人类和人工智能的开放式和封闭式问题解决:提问复杂性的影响

IF 3.7 2区 教育学 Q1 Social Sciences Thinking Skills and Creativity Pub Date : 2024-08-06 DOI:10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101598
Tuval Raz , Roni Reiter-Palmon , Yoed N. Kenett
{"title":"人类和人工智能的开放式和封闭式问题解决:提问复杂性的影响","authors":"Tuval Raz ,&nbsp;Roni Reiter-Palmon ,&nbsp;Yoed N. Kenett","doi":"10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Question-asking, an underexplored aspect of creativity, is integral to creative problem-solving and information-seeking. Previous research reveals that lower creativity correlates with asking simpler, closed questions, while higher creativity correlates with complex, open-ended inquiries. The present study explores the relation between question asking complexity and problem-solving tasks involving open- and close-ended thinking and how these abilities generalize and compare to AI. In Study 1, participants (N = 89) completed the alternative questions task (AQT), a close-ended riddles task (Stumpers), and the alternate uses task (AUT), a creativity measure. Our results show AQT question complexity wasn't correlated with stumpers performance, although it correlated with AUT originality (r = .3). In Study 2, participants (N = 100) completed the AQT, AUT, and open-ended creative problem-solving (CPS) task. CPS responses were evaluated for originality and quality. A positive correlation was observed between CPS quality and AQT complexity (r = .29) and originality (r = .34). In study 3, AI agents (N = 100) completed the AQT, AUT, stumpers, and CPS tasks. Like humans, AI's AQT originality and complexity were related with open, but not closed problem-solving. AI questions were also significantly more creative and complex, it solved more stumpers and gave higher quality CPS solutions. Surprisingly, human and AI CPS originality didn't differ. We find significant links between question complexity and open—but not closed-ended—problem-solving in humans, which generalize to AI. Our results highlight the significance of complex and creative question-asking in everyday life and as an integral part of our problem-solving toolkit.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47729,"journal":{"name":"Thinking Skills and Creativity","volume":"53 ","pages":"Article 101598"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Open and closed-ended problem solving in humans and AI: The influence of question asking complexity\",\"authors\":\"Tuval Raz ,&nbsp;Roni Reiter-Palmon ,&nbsp;Yoed N. Kenett\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101598\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Question-asking, an underexplored aspect of creativity, is integral to creative problem-solving and information-seeking. Previous research reveals that lower creativity correlates with asking simpler, closed questions, while higher creativity correlates with complex, open-ended inquiries. The present study explores the relation between question asking complexity and problem-solving tasks involving open- and close-ended thinking and how these abilities generalize and compare to AI. In Study 1, participants (N = 89) completed the alternative questions task (AQT), a close-ended riddles task (Stumpers), and the alternate uses task (AUT), a creativity measure. Our results show AQT question complexity wasn't correlated with stumpers performance, although it correlated with AUT originality (r = .3). In Study 2, participants (N = 100) completed the AQT, AUT, and open-ended creative problem-solving (CPS) task. CPS responses were evaluated for originality and quality. A positive correlation was observed between CPS quality and AQT complexity (r = .29) and originality (r = .34). In study 3, AI agents (N = 100) completed the AQT, AUT, stumpers, and CPS tasks. Like humans, AI's AQT originality and complexity were related with open, but not closed problem-solving. AI questions were also significantly more creative and complex, it solved more stumpers and gave higher quality CPS solutions. Surprisingly, human and AI CPS originality didn't differ. We find significant links between question complexity and open—but not closed-ended—problem-solving in humans, which generalize to AI. Our results highlight the significance of complex and creative question-asking in everyday life and as an integral part of our problem-solving toolkit.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47729,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Thinking Skills and Creativity\",\"volume\":\"53 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101598\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Thinking Skills and Creativity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871187124001366\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thinking Skills and Creativity","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871187124001366","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

