial immunity to the bias due to their initial lack of problem-solving experience, allowing them to be more creative in their solutions. 1

Functional fixedness has also proven to develop more as individuals gain more experience with problem-solving. Ironically, the more practice we have with identifying solutions to a problem, the more difficult it is to identify alternative or more creative solutions. 3 Though individuals may be aware that their traditional method of solving a problem may be over-used and ineffective, they are typically still tempted to use the same problem-solving approach, due to their familiarity with it.

Why it is important

Problem-solving is a regular part of any individual’s life. Functional fixedness impairs an individual’s ability to innovate and creatively tackle problems by limiting their problem-solving capabilities.

Individuals who are aware of functional fixedness can work towards avoiding bias and improving their problem-solving abilities. By consciously working to think innovatively, and better tackle problems in their professional and personal lives, they can strive towards unique and innovative solutions.

How to avoid it

As with many cognitive biases, functional fixedness can appear when tackling challenges in many different areas of life. Avoiding functional fixedness requires a conscious effort on the individual’s part towards promoting innovative ways of thinking and problem-solving.

Abstract the Problem

The first step to overcoming functional fixedness is done by first developing an awareness of the problem and simplifying it. A practice referred to as “uncommitting,” describes simplifying a challenge and distilling it down to the problem’s essential elements. By eliminating the details of the problem, we allow ourselves to think more creatively about the solution. By focusing on identifying the problem, and not judging ideas too early in the problem-solving process, alternative perspectives and possible solutions can be identified. 3

Draw Inspiration from Unexpected Places

Researchers have found that when people look for inspiration from distant domains, they tend to generate more creative solutions to their problems, especially in comparison to those who draw inspiration from more closely related fields. 3 Solutions from the abstract and distantly-related industries provide novel fixes, which tend to deliver creative and successful solutions.

Opinions from Different Disciplines

Like drawing inspiration from different disciplines, reaching out to experts in various fields also serves as a solution to avoiding functional fixedness and better-solving problems within one’s domain. Crowdsourcing initiatives by large technology companies provide an excellent example of this fix in play. Samsung, Unilever, and Lego have used crowdsourcing campaigns to share internal company challenges and call for innovative solutions from those external to their company in different industries. Crowdsourcing initiatives have continued to gain traction due to the success companies have seen in their ability to garner innovative solutions at a low cost, aiding these companies to avoid functional fixedness. 4 Crowdsourcing has proven to be an innovative way to avoid functional fixedness, as participants from outside of corporations do not hold the same preconceived notions of internal employees within these companies. Without these preconceived notions and set standards and processes, crowdsourcing participants are able to avoid the restrictive innovative barriers typically developed in these traditional settings.

How it all started

Functional fixedness was first defined by the German psychologist Karl Duncker in 1945. Karl Duncker described functional fixedness as a mental block when using an object in a new way that is required to solve a problem. 5 The block Karl emphasizes in his famous experiment demonstrates how an individual’s ability to complete a task with specific components were limited, as they were unable to rationalize their use outside of their original purpose.

The famous experiment conducted by Karl Duncker is well-known in psychology for demonstrating functional fixedness. In this experiment, Duncker gave participants a book of matches, a candle and a box of thumbtacks, and asked them to attach the candle to the wall so that when it was lit, it would not drip onto the table below it. Initially, most of the participants attempted to attach the candle to the wall by directly using the tacks or by trying to glue the candle to the wall by melting it. Because the Duncker gave participants a box with thumbtacks in them, few of the participants thought of using the box as a candle-holder and attaching the box to the wall with the tacks. Since the experiment participants fixated on the functionality of the box being used to hold the thumbtacks, they were unable to conceptualize the box as a potential solution for holding the candle, thus solving the challenge.

Additionally, in 1952 the experiment was later conducted by giving one set of participants an empty box without the thumbtacks while giving the other set of participants the box with thumbtacks inside. Participants who were given the box without the thumbtacks inside of the box were two times as likely to solve the problem. 6 The box no longer was used to hold the thumbtacks; therefore, its functionality was not tied to one single use.

Example 1 - PepsiCo leverages orthopedic experts

PepsiCo provides a notable example of functional fixedness and how companies attempt to curtail their own biases when developing products. In this example, PepsiCo’s challenge was to reduce the amount of sodium in its potato chips, without altering the salty flavors that customers traditionally loved. PepsiCo first tried to identify a solution to their problem by looking at the food and snack industry for similar challenges faced by their competitors but found nothing notable to their challenge. PepsiCo then worked with a third-party consulting firm and shared their problem to a broad and diverse range of technical experts to find an innovative and feasible solution.

Experts called on included those from engineering services, energy companies, and those in medical fields. The most creative and applicable response came from the orthopedics department of a global research lab. Researchers had developed a method of creating nano-particles of salt, which was initially used to conduct advanced research on osteoporosis. The process provided a new perspective and partner for PepsiCo, which ultimately led to Pepsi being able to solve their challenge by overcoming functional fixedness. 2

Example 2 - Creatively designing power strips

Another example of functional fixedness showcases how individuals overcame the cognitive bias by simplifying their initial problem. The experiment conducted by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University required participants to design a power strip in which larger plugs would not block adjacent outlets. To promote creative design solutions, researchers gave one set of participants the initial design challenge, and the second set of participants an abstracted version of the problem. The second set of participants were asked to instead fit objects of different sizes into a container without blocking one another, and taking advantage of the container’s full capacity. The challenge was reframed to avoid functional fixedness by stripping away the objects’ details being power strips, plugs, and outlets. By doing this, researchers looked to see which set of participants would develop the most innovative results.

The researchers found that when participants given the abstracted challenge identified relevant but distant domains to aid in their problem-solving. The areas of comparison included landscaping, carpentry, Japanese aesthetics, and contortionism. Participants who were able to gain inspiration from these distant domains found the most novel and practical solutions to the design problem. The study proves that when preventing functional fixedness, and promoting creativity, the best solutions are developed. 4

Functional fixedness is a cognitive bias that limits a person’s ability to use an object in more ways than it is traditionally used and affects an individual’s ability to innovate and be creative when solving challenges.

Functional fixedness occurs due to strong pre-conceived notions that people develop in regards to objects and how they must solve challenges using those objects. These preconceived notions typically develop as we age, and as we gain experience in problem-solving.

PepsiCo encountered functional fixedness issues when looking for ways to reduce the amount of sodium in its potato chip products without altering the salty flavors that customers love. When the PepsiCo team was unable to innovate and solve the challenge due to their functional fixedness, they attempted to crowdsource solutions from across domains and were able to find a solution from the orthopedics department of a global research lab. A practice used in researching osteoporosis helped solve PepsiCo’s challenge and provided a creative solution for the company.

A study conducted at Carnegie Mellon University tested the quality of design solutions in participants without functional fixedness bias. The first set of participants had to design a power strip which ensured that larger plugs would not block adjacent outlets. The second set of students were asked to develop a similar simplified task. This entailed fitting objects of different sizes into a container so that they wouldn’t block one another to take advantage of the container’s full capacity. The researchers found that when participants were given the abstracted problem, they identified relevant domains to aid in their problem-solving. Participants were able to gain inspiration from these distant domains and found the most novel and practical solutions to the design problem.

Functional fixedness can be avoided by firstly being aware of the bias. Abstracting the initial problem, drawing inspiration from other domains, and even getting opinions from different types of experts in other industries can help avoid Functional fixedness in one’s quotidian life.

• Clavin, D. A. (2015, April 19). Psych 256: Cognitive Psychology SP15. Retrieved July 13, 2020, from https://sites.psu.edu/psych256sp15/2015/04/19/functional-fixedness-in-children/
• Zynga, A. (2014, August 07). The Cognitive Bias Keeping Us from Innovating. Retrieved July 13, 2020, from https://hbr.org/2013/06/the-cognitive-bias-keeping-us-from
• Harley, A. (2017, July 30). Functional Fixedness Stops You From Having Innovative Ideas. Retrieved July 13, 2020, from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/functional-fixedness/
• Norton, K. (2019, June 10). 12 Brands Using Crowdsourcing for Product Design Ideas. Retrieved July 13, 2020, from https://www.cadcrowd.com/blog/12-brands-using-crowdsourcing-for-product-design-ideas/
• Duncker, K. (1945). On problem-solving. Psychological Monographs, 58 (5), I-113. doi:10.1037/h0093599
• Adamson, R. E. (1952). Functional Fixedness As Related To Problem Solving: A Repetition Of Three Experiments. doi:10.21236/ad0006119

About the Authors

Dan is a Co-Founder and Managing Director at The Decision Lab. He is a bestselling author of Intention - a book he wrote with Wiley on the mindful application of behavioral science in organizations. Dan has a background in organizational decision making, with a BComm in Decision & Information Systems from McGill University. He has worked on enterprise-level behavioral architecture at TD Securities and BMO Capital Markets, where he advised management on the implementation of systems processing billions of dollars per week. Driven by an appetite for the latest in technology, Dan created a course on business intelligence and lectured at McGill University, and has applied behavioral science to topics such as augmented and virtual reality.

