The Art of Research: A Divergent/Convergent Framework and Opportunities for Science-Based Approaches

Applying science to the current art of producing engineering and research knowledge has proven difficult, in large part because of its seeming complexity. We posit that the microscopic processes underlying research are not so complex, but instead are iterative and interacting cycles of divergent (generation of ideas) and convergent (testing and selecting of ideas) thinking processes. This reductionist framework coherently organizes a wide range of previously disparate microscopic mechanisms which inhibit these processes. We give examples of such inhibitory mechanisms and discuss how deeper scientific understanding of these mechanisms might lead to dis-inhibitory interventions for individuals, networks and institutional levels

Analogy as a strategy for supporting complex problem solving under uncertainty

Complex problem solving in naturalistic environments is fraught with uncertainty, which has significant impacts on problem-solving behavior. Thus, theories of human problem solving should include accounts of the cognitive strategies people bring to bear to deal with uncertainty during problem solving. In this article, we present evidence that analogy is one such strategy. Using statistical analyses of the temporal dynamics between analogy and expressed uncertainty in the naturalistic problem-solving conversations among scientists on the Mars Rover Mission, we show that spikes in expressed uncertainty reliably predict analogy use (Study 1) and that expressed uncertainty reduces to baseline levels following analogy use (Study 2). In addition, in Study 3, we show with qualitative analyses that this relationship between uncertainty and analogy is not due to miscommunication-related uncertainty but, rather, is primarily concentrated on substantive problem-solving issues. Finally, we discuss a hypothesis about how analogy might serve as an uncertainty reduction strategy in naturalistic complex problem solving. © 2012 Psychonomic Society, Inc

The interplay of conflict and analogy in multidisciplinary teams

Creative teamwork in multidisciplinary teams is a topic of interest to cognitive psychologists on the one hand, and to both social and organizational psychologists on the other. However, the interconnections between cognitive and social layers have been rarely explored. Drawing on mental models and dissonance theories, the current study takes a central variable studied by cognitive psychologists-analogy-and examines its relationship to a central variable examined by social psychologists-conflict. In an observational, field study, over 11. h of audio-video data from conversations of the Mars Exploration Rover scientists were coded for different types of analogy and micro-conflicts that reveal the character of underlying psychological mechanisms. Two different types of time-lagged logistic models applied to these data revealed asymmetric patterns of associations between analogy and conflict. Within-domain analogies, but not within-discipline or outside-discipline analogies, preceded science and work process conflicts, suggesting that in multidisciplinary teams, representational gaps in very close domains will be more likely to spark conflict. But analogies also occurred in reaction to conflict: Process and negative conflicts, but not task conflicts, preceded within-discipline analogies, but not to within-domain or outside-discipline analogies. This study demonstrates ways in which cognition can be bidirectionally tied to social processes and discourse. © 2012 Elsevier B.V

Situational pressures on aviation decision making: goal seduction and situation aversion

Introduction: The context in which a decision is made can shape the decision process in important ways. Of particular interest here are ‘ strong ’ situations, that is, contexts where the situation itself exerts an influence on decision making. Borrowing concepts from field theory and approach/avoidance theory, this paper explores the influence of strong situations on pilot decision making. Method: There were 28 pilots flying in Alaska who were interviewed using a critical incident technique where participants were asked to relate stories about challenging flying situations. A bottom-up qualitative analysis of reported social and psychological pressures revealed a range of types, including strong situations, which are described in this paper. Results: Strong situations were mentioned in 67% of the interviews and included situations likely to motivate the pilot toward unsafe behavior (goal seduction) and situations likely to motivate the pilot away from safe behavior (situation aversion). Goal seduction situations included rescuing others, meeting a significant other, time-related constraints, financial pressures, and unspecified goal seduction; aversive situations included physical discomfort, not having maintenance or facilities for the airplane, and a lack of basic necessities (e.g., lodging) for the pilot. Discussion: Goal seduction describes one broad, unspecified influence on pilot decision making, but situation aversion is also an important motivator for some pilots. Goal seduction and situation aversion may well underlie the phenomena of plan continuation errors, the tendency for pilots to continue despite evidence suggesting it is imprudent. This study suggests some specific factors that constrain decision making for pilots in challenging situations

Reuse and recycle: The development of adaptive expertise, routine expertise, and novelty in a large research team

Combining innovation and efficiency is ideal in many organizational settings. Adaptive expertise represents a cognitive explanation of how individuals and teams can learn to achieve simultaneous innovation and efficiency. In 2004, scientists led twin rovers on Mars in the search for historical water. The science team experienced a remarkable increase in efficiency, adapting with flexibility to unexpected events and dynamic, dwindling resources. After discussing the conceptual differences between adaptive expertise and related team learning and innovation concepts, we examine longitudinal behavioral data on novelty, routine and adaptive expertise. Sequential time series ARIMA analyses reveal that novelty fluctuated randomly, but both routine and adaptive expertise significantly increased over time. In addition, novelty, routine expertise, and adaptive expertise did not significantly predict each other directly or at a lag, suggesting that these are indeed three distinct constructs. Implications for theory and research on efficiency and innovation are discussed. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Organizational pressures and mitigating strategies in small commercial aviation: findings from Alaska

Introduction: Recent attention has focused on the way in which organizational factors can erode safety in aviation, particularly in regions that have a high accident rate, such as Alaska. The present study builds on this work by examining the direct and indirect pressures that can be exerted on pilots by Alaskan operators. In addition, the paper examines ways in which organizations and individuals manage the effects of pressure. Method: Using the critical incident method to uncover situations where the pilot’s skills had been challenged, 28 pilots who flew in Alaska were interviewed. A bottom-up qualitative analysis revealed a range of organizational pressures and mitigating strategies. Results: Pilots in Alaska encountered both implicit and explicit norms and expectations to fly in marginal conditions. Pressure also arose from pilots ’ awareness of the need for their company to make money and from perceived job competition. Some Alaskan operators were able to mitigate the effects of pressure on their pilots and some pilots reported mitigating pressure to fly by managing their employer’s expectations and re-emphasizing safety. Discussion: Organizational factors were found to be an important source of pressure for pilots and are likely to contribute to the high accident rate in Alaska. Balancing the competing demands of safety and productivity may be extremely difficult for many small operators, which places a heavy reliance on the decision making of individuals. Both the subtle pressures on individual pilots and strategies for mitigating those pressures are, therefore, extremely important to safety and productivity in small-scale commercial aviation