problem solving involvement

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

3.2 Low-Involvement Versus High-Involvement Buying Decisions and the Consumer’s Decision-Making Process

Learning objectives.

Distinguish between low-involvement and high-involvement buying decisions.
Understand what the stages of the buying process are and what happens in each stage.

As you have seen, many factors influence a consumer’s behavior. Depending on a consumer’s experience and knowledge, some consumers may be able to make quick purchase decisions and other consumers may need to get information and be more involved in the decision process before making a purchase. The level of involvement reflects how personally important or interested you are in consuming a product and how much information you need to make a decision. The level of involvement in buying decisions may be considered a continuum from decisions that are fairly routine (consumers are not very involved) to decisions that require extensive thought and a high level of involvement. Whether a decision is low, high, or limited, involvement varies by consumer, not by product, although some products such as purchasing a house typically require a high-involvement for all consumers. Consumers with no experience purchasing a product may have more involvement than someone who is replacing a product.

You have probably thought about many products you want or need but never did much more than that. At other times, you’ve probably looked at dozens of products, compared them, and then decided not to purchase any one of them. When you run out of products such as milk or bread that you buy on a regular basis, you may buy the product as soon as you recognize the need because you do not need to search for information or evaluate alternatives. As Nike would put it, you “just do it.” Low-involvement decisions are, however, typically products that are relatively inexpensive and pose a low risk to the buyer if she makes a mistake by purchasing them.

Consumers often engage in routine response behavior when they make low-involvement decisions—that is, they make automatic purchase decisions based on limited information or information they have gathered in the past. For example, if you always order a Diet Coke at lunch, you’re engaging in routine response behavior. You may not even think about other drink options at lunch because your routine is to order a Diet Coke, and you simply do it. Similarly, if you run out of Diet Coke at home, you may buy more without any information search.

Some low-involvement purchases are made with no planning or previous thought. These buying decisions are called impulse buying . While you’re waiting to check out at the grocery store, perhaps you see a magazine with Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt on the cover and buy it on the spot simply because you want it. You might see a roll of tape at a check-out stand and remember you need one or you might see a bag of chips and realize you’re hungry or just want them. These are items that are typically low-involvement decisions. Low-involvement decisions aren’t necessarily products purchased on impulse, although they can be.

By contrast, high-involvement decisions carry a higher risk to buyers if they fail, are complex, and/or have high price tags. A car, a house, and an insurance policy are examples. These items are not purchased often but are relevant and important to the buyer. Buyers don’t engage in routine response behavior when purchasing high-involvement products. Instead, consumers engage in what’s called extended problem solving , where they spend a lot of time comparing different aspects such as the features of the products, prices, and warranties.

High-involvement decisions can cause buyers a great deal of postpurchase dissonance (anxiety) if they are unsure about their purchases or if they had a difficult time deciding between two alternatives. Companies that sell high-involvement products are aware that postpurchase dissonance can be a problem. Frequently, they try to offer consumers a lot of information about their products, including why they are superior to competing brands and how they won’t let the consumer down. Salespeople may be utilized to answer questions and do a lot of customer “hand-holding.”

Allstate’s “You’re in Good Hands” advertisements are designed to convince consumers that the insurance company won’t let them down.

Mike Mozart – Allstate, – CC BY 2.0.

Limited problem solving falls somewhere between low-involvement (routine) and high-involvement (extended problem solving) decisions. Consumers engage in limited problem solving when they already have some information about a good or service but continue to search for a little more information. Assume you need a new backpack for a hiking trip. While you are familiar with backpacks, you know that new features and materials are available since you purchased your last backpack. You’re going to spend some time looking for one that’s decent because you don’t want it to fall apart while you’re traveling and dump everything you’ve packed on a hiking trail. You might do a little research online and come to a decision relatively quickly. You might consider the choices available at your favorite retail outlet but not look at every backpack at every outlet before making a decision. Or you might rely on the advice of a person you know who’s knowledgeable about backpacks. In some way you shorten or limit your involvement and the decision-making process.

Products, such as chewing gum, which may be low-involvement for many consumers often use advertising such as commercials and sales promotions such as coupons to reach many consumers at once. Companies also try to sell products such as gum in as many locations as possible. Many products that are typically high-involvement such as automobiles may use more personal selling to answer consumers’ questions. Brand names can also be very important regardless of the consumer’s level of purchasing involvement. Consider a low- versus high-involvement decision—say, purchasing a tube of toothpaste versus a new car. You might routinely buy your favorite brand of toothpaste, not thinking much about the purchase (engage in routine response behavior), but not be willing to switch to another brand either. Having a brand you like saves you “search time” and eliminates the evaluation period because you know what you’re getting.

When it comes to the car, you might engage in extensive problem solving but, again, only be willing to consider a certain brand or brands. For example, in the 1970s, American-made cars had such a poor reputation for quality that buyers joked that a car that’s “not Jap [Japanese made] is crap.” The quality of American cars is very good today, but you get the picture. If it’s a high-involvement product you’re purchasing, a good brand name is probably going to be very important to you. That’s why the manufacturers of products that are typically high-involvement decisions can’t become complacent about the value of their brands.

1970s American Cars

(click to see video)

Today, Lexus is the automotive brand that experiences the most customer loyalty. For a humorous, tongue-in-cheek look at why the brand reputation of American carmakers suffered in the 1970s, check out this clip.

Stages in the Buying Process

Figure 3.9 “Stages in the Consumer’s Purchasing Process” outlines the buying stages consumers go through. At any given time, you’re probably in a buying stage for a product or service. You’re thinking about the different types of things you want or need to eventually buy, how you are going to find the best ones at the best price, and where and how will you buy them. Meanwhile, there are other products you have already purchased that you’re evaluating. Some might be better than others. Will you discard them, and if so, how? Then what will you buy? Where does that process start?

Figure 3.9 Stages in the Consumer’s Purchasing Process

Stage 1. Need Recognition

You plan to backpack around the country after you graduate and don’t have a particularly good backpack. You realize that you must get a new backpack. You may also be thinking about the job you’ve accepted after graduation and know that you must get a vehicle to commute. Recognizing a need may involve something as simple as running out of bread or milk or realizing that you must get a new backpack or a car after you graduate. Marketers try to show consumers how their products and services add value and help satisfy needs and wants. Do you think it’s a coincidence that Gatorade, Powerade, and other beverage makers locate their machines in gymnasiums so you see them after a long, tiring workout? Previews at movie theaters are another example. How many times have you have heard about a movie and had no interest in it—until you saw the preview? Afterward, you felt like you had to see it.

Stage 2. Search for Information

For products such as milk and bread, you may simply recognize the need, go to the store, and buy more. However, if you are purchasing a car for the first time or need a particular type of backpack, you may need to get information on different alternatives. Maybe you have owned several backpacks and know what you like and don’t like about them. Or there might be a particular brand that you’ve purchased in the past that you liked and want to purchase in the future. This is a great position for the company that owns the brand to be in—something firms strive for. Why? Because it often means you will limit your search and simply buy their brand again.

If what you already know about backpacks doesn’t provide you with enough information, you’ll probably continue to gather information from various sources. Frequently people ask friends, family, and neighbors about their experiences with products. Magazines such as Consumer Reports (considered an objective source of information on many consumer products) or Backpacker Magazine might also help you. Similar information sources are available for learning about different makes and models of cars.

Internet shopping sites such as Amazon.com have become a common source of information about products. Epinions.com is an example of consumer-generated review site. The site offers product ratings, buying tips, and price information. Amazon.com also offers product reviews written by consumers. People prefer “independent” sources such as this when they are looking for product information. However, they also often consult non-neutral sources of information, such advertisements, brochures, company Web sites, and salespeople.

Stage 3. Product Evaluation

Obviously, there are hundreds of different backpacks and cars available. It’s not possible for you to examine all of them. In fact, good salespeople and marketing professionals know that providing you with too many choices can be so overwhelming that you might not buy anything at all. Consequently, you may use choice heuristics or rules of thumb that provide mental shortcuts in the decision-making process. You may also develop evaluative criteria to help you narrow down your choices. Backpacks or cars that meet your initial criteria before the consideration will determine the set of brands you’ll consider for purchase.

Evaluative criteria are certain characteristics that are important to you such as the price of the backpack, the size, the number of compartments, and color. Some of these characteristics are more important than others. For example, the size of the backpack and the price might be more important to you than the color—unless, say, the color is hot pink and you hate pink. You must decide what criteria are most important and how well different alternatives meet the criteria.

Figure 3.10

Osprey backpacks are known for their durability. The company has a special design and quality control center, and Osprey’s salespeople annually take a “canyon testing” trip to see how well the company’s products perform.

melanie innis – break – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Companies want to convince you that the evaluative criteria you are considering reflect the strengths of their products. For example, you might not have thought about the weight or durability of the backpack you want to buy. However, a backpack manufacturer such as Osprey might remind you through magazine ads, packaging information, and its Web site that you should pay attention to these features—features that happen to be key selling points of its backpacks. Automobile manufacturers may have similar models, so don’t be afraid to add criteria to help you evaluate cars in your consideration set.

