Kretzschmar André, Nebe Stephan
Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Binzmuehlestrasse 14/7, CH-8050 Zurich, Switzerland.
Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Bluemlisalpstrasse 10, CH-8006 Zurich, Switzerland.
J Intell. 2021 Jan 21;9(1):5. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence9010005.
In order to investigate the nature of complex problem solving (CPS) within the nomological network of cognitive abilities, few studies have simultantiously considered working memory and intelligence, and results are inconsistent. The Brunswik symmetry principle was recently discussed as a possible explanation for the inconsistent findings because the operationalizations differed greatly between the studies. Following this assumption, 16 different combinations of operationalizations of working memory and fluid reasoning were examined in the present study (N=152). Based on structural equation modeling with single-indicator latent variables (i.e., corrected for measurement error), it was found that working memory incrementally explained CPS variance above and beyond fluid reasoning in only 2 of 16 conditions. However, according to the Brunswik symmetry principle, both conditions can be interpreted as an asymmetrical (unfair) comparison, in which working memory was artificially favored over fluid reasoning. We conclude that there is little evidence that working memory plays a unique role in solving complex problems independent of fluid reasoning. Furthermore, the impact of the Brunswik symmetry principle was clearly demonstrated as the explained variance in CPS varied between 4 and 31%, depending on which operationalizations of working memory and fluid reasoning were considered. We argue that future studies investigating the interplay of cognitive abilities will benefit if the Brunswik principle is taken into account.
为了在认知能力的法则网络中研究复杂问题解决(CPS)的本质,很少有研究同时考虑工作记忆和智力,且结果并不一致。最近,布伦斯维克对称原则被讨论为对这些不一致发现的一种可能解释,因为不同研究之间的操作化差异很大。基于这一假设,本研究考察了工作记忆和流体推理操作化的16种不同组合(N = 152)。基于单指标潜在变量的结构方程模型(即校正测量误差),研究发现,在16种情况中只有2种情况下,工作记忆在流体推理之外还能逐步解释CPS方差。然而,根据布伦斯维克对称原则,这两种情况都可被解释为一种不对称(不公平)比较,即工作记忆被人为地置于流体推理之上。我们得出结论,几乎没有证据表明工作记忆在独立于流体推理的复杂问题解决中发挥独特作用。此外,布伦斯维克对称原则的影响得到了明确证明,因为CPS中解释的方差在4%至31%之间变化,这取决于所考虑的工作记忆和流体推理的操作化。我们认为,如果考虑布伦斯维克原则,未来研究认知能力之间的相互作用将受益。