Dr. Sekoul Krastev

Sekoul is a Co-Founder and Managing Director at The Decision Lab. He is a bestselling author of Intention - a book he wrote with Wiley on the mindful application of behavioral science in organizations. A decision scientist with a PhD in Decision Neuroscience from McGill University, Sekoul's work has been featured in peer-reviewed journals and has been presented at conferences around the world. Sekoul previously advised management on innovation and engagement strategy at The Boston Consulting Group as well as on online media strategy at Google. He has a deep interest in the applications of behavioral science to new technology and has published on these topics in places such as the Huffington Post and Strategy & Business.

Hyperbolic Discounting

Why do we value immediate rewards more than long-term rewards, dunning–kruger effect, why can we not perceive our own abilities, attentional bias, why do we focus more on some things than others.

Eager to learn about how behavioral science can help your organization?

Get new behavioral science insights in your inbox every month..

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

9.5: Pitfalls to Problem Solving

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 59922

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Learning Objectives

• Explain some common roadblocks to effective problem solving

Not all problems are successfully solved, however. What challenges stop us from successfully solving a problem? Albert Einstein once said, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.” Imagine a person in a room that has four doorways. One doorway that has always been open in the past is now locked. The person, accustomed to exiting the room by that particular doorway, keeps trying to get out through the same doorway even though the other three doorways are open. The person is stuck—but she just needs to go to another doorway, instead of trying to get out through the locked doorway. A mental set is where you persist in approaching a problem in a way that has worked in the past but is clearly not working now.  Functional fixedness is a type of mental set where you cannot perceive an object being used for something other than what it was designed for. During the Apollo 13 mission to the moon, NASA engineers at Mission Control had to overcome functional fixedness to save the lives of the astronauts aboard the spacecraft. An explosion in a module of the spacecraft damaged multiple systems. The astronauts were in danger of being poisoned by rising levels of carbon dioxide because of problems with the carbon dioxide filters. The engineers found a way for the astronauts to use spare plastic bags, tape, and air hoses to create a makeshift air filter, which saved the lives of the astronauts.

Figure 1 . In Duncker’s classic study, participants were provided the three objects in the top panel and asked to solve the problem. The solution is shown in the bottom portion.

Link to Learning

Check out this Apollo 13 scene where the group of NASA engineers are given the task of overcoming functional fixedness.

Researchers have investigated whether functional fixedness is affected by culture. In one experiment, individuals from the Shuar group in Ecuador were asked to use an object for a purpose other than that for which the object was originally intended. For example, the participants were told a story about a bear and a rabbit that were separated by a river and asked to select among various objects, including a spoon, a cup, erasers, and so on, to help the animals. The spoon was the only object long enough to span the imaginary river, but if the spoon was presented in a way that reflected its normal usage, it took participants longer to choose the spoon to solve the problem. (German & Barrett, 2005). The researchers wanted to know if exposure to highly specialized tools, as occurs with individuals in industrialized nations, affects their ability to transcend functional fixedness. It was determined that functional fixedness is experienced in both industrialized and nonindustrialized cultures (German & Barrett, 2005).

Query \(\PageIndex{1}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{2}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{3}\)

In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. Sometimes, however, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the $2,000 home? Why would the realtor show you the run-down houses and the nice house? The realtor may be challenging your anchoring bias. An anchoring bias occurs when you focus on one piece of information when making a decision or solving a problem. In this case, you’re so focused on the amount of money you are willing to spend that you may not recognize what kinds of houses are available at that price point.

The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms your existing beliefs. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. This bias proves that first impressions do matter and that we tend to look for information to confirm our initial judgments of others.

Watch this video from the Big Think to learn more about the confirmation bias.

You can view the transcript for “Confirmation Bias: Your Brain is So Judgmental” here (opens in new window) .

Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Representative bias describes a faulty way of thinking, in which you unintentionally stereotype someone or something; for example, you may assume that your professors spend their free time reading books and engaging in intellectual conversation, because the idea of them spending their time playing volleyball or visiting an amusement park does not fit in with your stereotypes of professors.

Finally, the availability heuristic is a heuristic in which you make a decision based on an example, information, or recent experience that is that readily available to you, even though it may not be the best example to inform your decision . To use a common example, would you guess there are more murders or more suicides in America each year? When asked, most people would guess there are more murders. In truth, there are twice as many suicides as there are murders each year. However, murders seem more common because we hear a lot more about murders on an average day. Unless someone we know or someone famous takes their own life, it does not make the news. Murders, on the other hand, we see in the news every day. This leads to the erroneous assumption that the easier it is to think of instances of something, the more often that thing occurs.

Watch the following video for an example of the availability heuristic.

You can view the transcript for “Availability Heuristic: Are Planes More Dangerous Than Cars?” here (opens in new window) .

Biases tend to “preserve that which is already established—to maintain our preexisting knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and hypotheses” (Aronson, 1995; Kahneman, 2011). These biases are summarized in Table 2 below.

Learn more about heuristics and common biases through the article, “ 8 Common Thinking Mistakes Our Brains Make Every Day and How to Prevent Them ” by  Belle Beth Cooper.

You can also watch this clever music video explaining these and other cognitive biases.

Query \(\PageIndex{4}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{5}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{6}\)

Think It Over

Which type of bias do you recognize in your own decision making processes? How has this bias affected how you’ve made decisions in the past and how can you use your awareness of it to improve your decisions making skills in the future?

anchoring bias:  faulty heuristic in which you fixate on a single aspect of a problem to find a solution

availability heuristic:  faulty heuristic in which you make a decision based on information readily available to you

confirmation bias:  faulty heuristic in which you focus on information that confirms your beliefs

functional fixedness:  inability to see an object as useful for any other use other than the one for which it was intended

hindsight bias:  belief that the event just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t

mental set:  continually using an old solution to a problem without results

representative bias:  faulty heuristic in which you stereotype someone or something without a valid basis for your judgment

Licenses and Attributions

CC licensed content, Original

• Modification, adaptation, and original content. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Problem Solving. Authored by : OpenStax College. Located at : http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]:Lk3YnvuC@6/Problem-Solving . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright . License Terms : Download for free at http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]
• More information on heuristics. Authored by : Dr. Scott Roberts, Dr. Ryan Curtis, Samantha Levy, and Dr. Dylan Selterman. Provided by : University of Maryland. Located at : http://openpsyc.blogspot.com/2014/07/heuristics.html . Project : OpenPSYC. License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Problem-Solving Strategies and Obstacles

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Sean is a fact-checker and researcher with experience in sociology, field research, and data analytics.

JGI / Jamie Grill / Getty Images

• Application
• Improvement

From deciding what to eat for dinner to considering whether it's the right time to buy a house, problem-solving is a large part of our daily lives. Learn some of the problem-solving strategies that exist and how to use them in real life, along with ways to overcome obstacles that are making it harder to resolve the issues you face.

What Is Problem-Solving?

In cognitive psychology , the term 'problem-solving' refers to the mental process that people go through to discover, analyze, and solve problems.

A problem exists when there is a goal that we want to achieve but the process by which we will achieve it is not obvious to us. Put another way, there is something that we want to occur in our life, yet we are not immediately certain how to make it happen.

Maybe you want a better relationship with your spouse or another family member but you're not sure how to improve it. Or you want to start a business but are unsure what steps to take. Problem-solving helps you figure out how to achieve these desires.

The problem-solving process involves:

• Discovery of the problem
• Deciding to tackle the issue
• Seeking to understand the problem more fully
• Researching available options or solutions
• Taking action to resolve the issue

Before problem-solving can occur, it is important to first understand the exact nature of the problem itself. If your understanding of the issue is faulty, your attempts to resolve it will also be incorrect or flawed.

Problem-Solving Mental Processes

Several mental processes are at work during problem-solving. Among them are:

• Perceptually recognizing the problem
• Representing the problem in memory
• Considering relevant information that applies to the problem
• Identifying different aspects of the problem
• Labeling and describing the problem

Problem-Solving Strategies

There are many ways to go about solving a problem. Some of these strategies might be used on their own, or you may decide to employ multiple approaches when working to figure out and fix a problem.

An algorithm is a step-by-step procedure that, by following certain "rules" produces a solution. Algorithms are commonly used in mathematics to solve division or multiplication problems. But they can be used in other fields as well.

In psychology, algorithms can be used to help identify individuals with a greater risk of mental health issues. For instance, research suggests that certain algorithms might help us recognize children with an elevated risk of suicide or self-harm.

One benefit of algorithms is that they guarantee an accurate answer. However, they aren't always the best approach to problem-solving, in part because detecting patterns can be incredibly time-consuming.

There are also concerns when machine learning is involved—also known as artificial intelligence (AI)—such as whether they can accurately predict human behaviors.

Heuristics are shortcut strategies that people can use to solve a problem at hand. These "rule of thumb" approaches allow you to simplify complex problems, reducing the total number of possible solutions to a more manageable set.

If you find yourself sitting in a traffic jam, for example, you may quickly consider other routes, taking one to get moving once again. When shopping for a new car, you might think back to a prior experience when negotiating got you a lower price, then employ the same tactics.

While heuristics may be helpful when facing smaller issues, major decisions shouldn't necessarily be made using a shortcut approach. Heuristics also don't guarantee an effective solution, such as when trying to drive around a traffic jam only to find yourself on an equally crowded route.