Stage 4. Product Choice and Purchase

With low-involvement purchases, consumers may go from recognizing a need to purchasing the product. However, for backpacks and cars, you decide which one to purchase after you have evaluated different alternatives. In addition to which backpack or which car, you are probably also making other decisions at this stage, including where and how to purchase the backpack (or car) and on what terms. Maybe the backpack was cheaper at one store than another, but the salesperson there was rude. Or maybe you decide to order online because you’re too busy to go to the mall. Other decisions related to the purchase, particularly those related to big-ticket items, are made at this point. For example, if you’re buying a high-definition television, you might look for a store that will offer you credit or a warranty.

Stage 5. Postpurchase Use and Evaluation

At this point in the process you decide whether the backpack you purchased is everything it was cracked up to be. Hopefully it is. If it’s not, you’re likely to suffer what’s called postpurchase dissonance . You might call it buyer’s remorse . Typically, dissonance occurs when a product or service does not meet your expectations. Consumers are more likely to experience dissonance with products that are relatively expensive and that are purchased infrequently.

You want to feel good about your purchase, but you don’t. You begin to wonder whether you should have waited to get a better price, purchased something else, or gathered more information first. Consumers commonly feel this way, which is a problem for sellers. If you don’t feel good about what you’ve purchased from them, you might return the item and never purchase anything from them again. Or, worse yet, you might tell everyone you know how bad the product was.

Companies do various things to try to prevent buyer’s remorse. For smaller items, they might offer a money back guarantee or they might encourage their salespeople to tell you what a great purchase you made. How many times have you heard a salesperson say, “That outfit looks so great on you!” For larger items, companies might offer a warranty, along with instruction booklets, and a toll-free troubleshooting line to call or they might have a salesperson call you to see if you need help with product. Automobile companies may offer loaner cars when you bring your car in for service.

Companies may also try to set expectations in order to satisfy customers. Service companies such as restaurants do this frequently. Think about when the hostess tells you that your table will be ready in 30 minutes. If they seat you in 15 minutes, you are much happier than if they told you that your table would be ready in 15 minutes, but it took 30 minutes to seat you. Similarly, if a store tells you that your pants will be altered in a week and they are ready in three days, you’ll be much more satisfied than if they said your pants would be ready in three days, yet it took a week before they were ready.

Stage 6. Disposal of the Product

There was a time when neither manufacturers nor consumers thought much about how products got disposed of, so long as people bought them. But that’s changed. How products are being disposed of is becoming extremely important to consumers and society in general. Computers and batteries, which leech chemicals into landfills, are a huge problem. Consumers don’t want to degrade the environment if they don’t have to, and companies are becoming more aware of this fact.

Take for example Crystal Light, a water-based beverage that’s sold in grocery stores. You can buy it in a bottle. However, many people buy a concentrated form of it, put it in reusable pitchers or bottles, and add water. That way, they don’t have to buy and dispose of plastic bottle after plastic bottle, damaging the environment in the process. Windex has done something similar with its window cleaner. Instead of buying new bottles of it all the time, you can purchase a concentrate and add water. You have probably noticed that most grocery stores now sell cloth bags consumers can reuse instead of continually using and discarding of new plastic or paper bags.

Figure 3.11

The hike up to Mount Everest used to be pristine. Now it looks more like this. Who’s responsible? Are consumers or companies responsible, or both?

jqpubliq – Recycling Center Pile – CC BY-SA 2.0.

Other companies are less concerned about conservation than they are about planned obsolescence . Planned obsolescence is a deliberate effort by companies to make their products obsolete, or unusable, after a period of time. The goal is to improve a company’s sales by reducing the amount of time between the repeat purchases consumers make of products. When a software developer introduces a new version of product, it is usually designed to be incompatible with older versions of it. For example, not all the formatting features are the same in Microsoft Word 2007 and 2010. Sometimes documents do not translate properly when opened in the newer version. Consequently, you will be more inclined to upgrade to the new version so you can open all Word documents you receive.

Products that are disposable are another way in which firms have managed to reduce the amount of time between purchases. Disposable lighters are an example. Do you know anyone today that owns a nondisposable lighter? Believe it or not, prior to the 1960s, scarcely anyone could have imagined using a cheap disposable lighter. There are many more disposable products today than there were in years past—including everything from bottled water and individually wrapped snacks to single-use eye drops and cell phones.

Figure 3.12

Disposable lighters came into vogue in the United States in the 1960s. You probably don’t own a cool, nondisposable lighter like one of these, but you don’t have to bother refilling it with lighter fluid either.

Europeana staff photographer – A trench art lighter – public domain.

Key Takeaways

Consumer behavior looks at the many reasons why people buy things and later dispose of them. Consumers go through distinct buying phases when they purchase products: (1) realizing the need or wanting something, (2) searching for information about the item, (3) evaluating different products, (4) choosing a product and purchasing it, (5) using and evaluating the product after the purchase, and (6) disposing of the product. A consumer’s level of involvement is how interested he or she is in buying and consuming a product. Low-involvement products are usually inexpensive and pose a low risk to the buyer if he or she makes a mistake by purchasing them. High-involvement products carry a high risk to the buyer if they fail, are complex, or have high price tags. Limited-involvement products fall somewhere in between.

Review Questions

How do low-involvement decisions differ from high-involvement decisions in terms of relevance, price, frequency, and the risks their buyers face? Name some products in each category that you’ve recently purchased.
What stages do people go through in the buying process for high-involvement decisions? How do the stages vary for low-involvement decisions?
What is postpurchase dissonance and what can companies do to reduce it?

Share This Book

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Consumer Motivation and Involvement

15 Involvement Levels

Depending on a consumer’s experience and knowledge, some consumers may be able to make quick purchase decisions and other consumers may need to get information and be more involved in the decision process before making a purchase. The level of involvement reflects how personally important or interested you are in consuming a product and how much information you need to make a decision. The level of involvement in buying decisions may be considered a continuum from decisions that are fairly routine (consumers are not very involved) to decisions that require extensive thought and a high level of involvement. Whether a decision is low, high, or limited, involvement varies by consumer, not by product.

Low Involvement Consumer Decision Making

At some point in your life you may have considered products you want to own (e.g. luxury or novelty items), but like many of us, you probably didn’t do much more than ponder their relevance or suitability to your life. At other times, you’ve probably looked at dozens of products, compared them, and then decided not to purchase any one of them. When you run out of products such as milk or bread that you buy on a regular basis, you may buy the product as soon as you recognize the need because you do not need to search for information or evaluate alternatives . As Nike would put it, you “just do it.” Low-involvement decisions are, however, typically products that are relatively inexpensive and pose a low risk to the buyer if a mistake is made in purchasing them.

Consumers often engage in routine response behaviour when they make low-involvement decisions — that is, they make automatic purchase decisions based on limited information or information they have gathered in the past. For example, if you always order a Diet Coke at lunch, you’re engaging in routine response behaviour. You may not even think about other drink options at lunch because your routine is to order a Diet Coke, and you simply do it. Similarly, if you run out of Diet Coke at home, you may buy more without any information search.

Some low-involvement purchases are made with no planning or previous thought. These buying decisions are called impulse buying . While you’re waiting to check out at the grocery store, perhaps you see a magazine with a notable celebrity on the cover and buy it on the spot simply because you want it. You might see a roll of tape at a check-out stand and remember you need one or you might see a bag of chips and realize you’re hungry or just want them. These are items that are typically low-involvement decisions. Low involvement decisions aren’t necessarily products purchased on impulse, although they can be.

High Involvement Consumer Decision Making

By contrast, high-involvement decisions carry a higher risk to buyers if they fail. These are often more complex purchases that may carry a high price tag, such as a house, a car, or an insurance policy. These items are not purchased often but are relevant and important to the buyer. Buyers don’t engage in routine response behaviour when purchasing high-involvement products. Instead, consumers engage in what’s called extended problem solving where they spend a lot of time comparing different aspects such as the features of the products, prices, and warranties.

High-involvement decisions can cause buyers a great deal of post-purchase dissonance, also known as cognitive dissonance which is a form of anxiety consumers experience if they are unsure about their purchases or if they had a difficult time deciding between two alternatives. Companies that sell high-involvement products are aware that post purchase dissonance can be a problem. Frequently, marketers try to offer consumers a lot of supporting information about their products, including why they are superior to competing brands and why the consumer won’t be disappointed with their purchase afterwards. Salespeople play a critical role in answering consumer questions and providing extensive support during and after the purchasing stage.

