You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Solving Problems with Ambiguous Subgoal Ordering: Preschoolers' Performance
Vol. 56, No. 4 (Aug., 1985), pp. 940-952
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1130106
Page Count: 13
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Children, Puzzles, Child development, Preschool children, Child psychology, Probabilities, Mathematical minima, Cognitive psychology, Modeling, Adults
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Recent evidence has shown that although there are large adult-child differences in overall problem-solving performance, even preschoolers have rudimentary forms of strategies such as means-ends analysis that rely on the use of subgoals. However, in many situations, means-ends analysis is not applicable, and in order to solve a problem, some other method must be used. This study further explores preschoolers' repertoire of problem-solving methods. We use problems in which it is difficult to order subgoals, and in which, therefore, some method other than means-ends analysis must be used. 40 children between 45 and 70 months of age were presented with problems having ambiguous subgoal ordering. Although individual scores varied widely, none of several indices of performance were reliably correlated with age. A detailed analysis of move sequences revealed that preschoolers (a) tend to avoid backup, (b) are sensitive to incremental progress toward the goal, and (c) search 2 or 3 moves ahead for a goal. All of these component skills were combined into a "hill-climbing" method that explains 70% of the variance in problem difficulty.
Child Development © 1985 Society for Research in Child Development