Next Article in Journal
Developmental Differentiation and Binding of Mental Processes with g through the Life-Span
Next Article in Special Issue
Fluid Ability (Gf) and Complex Problem Solving (CPS)
Previous Article in Journal
Is the Correlation between Storage Capacity and Matrix Reasoning Driven by the Storage of Partial Solutions? A Pilot Study of an Experimental Approach
Previous Article in Special Issue
Comparing Business Experts and Novices in Complex Problem Solving
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle

The Impact of Symmetry: Explaining Contradictory Results Concerning Working Memory, Reasoning, and Complex Problem Solving

Institut für Notfallmedizin und Medizinmanagement, Klinikum der Universität München, LMU München, 80336 Munich, Germany
Department of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, 80802 Munich, Germany
Department of Education, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90478 Nuremberg, Germany
Faculty of Psychology, Educational Science, and Sport Science, University of Regensburg, 93053 Regensburg, Germany
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: Samuel Greiff and Ronny Scherer
Received: 13 December 2016 / Revised: 2 May 2017 / Accepted: 10 May 2017 / Published: 18 May 2017
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [1422 KB, uploaded 19 May 2017]   |  


Findings of studies on the unique effects of reasoning and working memory regarding complex problem solving are inconsistent. To find out if these inconsistencies are due to a lack of symmetry between the studies, we reconsidered the findings of three published studies on this issue, which resulted in conflicting conclusions regarding the inter-relations between reasoning, working memory, and complex problem solving. This was achieved by analysing so far unpublished problem solving data from the study of Bühner, Krumm, Ziegler, and Plücken (2006) (N= 124). One of the three published studies indicated unique effects of working memory and reasoning on complex problem solving using aggregated scores, a second study found no unique contribution of working memory using only figural scores, and a third study reported a unique influence only for reasoning using only numerical scores. Our data featured an evaluation of differences across content facets and levels of aggregation of the working memory scores. Path models showed that the results of the first study could not be replicated using content aggregated scores; the results of the second study could be replicated if only figural scores were used, and the results of the third study could be obtained by using only numerical scores. For verbal content, none of the published results could be replicated. This leads to the assumption that not only symmetry is an issue when correlating non-symmetrical data, but that content also has to be taken into account when comparing different studies on the same topic. View Full-Text
Keywords: symmetry; content; working memory; reasoning; complex problem solving; MultiFlux symmetry; content; working memory; reasoning; complex problem solving; MultiFlux

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Zech, A.; Bühner, M.; Kröner, S.; Heene, M.; Hilbert, S. The Impact of Symmetry: Explaining Contradictory Results Concerning Working Memory, Reasoning, and Complex Problem Solving. J. Intell. 2017, 5, 22.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
J. Intell. EISSN 2079-3200 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top