Trial and Error

A trial-and-error approach to problem-solving involves trying a number of potential solutions to a particular issue, then ruling out those that do not work. If you're not sure whether to buy a shirt in blue or green, for instance, you may try on each before deciding which one to purchase.

This can be a good strategy to use if you have a limited number of solutions available. But if there are many different choices available, narrowing down the possible options using another problem-solving technique can be helpful before attempting trial and error.

In some cases, the solution to a problem can appear as a sudden insight. You are facing an issue in a relationship or your career when, out of nowhere, the solution appears in your mind and you know exactly what to do.

Insight can occur when the problem in front of you is similar to an issue that you've dealt with in the past. Although, you may not recognize what is occurring since the underlying mental processes that lead to insight often happen outside of conscious awareness .

Research indicates that insight is most likely to occur during times when you are alone—such as when going on a walk by yourself, when you're in the shower, or when lying in bed after waking up.

How to Apply Problem-Solving Strategies in Real Life

If you're facing a problem, you can implement one or more of these strategies to find a potential solution. Here's how to use them in real life:

• Create a flow chart . If you have time, you can take advantage of the algorithm approach to problem-solving by sitting down and making a flow chart of each potential solution, its consequences, and what happens next.
• Recall your past experiences . When a problem needs to be solved fairly quickly, heuristics may be a better approach. Think back to when you faced a similar issue, then use your knowledge and experience to choose the best option possible.
• Start trying potential solutions . If your options are limited, start trying them one by one to see which solution is best for achieving your desired goal. If a particular solution doesn't work, move on to the next.
• Take some time alone . Since insight is often achieved when you're alone, carve out time to be by yourself for a while. The answer to your problem may come to you, seemingly out of the blue, if you spend some time away from others.

Obstacles to Problem-Solving

Problem-solving is not a flawless process as there are a number of obstacles that can interfere with our ability to solve a problem quickly and efficiently. These obstacles include:

• Assumptions: When dealing with a problem, people can make assumptions about the constraints and obstacles that prevent certain solutions. Thus, they may not even try some potential options.
• Functional fixedness : This term refers to the tendency to view problems only in their customary manner. Functional fixedness prevents people from fully seeing all of the different options that might be available to find a solution.
• Irrelevant or misleading information: When trying to solve a problem, it's important to distinguish between information that is relevant to the issue and irrelevant data that can lead to faulty solutions. The more complex the problem, the easier it is to focus on misleading or irrelevant information.
• Mental set: A mental set is a tendency to only use solutions that have worked in the past rather than looking for alternative ideas. A mental set can work as a heuristic, making it a useful problem-solving tool. However, mental sets can also lead to inflexibility, making it more difficult to find effective solutions.

How to Improve Your Problem-Solving Skills

In the end, if your goal is to become a better problem-solver, it's helpful to remember that this is a process. Thus, if you want to improve your problem-solving skills, following these steps can help lead you to your solution:

• Recognize that a problem exists . If you are facing a problem, there are generally signs. For instance, if you have a mental illness , you may experience excessive fear or sadness, mood changes, and changes in sleeping or eating habits. Recognizing these signs can help you realize that an issue exists.
• Decide to solve the problem . Make a conscious decision to solve the issue at hand. Commit to yourself that you will go through the steps necessary to find a solution.
• Seek to fully understand the issue . Analyze the problem you face, looking at it from all sides. If your problem is relationship-related, for instance, ask yourself how the other person may be interpreting the issue. You might also consider how your actions might be contributing to the situation.
• Research potential options . Using the problem-solving strategies mentioned, research potential solutions. Make a list of options, then consider each one individually. What are some pros and cons of taking the available routes? What would you need to do to make them happen?
• Take action . Select the best solution possible and take action. Action is one of the steps required for change . So, go through the motions needed to resolve the issue.
• Try another option, if needed . If the solution you chose didn't work, don't give up. Either go through the problem-solving process again or simply try another option.

You can find a way to solve your problems as long as you keep working toward this goal—even if the best solution is simply to let go because no other good solution exists.

Sarathy V. Real world problem-solving .  Front Hum Neurosci . 2018;12:261. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2018.00261

Dunbar K. Problem solving . A Companion to Cognitive Science . 2017. doi:10.1002/9781405164535.ch20

Stewart SL, Celebre A, Hirdes JP, Poss JW. Risk of suicide and self-harm in kids: The development of an algorithm to identify high-risk individuals within the children's mental health system . Child Psychiat Human Develop . 2020;51:913-924. doi:10.1007/s10578-020-00968-9

Rosenbusch H, Soldner F, Evans AM, Zeelenberg M. Supervised machine learning methods in psychology: A practical introduction with annotated R code . Soc Personal Psychol Compass . 2021;15(2):e12579. doi:10.1111/spc3.12579

Mishra S. Decision-making under risk: Integrating perspectives from biology, economics, and psychology . Personal Soc Psychol Rev . 2014;18(3):280-307. doi:10.1177/1088868314530517

Csikszentmihalyi M, Sawyer K. Creative insight: The social dimension of a solitary moment . In: The Systems Model of Creativity . 2015:73-98. doi:10.1007/978-94-017-9085-7_7

Chrysikou EG, Motyka K, Nigro C, Yang SI, Thompson-Schill SL. Functional fixedness in creative thinking tasks depends on stimulus modality .  Psychol Aesthet Creat Arts . 2016;10(4):425‐435. doi:10.1037/aca0000050

Huang F, Tang S, Hu Z. Unconditional perseveration of the short-term mental set in chunk decomposition .  Front Psychol . 2018;9:2568. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02568

National Alliance on Mental Illness. Warning signs and symptoms .

Mayer RE. Thinking, problem solving, cognition, 2nd ed .

Schooler JW, Ohlsson S, Brooks K. Thoughts beyond words: When language overshadows insight. J Experiment Psychol: General . 1993;122:166-183. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.2.166

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Functional Fixedness

Functional fixedness is a cognitive bias that occurs when an individual is unable to see the potential uses of an object beyond its typical function. This can hinder problem-solving and creativity, as the individual may struggle to think of novel ways to use the object.

In the context of innovation and technology, functional fixedness can be a significant obstacle. It is important for businesses and individuals to be open to new and unconventional uses for existing products and technologies. By embracing a diverse range of perspectives and approaches, organizations can foster a culture of creativity and continuous improvement.

One way to overcome functional fixedness is through the use of lateral thinking, which involves approaching problems from unconventional angles and seeking out novel solutions. This can involve breaking down mental barriers and preconceptions about the ways in which things are typically used.

Another approach is to expose oneself to diverse experiences and ideas. This can help to expand one's frame of reference and enable them to think more creatively and flexibly. By actively seeking out new perspectives and exposing oneself to unfamiliar situations, individuals can better overcome functional fixedness and improve their problem-solving skills.

Functional Fixedness: What It Is and How to Overcome It - Healthline

https://www.healthline.com/health/mental-health/functional-fixedness

Functional Fixedness as a Cognitive Bias - Verywell Mind

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-functional-fixedness-2795484

Functional Fixedness Psychology | What is Functional Fixedness? - Video ...

https://study.com/learn/lesson/what-is-functional-fixedness-psychology.html

Functional fixedness - Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_fixedness

Functional Fixedness in Psychology: Definition & Examples

https://study.com/academy/lesson/functional-fixedness-in-psychology-definition-examples-quiz.html

Psychology Of Fixation

Functional fixedness is a psychological and cognitive bias that may limit a person to seeing any object or issue only in the way it has traditionally been used or seen.

For example, you might think of a pair of scissors and paper. Scissors are often fixed in their function as paper cutters, which is their traditional use. Paper might be seen as a drawing, creating, or writing tool. Similarly, a car can be thought of as functionally fixed in its purpose as a means of transport.

A brief background of functional fixedness

Functional fixedness, or functional fixity, as it was previously known, was coined around 1935 by German-born Gestalt therapist Karl Duncker. Duncker's contribution to cognitive psychology was his extensive work in understanding cognition and problem-solving. Functional fixedness originated in Duncker's seminal study of how adults solved various mathematical and practical problems. 

The study was published in his book Psychologie des produktiven Denkens in 1935. Duncker argued that while functional fixedness is a necessary perceptive and cognitive skill, it can hamper problem-solving and creativity. Later, in 1945, he became famous for the Candle Problem, devised to test a person's functional fixedness and ability to "think outside the box."

Duncker's "Candle Problem" and "thinking outside the box"

The Candle Problem experiment serves as an example of functional fixedness in action. The experiment’s materials included a candle, a box with thumbtacks, and matches, which were placed on a table close to a wall. Subjects were instructed to attach the candle to the wall so that wax would not drip onto the table when the candle was lit and to complete this task as fast as possible.

Many subjects tried unsuccessful creative methods, such as trying to pin the candle to the wall with a tack. Others melted the end of the candle and tried to stick it to the wall. Only some figured out the solution to this problem: empty the thumbtacks from the box, attach the empty box to the wall with a thumbtack, and make the candle stand upright in the box before lighting it.

From this experiment, Duncker derived that people have difficulty solving a problem when one object has a fixed function that must be changed for a solution to be found. In this instance, the successful subjects were able to overcome functional fixedness and realize that the box was not only a container for the tacks but also a candle holder.

