When Less Is Less: Solving Multiple Simple Problems Is Not Complex Problem Solving-A comment on Greiff et al. (2015)

Joachim Funke; Andreas Fischer; Daniel V Holt

doi:10.3390/jintelligence5010005

When Less Is Less: Solving Multiple Simple Problems Is Not Complex Problem Solving-A comment on Greiff et al. (2015)

J Intell. 2017 Jan 5;5(1):5. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence5010005.

Authors

Joachim Funke¹, Andreas Fischer², Daniel V Holt³

Affiliations

¹ Institute of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Hauptstr. 47, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany. joachim.funke@psychologie.uni-heidelberg.de.
² Research Institute for Vocational Education and Training, Rollnerstraße 14, 90408 Nürnberg, Germany. fischer.andreas@f-bb.de.
³ Institute of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Hauptstr. 47, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany. daniel.holt@psychologie.uni-heidelberg.de.

Abstract

In this commentary, we critically review the study of Greiff, Stadler, Sonnleitner, Wolff, and Martin, "Sometimes less is more: Comparing the validity of complex problem solving measures" (Intelligence, 2015, 50, 100-113). The main conclusion of Greiff et al. that the "multiple complex systems" (MCS) approach to measuring complex problem-solving ability possesses superior validity compared to classical microworld scenarios ("less is more") seems to be an overgeneralization based on inappropriate analysis and selective interpretation of results. In its original form, MCS is a useful tool for investigating specific aspects of problem solving within dynamic systems. However, its value as an instrument for the assessment of complex problem solving ability remains limited.

Keywords: Genetics Lab; MicroDYN; MicroFIN; Tailorshop; assessment; complex problem solving; multiple complex systems; simulated microworlds; validity.

Abstract

Grants and funding