Cognitive Studies, 0(0), 1-16. (May 1993) In this study, we investigated effects of having different perspectives in solving collaborative tasks. A simple reasoning task was given to several pairs of participants, each of whom discussed their views with their partner. Protocol analysis was performed to reveal how people exchange information with a partner who has a different perspective to achieve successful collaboration. In the experiment, we controlled participants perspectives, where the appearance of visual images was manipulated based on Gestalt psychological theory. Three conditions were set up: (1) the distributed-view condition, where one of two different perspectives was presented separately to each of the participants in a pair; (2) the dual-view condition, where two equivalent perspectives were presented together to both participants; and (3) the single-view condition, where only a single perspective was presented to both participants. The protocol analysis showed that the pairs in the distributed view condition who reached to solution engaged in the task with complementary interactive manners. On the other hand, the protocols of the pairs who could not reach solution showed that one of the participants shifted his/her perspective towards the opponents perspective. It is also argued that the problem solving in collaboration of pairs with different perspectives is performed through insight processes. Keywords: Collaboration() Social Interaction( ) Perspectives( ) Aha! Experience(Aha! ) 1. Two Heads are better than one The more the merrier A laboratory study on collaborative problem solving by taking different perspectives, by Yugo Hyashi and Kazuhisa Miwa(Graduate School of Information Science, Nagoya University) and Junya Morita(School of Knowlege Science, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology ). (Hill, 1982; Shaw, 1932) (, 1999)
2 Cognitive Studies May 1993 1.1 1.1.1 Herbert Simon Allen Newell (Dasgupta, 2003) (1996) (1) (2) (3) Dunbar (1995) (Okada & Simon, 1997; Miyake, 1986) Shirouzu, Miyake, and Masukawa (2002) Miwa (2004) 2 (1) (2) 1.1.2
Vol. 0 No. 0 3 (1999) Hanson (1958) (Cole & Scribner, 1974) Keysar, Barr, Balin, and Brauner (2000) (Heider, 1958) 2. 2.1 1 (1980) Fact Data2 Data 2 Data Data Data Fact 2 Fact 2 Shirouzu et al. (2002) Miwa (2004)
4 Cognitive Studies May 1993 1 Data and Fact 2.2 2 ( 1 ) ( 2 ) Warmth rating 3. 3.1 2 26 6 25 5 10 (Koffka, 1935) 4 2 3.2 2 1 1 3 30 30 3 2
Vol. 0 No. 0 5 条件分散視点条件 被験者 A 被験者 B 3.3 30 Metcalfe and Wiebe (1987) Warmth rating 3 1 7 3.4 4 3 複数視点条件単一視点条件 4 2 1 3.5 3.4 2 1 46 23 2:1:1 11 6 6 3 3 2 3 3.6
6 Cognitive Studies May 1993 1 Introductory phase Conflict phase 3 4 5 6 2 2 6 5 2 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 4 6 4 7 4 3 4 5 6 8 10 12 6 8 10 12 6 8 10 12 2 Introductory phase1 Conflict phase 2 1 Introductory phase 6 8 10 12 3 4 5 6 2 6 8 10 12 Introductory phase Conflict phase 17 1 2 2 6 5 4 6 4 7 Conflict phase 6 8 10 12 ±1 3 4 5 6 6 8 10 12 2 4. 4.1 3 : : : / / 4.1.1 2 3.5 2 1
Vol. 0 No. 0 7 2 0.54(6/5) 0.50(3/3) 0(0/6) 0.45(10/12) 0.92(11/1) 0.92(11/1) 4.1.2 2 2 4.1.2.1 3 (1) (2) (3) (4) [p <.05] 32 1 0 2 3 3 8 2 4 8 4.1.3 4.2 5 5 2 2 [F (1, 13) = 1.224, n.s.] [F (1, 13) = 0.036, n.s.] / [F (1, 13) = 8.884, p <.05] / 観察事例数 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 規則発見群 規則未発見群 分散視点条件 複数視点条件 単一視点条件 条件 5
8 Cognitive Studies May 1993 4.2 2 1 Fact Data Data 4.2.1 Data 46 3 3 Unidentified 1) 46 4 Data A 3 B 5? A B A 被験者 A 6 4.2.2 被験者 B 2 4.2.2.1 5n 1 n 2 Bias 5 A n 1 n 2 Bias = n 1 n 2 n 1 + n 2 (1) Bias 0 11 0 Bias 1 1 Bias 02 1) http://chasen.aist-nara.ac.jp/
Vol. 0 No. 0 9 4.2.2.2 2 2 6 22 6 2 2 A n 11 n 12 n 1. B n 21 n 22 n 2. n.1 n.2 N = 0(n 1. = 0, n 2. = 0, n.1 = 0, n.2 = 0 ) (2) 4.2.3 Conflict phase 17 Bias 7 8 Bias 4.2.3.1 7 8Bias 1 = n11n22 n12n21 n1. n 2. n.1 n.2 (3) 0 1 1 0 AB A B 1 0 Bias 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 7 1 0.9 0.8 規則発見者規則未発見者 分散視点条件 複数視点条件 単一視点条件 条件 Bias 規則発見群規則未発見群 4.2.2.3 Bias Bias 7 2) 2) Bias 2 φ 係数 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 8 分散視点条件 複数視点条件 単一視点条件 条件.
