Problem-Solving and Analogical Transfer

Solving novel problems (target problems) using previously learned strategies (source problems) is an important skill in both everyday life and educational contexts. However, individuals often struggle to successfully accomplish this task (i.e., analogical transfer). Explanations for why this difficulty occurs include: (1) a “failure-to-notice” (i.e., not noticing that a prior solution is relevant and thus no retrieval attempt is made); (2) a “failure-to-retrieve” (i.e., successfully noticing that a prior solution is relevant and a retrieval attempt is initiated, but fails); and (3) a “failure-to-map” (i.e., successful noticing and retrieval, but unable to accurately connect relevant components between problems to actually apply the solution). The present study was designed to assess predictions from these explanations regarding the potential benefit of additional overlapping contextual features between problems that are unrelated to the problems themselves. Participants first read a problem (source) and a worked-example of how to solve it using a specific procedure under the guise of evaluating it for use in a future study. After a break, participants were unexpectedly given a novel problem (target) and asked to solve it. The target problem could be solved using the same procedure in the source problem. The critical manipulation involved the addition of contextual cues. While working on both problems, participants listened to music designed to induce either happy or sad emotions, resulting in four total conditions, two with matching emotional features (i.e., happy-happy and sad-sad conditions) and two with mismatching emotional features (i.e., happy-sad and sad-happy conditions). Based on prior memory research, both the “failure-to-notice” and “failure-to-retrieve” hypotheses would predict increased rates of transfer for the two matching conditions, while the “failure-to-map” hypothesis would predict no difference in transfer between any conditions