When Duncker repeated the experiment, placing the tacks outside the box, nearly all participants were able to solve the problem faster. Changing one detail enhanced their ability to overcome functional fixedness and solve the problem far more efficiently.

Functional fixedness in problem-solving and creativity

It can be illuminating to look at how Duncker viewed problem-solving. According to his process, there are seven stages of overcoming the type of cognitive bias that leads to functional fixedness.  

If a goal cannot be reached immediately through one's obvious or usual actions, it may be a problem. In Duncker's words, "A problem arises when a living creature has a goal but does not know how this goal is to be reached. There must be recourse to thinking whenever one cannot go from the given situation to the desired situation simply by action."  

Problem-solving comprises phases, with each phase being a reformulation of the problem. Duncker describes this step by stating, "The solution of a new problem typically takes place in successive phases which (except the first phase) have, in retrospect, the character of a solution and (except the last phase), in prospect, that of a problem."

In summation, looking at multiple angles may help you overcome your mental block, understand a problem on a deeper level, and formulate a strategy for tackling it. Creative solutions may arise in this stage.

Stage three 

The point or function of a solution is also considered its definition as a solution. Duncker wrote, "The functional value of a solution is indispensable for the understanding of its being a solution. It is exactly what is called the sense, the principle, or the point of the solution."

Stage four 

Defining the principle of the solution is, in general, the first step in the process of solving it. According to Duncker, "the final form of an individual solution is, in general, not reached by a single step from the original setting of the problem; on the contrary, the principle, the functional value of the solution, typically arises first, and the final form of the solution in question develops only as this principle becomes more and more concrete successively."

Stage five 

While progressing through phases to solve a problem, the human mind may return to earlier phases. Duncker stated, "It will be realized that, in the transition to phases in another line, the thought process may range widely. Every such transition involves a return to an earlier phase of the problem; an earlier task is set anew; a new branching off from an old point in the family tree occurs. Sometimes a [subject] returns to the original setting of the problem, sometimes just to the immediately preceding phase."

General heuristic methods may control each phase of problem-solving. Heuristics are processes or methods that allow a person to discover answers for themselves. Duncker claimed, "We can, therefore, say that 'insistent' analyses of the situation, especially the endeavor to vary appropriate elements meaningfully subspecies of the goal, must belong to the essential nature of a solution through thinking. We may call such relatively general procedures, 'heuristic methods of thinking.'"

Stage seven 

The solution may depend on details specific to the problem. Using an object only for its stated function, or seeing problems only as they present themselves, can become a barrier to both problem-solving and creativity.

Problem-solving

Duncker distinguished between mechanical and organic problem-solving abilities. In his book, Psychologie des produktiven Denkens, he explained that mechanical thinking is not conducive to problem-solving. He wrote, "he who merely searches his memory for a 'solution of such-and-such problem' may remain just as blind to the inner nature of the problem-situation before him as a person who, instead of thinking himself, refers the problem to an intelligent acquaintance or an encyclopedia. Truly, these methods are not to be despised; for they have a certain heuristic value, and one can arrive at solutions in that fashion. But such problem-solving has little to do with thinking."

On the other hand, organic or productive thinking (or problem-solving) requires a reorganization of a problem and a structural understanding of the problem situation. To avoid functional fixedness bias, a person may be required to look at an object or a problem in a way that assigns new functions and breaks away from functions that may appear inherent. 

One excellent example of this bias can be seen by simply looking at a thin cloth. If you see cloth only for its usual cleaning function, you might not consider other uses. On the other hand, if you are cold at a campsite and can't find your kindling, you might consider using a cleaning cloth doused in gas to start your fire. You solved the problem by considering other possibilities than what you are used to. Many engineers use this process in their work. The concept of “function fixedness” may also only apply to objects being viewed by individuals of certain ages. One clinical trial showed that children below the age of six seemed “immune” to the effect of functional fixedness bias, even after the box’s containment ability was demonstrated. In this social psychology experiment, the immunity during early development was attributed to the children’s forming notions of function, as well as their past experience related to problem-solving. 

To explain how changing fixed-function thinking can lead to creative problem-solving, we may consider Elon Musk sending a Tesla car to space. 

All people may assign a fixed function to a Tesla car. It often serves as a means of transport from point A to B. Musk, an inventor and entrepreneur, invested his time and money to discover more economical and powerful ways to travel in space. To test the first rocket, Tesla's company developed the Falcon Heavy. The Falcon Heavy needed a payload.

Instead of choosing a conventional payload, such as a dummy cargo or passengers, he chose a car he designed and drove himself, a red Tesla Roadster. Musk changed the function of the car (transport), so it served as a payload (solved a problem) and became a symbol bigger than its function (creativity). It may have also boosted sales for his brand. 

Creative people may be non-conforming and independent; in some cases, they can think in a manner that flies in the face of many cognitive biases. Fixedness is not often a characteristic of creativity, so those who practice it may not showcase as much functional fixedness. Testing someone's sensitivity to functional fixedness bias is often done in psychological settings to measure creativity and cognitive flexibility.

Creativity and money

In the 1960s, Canadian Professor of Psychology, Sam Glucksberg, repeated Duncker's Candle Problem experiment. This time, however, he incentivized it with money. His findings were that monetizing the outcome hampered a person’s ability to creatively solve the problem, and he thus concluded that money does not help avoid functional fixedness but actually stifles creativity. 

This notion was tested again in 2013 by Ramm and Torsvik , both in individuals and groups, but the researchers could not replicate Glucksberg's findings. Instead, they found that "…providing monetary rewards leaves performance unaltered. This is also somewhat surprising, at least for those who think monetary incentives always induce individuals to work harder and smarter."

Whether money hampers or does not affect creativity, both studies indicate that it does not improve or motivate creativity, which can be motivated by other factors. Money simply cannot provide a mental shortcut to increased creativity.

Addressing functional fixedness in therapy

Functional fixedness and other cognitive biases are not psychological conditions that require therapeutic intervention. Overcoming functional fixedness and cognitive bias isn’t typically a goal you might set for your treatment. However, therapists may have creative solutions to common mental health symptoms and daily stressors. If you're unsure where to turn in your life or how to solve problems effectively, consider enlisting assistance from a board-certified therapist. 

Although therapy has been traditionally carried out in an office environment, the functional fixedness of counseling is now changing. More individuals are trying online counseling as a creative form of therapy. A Berkeley study demonstrated that online therapy is a viable alternative to face-to-face counseling and is often as effective as traditional methods. In this study, participants reported a significant reduction in symptoms of depression. People who feel stuck in a depressive state may find value in working with a therapist, who may be able to help them come up with a creative solution to their mental health challenges.

In addition to its effectiveness, online therapy provides benefits that in-person therapy may not. Online therapy is often more affordable than in-person therapy, and online therapy grants a level of convenience, as you can meet from a location that suits you. This may help you overcome any reservations you hold about attending therapy.

Thanks to researchers like Duncker, we may better understand why some individuals struggle to envision innovative solutions to enduring problems. At times, a new perspective can help enlighten us to a helpful idea. If you're hoping to gain a new perspective from a professional, consider reaching out to a mental health provider for support.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is an example of overcoming functional fixedness? When can functional fixedness occur? What is functional and mental set fixedness? What is a real life example of functionalism in psychology? What is an example of structural fixedness? How does functional fixedness affect our thinking? What is functional fixedness in men? What is the difference between functional fixedness and fixation? Where did functional fixedness come from? What is an example of a functional disorder? How does functionalism explain human behavior? What is the opposite of functional fixedness? How do you test functional fixedness? Is functional fixedness a barrier to problem solving? What is fixation in thinking?

• What Is Habituation In Psychology, And What Does It Signify? Medically reviewed by Laura Angers Maddox , NCC, LPC
• What To Know About The APA Ethics Code Medically reviewed by Paige Henry , LMSW, J.D.
• Psychologists
• Relationships and Relations

7.3 Problem-Solving

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Describe problem solving strategies
• Define algorithm and heuristic
• Explain some common roadblocks to effective problem solving

   People face problems every day—usually, multiple problems throughout the day. Sometimes these problems are straightforward: To double a recipe for pizza dough, for example, all that is required is that each ingredient in the recipe be doubled. Sometimes, however, the problems we encounter are more complex. For example, say you have a work deadline, and you must mail a printed copy of a report to your supervisor by the end of the business day. The report is time-sensitive and must be sent overnight. You finished the report last night, but your printer will not work today. What should you do? First, you need to identify the problem and then apply a strategy for solving the problem.

The study of human and animal problem solving processes has provided much insight toward the understanding of our conscious experience and led to advancements in computer science and artificial intelligence. Essentially much of cognitive science today represents studies of how we consciously and unconsciously make decisions and solve problems. For instance, when encountered with a large amount of information, how do we go about making decisions about the most efficient way of sorting and analyzing all the information in order to find what you are looking for as in visual search paradigms in cognitive psychology. Or in a situation where a piece of machinery is not working properly, how do we go about organizing how to address the issue and understand what the cause of the problem might be. How do we sort the procedures that will be needed and focus attention on what is important in order to solve problems efficiently. Within this section we will discuss some of these issues and examine processes related to human, animal and computer problem solving.