10 Cognitive Studies May 1993 7 Bias 2 1 1 Bias 2 4.2.3.2 7 8 Bias 2 Bias Bias 1 2 2 4.2.3.3 7 8Bias Bias 2 2 Bias [F (1, 30) = 25.458, p <.01] [F (1, 16) = 7.322, p <.05] [F (1, 14) = 18.21, p <.01] [F (1, 10) = 125.269, p <.01] [F (1, 20) = 0.069, n.s.] [F (1, 13) = 1.071, n.s.] [F (1, 13) = 4.931, p <.05] / [F (1, 13) = 5.313, p <.05] /
Vol. 0 No. 0 11 7 6 5 値定 4 評 3 2 1 9 分散視点条件複数視点条件 発見 3 回前発見 2 回前発見 1 回前発見後評定時点 Warmth rating 4.3 Warmth rating Warmth rating 4 (1) (2)1 (3) 2 (4)3 (1) (1) (2) 9 Warmth rating 3 2 1 2 43 2 1 [F (3, 48) = 7.93, p <.01] 1 [F (1, 16) = 4.51, p <.05] [F (1, 16) = 6.50, p <.05] Warmth ratingwarmth rating Warmth rating Warmth rating 5. 5.1 5.1.1 10 6 17 Introductory Phase Conflict Phase A B C D E 10 6 4
12 Cognitive Studies May 1993 4.2.3.3 Bias 8 A B 1 28 29 32 33 34 8 6 A 6 B 6 B 4 A 2 B 7 A 5 B 7 B B 4 A 2 B B 4 A 4 A 4 B A A A 5 10 15 A1 B1 D2 B2 20 A2 C1 A1 25 E2 A2 30 B1 35 D1 E1 E2 40 A1 A2 D1 B1 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 10 E2 B1D1 E1 E2 5.1.2 4.2.3.3
Vol. 0 No. 0 13 Deutsch and Gerard (1955) 2 2 Conflict phase (Galantucci, 2005) 5.2 6,8,10,12 Okada and Simon (1997) Miyake (1986) 1 1 5.3 4.1.2
14 Cognitive Studies May 1993 2 4.1.2 1 5.4 Aha! (, 2003) Warmth rating Metcalfe and Wiebe (1987) Warmth rating Warmth rating Warmth rating 9Warmth rating Metcalfe 6. 2 (1) (2) 2 (a) (b)(c) (a) (b) (c)
Vol. 0 No. 0 15 (a) (c) Cole, M. & Scribner, (1974). Culture and thought : a psychological introduction. John Wiley and Sons Inc. Dasgupta, S. (2003). Multidisciplinary creativity: the case of Herbert A. Simon. Cognitive Science, 27 (5), 683 707. Deutsch, M. & Gerard, B H. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influence on individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629 636. Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. The nature of insight. MIT Press. (1999). 14. ( ), 14, 186 211.. Galantucci, B. (2005). An experimental study of the emergence of human communication systems. Cognitive science, 29, 737 767. Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of discovery: an inquiry into the conceptual foundations of science. Cambridge University Press. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc Inc. Hill, G. W. (1982). Group versus individual performance:are N+1 heads better than one?. Psychological Bulletin, 91 (3), 517 539. (1999).., 40, 557 563. Keysar,B., Barr,J.D., Balin,A.J., &Brauner,S.J. (2000). Taking perspective in conversation: The role of mutual knowledge in comprehension. Psychological Science, 11 (1), 32 38. Koffka, K. (1935). Principles of gestalt psychology. Routledge and Kegan Paul. Metcalfe, J. & Wiebe, D. (1987). Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 15 (3), 238 246. Miwa, K. (2004). Collaborative discovery in a simple reasoning task. Cognitive System Research, 5 (1), 41 62. (2003). - -., 18 (3), 275 282. Miyake, N. (1986). Constructive interaction and the interactive process of understanding.cognitive Science, 10 (2), 151 177. (1980)... Okada, T. & Simon, H. (1997). Collaborative discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 21 (2), 109 146. Shaw, M. E. (1932). Comparison of individuals and small groups in the rational solution of complex solutions. American Journal of Psychology, 44, 491 504. Shirouzu, H., Miyake, N., & Masukawa, H. (2002). Cognitively active externalization for situated reflection. Cognitive Science, 26 (4), 469 501. (1996). -., 3 (4), 102 118. (Received 0000 0 0) (Accepted 0000 0 0)
16 Cognitive Studies May 1993 ( ) 2003 2006 Cognitive Science Society () 2006 Cognitive Science Society DesignSociety () 1984 1989 1989 1993 2004 19911992 Carnegie Mellon University, Dept. of Psychology, visiting assistant professor