提问是创造力中一个未被充分探索的方面,是创造性地解决问题和寻找信息不可或缺的因素。以往的研究表明,创造力较低与提出较简单的封闭式问题有关,而创造力较高与提出复杂的开放式问题有关。本研究探讨了提问的复杂性与涉及开放式和封闭式思维的问题解决任务之间的关系,以及这些能力与人工智能的通用性和比较。在研究 1 中,参与者(89 人)完成了替代性问题任务(AQT)、封闭式谜语任务(Stumpers)和替代性使用任务(AUT)(一种创造力测量方法)。研究结果表明,AQT 问题的复杂程度与谜语任务的成绩无关,但与 AUT 的独创性有关(r = 0.3)。在研究 2 中,参与者(N = 100)完成了 AQT、AUT 和开放式创造性问题解决(CPS)任务。对 CPS 回答的原创性和质量进行了评估。CPS 质量与 AQT 复杂性(r = 0.29)和原创性(r = 0.34)之间呈正相关。在研究 3 中,人工智能代理(N = 100)完成了 AQT、AUT、stumpers 和 CPS 任务。与人类一样,人工智能的 AQT 独创性和复杂性与开放式问题解决有关,但与封闭式问题解决无关。人工智能的问题也明显更具创造性和复杂性,它能解决更多的难题,并给出更高质量的 CPS 解决方案。令人惊讶的是,人类和人工智能的 CPS 独创性并无差异。我们发现人类问题的复杂性与开放式问题(而非封闭式问题)的解决之间存在重要联系,这一点也适用于人工智能。我们的研究结果凸显了复杂和创造性提问在日常生活中的重要性,也是我们解决问题工具包中不可或缺的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Open and closed-ended problem solving in humans and AI: The influence of question asking complexity

Question-asking, an underexplored aspect of creativity, is integral to creative problem-solving and information-seeking. Previous research reveals that lower creativity correlates with asking simpler, closed questions, while higher creativity correlates with complex, open-ended inquiries. The present study explores the relation between question asking complexity and problem-solving tasks involving open- and close-ended thinking and how these abilities generalize and compare to AI. In Study 1, participants (N = 89) completed the alternative questions task (AQT), a close-ended riddles task (Stumpers), and the alternate uses task (AUT), a creativity measure. Our results show AQT question complexity wasn't correlated with stumpers performance, although it correlated with AUT originality (r = .3). In Study 2, participants (N = 100) completed the AQT, AUT, and open-ended creative problem-solving (CPS) task. CPS responses were evaluated for originality and quality. A positive correlation was observed between CPS quality and AQT complexity (r = .29) and originality (r = .34). In study 3, AI agents (N = 100) completed the AQT, AUT, stumpers, and CPS tasks. Like humans, AI's AQT originality and complexity were related with open, but not closed problem-solving. AI questions were also significantly more creative and complex, it solved more stumpers and gave higher quality CPS solutions. Surprisingly, human and AI CPS originality didn't differ. We find significant links between question complexity and open—but not closed-ended—problem-solving in humans, which generalize to AI. Our results highlight the significance of complex and creative question-asking in everyday life and as an integral part of our problem-solving toolkit.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Thinking Skills and Creativity
Thinking Skills and Creativity EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
16.20%
发文量
172
审稿时长
76 days
期刊介绍: Thinking Skills and Creativity is a new journal providing a peer-reviewed forum for communication and debate for the community of researchers interested in teaching for thinking and creativity. Papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches and may relate to any age level in a diversity of settings: formal and informal, education and work-based.
期刊最新文献
Validation and network structure of the Kaufman domains of creativity scale: A psychometric investigation in an Arabic context Creativity and motor skill learning among kindergarten children: Investigating Predictive correlations and performance differences The influence of group categorization and common ingroup identity on malevolent creativity, benevolent creativity, and neutral creativity The long-term impact of executive functions on everyday creativity among Chinese adolescents: A longitudinal mediation model of emotional resilience and creative self-efficacy Measuring parental behaviors supporting higher order thinking skills in children: A scale development study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1