Functional fixedness in tool use: Learning modality, limitations and individual differences

2018 ◽  
Vol 190 ◽  
pp. 11-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felipe Munoz-Rubke ◽  
Devon Olson ◽  
Russell Will ◽  
Karin H. James
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thuy Tuong Uyen Tran ◽  
Rana Esseily ◽  
Dalila Bovet ◽  
Ildikó Király

The goal of this review is twofold: first to explore whether mutual exclusivity and functional fixedness overlap and what might be their respective specificities and second, to investigate whether mutual exclusivity as an inferential principle could be applied in other domains than language and whether it can be found in non-human species. In order to do that, we first give an overview of the representative studies of each phenomenon. We then analyze papers on tool use learning in children that studied or observed one of these phenomena. We argue that, despite their common principle -one tool one function- mutual exclusivity and functional fixedness are two distinct phenomena and need to be addressed separately in order to fully understand the mechanisms underlying social learning and cognition. In addition, mutual exclusivity appears to be applicable in other domains than language learning, namely tool use learning and is also found in non-human species when learning symbols and tools.


2012 ◽  
Vol 367 (1603) ◽  
pp. 2753-2761 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Herrmann ◽  
Josep Call

We are often asked whether some apes are smarter than others. Here we used two individual-based datasets on cognitive abilities to answer this question and to elucidate the structure of individual differences. We identified some individuals who consistently scored well across multiple tasks, and even one individual who could be classified as exceptional when compared with her conspecifics. However, we found no general intelligence factor. Instead, we detected some clusters of certain abilities, including inferences, learning and perhaps a tool-use and quantities cluster. Thus, apes in general and chimpanzees in particular present a pattern characterized by the existence of some smart animals but no evidence of a general intelligence factor. This conclusion contrasts with previous studies that have found evidence of a g factor in primates. However, those studies have used group-based as opposed to the individual-based data used here, which means that the two sets of analyses are not directly comparable. We advocate an approach based on testing multiple individuals (of multiple species) on multiple tasks that capture cognitive, motivational and temperament factors affecting performance. One of the advantages of this approach is that it may contribute to reconcile the general and domain-specific views on primate intelligence.


2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Cummins-Sebree ◽  
Joseph D. Perazzo ◽  
Karly A. Branch ◽  
Dorothy M. Fragaszy

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher R Madan ◽  
Adrian Ng ◽  
Anthony Singhal

Tool use is an important facet of everyday life, though sometimes it is necessary to use tools in ways that do not fit within their typical functions. Here we asked participants to imagine characters using objects based on instructions that fit the prototypical actions for the object or were atypical in a novel object-action imagery task. Atypical action instructions either described sensible, substitute uses of the object, or actions that were bizarre but possible. Participants were better able to imagine the prototypical than atypical actions, but no effect of bizarreness was found. We additionally assessed inter-individual differences in movement imagery ability using two objective tests. Performance in the object-action imagery task correlated with the movement imagery tests, providing a link between motor simulations and mental imagery ability.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cara J. DiYanni ◽  
Jennifer Marie Clegg ◽  
Kathleen H. Corriveau

In this study, we extended research on children’s imitation by examining the impact of normativity on children’s decision about whether to imitate inefficient actions in the context of tool use. In particular, this study explored how conventional language (highlighting norms) versus instrumental language (highlighting a desired end-goal) influenced children’s imitation and transmission of the use of an inefficient tool to achieve a particular end-goal. Rather than examining children’s imitation of unnecessary actions that do not impede goal-completion, we examined children’s conformity with a modeled behavior that may result in sacrificing goal completion. Thus, the stakes of conforming with the stated norm were higher than when children are asked to imitate a series of unnecessary actions that may not impede achieving a designated goal. Children (N = 96 4- to 6-year-olds) were presented with either a conventional or instrumental description of a model’s actions before watching the model choose an inefficient tool. Results indicated that children who heard conventional language imitated the model’s inefficient tool choice and chose to teach a third party to use the inefficient tool at significantly higher rates than when they heard instrumental language. The use of a within-subjects design allowed us to confirm that descriptions that included conventional language impacted children’s imitation and transmission of inefficient tool use above and beyond individual differences in children’s baseline imitation rate. The results have implications for the extent to which children will conform with what “we” are “supposed” to do.


1996 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 329-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie J. Shute ◽  
Kevin A. Gluck

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin C. Ruisch ◽  
Rajen A. Anderson ◽  
David A. Pizarro

AbstractWe argue that existing data on folk-economic beliefs (FEBs) present challenges to Boyer & Petersen's model. Specifically, the widespread individual variation in endorsement of FEBs casts doubt on the claim that humans are evolutionarily predisposed towards particular economic beliefs. Additionally, the authors' model cannot account for the systematic covariance between certain FEBs, such as those observed in distinct political ideologies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. Mundy

Abstract The stereotype of people with autism as unresponsive or uninterested in other people was prominent in the 1980s. However, this view of autism has steadily given way to recognition of important individual differences in the social-emotional development of affected people and a more precise understanding of the possible role social motivation has in their early development.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document