1

Types of Verbalization (Erickson & Simon, 1993)

1.1. Thinking-aloudThinking-aloud: concurrent verbal reporting while problem solving per se; vocalizing “inner speech”

2.2. RetrospectionRetrospection: there is some time delay between problem-solving performance and its vocalizing

3.3. IntrospectionIntrospection: “Why did you do this?” or “Why do you feel the way you do?”

2

Comparison of different types of verbalization (E & S, 1993)

Distur-Distur-bancebance

Memory Memory errorserrors

Interpre-Interpre-tation tation

Learning Learning effecteffect

1. Thinking 1. Thinking aloud aloud

No No No Yes

2. Retrospection2. Retrospection No Yes Yes Yes

3. Introspection3. IntrospectionNot

applicableYes Yes Yes

3

Premises of thinking-aloud method (1930th – 1990th)

• While solving a problem in silence, a person produces inner speech, which is condensed and abbreviated verbal speech (Vygotsky, 1934/1987)

• It is possible to instruct interviewees to verbalize some of their inner speech while solving a problem (Ericsson & Simon, 1993).“Tell me EVERYTHING you are thinking from the time you first see the question until you give an answer… I don’t want you to try to plan out what to say or try to explain to me what are you saying… Just act as if you are alone in the room speaking to yourself. (E & S). ”“What are you thinking about?” vs. “Keep talking” (E & S).

• Thinking-aloud speech reflects one’s inner speech in an essentially concurrent manner: it mediates a particular sub-sequence of problem-solving thoughts without changing the order of thoughts (E & S).

4

Some methodological questions

• To what extend the students’ thoughts were influenced by the interview setting? By the interviewer?

• What was going on when the students were silent for a while?

• What can we learn from the fragments about the students’ individual ways of thinking? About their ways of communication?

5

02

2

1

1

x

x

x

x

[ לא צריך אפילו מכנה משותף. רואים שניות3שקט מכנה משותף ]שיש לו שני שברים, אחד פחות השני. בשבר הראשון מונה ומחנה

, אפשר להגיד שזה 1 חלקי 1, אז זה 1זהים, בגלל זה השבר שווה ל-[ גם מונה ומחנה זהים, אז אפשר שניות2שקט . בשבר השני ]1

1 פחות 1[ אז מקבלים ש שניות3שקט . אז בסוף ]1להגיד שזה גם [.מסתכל על המראיין, ושיש אינסוף פתרונות ]0שווה

אלון:

אז מהם הפתרונות של המשוואה? מ':

, 2 ו-1[ כל המספרים חוץ מ- שניות3שקט פתרונות המשוואה? טוב ] במקום אז יהיה לך ביטוי חסרי משמעות.2 או 1בגלל שאם תוציא

אלון:

ראיון עם אלון

• To what extend the students’ thoughts were influenced by the interview setting? By the interviewer?

• What was going on when the students were silent for a while?

• What can we learn from the fragments about the student’s individual ways of thinking (e.g., heuristics)? About his ways of communication?

6

ObservationsObservations

• Both thinking aloud and retrospective verbalizations are interlaced.

• The interviewer, even when behaving as a silent observer, served as an addressee of the interviewees’ discourse and, apparently, an influential interlocutor.

• Interviewer’s actions may have unexpected reactions.

7

The task: “Make up a word problem whose solution may be found by computing 4/5 divided by 2/3.”

Ted: All right, ]Reading[ make up a word problem whose solution may be found by computing four-fifths divided by two-thirds. Um, let’s see, and explain my thought process out loud as I go. All right ]Pause 5 sec[ Well the first thing I’d do is to find the solution. So divide four-fifths by two-thirds and so that ]Talking with 1-2 sec pauses and writing[ is twelve-tenths which is sixth-fifths, which is one and one-fifth. All right so, I am going to...Int.: This is how you are solving, OK, OK.Ted: Yeah…sorry would you like me to explain?Int.: No, no, it’s OK, just go ahead.Ted: So I found the solution one and one-fifths um and let’s see. If, and I’ll just throw in these problems first. ]Talking with 1-2 sec pauses and writing[ Um, if Gloria picks a, why don’t we say, four-fifths of all the apples and divides them between herself and her two sisters, how much, er, how much, let’s see… um, how many apples will Gloria and a sister have? OK, OK.