Limited Problem Solving

Limited problem solving falls somewhere between low-involvement (routine) and high-involvement (extended problem solving) decisions. Consumers engage in limited problem solving when they already have some information about a good or service but continue to search for a little more information. Assume you need a new backpack for a hiking trip. While you are familiar with backpacks, you know that new features and materials are available since you purchased your last backpack. You’re going to spend some time looking for one that’s decent because you don’t want it to fall apart while you’re traveling and dump everything you’ve packed on a hiking trail. You might do a little research online and come to a decision relatively quickly. You might consider the choices available at your favourite retail outlet but not look at every backpack at every outlet before making a decision. Or you might rely on the advice of a person you know who’s knowledgeable about backpacks. In some way you shorten or limit your involvement and the decision-making process.

Distinguishing Between Low Involvement and High Involvement

Products, such as chewing gum, which may be low-involvement for many consumers often use advertising such as commercials and sales promotions such as coupons to reach many consumers at once. Companies also try to sell products such as gum in as many locations as possible. Many products that are typically high-involvement such as automobiles may use more personal selling to answer consumers’ questions. Brand names can also be very important regardless of the consumer’s level of purchasing involvement. Consider a low-versus high-involvement decision — say, purchasing a tube of toothpaste versus a new car. You might routinely buy your favorite brand of toothpaste, not thinking much about the purchase (engage in routine response behaviour), but not be willing to switch to another brand either. Having a brand you like saves you “search time” and eliminates the evaluation period because you know what you’re getting.

When it comes to the car, you might engage in extensive problem solving but, again, only be willing to consider a certain brand or brands (e.g. your evoke set for automobiles). For example, in the 1970s, American-made cars had such a poor reputation for quality that buyers joked that a car that’s not foreign is “crap.” The quality of American cars is very good today, but you get the picture. If it’s a high-involvement product you’re purchasing, a good brand name is probably going to be very important to you. That’s why the manufacturers of products that are typically high-involvement decisions can’t become complacent about the value of their brands.

Ways to Increase Involvement Levels

Involvement levels – whether they are low, high, or limited – vary by consumer and less so by product. A consumer’s involvement with a particular product will depend on their experience and knowledge, as well as their general approach to gathering information before making purchasing decisions. In a highly competitive marketplace, however, brands are always vying for consumer preference, loyalty, and affirmation. For this reason, many brands will engage in marketing strategies to increase exposure, attention, and relevance; in other words, brands are constantly seeking ways to motivate consumers with the intention to increase consumer involvement with their products and services.

Some of the different ways marketers increase consumer involvement are: customization; engagement; incentives; appealing to hedonic needs; creating purpose; and, representation.

1. Customization

Person's feet, wearing two different coloured sneakers reflecting a consumer's unique personal preference.

With Share a Coke, Coca-Cola made a global mass customization implementation that worked for them. The company was able to put the labels on millions of bottles in order to get consumers to notice the changes to the coke bottle in the aisle. People also felt a kinship and moment of recognition once they spotted their names or a friend’s name. Simultaneously this personalization also worked because of the printing equipment that could make it happen and there are not that many first names to begin with. These factors lead the brand to be able to roll this out globally ( Mass Customization #12 , 2017).

2. Engagement

Have you ever heard the expression, “content is king”? Without a doubt, engaging, memorable, and unique marketing content has a lasting impact on consumers. The marketing landscape is a noisy one, polluted with an infinite number of brands advertising extensively to consumers, vying for a fraction of our attention. Savvy marketers recognize the importance of sparking just enough consumer interest so they become motivated to take notice and process their marketing messages. Marketers who create content (that isn’t just about sales and promotion) that inspires, delights, and even serves an audience’s needs are unlocking the secret to engagement. And engagement leads to loyalty.

There is no trick to content marketing, but the brands who do it well know that stepping away – far away – from the usual sales and promotion lines is critical. While content marketing is an effective way to increase sales, grow a brand, and create loyalty, authenticity is at its core.

Bodyform and Old Spice are two brands who very cleverly applied just the right amount of self-deprecating humour to their content marketing that not only engaged consumers, but had them begging for more!

Content as a Key Driver to Consumer Engagement

Engaging customers through content might involve a two-way conversation online, or an entire campaign designed around a single customer comment.

In 2012, Richard Neill posted a message to Bodyform’s Facebook page calling out the brand for lying to and deceiving its customers and audiences for years. Richard went on to say that Bodyform’s advertisements failed to truly depict any sense of reality and that in fact he felt set up by the brand to experience a huge fall. Bodyform, or as Richard addressed the company, “you crafty bugger,” is a UK company that produces and sells feminine protection products to menstruating girls and women (Bodyform, n.d.). Little did Richard know that when he posted his humorous rant to Bodyform that the company would respond by creating a video speaking directly at Richard and coming “clean” on all their deceitful attempts to make having period look like fun. When Bodyform’s video went viral, a brand that would have otherwise continued to blend into the background, captured the attention of a global audience.

Xavier Izaguirre says that, “[a]udience involvement is the process and act of actively involving your target audience in your communication mix, in order to increase their engagement with your message as well as advocacy to your brand.” Bodyform gained global recognition by turning one person’s rant into a viral publicity sensation (even though Richard was not the customer in this case).

Despite being a household name, in the years leading up to Old Spice’s infamous “The Man Your Man Should Smell Like” campaign, sales were flat and the brand had failed to strike a chord in a new generation of consumers. Ad experts at Wieden + Kennedy produced a single 30-second ad (featuring a shirtless and self-deprecating Isaiah Mustafa) that played around the time of the 2010 Super Bowl game. While the ad quickly gained notoriety on YouTube, it was the now infamous, “ Response Campaign ” that made the campaign a leader of its time in audience engagement.

3. Incentives

Person's hand, holding a wallet that contains a Starbucks card.

Customer loyalty and reward programs successfully motivate consumers in the decision making process and reinforce purchasing behaviours ( a feature of instrumental conditioning ). The rationale for loyalty and rewards programs is clear: the cost of acquiring a new customer runs five to 25 times more than selling to an existing one and existing customers spend 67 per cent more than new customers (Bernazzani, n.d.). From the customer perspective, simple and practical reward programs such as Beauty Insider – a point-accumulation model used by Sephora – provides strong incentive for customer loyalty (Bernazzani, n.d.).

4. Appealing to Hedonic Needs

Photo of exotic tropic destination in the Maldives.

A particularly strong way to motivate consumers to increase involvement levels with a product or service is to appeal to their hedonic needs. Consumers seek to satisfy their need for fun, pleasure, and enjoyment through luxurious and rare purchases. In these cases, consumers are less likely to be price sensitive (“it’s a treat”) and more likely to spend greater processing time on the marketing messages they are presented with when a brand appeals to their greatest desires instead of their basic necessities.

5. Creating Purpose

Millennial and Digital Native consumers are profoundly different than those who came before them. Brands, particularly in the consumer goods category, who demonstrate (and uphold) a commitment to sustainability grow at a faster rate (4 per cent) than those who do not (1 per cent) (“Consumer-Goods…”, 2015). In a 2015 poll, 30,000 consumers were asked how much the environment, packaging, price, marketing, and organic or health and wellness claims had on their consumer-goods’ purchase decisions, and to no surprise, 66 per cent said they would be willing to pay more for sustainable brands. (Nielsen, 2015). A rising trend and important factor to consider in evaluating consumer involvement levels and ways to increase them. So while cruelty-free, fair trade, and locally-sourced may all seem like buzz words to some, they are non-negotiable decision-making factors to a large and growing consumer market.

6. Representation

Various Vogue magazine covers featuring models such as Rianna.

Celebrity endorsement can have a profound impact on consumers’ overall attitude towards a brand. Consumers who might otherwise have a “neutral” attitude towards a brand (neither positive nor negative) may be more noticed to take notice of a brand’s messages and stimuli if a celebrity they admire is the face of the brand.

When sportswear and sneaker brand Puma signed Rihanna on to not just endorse the brand but design an entire collection, sales soared in all the regions and the brand enjoyed a new “revival” in the U.S. where Under Armour and Nike had been making significant gains (“Rihanna Designs…”, 2017). “Rihanna’s relationship with us makes the brand actual and hot again with young consumers,” said chief executive Bjorn Gulden (“Rihanna Designs…”, 2017).

Media Attributions

The image of two different coloured sneakers is by Raka Rachgo on Unsplash .
The image of a coffee card in a wallet is by Rebecca Aldama on Unsplash .
The image of an island resort in tropical destination is by Ishan @seefromthesky on Unsplash .
The image of a stack of glossy magazine covers is by Charisse Kenion on Unsplash .

Text Attributions

The introductory paragraph; sections on “Low Involvement Consumer Decision Making”, “High Involvement Consumer Decision Making”, and “Limited Problem Solving” are adapted from Principles of Marketing which is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

About Us . (n.d.). Body Form. Retrieved February 2, 2019, from https://www.bodyform.co.uk/about-us/.

Kalamut, A. (2010, August 18). Old Spice Video “Case Study” . YouTube [Video]. https://youtu.be/Kg0booW1uOQ.

Bernazzani, S. (n.d.). Customer Loyalty: The Ultimate Guide [Blog post]. https://blog.hubspot.com/service/customer-loyalty.

