Please wait a minute...
Acta Psychologica Sinica
Routines in Three-Person Problem Solving: Measurement and the Effect of Different Collaborative Level
ZHANG Mei1; XIN Ziqiang1; LIN Chongde2
(1 Department of Psychology at School of Social Development, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 100081, China) (2 Institute of Developmental Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)
Download: PDF(624 KB)   Review File (1 KB) 
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks    

Routines are some kind of patterned behaviors or strategies when solving the same problem repeatedly. This issue has gained wide concern in different fields of social science. Since 1994, this phenomenon has been studied experimentally by Cohen and Bacdayan (1994) using the task of Transform The Target (TTT). However, this task has not gained as much attention as Tower of Hanoi in problem solving because of its complexity and uncontrollability. Searching for appropriate experimental task of routines is necessary. The “sum 10” game, which was developed by Novarese (2003) for group learning research is one of the appropriate. Based on the sum 10 game, the purpose of this research was to: (1) verify and depict the phenomenon of routines in three-person problem solving, and develop the index of routinization; (2) investigate the effect of different cooperation levels on routinization. According to the requirements of the study purpose, two electronic programs were developed based on a software development technology called LAMP, which is the combination of software Linux, Apache, Mysql and PHP for building network platform. In Experiment 1, 93 undergraduates were randomly assigned into 31 groups to complete 28 rounds of the sum 10 game cooperatively. After the experiment, we interviewed all these 93 participants to learn about the process of the cooperation in the sum 10 game among the three group members. In Experiment 2, 96 undergraduates were randomly assigned to three treatment levels: full cooperation, conditional cooperation and noncooperation levels. Participants completed 28 round of the sum 10 game with two fake participants in three game rooms on the internet platform. Computer automatically recorded all performance of the participants in two experiments. The results of Experiment 1 showed that the phenomenon of routines existed obviously in the sum 10 game. Routines were confirmed and measured by two methods. Firstly, it can be confirmed and described by the following 7 indexes in three categories (behavior, cognition and emotion): increasing reliability, increasing speed, repeated action sequences, occasional suboptimality, patterned behaviors based on defined strategy, satisfaction and expectation. Secondly, routines were verified according to whether a number has been chosen more than 10 times at the individual level or whether a strategy has been chosen more than 11 times at the group level. Correspondingly, routinization could also be depicted at the individual and group level. The results of Experiment 2 showed that there were significant differences of the routinization under three different cooperation levels. The degree of routinization was the highest under the noncooperation condition, whereas it was the lowest under the full cooperation condition. Combined with previous research results, the present study constructed a new index system for routines and routinization, which could be applied to future studies. The effect of cooperation levels on routinzation indicated that routines have positive effects in problem solving, providing new ideas to investigate routine and routinization in such problem solving groups.

Keywords routines      sum 10 game      problem solving      measurement      cooperation     
Corresponding Authors: XIN Ziqiang, E-mail:    
Issue Date: 25 June 2015
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
Articles by authors
XIN Ziqiang
LIN Chongde
Cite this article:   
ZHANG Mei,XIN Ziqiang,LIN Chongde. Routines in Three-Person Problem Solving: Measurement and the Effect of Different Collaborative Level[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2015.00814
URL:     OR
[1] LI WenFu; TONG DanDan; QIU Jiang; ZHANG QingLin. The neural basis of scientific innovation problems solving[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2016, 48(4): 331-342.
[2] CHEN Sijing; HE Quan; MA Jianhong. The Influence of Third-party Punishment on Cooperation: An Explanation of Social Norm Activation[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2015, 47(3): 389-405.
[3] LI Jing; ZHU Liqi. Cooperation in Children with High-functioning Autism[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2014, 46(9): 1301-1316.
[4] HOU Xuanfang;LI Yanping;TU Yidong. Work Values of Chinese Millennial Generation: Structure, Measurement and Effects on Employee Performance[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2014, 46(6): 823-840.
[5] MAO Xiuzhen; XIN Tao. A Comparison of Item Selection Methods for Cognitive Diagnostic Computerized Adaptive Testing with Nonstatistical Constraints[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2014, 46(12): 1910-1922.
[6] ZHANG Bo; LI Jian; XU Chu; LI Yiming. The Developmental Differences of Problem Solving Ability between Intellectually-gifted and Intellectually-average Children Aged from 11-14 Years Old[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2014, 46(12): 1823-1834.
[7] BAI Liying; YUAN Bo; ZHANG Wei; ZHANG Zhen; Lan Jiao; WANG Yiwen. Interpersonal Cooperation and Conflict Influenced Outcome Evaluation in Social Decision-making[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2014, 46(11): 1760-1771.
[8] MAO Xiuzhen;XIN Tao. A Comparison of Item Selection Methods for Controlling Exposure Rate in Cognitive Diagnostic Computerized Adaptive Testing[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2013, 45(6): 694-703.
[9] ZHANG Mei;XIN Ziqiang;Lin Chongde. The Measurement and Microgenetic Study of Routines in Two-Person Problem Solving[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2013, 45(10): 1119-1130.
[10] LIU Hong-Yun,LI Chong,ZHANG Ping-Ping,LUO Fang. Testing Measurement Equivalence of Categorical Items’ Threshold/Difficulty Parameters: A Comparison of CCFA and (M)IRT Approaches[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2012, 44(8): 1124-1136.
[11] SHEN Wang-Bing,LIU Chang,LUO Jing,YU Jie. Brain Perceived Intuitively Mental Impasses in Insight Problem Solving: An ERP Study[J]. , 2012, 44(7): 924-935.
[12] SONG Guang-Wen,HE Wen-Guang,KONG-Wei. Influence of Problem Representation and Working Memory Span on Pupils’ Mathematical Problem Solving[J]. , 2011, 43(11): 1283-1292.
[13] TIAN Yan,LUO Jun-Long,LI Wen-Fu,QIU Jiang,ZHANG Qing-Lin. Influence of Prototype Representation on Elicitation Effect in Creative Problem Solving[J]. , 2011, 43(06): 619-628.
[14] LIU Chang-Jiang,HAO Fang. Social Value Orientation and Cooperation in Asymmetric Social Dilemmas[J]. , 2011, 43(04): 432-441.
[15] SHEN Wang-Bing,LIU Chang,ZHANG Xiao-Jiang,CHEN Ya-Lin. The Time Course and Hemispheric Effect of “Insight” in Three-character Chinese Riddles Task: An ERP Study[J]. , 2011, 43(03): 229-240.
Full text



Copyright © Acta Psychologica Sinica
Support by Beijing Magtech