PROBLEM-SOLVING STRATEGIES

   When people are presented with a problem—whether it is a complex mathematical problem or a broken printer, how do you solve it? Before finding a solution to the problem, the problem must first be clearly identified. After that, one of many problem solving strategies can be applied, hopefully resulting in a solution.

Problems themselves can be classified into two different categories known as ill-defined and well-defined problems (Schacter, 2009). Ill-defined problems represent issues that do not have clear goals, solution paths, or expected solutions whereas well-defined problems have specific goals, clearly defined solutions, and clear expected solutions. Problem solving often incorporates pragmatics (logical reasoning) and semantics (interpretation of meanings behind the problem), and also in many cases require abstract thinking and creativity in order to find novel solutions. Within psychology, problem solving refers to a motivational drive for reading a definite “goal” from a present situation or condition that is either not moving toward that goal, is distant from it, or requires more complex logical analysis for finding a missing description of conditions or steps toward that goal. Processes relating to problem solving include problem finding also known as problem analysis, problem shaping where the organization of the problem occurs, generating alternative strategies, implementation of attempted solutions, and verification of the selected solution. Various methods of studying problem solving exist within the field of psychology including introspection, behavior analysis and behaviorism, simulation, computer modeling, and experimentation.

A problem-solving strategy is a plan of action used to find a solution. Different strategies have different action plans associated with them (table below). For example, a well-known strategy is trial and error. The old adage, “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again” describes trial and error. In terms of your broken printer, you could try checking the ink levels, and if that doesn’t work, you could check to make sure the paper tray isn’t jammed. Or maybe the printer isn’t actually connected to your laptop. When using trial and error, you would continue to try different solutions until you solved your problem. Although trial and error is not typically one of the most time-efficient strategies, it is a commonly used one.

   Another type of strategy is an algorithm. An algorithm is a problem-solving formula that provides you with step-by-step instructions used to achieve a desired outcome (Kahneman, 2011). You can think of an algorithm as a recipe with highly detailed instructions that produce the same result every time they are performed. Algorithms are used frequently in our everyday lives, especially in computer science. When you run a search on the Internet, search engines like Google use algorithms to decide which entries will appear first in your list of results. Facebook also uses algorithms to decide which posts to display on your newsfeed. Can you identify other situations in which algorithms are used?

A heuristic is another type of problem solving strategy. While an algorithm must be followed exactly to produce a correct result, a heuristic is a general problem-solving framework (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). You can think of these as mental shortcuts that are used to solve problems. A “rule of thumb” is an example of a heuristic. Such a rule saves the person time and energy when making a decision, but despite its time-saving characteristics, it is not always the best method for making a rational decision. Different types of heuristics are used in different types of situations, but the impulse to use a heuristic occurs when one of five conditions is met (Pratkanis, 1989):

• When one is faced with too much information
• When the time to make a decision is limited
• When the decision to be made is unimportant
• When there is access to very little information to use in making the decision
• When an appropriate heuristic happens to come to mind in the same moment

Working backwards is a useful heuristic in which you begin solving the problem by focusing on the end result. Consider this example: You live in Washington, D.C. and have been invited to a wedding at 4 PM on Saturday in Philadelphia. Knowing that Interstate 95 tends to back up any day of the week, you need to plan your route and time your departure accordingly. If you want to be at the wedding service by 3:30 PM, and it takes 2.5 hours to get to Philadelphia without traffic, what time should you leave your house? You use the working backwards heuristic to plan the events of your day on a regular basis, probably without even thinking about it.

Another useful heuristic is the practice of accomplishing a large goal or task by breaking it into a series of smaller steps. Students often use this common method to complete a large research project or long essay for school. For example, students typically brainstorm, develop a thesis or main topic, research the chosen topic, organize their information into an outline, write a rough draft, revise and edit the rough draft, develop a final draft, organize the references list, and proofread their work before turning in the project. The large task becomes less overwhelming when it is broken down into a series of small steps.

Further problem solving strategies have been identified (listed below) that incorporate flexible and creative thinking in order to reach solutions efficiently.

Additional Problem Solving Strategies :

• Abstraction – refers to solving the problem within a model of the situation before applying it to reality.
• Analogy – is using a solution that solves a similar problem.
• Brainstorming – refers to collecting an analyzing a large amount of solutions, especially within a group of people, to combine the solutions and developing them until an optimal solution is reached.
• Divide and conquer – breaking down large complex problems into smaller more manageable problems.
• Hypothesis testing – method used in experimentation where an assumption about what would happen in response to manipulating an independent variable is made, and analysis of the affects of the manipulation are made and compared to the original hypothesis.
• Lateral thinking – approaching problems indirectly and creatively by viewing the problem in a new and unusual light.
• Means-ends analysis – choosing and analyzing an action at a series of smaller steps to move closer to the goal.
• Method of focal objects – putting seemingly non-matching characteristics of different procedures together to make something new that will get you closer to the goal.
• Morphological analysis – analyzing the outputs of and interactions of many pieces that together make up a whole system.
• Proof – trying to prove that a problem cannot be solved. Where the proof fails becomes the starting point or solving the problem.
• Reduction – adapting the problem to be as similar problems where a solution exists.
• Research – using existing knowledge or solutions to similar problems to solve the problem.
• Root cause analysis – trying to identify the cause of the problem.

The strategies listed above outline a short summary of methods we use in working toward solutions and also demonstrate how the mind works when being faced with barriers preventing goals to be reached.

One example of means-end analysis can be found by using the Tower of Hanoi paradigm . This paradigm can be modeled as a word problems as demonstrated by the Missionary-Cannibal Problem :

Missionary-Cannibal Problem

Three missionaries and three cannibals are on one side of a river and need to cross to the other side. The only means of crossing is a boat, and the boat can only hold two people at a time. Your goal is to devise a set of moves that will transport all six of the people across the river, being in mind the following constraint: The number of cannibals can never exceed the number of missionaries in any location. Remember that someone will have to also row that boat back across each time.

Hint : At one point in your solution, you will have to send more people back to the original side than you just sent to the destination.

The actual Tower of Hanoi problem consists of three rods sitting vertically on a base with a number of disks of different sizes that can slide onto any rod. The puzzle starts with the disks in a neat stack in ascending order of size on one rod, the smallest at the top making a conical shape. The objective of the puzzle is to move the entire stack to another rod obeying the following rules:

• 1. Only one disk can be moved at a time.
• 2. Each move consists of taking the upper disk from one of the stacks and placing it on top of another stack or on an empty rod.
• 3. No disc may be placed on top of a smaller disk.

  Figure 7.02. Steps for solving the Tower of Hanoi in the minimum number of moves when there are 3 disks.

Figure 7.03. Graphical representation of nodes (circles) and moves (lines) of Tower of Hanoi.

The Tower of Hanoi is a frequently used psychological technique to study problem solving and procedure analysis. A variation of the Tower of Hanoi known as the Tower of London has been developed which has been an important tool in the neuropsychological diagnosis of executive function disorders and their treatment.

GESTALT PSYCHOLOGY AND PROBLEM SOLVING

As you may recall from the sensation and perception chapter, Gestalt psychology describes whole patterns, forms and configurations of perception and cognition such as closure, good continuation, and figure-ground. In addition to patterns of perception, Wolfgang Kohler, a German Gestalt psychologist traveled to the Spanish island of Tenerife in order to study animals behavior and problem solving in the anthropoid ape.

As an interesting side note to Kohler’s studies of chimp problem solving, Dr. Ronald Ley, professor of psychology at State University of New York provides evidence in his book A Whisper of Espionage  (1990) suggesting that while collecting data for what would later be his book  The Mentality of Apes (1925) on Tenerife in the Canary Islands between 1914 and 1920, Kohler was additionally an active spy for the German government alerting Germany to ships that were sailing around the Canary Islands. Ley suggests his investigations in England, Germany and elsewhere in Europe confirm that Kohler had served in the German military by building, maintaining and operating a concealed radio that contributed to Germany’s war effort acting as a strategic outpost in the Canary Islands that could monitor naval military activity approaching the north African coast.

While trapped on the island over the course of World War 1, Kohler applied Gestalt principles to animal perception in order to understand how they solve problems. He recognized that the apes on the islands also perceive relations between stimuli and the environment in Gestalt patterns and understand these patterns as wholes as opposed to pieces that make up a whole. Kohler based his theories of animal intelligence on the ability to understand relations between stimuli, and spent much of his time while trapped on the island investigation what he described as  insight , the sudden perception of useful or proper relations. In order to study insight in animals, Kohler would present problems to chimpanzee’s by hanging some banana’s or some kind of food so it was suspended higher than the apes could reach. Within the room, Kohler would arrange a variety of boxes, sticks or other tools the chimpanzees could use by combining in patterns or organizing in a way that would allow them to obtain the food (Kohler & Winter, 1925).

While viewing the chimpanzee’s, Kohler noticed one chimp that was more efficient at solving problems than some of the others. The chimp, named Sultan, was able to use long poles to reach through bars and organize objects in specific patterns to obtain food or other desirables that were originally out of reach. In order to study insight within these chimps, Kohler would remove objects from the room to systematically make the food more difficult to obtain. As the story goes, after removing many of the objects Sultan was used to using to obtain the food, he sat down ad sulked for a while, and then suddenly got up going over to two poles lying on the ground. Without hesitation Sultan put one pole inside the end of the other creating a longer pole that he could use to obtain the food demonstrating an ideal example of what Kohler described as insight. In another situation, Sultan discovered how to stand on a box to reach a banana that was suspended from the rafters illustrating Sultan’s perception of relations and the importance of insight in problem solving.