Bodyform Channel. (2012, October 16). Bodyform Responds: The Truth . YouTube [Video]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bpy75q2DDow&feature=youtu.be.

Consumer-Goods’ Brands That Demonstrate Commitment to Sustainability Outperform Those That Don’t. (2015, October 12). Nielsen [Press Release]. https://www.nielsen.com/us/en/press-room/2015/consumer-goods-brands-that-demonstrate-commitment-to-sustainability-outperform.html.

Curtin, M. (2018, March 30). 73 Per Cent of Millennials are Willing to Spend More Money on This 1 Type of Product . Inc. https://www.inc.com/melanie-curtin/73-percent-of-millennials-are-willing-to-spend-more-money-on-this-1-type-of-product.html.

Izaguirre, X. (2012, October 17). How are brands using audience involvement to increase reach and engagement? EConsultancy. https://econsultancy.com/how-are-brands-using-audience-involvement-to-increase-reach-and-engagement/.

Rihanna Designs Help Lift Puma Sportswear Sales . (2017, October 24). Reuters. https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/news-analysis/rihanna-designs-help-lift-puma-sportswear-sales.

Tarver, E. (2018, October 20). Why the ‘Share a Coke’ Campaign Is So Successful . Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/100715/what-makes-share-coke-campaign-so-successful.asp.

Low involvement decision making typically reflects when a consumer who has a low level of interest and attachment to an item. These items may be relatively inexpensive, pose low risk (can be exchanged, returned, or replaced easily), and not require research or comparison shopping.

This concept describes when consumers make low-involvement decisions that are "automatic" in nature and reflect a limited amount of information the consumer has gathered in the past.

A type of purchase that is made with no previous planning or thought.

High involvement decision making typically reflects when a consumer who has a high degree of interest and attachment to an item. These items may be relatively expensive, pose a high risk to the consumer (can't be exchanged or refunded easily or at all), and require some degree of research or comparison shopping.

Also known as "consumer remorse" or "consumer guilt", this is an unsettling feeling consumers may experience post-purchase if they feel their actions are not aligned with their needs.

Consumers engage in limited problem solving when they have some information about an item, but continue to gather more information to inform their purchasing decision. This falls between "low" and "high" involvement on the involvement continuum.

Share This Book

How to improve your problem solving skills and build effective problem solving strategies

Design your next session with SessionLab

Join the 150,000+ facilitators  using SessionLab.

What is a problem solving process?

What are the problem solving steps I need to follow?

Problem solving strategies

What skills do i need to be an effective problem solver, how can i improve my problem solving skills.

Solving problems is like baking a cake. You can go straight into the kitchen without a recipe or the right ingredients and do your best, but the end result is unlikely to be very tasty!

Using a process to bake a cake allows you to use the best ingredients without waste, collect the right tools, account for allergies, decide whether it is a birthday or wedding cake, and then bake efficiently and on time. The result is a better cake that is fit for purpose, tastes better and has created less mess in the kitchen. Also, it should have chocolate sprinkles. Having a step by step process to solve organizational problems allows you to go through each stage methodically and ensure you are trying to solve the right problems and select the most appropriate, effective solutions.

What are the problem solving steps I need to follow?

All problem solving processes go through a number of steps in order to move from identifying a problem to resolving it.

Depending on your problem solving model and who you ask, there can be anything between four and nine problem solving steps you should follow in order to find the right solution. Whatever framework you and your group use, there are some key items that should be addressed in order to have an effective process.

We’ve looked at problem solving processes from sources such as the American Society for Quality and their four step approach , and Mediate ‘s six step process. By reflecting on those and our own problem solving processes, we’ve come up with a sequence of seven problem solving steps we feel best covers everything you need in order to effectively solve problems.

1. Problem identification

The first stage of any problem solving process is to identify the problem or problems you might want to solve. Effective problem solving strategies always begin by allowing a group scope to articulate what they believe the problem to be and then coming to some consensus over which problem they approach first. Problem solving activities used at this stage often have a focus on creating frank, open discussion so that potential problems can be brought to the surface.

2. Problem analysis

Though this step is not a million miles from problem identification, problem analysis deserves to be considered separately. It can often be an overlooked part of the process and is instrumental when it comes to developing effective solutions.

The process of problem analysis means ensuring that the problem you are seeking to solve is the right problem . As part of this stage, you may look deeper and try to find the root cause of a specific problem at a team or organizational level.

Remember that problem solving strategies should not only be focused on putting out fires in the short term but developing long term solutions that deal with the root cause of organizational challenges.

Whatever your approach, analyzing a problem is crucial in being able to select an appropriate solution and the problem solving skills deployed in this stage are beneficial for the rest of the process and ensuring the solutions you create are fit for purpose.

3. Solution generation

Once your group has nailed down the particulars of the problem you wish to solve, you want to encourage a free flow of ideas connecting to solving that problem. This can take the form of problem solving games that encourage creative thinking or problem solving activities designed to produce working prototypes of possible solutions.

The key to ensuring the success of this stage of the problem solving process is to encourage quick, creative thinking and create an open space where all ideas are considered. The best solutions can come from unlikely places and by using problem solving techniques that celebrate invention, you might come up with solution gold.

4. Solution development

No solution is likely to be perfect right out of the gate. It’s important to discuss and develop the solutions your group has come up with over the course of following the previous problem solving steps in order to arrive at the best possible solution. Problem solving games used in this stage involve lots of critical thinking, measuring potential effort and impact, and looking at possible solutions analytically.

During this stage, you will often ask your team to iterate and improve upon your frontrunning solutions and develop them further. Remember that problem solving strategies always benefit from a multitude of voices and opinions, and not to let ego get involved when it comes to choosing which solutions to develop and take further.

Finding the best solution is the goal of all problem solving workshops and here is the place to ensure that your solution is well thought out, sufficiently robust and fit for purpose.

5. Decision making

Nearly there! Once your group has reached consensus and selected a solution that applies to the problem at hand you have some decisions to make. You will want to work on allocating ownership of the project, figure out who will do what, how the success of the solution will be measured and decide the next course of action.

The decision making stage is a part of the problem solving process that can get missed or taken as for granted. Fail to properly allocate roles and plan out how a solution will actually be implemented and it less likely to be successful in solving the problem.

Have clear accountabilities, actions, timeframes, and follow-ups. Make these decisions and set clear next-steps in the problem solving workshop so that everyone is aligned and you can move forward effectively as a group.

Ensuring that you plan for the roll-out of a solution is one of the most important problem solving steps. Without adequate planning or oversight, it can prove impossible to measure success or iterate further if the problem was not solved.

6. Solution implementation

This is what we were waiting for! All problem solving strategies have the end goal of implementing a solution and solving a problem in mind.

Remember that in order for any solution to be successful, you need to help your group through all of the previous problem solving steps thoughtfully. Only then can you ensure that you are solving the right problem but also that you have developed the correct solution and can then successfully implement and measure the impact of that solution.

Project management and communication skills are key here – your solution may need to adjust when out in the wild or you might discover new challenges along the way.

7. Solution evaluation

So you and your team developed a great solution to a problem and have a gut feeling its been solved. Work done, right? Wrong. All problem solving strategies benefit from evaluation, consideration, and feedback. You might find that the solution does not work for everyone, might create new problems, or is potentially so successful that you will want to roll it out to larger teams or as part of other initiatives.

None of that is possible without taking the time to evaluate the success of the solution you developed in your problem solving model and adjust if necessary.

Remember that the problem solving process is often iterative and it can be common to not solve complex issues on the first try. Even when this is the case, you and your team will have generated learning that will be important for future problem solving workshops or in other parts of the organization.

It’s worth underlining how important record keeping is throughout the problem solving process. If a solution didn’t work, you need to have the data and records to see why that was the case. If you go back to the drawing board, notes from the previous workshop can help save time. Data and insight is invaluable at every stage of the problem solving process and this one is no different.

Problem solving workshops made easy

Problem solving strategies are methods of approaching and facilitating the process of problem-solving with a set of techniques , actions, and processes. Different strategies are more effective if you are trying to solve broad problems such as achieving higher growth versus more focused problems like, how do we improve our customer onboarding process?

Broadly, the problem solving steps outlined above should be included in any problem solving strategy though choosing where to focus your time and what approaches should be taken is where they begin to differ. You might find that some strategies ask for the problem identification to be done prior to the session or that everything happens in the course of a one day workshop.

The key similarity is that all good problem solving strategies are structured and designed. Four hours of open discussion is never going to be as productive as a four-hour workshop designed to lead a group through a problem solving process.

Good problem solving strategies are tailored to the team, organization and problem you will be attempting to solve. Here are some example problem solving strategies you can learn from or use to get started.

Use a workshop to lead a team through a group process

Often, the first step to solving problems or organizational challenges is bringing a group together effectively. Most teams have the tools, knowledge, and expertise necessary to solve their challenges – they just need some guidance in how to use leverage those skills and a structure and format that allows people to focus their energies.