8

Comparison of different types of verbalizationDistur-Distur-bancebance

Memory Memory errorserrors

Interpre-Interpre-tation tation

Learning Learning effecteffect

1. Thinking 1. Thinking aloud aloud

No? No? No? Yes

2. Retrospection2. Retrospection No Yes Yes Yes

3. Introspection3. Introspection No Yes Yes Yes

9

Thinking-aloud dilemmaThinking-aloud dilemma

“The need for completeness argues for doing more probing, whereas the need for minimizing interference argues for doing less…How one resolves this trade-off also depends on the purpose of the interview. Researchers trying to describe stable knowledge states (e.g., persistent preconceptions) can allow more intrusive probing than describers of transient reasoning processes” (Clement, 2000, p.571-572)

Reformulation: What can be done with the dialogical constituent of individual problem-solving discourse?

10

What can be done?What can be done?

I. To make the interviewing methodology more explicit

“Overt consideration and analysis of such issues [social contexts of clinical task-based interviews] can contribute substantially to the quality of the research study through improved interview design and more careful inferences drawn from the outcomes observed” (Goldin, 2000, p. 534)

II. To revise ontological premises of individual problem-solving discourse“Human thinking can be regarded (defined, in fact) as the individualized form of the activity of communicating. Indeed, it is self-communication – a person’s communication with oneself (Sfard, 2007 p. 127).

11

I. Making the interviewing I. Making the interviewing methodology more explicitmethodology more explicit

• Distinguishing between private and public constituents of the subjects’ verbal responses (Scubauer-Leoni & Grossen, 1993).

• A researcher should be aware of the following phenomena: Subject may be try “to be in the know”, “to offer the ‘correct’ response”, to “produce the interviewer’s preferred response” (Aronsson & Hundeide, 2002)

• Tracing the development of the research contract (Koichu & Harel, in press)

12

I. Triadic Interaction in I. Triadic Interaction in Clinical Task-Based InterviewsClinical Task-Based Interviews

Subject

Interviewer

Knowledge negotiated

13

I. The idea of 3-D I. The idea of 3-D Interview Communication Map (ICM)Interview Communication Map (ICM)

Int.

Subject

I1.

Explaining the

procedure

I2.

Keeping silence

I3.

Prompting to think aloud

I4.

Requesting clarification

I5.

Providing help or

evaluation

S1. Keeping silence

S2. Talk with no signs of attention to Int.

S3. Talk with attention to Int.

S4. Questions to the Int. as a “neutral” observer

S5. Questions to an Int. as an “expert”

Knowledge negotiated

14

The Fragments of ICMs Time: 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00

Ted

S: S1 ;S2 ;S6; S3 ;S2+S3

I: I1 ;I2 ;I4+I3; I2 ;I6, I2

K: K4 ;K2 ;K1+K2 ;K3

Carol

S: S1 ;S6; S1 ;S3 ;S1 ;S6 ;S1

I: I1 ;I2 ;I3; I2 ;I4 ;I2 ;I4

K: K4 ;K2 ;K1+K2 ;K1

15

How can ICMs serve?How can ICMs serve?

• It serves to shape the analysts’ thinking about the nature It serves to shape the analysts’ thinking about the nature of the interview data in designing and analyzing the of the interview data in designing and analyzing the interviews.interviews.

• It provides useful notation, which helps to reduce the It provides useful notation, which helps to reduce the data and to focus on the most reliable and relevant (to data and to focus on the most reliable and relevant (to the research questions) parts of the transcripts.the research questions) parts of the transcripts.

• It demonstrates differences between the interviews.It demonstrates differences between the interviews. • It helps us to be better interviewers or at least to be more It helps us to be better interviewers or at least to be more

explicit regarding the quality of the data, since it explicit regarding the quality of the data, since it highlights trade-offs and their consequences.highlights trade-offs and their consequences.

• It can be ignored, It can be ignored, if there is no intention to analyze transient problem-solving processes.

16

II. Towards the revision of ontological premises II. Towards the revision of ontological premises of individual problem-solving discourseof individual problem-solving discourse

“… thinking stops being a self-sustained process separate from and, in a sense, primary to any act of communication, and becomes an act of communication in itself, although not necessarily interpersonal. To stress this fact, I combined the terms cognitive and communicative into the new adjective commognitive” (Sfard, 2007, p. 124)

17

II. Next step II. Next step

• Ontological: Who is (are) an addressee (addressees) of one’s individual problem-solving discourse?

• Methodological: What is the role of procedural replicability in language-loaded problem solving research-setting? (Thinking-aloud interviews, problem-solving in pairs, small groups etc.)

18

“How can a heart expression find?

How should another know your mind?

Will he discern what quickens you?

A thought once uttered is untrue.”

Fyodor Tyutchev (1830)