Sharp Brains: Brain Fitness and Cognitive Health News

Neuroplasticity, Brain Fitness and Cognitive Health News


Enhance Metacognition and Problem-Solving by Talking Out Loud to Yourself

The MC at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Michigan’s reunion din­ner encour­aged audi­ence mem­bers to reveal the most sig­nif­i­cant take-away from their under­grad­u­ate nurs­ing edu­ca­tion. The great­est ben­e­fit was quick­ly clear to me — prob­lem-solv­ing think­ing. Mem­o­ry pro­duced a mind video: a short, dark-haired, nurs­ing instruc­tor lec­tur­ing a small group of first year stu­dents in an emp­ty patient room. “Don’t mem­o­rize the steps of ster­ile tech­nique. Use a prob­lem-solv­ing think­ing process.” She described the sequen­tial, cycli­cal process: define the prob­lem, gath­er infor­ma­tion, devel­op a solu­tion strat­e­gy, allo­cate resources, mon­i­tor progress, and eval­u­ate the solu­tion.

Pre­dictably, the per­cep­tion, appli­ca­tion, and even tax­on­o­my of prob­lem-solv­ing has changed in the last sev­er­al decades. Then, it might have been called the Socrat­ic or sci­en­tif­ic method of think­ing. Now, prob­lem-solv­ing stands under the metacog­ni­tion canopy joined by close, but not quite syn­ony­mous sib­lings such as crit­i­cal think­ing, design think­ing, lat­er­al think­ing, and cre­ative think­ing. Metacog­ni­tion, which means most sim­ply, think­ing about think­ing, was described and defined in the sev­en­ties by John Flavell, a devel­op­men­tal psy­chol­o­gist at Stan­ford. The enthu­si­asm cre­at­ed by his the­o­ry con­tributed to a revi­tal­iza­tion of prob­lem-solv­ing research.

From ori­gins in the field of psy­chol­o­gy and phi­los­o­phy, the study of prob­lem-solv­ing slid into the ball­park of edu­ca­tion­al psy­chol­o­gy and lat­er became of inter­est to cog­ni­tive neu­ro­science. Prob­lem-solv­ing bloomed anew with a cool, trendy iden­ti­ty. A vari­ety of recent research stud­ies fields pro­duced facts and find­ings that we can use today: some fun­ny, oth­ers thought pro­vok­ing, and all inter­est­ing.

Talk­ing Aloud Part­ner Prob­lem-Solv­ing (TAPPS) is a teaching/learning strat­e­gy that evolved in the late eight­ies and nineties. The basic idea is sim­ple. Pair two peo­ple, one the des­ig­nat­ed prob­lem solver and one the mon­i­tor, and pro­vide prob­lems for them to solve. The monitor’s job is to lis­ten, but not con­tribute any advice about the prob­lem and its solu­tion. She can alert the prob­lem solver to his own think­ing pat­tern by say­ing for exam­ple, “I heard you men­tion a poten­tial obsta­cle to solv­ing the prob­lem ear­li­er, but then I didn’t hear more about that.” But she can’t add, “I see a cou­ple of oth­er obsta­cles that you didn’t talk about.” Mon­i­tor­ing com­ments are exclu­sive­ly about the des­ig­nat­ed prob­lem solver’s talk­ing aloud process. Gen­er­al­ly, increased speed and effi­cien­cy of prob­lem-solv­ing result­ed when the pairs group was com­pared with a con­trol group.

In recent research on TAPPS, report­ed in the Uni­ver­si­ty of Arkansas pub­li­ca­tion Research Foun­da­tions, Spring 2011, the author not­ed that the increased speed and effec­tive­ness of part­ner prob­lem-solv­ing has lit­tle to do with the mon­i­tor and much to do with the prob­lem solver’s own behav­ior; think­ing aloud or TA. The con­stant ver­bal­iza­tion of their thoughts out loud encour­aged the prob­lem solvers to con­tin­u­ous­ly cor­rect faulty steps in log­ic. The causal mech­a­nism of suc­cess was the problem-solver’s metacog­ni­tion.

Anoth­er study on talk­ing aloud report­ed in the jour­nal Aging, Neu­ropsy­chol­o­gy, and Cog­ni­tion car­ries the intrigu­ing title, “How to Gain Eleven IQ Points in Ten Min­utes: Think­ing Aloud Improves Raven’s Matri­ces Per­for­mance in Old­er Adults.” At the end of the arti­cle, fol­low­ing the usu­al iden­ti­fi­ca­tion of study lim­i­ta­tions, the authors stat­ed, “Nonethe­less, these stud­ies pro­vide some evi­dence that indi­vid­u­als with low­er flu­id abil­i­ty (e.g., chil­dren and old­er adults) may ben­e­fit most from con­cur­rent ver­bal­iza­tion.”

H‑m-m‑m. Inter­est­ing. We might need to have renewed respect for peo­ple we notice talk­ing to them­selves. Instead of assum­ing they’re off the wall, we’ll more gen­er­ous­ly ascribe good prob­lem-solv­ing skills to them. And for us? Let’s give talk­ing out loud prob­lem-solv­ing a shot — per­haps alone, at home in a locked bath­room for the first attempt.

My advice? Start out with a sim­ple prob­lem that fits ratio­nal prob­lem solv­ing rather than a prob­lem bet­ter suit­ed for the intu­itive style of think­ing. E.g. “What orga­ni­za­tion­al struc­ture will work best for my book in progress?” rather than “What’s a catchy title for my book on prob­lem solv­ing think­ing?” I’ll acknowl­edge I haven’t been high­ly suc­cess­ful with the TA approach that I’m describ­ing and I’m quite sure my IQ hasn’t increased yet, but I’m hav­ing fun prac­tic­ing. Let me know what you find out think­ing aloud, alone, at home.

Judith C. Tin­gley Ph.D. is a for­mer psy­chi­atric nurse, psy­chol­o­gist, author of 4 pub­lished books, and free-lance writer, cur­rent­ly work­ing on a book on how to break the neg­a­tive self-talk habit. You can fol­low her via Twit­ter @drtingley

Leave a Reply...

Loading Facebook Comments ...

Leave a Reply

Categories: Cognitive Neuroscience, Education & Lifelong Learning, Health & Wellness

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Search in our Archives

Follow us and Engage via…

RSS Feed

About SharpBrains

As seen in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, BBC News, CNN, Reuters,  SharpBrains is an independent market research firm tracking how brain science can improve our health and our lives.

Watch All Recordings Now (40+ Speakers, 12+ Hours)