Facilitated workshops are one of the most effective ways of solving problems of any scale. By designing and planning your workshop carefully, you can tailor the approach and scope to best fit the needs of your team and organization.

Problem solving workshop

Creating a bespoke, tailored process
Tackling problems of any size
Building in-house workshop ability and encouraging their use

Workshops are an effective strategy for solving problems. By using tried and test facilitation techniques and methods, you can design and deliver a workshop that is perfectly suited to the unique variables of your organization. You may only have the capacity for a half-day workshop and so need a problem solving process to match.

By using our session planner tool and importing methods from our library of 700+ facilitation techniques, you can create the right problem solving workshop for your team. It might be that you want to encourage creative thinking or look at things from a new angle to unblock your groups approach to problem solving. By tailoring your workshop design to the purpose, you can help ensure great results.

One of the main benefits of a workshop is the structured approach to problem solving. Not only does this mean that the workshop itself will be successful, but many of the methods and techniques will help your team improve their working processes outside of the workshop.

We believe that workshops are one of the best tools you can use to improve the way your team works together. Start with a problem solving workshop and then see what team building, culture or design workshops can do for your organization!

Run a design sprint

Great for:

aligning large, multi-discipline teams
quickly designing and testing solutions
tackling large, complex organizational challenges and breaking them down into smaller tasks

By using design thinking principles and methods, a design sprint is a great way of identifying, prioritizing and prototyping solutions to long term challenges that can help solve major organizational problems with quick action and measurable results.

Some familiarity with design thinking is useful, though not integral, and this strategy can really help a team align if there is some discussion around which problems should be approached first.

The stage-based structure of the design sprint is also very useful for teams new to design thinking. The inspiration phase, where you look to competitors that have solved your problem, and the rapid prototyping and testing phases are great for introducing new concepts that will benefit a team in all their future work.

It can be common for teams to look inward for solutions and so looking to the market for solutions you can iterate on can be very productive. Instilling an agile prototyping and testing mindset can also be great when helping teams move forwards – generating and testing solutions quickly can help save time in the long run and is also pretty exciting!

Break problems down into smaller issues

Organizational challenges and problems are often complicated and large scale in nature. Sometimes, trying to resolve such an issue in one swoop is simply unachievable or overwhelming. Try breaking down such problems into smaller issues that you can work on step by step. You may not be able to solve the problem of churning customers off the bat, but you can work with your team to identify smaller effort but high impact elements and work on those first.

This problem solving strategy can help a team generate momentum, prioritize and get some easy wins. It’s also a great strategy to employ with teams who are just beginning to learn how to approach the problem solving process. If you want some insight into a way to employ this strategy, we recommend looking at our design sprint template below!

Use guiding frameworks or try new methodologies

Some problems are best solved by introducing a major shift in perspective or by using new methodologies that encourage your team to think differently.

Props and tools such as Methodkit , which uses a card-based toolkit for facilitation, or Lego Serious Play can be great ways to engage your team and find an inclusive, democratic problem solving strategy. Remember that play and creativity are great tools for achieving change and whatever the challenge, engaging your participants can be very effective where other strategies may have failed.

LEGO Serious Play

Improving core problem solving skills
Thinking outside of the box
Encouraging creative solutions

LEGO Serious Play is a problem solving methodology designed to get participants thinking differently by using 3D models and kinesthetic learning styles. By physically building LEGO models based on questions and exercises, participants are encouraged to think outside of the box and create their own responses.

Collaborate LEGO Serious Play exercises are also used to encourage communication and build problem solving skills in a group. By using this problem solving process, you can often help different kinds of learners and personality types contribute and unblock organizational problems with creative thinking.

Problem solving strategies like LEGO Serious Play are super effective at helping a team solve more skills-based problems such as communication between teams or a lack of creative thinking. Some problems are not suited to LEGO Serious Play and require a different problem solving strategy.

Card Decks and Method Kits

New facilitators or non-facilitators
Approaching difficult subjects with a simple, creative framework
Engaging those with varied learning styles

Card decks and method kids are great tools for those new to facilitation or for whom facilitation is not the primary role. Card decks such as the emotional culture deck can be used for complete workshops and in many cases, can be used right out of the box. Methodkit has a variety of kits designed for scenarios ranging from personal development through to personas and global challenges so you can find the right deck for your particular needs.

Having an easy to use framework that encourages creativity or a new approach can take some of the friction or planning difficulties out of the workshop process and energize a team in any setting. Simplicity is the key with these methods. By ensuring everyone on your team can get involved and engage with the process as quickly as possible can really contribute to the success of your problem solving strategy.

Source external advice

Looking to peers, experts and external facilitators can be a great way of approaching the problem solving process. Your team may not have the necessary expertise, insights of experience to tackle some issues, or you might simply benefit from a fresh perspective. Some problems may require bringing together an entire team, and coaching managers or team members individually might be the right approach. Remember that not all problems are best resolved in the same manner.

If you’re a solo entrepreneur, peer groups, coaches and mentors can also be invaluable at not only solving specific business problems, but in providing a support network for resolving future challenges. One great approach is to join a Mastermind Group and link up with like-minded individuals and all grow together. Remember that however you approach the sourcing of external advice, do so thoughtfully, respectfully and honestly. Reciprocate where you can and prepare to be surprised by just how kind and helpful your peers can be!

Mastermind Group

Solo entrepreneurs or small teams with low capacity
Peer learning and gaining outside expertise
Getting multiple external points of view quickly

Problem solving in large organizations with lots of skilled team members is one thing, but how about if you work for yourself or in a very small team without the capacity to get the most from a design sprint or LEGO Serious Play session?

A mastermind group – sometimes known as a peer advisory board – is where a group of people come together to support one another in their own goals, challenges, and businesses. Each participant comes to the group with their own purpose and the other members of the group will help them create solutions, brainstorm ideas, and support one another.

Mastermind groups are very effective in creating an energized, supportive atmosphere that can deliver meaningful results. Learning from peers from outside of your organization or industry can really help unlock new ways of thinking and drive growth. Access to the experience and skills of your peers can be invaluable in helping fill the gaps in your own ability, particularly in young companies.

A mastermind group is a great solution for solo entrepreneurs, small teams, or for organizations that feel that external expertise or fresh perspectives will be beneficial for them. It is worth noting that Mastermind groups are often only as good as the participants and what they can bring to the group. Participants need to be committed, engaged and understand how to work in this context.

Coaching and mentoring

Focused learning and development
Filling skills gaps
Working on a range of challenges over time

Receiving advice from a business coach or building a mentor/mentee relationship can be an effective way of resolving certain challenges. The one-to-one format of most coaching and mentor relationships can really help solve the challenges those individuals are having and benefit the organization as a result.

A great mentor can be invaluable when it comes to spotting potential problems before they arise and coming to understand a mentee very well has a host of other business benefits. You might run an internal mentorship program to help develop your team’s problem solving skills and strategies or as part of a large learning and development program. External coaches can also be an important part of your problem solving strategy, filling skills gaps for your management team or helping with specific business issues.

Now we’ve explored the problem solving process and the steps you will want to go through in order to have an effective session, let’s look at the skills you and your team need to be more effective problem solvers.

Problem solving skills are highly sought after, whatever industry or team you work in. Organizations are keen to employ people who are able to approach problems thoughtfully and find strong, realistic solutions. Whether you are a facilitator , a team leader or a developer, being an effective problem solver is a skill you’ll want to develop.

Problem solving skills form a whole suite of techniques and approaches that an individual uses to not only identify problems but to discuss them productively before then developing appropriate solutions.

Here are some of the most important problem solving skills everyone from executives to junior staff members should learn. We’ve also included an activity or exercise from the SessionLab library that can help you and your team develop that skill.

If you’re running a workshop or training session to try and improve problem solving skills in your team, try using these methods to supercharge your process!

Active listening

Active listening is one of the most important skills anyone who works with people can possess. In short, active listening is a technique used to not only better understand what is being said by an individual, but also to be more aware of the underlying message the speaker is trying to convey. When it comes to problem solving, active listening is integral for understanding the position of every participant and to clarify the challenges, ideas and solutions they bring to the table.

Some active listening skills include:

Paying complete attention to the speaker.
Removing distractions.
Avoid interruption.
Taking the time to fully understand before preparing a rebuttal.
Responding respectfully and appropriately.
Demonstrate attentiveness and positivity with an open posture, making eye contact with the speaker, smiling and nodding if appropriate. Show that you are listening and encourage them to continue.
Be aware of and respectful of feelings. Judge the situation and respond appropriately. You can disagree without being disrespectful.
Observe body language.
Paraphrase what was said in your own words, either mentally or verbally.
Remain neutral.
Reflect and take a moment before responding.
Ask deeper questions based on what is said and clarify points where necessary.