Grande (another chimp in the group studied by Kohler) builds a three-box structure to reach the bananas, while Sultan watches from the ground.  Insight , sometimes referred to as an “Ah-ha” experience, was the term Kohler used for the sudden perception of useful relations among objects during problem solving (Kohler, 1927; Radvansky & Ashcraft, 2013).

Solving puzzles.

   Problem-solving abilities can improve with practice. Many people challenge themselves every day with puzzles and other mental exercises to sharpen their problem-solving skills. Sudoku puzzles appear daily in most newspapers. Typically, a sudoku puzzle is a 9×9 grid. The simple sudoku below (see figure) is a 4×4 grid. To solve the puzzle, fill in the empty boxes with a single digit: 1, 2, 3, or 4. Here are the rules: The numbers must total 10 in each bolded box, each row, and each column; however, each digit can only appear once in a bolded box, row, and column. Time yourself as you solve this puzzle and compare your time with a classmate.

How long did it take you to solve this sudoku puzzle? (You can see the answer at the end of this section.)

   Here is another popular type of puzzle (figure below) that challenges your spatial reasoning skills. Connect all nine dots with four connecting straight lines without lifting your pencil from the paper:

Did you figure it out? (The answer is at the end of this section.) Once you understand how to crack this puzzle, you won’t forget.

   Take a look at the “Puzzling Scales” logic puzzle below (figure below). Sam Loyd, a well-known puzzle master, created and refined countless puzzles throughout his lifetime (Cyclopedia of Puzzles, n.d.).

What steps did you take to solve this puzzle? You can read the solution at the end of this section.

Pitfalls to problem solving.

   Not all problems are successfully solved, however. What challenges stop us from successfully solving a problem? Albert Einstein once said, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.” Imagine a person in a room that has four doorways. One doorway that has always been open in the past is now locked. The person, accustomed to exiting the room by that particular doorway, keeps trying to get out through the same doorway even though the other three doorways are open. The person is stuck—but she just needs to go to another doorway, instead of trying to get out through the locked doorway. A mental set is where you persist in approaching a problem in a way that has worked in the past but is clearly not working now.

Functional fixedness is a type of mental set where you cannot perceive an object being used for something other than what it was designed for. During the Apollo 13 mission to the moon, NASA engineers at Mission Control had to overcome functional fixedness to save the lives of the astronauts aboard the spacecraft. An explosion in a module of the spacecraft damaged multiple systems. The astronauts were in danger of being poisoned by rising levels of carbon dioxide because of problems with the carbon dioxide filters. The engineers found a way for the astronauts to use spare plastic bags, tape, and air hoses to create a makeshift air filter, which saved the lives of the astronauts.

   Researchers have investigated whether functional fixedness is affected by culture. In one experiment, individuals from the Shuar group in Ecuador were asked to use an object for a purpose other than that for which the object was originally intended. For example, the participants were told a story about a bear and a rabbit that were separated by a river and asked to select among various objects, including a spoon, a cup, erasers, and so on, to help the animals. The spoon was the only object long enough to span the imaginary river, but if the spoon was presented in a way that reflected its normal usage, it took participants longer to choose the spoon to solve the problem. (German & Barrett, 2005). The researchers wanted to know if exposure to highly specialized tools, as occurs with individuals in industrialized nations, affects their ability to transcend functional fixedness. It was determined that functional fixedness is experienced in both industrialized and nonindustrialized cultures (German & Barrett, 2005).

In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. Sometimes, however, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the $2,000 home? Why would the realtor show you the run-down houses and the nice house? The realtor may be challenging your anchoring bias. An anchoring bias occurs when you focus on one piece of information when making a decision or solving a problem. In this case, you’re so focused on the amount of money you are willing to spend that you may not recognize what kinds of houses are available at that price point.

The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms your existing beliefs. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Representative bias describes a faulty way of thinking, in which you unintentionally stereotype someone or something; for example, you may assume that your professors spend their free time reading books and engaging in intellectual conversation, because the idea of them spending their time playing volleyball or visiting an amusement park does not fit in with your stereotypes of professors.

Finally, the availability heuristic is a heuristic in which you make a decision based on an example, information, or recent experience that is that readily available to you, even though it may not be the best example to inform your decision . Biases tend to “preserve that which is already established—to maintain our preexisting knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and hypotheses” (Aronson, 1995; Kahneman, 2011). These biases are summarized in the table below.

Were you able to determine how many marbles are needed to balance the scales in the figure below? You need nine. Were you able to solve the problems in the figures above? Here are the answers.

   Many different strategies exist for solving problems. Typical strategies include trial and error, applying algorithms, and using heuristics. To solve a large, complicated problem, it often helps to break the problem into smaller steps that can be accomplished individually, leading to an overall solution. Roadblocks to problem solving include a mental set, functional fixedness, and various biases that can cloud decision making skills.

References:

Openstax Psychology text by Kathryn Dumper, William Jenkins, Arlene Lacombe, Marilyn Lovett and Marion Perlmutter licensed under CC BY v4.0. https://openstax.org/details/books/psychology

Review Questions:

1. A specific formula for solving a problem is called ________.

a. an algorithm

b. a heuristic

c. a mental set

d. trial and error

2. Solving the Tower of Hanoi problem tends to utilize a  ________ strategy of problem solving.

a. divide and conquer

b. means-end analysis

d. experiment

3. A mental shortcut in the form of a general problem-solving framework is called ________.

4. Which type of bias involves becoming fixated on a single trait of a problem?

a. anchoring bias

b. confirmation bias

c. representative bias

d. availability bias

5. Which type of bias involves relying on a false stereotype to make a decision?

6. Wolfgang Kohler analyzed behavior of chimpanzees by applying Gestalt principles to describe ________.

a. social adjustment

b. student load payment options

c. emotional learning

d. insight learning

7. ________ is a type of mental set where you cannot perceive an object being used for something other than what it was designed for.

a. functional fixedness

c. working memory

Critical Thinking Questions:

1. What is functional fixedness and how can overcoming it help you solve problems?

2. How does an algorithm save you time and energy when solving a problem?

Personal Application Question:

1. Which type of bias do you recognize in your own decision making processes? How has this bias affected how you’ve made decisions in the past and how can you use your awareness of it to improve your decisions making skills in the future?

anchoring bias

availability heuristic

confirmation bias

functional fixedness

hindsight bias

problem-solving strategy

representative bias

trial and error

working backwards

Answers to Exercises

algorithm:  problem-solving strategy characterized by a specific set of instructions

anchoring bias:  faulty heuristic in which you fixate on a single aspect of a problem to find a solution

availability heuristic:  faulty heuristic in which you make a decision based on information readily available to you

confirmation bias:  faulty heuristic in which you focus on information that confirms your beliefs

functional fixedness:  inability to see an object as useful for any other use other than the one for which it was intended

heuristic:  mental shortcut that saves time when solving a problem

hindsight bias:  belief that the event just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t

mental set:  continually using an old solution to a problem without results

problem-solving strategy:  method for solving problems

representative bias:  faulty heuristic in which you stereotype someone or something without a valid basis for your judgment

trial and error:  problem-solving strategy in which multiple solutions are attempted until the correct one is found

working backwards:  heuristic in which you begin to solve a problem by focusing on the end result

Share This Book

• Increase Font Size

7.3 Problem Solving

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Describe problem solving strategies
• Define algorithm and heuristic
• Explain some common roadblocks to effective problem solving and decision making

People face problems every day—usually, multiple problems throughout the day. Sometimes these problems are straightforward: To double a recipe for pizza dough, for example, all that is required is that each ingredient in the recipe be doubled. Sometimes, however, the problems we encounter are more complex. For example, say you have a work deadline, and you must mail a printed copy of a report to your supervisor by the end of the business day. The report is time-sensitive and must be sent overnight. You finished the report last night, but your printer will not work today. What should you do? First, you need to identify the problem and then apply a strategy for solving the problem.

Problem-Solving Strategies

When you are presented with a problem—whether it is a complex mathematical problem or a broken printer, how do you solve it? Before finding a solution to the problem, the problem must first be clearly identified. After that, one of many problem solving strategies can be applied, hopefully resulting in a solution.

A problem-solving strategy is a plan of action used to find a solution. Different strategies have different action plans associated with them ( Table 7.2 ). For example, a well-known strategy is trial and error . The old adage, “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again” describes trial and error. In terms of your broken printer, you could try checking the ink levels, and if that doesn’t work, you could check to make sure the paper tray isn’t jammed. Or maybe the printer isn’t actually connected to your laptop. When using trial and error, you would continue to try different solutions until you solved your problem. Although trial and error is not typically one of the most time-efficient strategies, it is a commonly used one.

