In thecandle problem (Duncker, 1945), subjects must attach a candle to a vertical surface, using only a box of tacks and a book of matches. Subjects exhibitfunctional fixedness by failing, or being slow, to make use of one object (the tack box) as a support, rather than as a container, in their solutions. This failure to produce alternate functions is measured against improved performance when the tack box is presented empty rather than full of tacks (i.e., not preutilized as a container). Using an analogous task, we show that functional fixedness can be demonstrated in older children (6- and 7-year-olds); they are significantly slower to use a box as a support when its containment function has been demonstrated than when it has not. However, younger children (5-year-olds) are immune to this effect, showing no advantage when the standard function is not demonstrated. Moreover, their performance under conditions of preutilization is better than that of both older groups. These results are interpreted in terms of children’s developing intuitions about function and the effects of past experience on problem solving.
Abravanel, E., &Gingold, H. (1985). Learning via observation during the second year of life.Developmental Psychology,21, 614–623.
Adamson, R. E. (1952). Functional fixedness as related to problem solving: A repetition of three experiments.Journal of Experimental Psychology,44, 288–293.
Campione, J., Brown, A., &Ferrera, R. (1982). Mental retardation and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.),Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 392–490). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Case, R. (1985).Intellectual development: Birth to adulthood. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Defeyter, M. A. &German, T. P. (2000, September).Immunity to fractional fixedness in young children: Flexible or impoverished understanding of object function? Poster presented at the BPS Cognitive Section Conference, University of Essex.
Dominowski, R. L. (1981). Comment on “An examination of the alleged role of ‘fixation’ in the solution of several ‘insight’ problems” by Weisberg and Alba.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,110, 199–203.
Dominowski, R. L., &Dallob, P. (1995). Insight and problem solving. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.),The nature of insight (pp. 33–62). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Duncker, K. (1945). On problem solving.Psychological Monographs,58, 5 (Whole No. 270).
Gauvain, M., &Greene, J. K. (1994). What do young children know about objects?Cognitive Development,9, 311–329.
German, T. P., &Johnson, S. A. (1996, August).Children’s knowledge of artifacts: Origins of the “design stance.” Poster presented at the XXVI International Congress of Psychology, Montreal. [Abstract:International Journal of Psychology,31, 342]
German, T. P., &Johnson, S. A. (1997, April).Agents, goals and origins: Children’s understanding of artifact function. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Washington, DC.
Gopnik, A., &Meltzoff, A. N. (1997).Words, thoughts and theories. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hughes, C. (1998). Executive function in preschoolers: Links with theory of mind and verbal ability.British Journal of Developmental Psychology,16, 233–253.
Keane, M. T. (1989). Modelling problem solving in Gestalt “insight” problems.Irish Journal of Psychology,10, 201–215.
Kelemen, D. A. (1999). The scope of teleological thinking in preschool children.Cognition,70, 241–272.
Leslie, A. M., &Polizzi, P. (1998). Inhibitory processing in the false belief task: Two conjectures.Developmental Science,1, 247–253.
Maier, N. R. F. (1970).Problem solving and creativity in individuals and groups. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Marcus, G. F., Pinker, S., Ullman, M. H., Rosen, T. J., &Xu, F. (1992).Over-regularization in language acquisition (Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, Vol. 57, No. 4). Chicago: Society for Research in Child Development.
McDonough, L., &Mandler, J. (1998). Inductive generalization in 9- and 11-month-olds.Developmental Science,1, 227–232.
Morton, J., &Johnson, M. H. (1991). CONSPEC and CONLERN: A two-process theory of infant face recognition.Psychological Review,98, 164–181.
Ohlsson, S. (1984). Restructuring revisited: II. An information processing theory of restructuring and insight.Scandinavian Journal of Psychology,25, 117–129.
Piaget, J. (1954).The construction of reality in the child. New York: Basic Books. (Original work published 1937)
Russell, J., Jarrold, C., &Potel, D. (1994). What makes strategic deception difficult for children—the deception or the strategy?British Journal of Developmental Psychology,12, 301–314.
Siegler, R. (1996).Emerging minds: The process of change in children’s thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.
Weisberg, R. W., &Alba, J. W. (1981a). An examination of the alleged role of “fixation” in the solution of several “insight” problems.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,110, 169–192.
Weisberg, R. W., &Alba, J. W. (1981b). Gestalt theory, insight and past experience: Reply to Dominowski.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,110, 193–198.
Wimmer, H., &Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in children’s understanding of deception.Cognition,53, 45–57.
This work was presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Albuquerque, NM, April 1999. We thank Bernadette West and the rest of the staff, the children, and their parents at Broomgrove Primary School, Colchester. Thanks also to Steve Avons, Rick Hanley, Janet Metcalfe, Max Roberts, Steven Smith, Cristina Sorrentino, one anonymous reviewer, and especially Geoff Ward for helpful discussion of the issues raised here and/or comments on a previous version of this manuscript.
About this article
Cite this article
German, T.P., Defeyter, M.A. Immunity to functional fixedness in young children. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 7, 707–712 (2000). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213010
- Young Child
- Functional Fixedness
- False Belief Task
- Insight Problem
- Conventional Function