Active Listening #hyperisland #skills #active listening #remote-friendly This activity supports participants to reflect on a question and generate their own solutions using simple principles of active listening and peer coaching. It’s an excellent introduction to active listening but can also be used with groups that are already familiar with it. Participants work in groups of three and take turns being: “the subject”, the listener, and the observer.

Analytical skills

All problem solving models require strong analytical skills, particularly during the beginning of the process and when it comes to analyzing how solutions have performed.

Analytical skills are primarily focused on performing an effective analysis by collecting, studying and parsing data related to a problem or opportunity.

It often involves spotting patterns, being able to see things from different perspectives and using observable facts and data to make suggestions or produce insight.

Analytical skills are also important at every stage of the problem solving process and by having these skills, you can ensure that any ideas or solutions you create or backed up analytically and have been sufficiently thought out.

Nine Whys #innovation #issue analysis #liberating structures With breathtaking simplicity, you can rapidly clarify for individuals and a group what is essentially important in their work. You can quickly reveal when a compelling purpose is missing in a gathering and avoid moving forward without clarity. When a group discovers an unambiguous shared purpose, more freedom and more responsibility are unleashed. You have laid the foundation for spreading and scaling innovations with fidelity.

Collaboration

Trying to solve problems on your own is difficult. Being able to collaborate effectively, with a free exchange of ideas, to delegate and be a productive member of a team is hugely important to all problem solving strategies.

Remember that whatever your role, collaboration is integral, and in a problem solving process, you are all working together to find the best solution for everyone.

Marshmallow challenge with debriefing #teamwork #team #leadership #collaboration In eighteen minutes, teams must build the tallest free-standing structure out of 20 sticks of spaghetti, one yard of tape, one yard of string, and one marshmallow. The marshmallow needs to be on top. The Marshmallow Challenge was developed by Tom Wujec, who has done the activity with hundreds of groups around the world. Visit the Marshmallow Challenge website for more information. This version has an extra debriefing question added with sample questions focusing on roles within the team.

Communication

Being an effective communicator means being empathetic, clear and succinct, asking the right questions, and demonstrating active listening skills throughout any discussion or meeting.

In a problem solving setting, you need to communicate well in order to progress through each stage of the process effectively. As a team leader, it may also fall to you to facilitate communication between parties who may not see eye to eye. Effective communication also means helping others to express themselves and be heard in a group.

Bus Trip #feedback #communication #appreciation #closing #thiagi #team This is one of my favourite feedback games. I use Bus Trip at the end of a training session or a meeting, and I use it all the time. The game creates a massive amount of energy with lots of smiles, laughs, and sometimes even a teardrop or two.

Creative problem solving skills can be some of the best tools in your arsenal. Thinking creatively, being able to generate lots of ideas and come up with out of the box solutions is useful at every step of the process.

The kinds of problems you will likely discuss in a problem solving workshop are often difficult to solve, and by approaching things in a fresh, creative manner, you can often create more innovative solutions.

Having practical creative skills is also a boon when it comes to problem solving. If you can help create quality design sketches and prototypes in record time, it can help bring a team to alignment more quickly or provide a base for further iteration.

The paper clip method #sharing #creativity #warm up #idea generation #brainstorming The power of brainstorming. A training for project leaders, creativity training, and to catalyse getting new solutions.

Critical thinking

Critical thinking is one of the fundamental problem solving skills you’ll want to develop when working on developing solutions. Critical thinking is the ability to analyze, rationalize and evaluate while being aware of personal bias, outlying factors and remaining open-minded.

Defining and analyzing problems without deploying critical thinking skills can mean you and your team go down the wrong path. Developing solutions to complex issues requires critical thinking too – ensuring your team considers all possibilities and rationally evaluating them.

Agreement-Certainty Matrix #issue analysis #liberating structures #problem solving You can help individuals or groups avoid the frequent mistake of trying to solve a problem with methods that are not adapted to the nature of their challenge. The combination of two questions makes it possible to easily sort challenges into four categories: simple, complicated, complex , and chaotic . A problem is simple when it can be solved reliably with practices that are easy to duplicate. It is complicated when experts are required to devise a sophisticated solution that will yield the desired results predictably. A problem is complex when there are several valid ways to proceed but outcomes are not predictable in detail. Chaotic is when the context is too turbulent to identify a path forward. A loose analogy may be used to describe these differences: simple is like following a recipe, complicated like sending a rocket to the moon, complex like raising a child, and chaotic is like the game “Pin the Tail on the Donkey.” The Liberating Structures Matching Matrix in Chapter 5 can be used as the first step to clarify the nature of a challenge and avoid the mismatches between problems and solutions that are frequently at the root of chronic, recurring problems.

Data analysis

Though it shares lots of space with general analytical skills, data analysis skills are something you want to cultivate in their own right in order to be an effective problem solver.

Being good at data analysis doesn’t just mean being able to find insights from data, but also selecting the appropriate data for a given issue, interpreting it effectively and knowing how to model and present that data. Depending on the problem at hand, it might also include a working knowledge of specific data analysis tools and procedures.

Having a solid grasp of data analysis techniques is useful if you’re leading a problem solving workshop but if you’re not an expert, don’t worry. Bring people into the group who has this skill set and help your team be more effective as a result.

Decision making

All problems need a solution and all solutions require that someone make the decision to implement them. Without strong decision making skills, teams can become bogged down in discussion and less effective as a result.

Making decisions is a key part of the problem solving process. It’s important to remember that decision making is not restricted to the leadership team. Every staff member makes decisions every day and developing these skills ensures that your team is able to solve problems at any scale. Remember that making decisions does not mean leaping to the first solution but weighing up the options and coming to an informed, well thought out solution to any given problem that works for the whole team.

Lightning Decision Jam (LDJ) #action #decision making #problem solving #issue analysis #innovation #design #remote-friendly The problem with anything that requires creative thinking is that it’s easy to get lost—lose focus and fall into the trap of having useless, open-ended, unstructured discussions. Here’s the most effective solution I’ve found: Replace all open, unstructured discussion with a clear process. What to use this exercise for: Anything which requires a group of people to make decisions, solve problems or discuss challenges. It’s always good to frame an LDJ session with a broad topic, here are some examples: The conversion flow of our checkout Our internal design process How we organise events Keeping up with our competition Improving sales flow

Dependability

Most complex organizational problems require multiple people to be involved in delivering the solution. Ensuring that the team and organization can depend on you to take the necessary actions and communicate where necessary is key to ensuring problems are solved effectively.

Being dependable also means working to deadlines and to brief. It is often a matter of creating trust in a team so that everyone can depend on one another to complete the agreed actions in the agreed time frame so that the team can move forward together. Being undependable can create problems of friction and can limit the effectiveness of your solutions so be sure to bear this in mind throughout a project.

Team Purpose & Culture #team #hyperisland #culture #remote-friendly This is an essential process designed to help teams define their purpose (why they exist) and their culture (how they work together to achieve that purpose). Defining these two things will help any team to be more focused and aligned. With support of tangible examples from other companies, the team members work as individuals and a group to codify the way they work together. The goal is a visual manifestation of both the purpose and culture that can be put up in the team’s work space.

Emotional intelligence

Emotional intelligence is an important skill for any successful team member, whether communicating internally or with clients or users. In the problem solving process, emotional intelligence means being attuned to how people are feeling and thinking, communicating effectively and being self-aware of what you bring to a room.

There are often differences of opinion when working through problem solving processes, and it can be easy to let things become impassioned or combative. Developing your emotional intelligence means being empathetic to your colleagues and managing your own emotions throughout the problem and solution process. Be kind, be thoughtful and put your points across care and attention.

Being emotionally intelligent is a skill for life and by deploying it at work, you can not only work efficiently but empathetically. Check out the emotional culture workshop template for more!

Facilitation

As we’ve clarified in our facilitation skills post, facilitation is the art of leading people through processes towards agreed-upon objectives in a manner that encourages participation, ownership, and creativity by all those involved. While facilitation is a set of interrelated skills in itself, the broad definition of facilitation can be invaluable when it comes to problem solving. Leading a team through a problem solving process is made more effective if you improve and utilize facilitation skills – whether you’re a manager, team leader or external stakeholder.

The Six Thinking Hats #creative thinking #meeting facilitation #problem solving #issue resolution #idea generation #conflict resolution The Six Thinking Hats are used by individuals and groups to separate out conflicting styles of thinking. They enable and encourage a group of people to think constructively together in exploring and implementing change, rather than using argument to fight over who is right and who is wrong.

Flexibility

Being flexible is a vital skill when it comes to problem solving. This does not mean immediately bowing to pressure or changing your opinion quickly: instead, being flexible is all about seeing things from new perspectives, receiving new information and factoring it into your thought process.

Flexibility is also important when it comes to rolling out solutions. It might be that other organizational projects have greater priority or require the same resources as your chosen solution. Being flexible means understanding needs and challenges across the team and being open to shifting or arranging your own schedule as necessary. Again, this does not mean immediately making way for other projects. It’s about articulating your own needs, understanding the needs of others and being able to come to a meaningful compromise.