Another type of strategy is an algorithm. An algorithm is a problem-solving formula that provides you with step-by-step instructions used to achieve a desired outcome (Kahneman, 2011). You can think of an algorithm as a recipe with highly detailed instructions that produce the same result every time they are performed. Algorithms are used frequently in our everyday lives, especially in computer science. When you run a search on the Internet, search engines like Google use algorithms to decide which entries will appear first in your list of results. Facebook also uses algorithms to decide which posts to display on your newsfeed. Can you identify other situations in which algorithms are used?

A heuristic is another type of problem solving strategy. While an algorithm must be followed exactly to produce a correct result, a heuristic is a general problem-solving framework (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). You can think of these as mental shortcuts that are used to solve problems. A “rule of thumb” is an example of a heuristic. Such a rule saves the person time and energy when making a decision, but despite its time-saving characteristics, it is not always the best method for making a rational decision. Different types of heuristics are used in different types of situations, but the impulse to use a heuristic occurs when one of five conditions is met (Pratkanis, 1989):

• When one is faced with too much information
• When the time to make a decision is limited
• When the decision to be made is unimportant
• When there is access to very little information to use in making the decision
• When an appropriate heuristic happens to come to mind in the same moment

Working backwards is a useful heuristic in which you begin solving the problem by focusing on the end result. Consider this example: You live in Washington, D.C. and have been invited to a wedding at 4 PM on Saturday in Philadelphia. Knowing that Interstate 95 tends to back up any day of the week, you need to plan your route and time your departure accordingly. If you want to be at the wedding service by 3:30 PM, and it takes 2.5 hours to get to Philadelphia without traffic, what time should you leave your house? You use the working backwards heuristic to plan the events of your day on a regular basis, probably without even thinking about it.

Another useful heuristic is the practice of accomplishing a large goal or task by breaking it into a series of smaller steps. Students often use this common method to complete a large research project or long essay for school. For example, students typically brainstorm, develop a thesis or main topic, research the chosen topic, organize their information into an outline, write a rough draft, revise and edit the rough draft, develop a final draft, organize the references list, and proofread their work before turning in the project. The large task becomes less overwhelming when it is broken down into a series of small steps.

Everyday Connection

Solving puzzles.

Problem-solving abilities can improve with practice. Many people challenge themselves every day with puzzles and other mental exercises to sharpen their problem-solving skills. Sudoku puzzles appear daily in most newspapers. Typically, a sudoku puzzle is a 9×9 grid. The simple sudoku below ( Figure 7.7 ) is a 4×4 grid. To solve the puzzle, fill in the empty boxes with a single digit: 1, 2, 3, or 4. Here are the rules: The numbers must total 10 in each bolded box, each row, and each column; however, each digit can only appear once in a bolded box, row, and column. Time yourself as you solve this puzzle and compare your time with a classmate.

Here is another popular type of puzzle ( Figure 7.8 ) that challenges your spatial reasoning skills. Connect all nine dots with four connecting straight lines without lifting your pencil from the paper:

Take a look at the “Puzzling Scales” logic puzzle below ( Figure 7.9 ). Sam Loyd, a well-known puzzle master, created and refined countless puzzles throughout his lifetime (Cyclopedia of Puzzles, n.d.).

Pitfalls to Problem Solving

Not all problems are successfully solved, however. What challenges stop us from successfully solving a problem? Imagine a person in a room that has four doorways. One doorway that has always been open in the past is now locked. The person, accustomed to exiting the room by that particular doorway, keeps trying to get out through the same doorway even though the other three doorways are open. The person is stuck—but they just need to go to another doorway, instead of trying to get out through the locked doorway. A mental set is where you persist in approaching a problem in a way that has worked in the past but is clearly not working now.

Functional fixedness is a type of mental set where you cannot perceive an object being used for something other than what it was designed for. Duncker (1945) conducted foundational research on functional fixedness. He created an experiment in which participants were given a candle, a book of matches, and a box of thumbtacks. They were instructed to use those items to attach the candle to the wall so that it did not drip wax onto the table below. Participants had to use functional fixedness to overcome the problem ( Figure 7.10 ). During the Apollo 13 mission to the moon, NASA engineers at Mission Control had to overcome functional fixedness to save the lives of the astronauts aboard the spacecraft. An explosion in a module of the spacecraft damaged multiple systems. The astronauts were in danger of being poisoned by rising levels of carbon dioxide because of problems with the carbon dioxide filters. The engineers found a way for the astronauts to use spare plastic bags, tape, and air hoses to create a makeshift air filter, which saved the lives of the astronauts.

Link to Learning

Check out this Apollo 13 scene about NASA engineers overcoming functional fixedness to learn more.

Researchers have investigated whether functional fixedness is affected by culture. In one experiment, individuals from the Shuar group in Ecuador were asked to use an object for a purpose other than that for which the object was originally intended. For example, the participants were told a story about a bear and a rabbit that were separated by a river and asked to select among various objects, including a spoon, a cup, erasers, and so on, to help the animals. The spoon was the only object long enough to span the imaginary river, but if the spoon was presented in a way that reflected its normal usage, it took participants longer to choose the spoon to solve the problem. (German & Barrett, 2005). The researchers wanted to know if exposure to highly specialized tools, as occurs with individuals in industrialized nations, affects their ability to transcend functional fixedness. It was determined that functional fixedness is experienced in both industrialized and nonindustrialized cultures (German & Barrett, 2005).

In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. Sometimes, however, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the $2,000 home? Why would the realtor show you the run-down houses and the nice house? The realtor may be challenging your anchoring bias. An anchoring bias occurs when you focus on one piece of information when making a decision or solving a problem. In this case, you’re so focused on the amount of money you are willing to spend that you may not recognize what kinds of houses are available at that price point.

The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms your existing beliefs. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Representative bias describes a faulty way of thinking, in which you unintentionally stereotype someone or something; for example, you may assume that your professors spend their free time reading books and engaging in intellectual conversation, because the idea of them spending their time playing volleyball or visiting an amusement park does not fit in with your stereotypes of professors.

Finally, the availability heuristic is a heuristic in which you make a decision based on an example, information, or recent experience that is that readily available to you, even though it may not be the best example to inform your decision . Biases tend to “preserve that which is already established—to maintain our preexisting knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and hypotheses” (Aronson, 1995; Kahneman, 2011). These biases are summarized in Table 7.3 .

Watch this teacher-made music video about cognitive biases to learn more.

Were you able to determine how many marbles are needed to balance the scales in Figure 7.9 ? You need nine. Were you able to solve the problems in Figure 7.7 and Figure 7.8 ? Here are the answers ( Figure 7.11 ).

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Rose M. Spielman, William J. Jenkins, Marilyn D. Lovett
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Psychology 2e
• Publication date: Apr 22, 2020
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/7-3-problem-solving

© Jan 6, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

ScienceBeta

Functional Fixedness: Breaking Mental Models to Enhance Problem Solving

Functional fixedness is a cognitive bias that limits a person’s ability to use objects only in the way they are traditionally used. Discovered by psychologist Karl Duncker, it represents the mental shortcuts that often prevent individuals from seeing potential innovative uses for common items.

Functional fixedness hinders problem-solving because it restricts awareness to an item’s most familiar function. Understanding functional fixedness aids in creatively developing innovative solutions.

Methods to reduce functional fixedness involve:

• Challenging assumptions about the usage of objects
• Increasing awareness of one’s own cognitive biases
• Practicing divergent thinking to broaden potential functions

Examples of Functional Fixedness

This phenomenon, although it can often be a useful heuristic saving us time on simple tasks, can impede more complex problem-solving and creativity by hindering the ability to see alternative uses for familiar items.

Common Examples

Hammer:  Traditionally used for driving nails into wood or other materials, a hammer can also serve as an impromptu paperweight or a tool for breaking ice, illustrating how its common use can overshadow potential alternative uses.

Candle-holder:  While designed to hold candles, candle-holders can also be utilized as decorative plant pots or holders for art supplies, showing that items often have utility beyond their common use.

Book of Matches:  Generally used for lighting fires, a book of matches can double as a makeshift notepad or a tool for leveling tables by placing matchsticks under uneven legs.

The Two-cords Problem

In 1951, Birch and Rabinowitz adopted Norman Maier’s (1930, 1931) two-cord problem, in which respondents were given two cords hanging from the ceiling and two heavy objects in the room. They are instructed to join the cords, but they are so far apart that one cannot readily reach the other.

The idea was to attach one of the heavy things to a cord and use it as a weight, swing the cord like a pendulum, catch the rope as it swung while holding on to the other rope, and then knot them together. The participants are divided into three groups: Group R, which completes a pretask of completing an electrical circuit with a relay, Group S, which completes the circuit with a switch, and Group C, which receives no pretest experience.

Participants in Group R were more likely to use the switch as the weight, whereas those in Group S were more likely to utilize the relay. Both groups did so because their prior experience had taught them to use the objects in a specific way, and functional fixedness prevented them from seeing the objects as being used for a different purpose.

Barometer Question

The barometer question is an example of a poorly conceived examination question that demonstrates functional fixedness and puts the examiner in a moral bind. The classic form of the question, popularized by American test designer professor Alexander Calandra, requested the student to “show how it is possible to determine the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer?”

The examiner was certain that there was just one correct response. Contrary to the examiner’s expectations, the student provided a succession of radically diverse responses. These responses were also correct, but none of them demonstrated the student’s proficiency in the academic field being tested.

