Open-Ended Problem Solving in Groups

Abstract

Previous experimental research on problem-solving has predominantly investigated well-structured problems with predefined solutions. Studies of ill-structured, open-ended problem-solving have primarily employed observational and case study methods. This study used a controlled experiment in which groups solved ill-structured categorization problems to investigate effects of problem open-endedness on problem-solving behaviors and solution outcomes. The experimental design enables precise measurement and tracking of open-ended problem-solving behaviors. In the experiment, N=48 four-person groups solved three categorization problems, in which they grouped 16 randomly selected pictures into 4 categories of 4 pictures each. Task goals and participant beliefs were varied to create three levels of problem open-endedness. In two tasks, participants grouped pictures based on similarity, and their open-endedness beliefs were altered based on instructions suggesting either that a single best solution identified by experts should be found (“Expert”; least open-ended), or that multiple solutions were available, and a “good” solution should be found (“Good”; more open-ended). In a third task, participants grouped pictures by creating 4 simple stories involving the items (“Story”; most open-ended). The experiment investigated effects of the degree of problem open-endedness on several indicators of problem-solving behavior and properties of the solution, including problem-solving difficulty, the variability of solutions produced by different problem-solving groups, the influence of initial conditions on solutions (path dependency), the strength of concept association in solutions, structural moves toward solutions, and the variability of problem-solving search behavior. ANOVA results across the three levels of open-endedness confirmed hypothesized negative effects of problem open-endedness on task difficulty and variability in problem-solving behavior, as well as positive effects on solution variability, path dependency, and the strength of solution association. The results also provided evidence that solutions to open-ended problems are non-random. Post-hoc pairwise comparisons between open-endedness levels partially supported our hypotheses. Differences between the similarity and story tasks strongly supported hypotheses; however, differences between the two (least open-ended vs. more open-ended) similarity tasks were mainly non-significant although the distribution means varied in the predicted directions. Regarding structural progress towards a solution, participants in the least open-ended “Expert” condition first formed categories based on the strongest associations between items, then moved to progressively weaker associations. This effect was less prominent in the more open-ended “Good” condition and absent in the most open-ended “Story” condition. A verbal protocol analysis conducted on nine experimental tasks provided further insights into the problem-solving process across three conditions. A prominent pattern of behavior observed in all conditions was iterative conflict recognition and resolution until groups reached a satisfactory solution. In the “Expert” condition, groups exhibited more conflict recognition and resolution iterations, more emphasis on the logic behind requested picture exchanges and more resistance to accepting proposed resolutions, compared to the Good and Story conditions. Individual group members tended to develop partial solutions independently and simultaneously in the Story condition, whereas partial solutions were developed collectively in a sequential manner in the similarity conditions.