The Creativity Dice #creativity #problem solving #thiagi #issue analysis Too much linear thinking is hazardous to creative problem solving. To be creative, you should approach the problem (or the opportunity) from different points of view. You should leave a thought hanging in mid-air and move to another. This skipping around prevents premature closure and lets your brain incubate one line of thought while you consciously pursue another.

Working in any group can lead to unconscious elements of groupthink or situations in which you may not wish to be entirely honest. Disagreeing with the opinions of the executive team or wishing to save the feelings of a coworker can be tricky to navigate, but being honest is absolutely vital when to comes to developing effective solutions and ensuring your voice is heard.

Remember that being honest does not mean being brutally candid. You can deliver your honest feedback and opinions thoughtfully and without creating friction by using other skills such as emotional intelligence.

Explore your Values #hyperisland #skills #values #remote-friendly Your Values is an exercise for participants to explore what their most important values are. It’s done in an intuitive and rapid way to encourage participants to follow their intuitive feeling rather than over-thinking and finding the “correct” values. It is a good exercise to use to initiate reflection and dialogue around personal values.

Initiative

The problem solving process is multi-faceted and requires different approaches at certain points of the process. Taking initiative to bring problems to the attention of the team, collect data or lead the solution creating process is always valuable. You might even roadtest your own small scale solutions or brainstorm before a session. Taking initiative is particularly effective if you have good deal of knowledge in that area or have ownership of a particular project and want to get things kickstarted.

That said, be sure to remember to honor the process and work in service of the team. If you are asked to own one part of the problem solving process and you don’t complete that task because your initiative leads you to work on something else, that’s not an effective method of solving business challenges.

15% Solutions #action #liberating structures #remote-friendly You can reveal the actions, however small, that everyone can do immediately. At a minimum, these will create momentum, and that may make a BIG difference. 15% Solutions show that there is no reason to wait around, feel powerless, or fearful. They help people pick it up a level. They get individuals and the group to focus on what is within their discretion instead of what they cannot change. With a very simple question, you can flip the conversation to what can be done and find solutions to big problems that are often distributed widely in places not known in advance. Shifting a few grains of sand may trigger a landslide and change the whole landscape.

Impartiality

A particularly useful problem solving skill for product owners or managers is the ability to remain impartial throughout much of the process. In practice, this means treating all points of view and ideas brought forward in a meeting equally and ensuring that your own areas of interest or ownership are not favored over others.

There may be a stage in the process where a decision maker has to weigh the cost and ROI of possible solutions against the company roadmap though even then, ensuring that the decision made is based on merit and not personal opinion.

Empathy map #frame insights #create #design #issue analysis An empathy map is a tool to help a design team to empathize with the people they are designing for. You can make an empathy map for a group of people or for a persona. To be used after doing personas when more insights are needed.

Being a good leader means getting a team aligned, energized and focused around a common goal. In the problem solving process, strong leadership helps ensure that the process is efficient, that any conflicts are resolved and that a team is managed in the direction of success.

It’s common for managers or executives to assume this role in a problem solving workshop, though it’s important that the leader maintains impartiality and does not bulldoze the group in a particular direction. Remember that good leadership means working in service of the purpose and team and ensuring the workshop is a safe space for employees of any level to contribute. Take a look at our leadership games and activities post for more exercises and methods to help improve leadership in your organization.

Leadership Pizza #leadership #team #remote-friendly This leadership development activity offers a self-assessment framework for people to first identify what skills, attributes and attitudes they find important for effective leadership, and then assess their own development and initiate goal setting.

In the context of problem solving, mediation is important in keeping a team engaged, happy and free of conflict. When leading or facilitating a problem solving workshop, you are likely to run into differences of opinion. Depending on the nature of the problem, certain issues may be brought up that are emotive in nature.

Being an effective mediator means helping those people on either side of such a divide are heard, listen to one another and encouraged to find common ground and a resolution. Mediating skills are useful for leaders and managers in many situations and the problem solving process is no different.

Conflict Responses #hyperisland #team #issue resolution A workshop for a team to reflect on past conflicts, and use them to generate guidelines for effective conflict handling. The workshop uses the Thomas-Killman model of conflict responses to frame a reflective discussion. Use it to open up a discussion around conflict with a team.

Planning

Solving organizational problems is much more effective when following a process or problem solving model. Planning skills are vital in order to structure, deliver and follow-through on a problem solving workshop and ensure your solutions are intelligently deployed.

Planning skills include the ability to organize tasks and a team, plan and design the process and take into account any potential challenges. Taking the time to plan carefully can save time and frustration later in the process and is valuable for ensuring a team is positioned for success.

3 Action Steps #hyperisland #action #remote-friendly This is a small-scale strategic planning session that helps groups and individuals to take action toward a desired change. It is often used at the end of a workshop or programme. The group discusses and agrees on a vision, then creates some action steps that will lead them towards that vision. The scope of the challenge is also defined, through discussion of the helpful and harmful factors influencing the group.

Prioritization

As organisations grow, the scale and variation of problems they face multiplies. Your team or is likely to face numerous challenges in different areas and so having the skills to analyze and prioritize becomes very important, particularly for those in leadership roles.

A thorough problem solving process is likely to deliver multiple solutions and you may have several different problems you wish to solve simultaneously. Prioritization is the ability to measure the importance, value, and effectiveness of those possible solutions and choose which to enact and in what order. The process of prioritization is integral in ensuring the biggest challenges are addressed with the most impactful solutions.

Impact and Effort Matrix #gamestorming #decision making #action #remote-friendly In this decision-making exercise, possible actions are mapped based on two factors: effort required to implement and potential impact. Categorizing ideas along these lines is a useful technique in decision making, as it obliges contributors to balance and evaluate suggested actions before committing to them.

Project management

Some problem solving skills are utilized in a workshop or ideation phases, while others come in useful when it comes to decision making. Overseeing an entire problem solving process and ensuring its success requires strong project management skills.

While project management incorporates many of the other skills listed here, it is important to note the distinction of considering all of the factors of a project and managing them successfully. Being able to negotiate with stakeholders, manage tasks, time and people, consider costs and ROI, and tie everything together is massively helpful when going through the problem solving process.

Record keeping

Working out meaningful solutions to organizational challenges is only one part of the process. Thoughtfully documenting and keeping records of each problem solving step for future consultation is important in ensuring efficiency and meaningful change.

For example, some problems may be lower priority than others but can be revisited in the future. If the team has ideated on solutions and found some are not up to the task, record those so you can rule them out and avoiding repeating work. Keeping records of the process also helps you improve and refine your problem solving model next time around!

Personal Kanban #gamestorming #action #agile #project planning Personal Kanban is a tool for organizing your work to be more efficient and productive. It is based on agile methods and principles.

Research skills

Conducting research to support both the identification of problems and the development of appropriate solutions is important for an effective process. Knowing where to go to collect research, how to conduct research efficiently, and identifying pieces of research are relevant are all things a good researcher can do well.

In larger groups, not everyone has to demonstrate this ability in order for a problem solving workshop to be effective. That said, having people with research skills involved in the process, particularly if they have existing area knowledge, can help ensure the solutions that are developed with data that supports their intention. Remember that being able to deliver the results of research efficiently and in a way the team can easily understand is also important. The best data in the world is only as effective as how it is delivered and interpreted.

Customer experience map #ideation #concepts #research #design #issue analysis #remote-friendly Customer experience mapping is a method of documenting and visualizing the experience a customer has as they use the product or service. It also maps out their responses to their experiences. To be used when there is a solution (even in a conceptual stage) that can be analyzed.

Risk management

Managing risk is an often overlooked part of the problem solving process. Solutions are often developed with the intention of reducing exposure to risk or solving issues that create risk but sometimes, great solutions are more experimental in nature and as such, deploying them needs to be carefully considered.

Managing risk means acknowledging that there may be risks associated with more out of the box solutions or trying new things, but that this must be measured against the possible benefits and other organizational factors.

Be informed, get the right data and stakeholders in the room and you can appropriately factor risk into your decision making process.

Decisions, Decisions… #communication #decision making #thiagi #action #issue analysis When it comes to decision-making, why are some of us more prone to take risks while others are risk-averse? One explanation might be the way the decision and options were presented. This exercise, based on Kahneman and Tversky’s classic study , illustrates how the framing effect influences our judgement and our ability to make decisions . The participants are divided into two groups. Both groups are presented with the same problem and two alternative programs for solving them. The two programs both have the same consequences but are presented differently. The debriefing discussion examines how the framing of the program impacted the participant’s decision.

Team-building

No single person is as good at problem solving as a team. Building an effective team and helping them come together around a common purpose is one of the most important problem solving skills, doubly so for leaders. By bringing a team together and helping them work efficiently, you pave the way for team ownership of a problem and the development of effective solutions.

In a problem solving workshop, it can be tempting to jump right into the deep end, though taking the time to break the ice, energize the team and align them with a game or exercise will pay off over the course of the day.