Calandra presented the incident as a real-life, first-person experience that occurred during the Sputnik crisis. Calandra’s essay, “Angels on a Pin”, was published in 1959 in Pride, a magazine of the American College Public Relations Association.

Influence of Age and Experience

In young children, problem-solving skills are in the early stages of development. They tend to view objects in a variety of ways, which can lead to less functional fixedness.

Studies demonstrate that 5-year-old children are more likely to find innovative ways to use an object, as their knowledge base is less rigidly defined compared to adults. An interesting research pointed out that age is a determinant in avoiding functional fixedness, noting that as children grow, there is an increased likelihood of applying objects in traditional manners due to the accumulation of knowledge.

Changes Over Lifespan

As individuals age, their wealth of experience often translates into a double-edged sword when it comes to functional fixedness. On one side, prior knowledge can streamline problem-solving processes, allowing for efficient utilization of common objects in their typical roles.

Conversely, this same knowledge can inhibit creative thinking, making it more challenging to perceive alternative uses for familiar items. The balance between experience-induced proficiency and creativity can shift at various stages throughout the lifespan, suggesting a complex interaction between age-related cognitive development and functional fixedness.

Cultural Experience

Scholars have also conducted investigations to determine whether culture has an impact on this bias. One recent study found preliminary evidence supporting the universality of functional fixedness.

The study’s goal was to see if people from non-industrialized countries, notably those who had little exposure to “high-tech” objects, exhibited functional fixedness. The Shuar, hunter-horticulturalists from Ecuador’s Amazon region, were evaluated and compared to a control group from an industrial civilization.

The Shuar community had only been exposed to a small number of “low-tech” industrialized artifacts, such as machetes, axes, cooking pots, nails, shotguns, and fishhooks. Two tasks were devised for the experiments.

• The box task, in which participants had to build a tower to help a character from a fictional storyline reach another character with a limited set of varied materials
• The spoon task, in which participants were also given a problem to solve based on a fictional story of a rabbit who had to cross a river (materials were used to represent settings) and they were given a spoon.

In the box-task, participants were slower to select the materials than participants in control conditions, but no difference in time to solve the problem was seen. In the spoon task, participants were slower in selection and completion of task.

Individuals from non-industrial (“technologically sparse cultures”) were found to be vulnerable to functional fixedness. They used items without priming faster than when the design function was communicated to them.

This occurred despite the fact that participants had less exposure to industrialized made artifacts and that the few artifacts they currently use were used in a variety of ways regardless of their design.

Methods to Overcome Functional Fixedness

Cognitive flexibility refers to the ability to adjust one’s thinking and adapt to new, unexpected situations. To enhance cognitive flexibility , one can engage in activities that challenge the brain’s existing patterns. This can include puzzles that require considering objects in unconventional ways, or brainstorming sessions that focus on the generation of alternative solutions. Research suggests that pushing beyond traditional uses of an object can reduce functional fixedness, as mentioned in a study on meaning training.

To promote cognitive flexibility:

• Uncommitting from previous ideas: Encourage the consideration of new, unfamiliar methods instead of relying on tried and tested solutions.
• Divergent Thinking: Implement unconventional uses for everyday objects to break away from their typical functions.

Promoting Divergent Thinking

This is a thought process used to break through mental blocks and generate creative ideas by exploring many possible solutions. To foster atypical thinking, individuals can undertake exercises that promote ideation without immediate judgment or restraint.

Techniques such as free writing, mind mapping, or the brainstorming method called “worst possible idea” can help deter the fixation brought on by functional fixedness. Encouraging the pursuit of novelty and diversity in thought opens up the potential for multiple viable solutions to emerge, addressing the functional fixedness issue highlighted in relation to the survival-processing paradigm.

Strategies include:

• Open brainstorming sessions: Allocate time specifically for free-form idea generation, where all suggestions are considered without criticism.
• Encouraging ‘what if’ scenarios: Regularly practicing to think about different scenarios where objects can have alternative functions or uses.

Uncommiting

In a 1996 study, computer scientists Larry Latour and Liesbeth Dusink suggested that functional fixedness can be combated by design decisions from functionally fixed designs that preserve the essence of the design. As an alternative to relying on the fixed solution for a particular design problem, this enables the students who have developed functionally fixed designs to comprehend how to approach resolving general problems of this nature.

Latour performed an experiment researching this by having software engineers analyze a fairly standard bit of code — the quicksort algorithm — and use it to create a partitioning function. Part of the quicksort algorithm involves partitioning a list into subsets so that it can be sorted; the experimenters wanted to use the code from within the algorithm to just do the partitioning.

To accomplish this, they abstracted each block of code in the function, determining its purpose and determining if it is required for the partitioning process. They were able to borrow the code from the quicksort method to develop a workable partition algorithm without having to reinvent the wheel.

Overcoming Prototypes

A thorough investigation of various traditional functional fixedness tests revealed an overarching theme of overcoming prototypes. Those who completed the tasks successfully demonstrated the ability to see beyond the prototype, or the initial intention for the object in use.

Those who were unable to produce a successful finished product were unable to progress beyond the item’s initial use. This appeared to be the case in investigations of functional fixedness categorization as well.

Reorganization into categories of seemingly unrelated items was easier for those that could look beyond intended function. Therefore, there is a need to overcome the prototype in order to avoid functional fixedness.

Peter Carnevale,, in his 1998 paper, suggests analyzing the object and mentally breaking it down into its components. After that is completed, it is essential to explore the possible functions of those parts.

As a result, an individual may become acquainted with new methods to use the objects provided to them at the givens. Individuals are thus thinking imaginatively and overcoming the prototypes that limit their capacity to accomplish the functional fixedness problem successfully.

References:

• Adamson, R.E. (1952). Functional Fixedness as related to problem solving: A repetition of three experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44, 288-291
• Birch, H.G., & Rabinowitz, H.S. (1951). The negative effect of previous experience on productive thinking . Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41, 121-125
• Calandra, Alexander (1959) Angels on a Pin. American College Public Relations Association.
• Carnevale, Peter J. (1998). Social Values and Social Conflict Creative Problem Solving and Categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1300
• Duncker, K. (1945). On problem solving. Psychological Monographs, 58:5
• Dusink, Liesbeth; Latour, Larry. (1996) Controlling functional fixedness: the essence of successful reuse . Know.-Based Syst. 9, 2, 137–143
• German, T.P., & Defeyter, M.A. (2000). Immunity to functional fixedness in young children. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7(4), 707-712
• Kroneisen, M., Kriechbaumer, M., Kamp, SM. et al. (2021) How can I use it? The role of functional fixedness in the survival-processing paradigm. Psychon Bull Rev 28, 324–332
• Mayer, R. E. (1992). Thinking, Problem Solving, Cognition. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company

Last Updated on March 4, 2024

Psych 256: Cognitive Psychology FA17, 001

Making connections between theory and reality., mental set and functional fixedness.

Throughout my many years of schooling, starting with grade school all the way to current day, I have been plagued with the inability to easily solve problems. Be it math problems or logical puzzles. During this week’s lesson on problem solving I learned that this is most likely due to a factor known as mental set.

Mental set prevents a person from being able to solve a problem due to them using previously known strategies and procedures while viewing the problem at hand. When an individual adds limitations or assumes that there are rules to solving a problem that were not actually set, this causes the person to have difficulties with solving said problem.

Mental set is tied in with another major obstacle to solving problems, when a person is presented a problem they may focus primarily on a specific portion of the problem. By doing this they are unable to arrive at a solution. This is known as fixation, along with fixation there is a specific type of mental set that involves limiting the use of an object to only its known function is called functional fixedness.

Gestalt psychology the first groups of psychological study to build the concept of functional fixedness. They performed numerous experiments to study how people reacted to problem solving and how mental set took play in solving the task at hand. One of the experiments described in our text book, Cognitive Psychology, Connecting Mind, Research, and Everyday Experience written by E. Bruce Goldstein describes the “two-string problem” participants in the experiment were asked to tie two strings together that were hanging down from the ceiling.  For this experiment they were provided a chair and a pair of pliers. This task was difficult because participants could not reach the two strings in order to tie them together. Most of the participants did not use the objects given to them to aid in solving the problem, which they needed to do. They needed to tie the pliers to one string and swing it like a pendulum in order to be able to reach it while holding onto the other string.

This example shows how a person who experiences mental set and or functional fixedness can be hinder when presented a rather easy problem. I believe in order to offset mental set and functional fixedness a person needs to try and be open minded, they need to use out of the box thinking and creativity while looking at the problem presented to them. However, this isn’t always an easy task for people, especially those set in their ways of thinking. I know I personally have this problem where I typically go to my usual way of problem solving instead of trying to find a new way around an issue.

Bibliography

Cherry, K. (2017, August 31). Mental Set and Seeing Solutions to Problems . Retrieved from Verywell: https://www.verywell.com/what-is-a-mental-set-2795370

GoldStein, E. (2008). Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Reasearch and Everyday Experiance (Vol. 3).

One thought on “ Mental Set and Functional Fixedness ”

easy solve problems shows how a person who experiences mental set and or functional fixedness can be hinder when presented a rather easy problem.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.