Remember that you will likely go through the problem solving process multiple times over an organization’s lifespan and building a strong team culture will make future problem solving more effective. It’s also great to work with people you know, trust and have fun with. Working on team building in and out of the problem solving process is a hallmark of successful teams that can work together to solve business problems.

9 Dimensions Team Building Activity #ice breaker #teambuilding #team #remote-friendly 9 Dimensions is a powerful activity designed to build relationships and trust among team members. There are 2 variations of this icebreaker. The first version is for teams who want to get to know each other better. The second version is for teams who want to explore how they are working together as a team.

Time management

The problem solving process is designed to lead a team from identifying a problem through to delivering a solution and evaluating its effectiveness. Without effective time management skills or timeboxing of tasks, it can be easy for a team to get bogged down or be inefficient.

By using a problem solving model and carefully designing your workshop, you can allocate time efficiently and trust that the process will deliver the results you need in a good timeframe.

Time management also comes into play when it comes to rolling out solutions, particularly those that are experimental in nature. Having a clear timeframe for implementing and evaluating solutions is vital for ensuring their success and being able to pivot if necessary.

Improving your skills at problem solving is often a career-long pursuit though there are methods you can use to make the learning process more efficient and to supercharge your problem solving skillset.

Remember that the skills you need to be a great problem solver have a large overlap with those skills you need to be effective in any role. Investing time and effort to develop your active listening or critical thinking skills is valuable in any context. Here are 7 ways to improve your problem solving skills.

Share best practices

Remember that your team is an excellent source of skills, wisdom, and techniques and that you should all take advantage of one another where possible. Best practices that one team has for solving problems, conducting research or making decisions should be shared across the organization. If you have in-house staff that have done active listening training or are data analysis pros, have them lead a training session.

Your team is one of your best resources. Create space and internal processes for the sharing of skills so that you can all grow together.

Ask for help and attend training

Once you’ve figured out you have a skills gap, the next step is to take action to fill that skills gap. That might be by asking your superior for training or coaching, or liaising with team members with that skill set. You might even attend specialized training for certain skills – active listening or critical thinking, for example, are business-critical skills that are regularly offered as part of a training scheme.

Whatever method you choose, remember that taking action of some description is necessary for growth. Whether that means practicing, getting help, attending training or doing some background reading, taking active steps to improve your skills is the way to go.

Learn a process

Problem solving can be complicated, particularly when attempting to solve large problems for the first time. Using a problem solving process helps give structure to your problem solving efforts and focus on creating outcomes, rather than worrying about the format.

Tools such as the seven-step problem solving process above are effective because not only do they feature steps that will help a team solve problems, they also develop skills along the way. Each step asks for people to engage with the process using different skills and in doing so, helps the team learn and grow together. Group processes of varying complexity and purpose can also be found in the SessionLab library of facilitation techniques . Using a tried and tested process and really help ease the learning curve for both those leading such a process, as well as those undergoing the purpose.

Effective teams make decisions about where they should and shouldn’t expend additional effort. By using a problem solving process, you can focus on the things that matter, rather than stumbling towards a solution haphazardly.

Create a feedback loop

Some skills gaps are more obvious than others. It’s possible that your perception of your active listening skills differs from those of your colleagues.

It’s valuable to create a system where team members can provide feedback in an ordered and friendly manner so they can all learn from one another. Only by identifying areas of improvement can you then work to improve them.

Remember that feedback systems require oversight and consideration so that they don’t turn into a place to complain about colleagues. Design the system intelligently so that you encourage the creation of learning opportunities, rather than encouraging people to list their pet peeves.

While practice might not make perfect, it does make the problem solving process easier. If you are having trouble with critical thinking, don’t shy away from doing it. Get involved where you can and stretch those muscles as regularly as possible.

Problem solving skills come more naturally to some than to others and that’s okay. Take opportunities to get involved and see where you can practice your skills in situations outside of a workshop context. Try collaborating in other circumstances at work or conduct data analysis on your own projects. You can often develop those skills you need for problem solving simply by doing them. Get involved!

Use expert exercises and methods

Learn from the best. Our library of 700+ facilitation techniques is full of activities and methods that help develop the skills you need to be an effective problem solver. Check out our templates to see how to approach problem solving and other organizational challenges in a structured and intelligent manner.

There is no single approach to improving problem solving skills, but by using the techniques employed by others you can learn from their example and develop processes that have seen proven results.

Try new ways of thinking and change your mindset

Using tried and tested exercises that you know well can help deliver results, but you do run the risk of missing out on the learning opportunities offered by new approaches. As with the problem solving process, changing your mindset can remove blockages and be used to develop your problem solving skills.

Most teams have members with mixed skill sets and specialties. Mix people from different teams and share skills and different points of view. Teach your customer support team how to use design thinking methods or help your developers with conflict resolution techniques. Try switching perspectives with facilitation techniques like Flip It! or by using new problem solving methodologies or models. Give design thinking, liberating structures or lego serious play a try if you want to try a new approach. You will find that framing problems in new ways and using existing skills in new contexts can be hugely useful for personal development and improving your skillset. It’s also a lot of fun to try new things. Give it a go!

Encountering business challenges and needing to find appropriate solutions is not unique to your organization. Lots of very smart people have developed methods, theories and approaches to help develop problem solving skills and create effective solutions. Learn from them!

Books like The Art of Thinking Clearly , Think Smarter, or Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow are great places to start, though it’s also worth looking at blogs related to organizations facing similar problems to yours, or browsing for success stories. Seeing how Dropbox massively increased growth and working backward can help you see the skills or approach you might be lacking to solve that same problem. Learning from others by reading their stories or approaches can be time-consuming but ultimately rewarding.

A tired, distracted mind is not in the best position to learn new skills. It can be tempted to burn the candle at both ends and develop problem solving skills outside of work. Absolutely use your time effectively and take opportunities for self-improvement, though remember that rest is hugely important and that without letting your brain rest, you cannot be at your most effective.

Creating distance between yourself and the problem you might be facing can also be useful. By letting an idea sit, you can find that a better one presents itself or you can develop it further. Take regular breaks when working and create a space for downtime. Remember that working smarter is preferable to working harder and that self-care is important for any effective learning or improvement process.

Want to design better group processes?

Over to you

Now we’ve explored some of the key problem solving skills and the problem solving steps necessary for an effective process, you’re ready to begin developing more effective solutions and leading problem solving workshops.

Need more inspiration? Check out our post on problem solving activities you can use when guiding a group towards a great solution in your next workshop or meeting. Have questions? Did you have a great problem solving technique you use with your team? Get in touch in the comments below. We’d love to chat!

Design your next workshop with SessionLab

Join the 150,000 facilitators using SessionLab

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

13 Leadership, Roles, and Problem Solving in Groups

Introduction

13.1 Group Member Roles

Task-related roles and behaviors.

Task roles and their related behaviors contribute directly to the group’s completion of a task or achievement of its goal or purpose. Task-related roles typically serve leadership, informational, or procedural functions. In this section, we will discuss the following roles and behaviors: task leader, expediter, information provider, information seeker, gatekeeper, and recorder.

Task Leader

Within any group, there may be a task leader. This person may have a high group status because of his or her maturity, problem-solving abilities, knowledge, and/or leadership experience and skills. This person acts to help the group complete its task (Cragan & Wright, 1991). This person may be a designated or emergent leader, but in either case, task leaders tend to talk more during group interactions than other group members and also tend to do more work in the group. Depending on the number of tasks a group has, there may be more than one task leader, especially if the tasks require different sets of skills or knowledge. Because of the added responsibilities of being a task leader, people in these roles may experience higher levels of stress. A task leader could lessen these stresses, however, through some of the maintenance role behaviors that will be discussed later.

We can divide task-leader behaviors two types: substantive and procedural (Pavitt, 1999). The substantive leader is the “idea person” who communicates “big picture” thoughts and suggestions that feed group discussion. The procedural leader is the person who gives the most guidance, perhaps following up on the ideas generated by the substantive leader. A skilled and experienced task leader may be able to perform both of these roles, but when the roles are filled by two different people, the person considered the procedural leader is more likely than the substantive leader to be viewed by members as the overall group leader. This indicates that task-focused groups assign more status to the person who actually guides the group toward the completion of the task (a “doer”) than the person who comes up with ideas (the “thinker”).

The expediter is a task-related role that functions to keep the group on track toward completing its task by managing the agenda and setting and assessing goals in order to monitor the group’s progress (Burke, Georganta, & Marlow, 2019). An expediter doesn’t push group members mindlessly along toward the completion of their task; an expediter must have a good sense of when a topic has been sufficiently discussed or when a group’s extended focus on one area has led to diminishing returns. In such cases, the expediter may say, “Now that we’ve had a thorough discussion of the pros and cons of switching the office from PCs to Macs, which side do you think has more support?” or “We’ve spent half of this meeting looking for examples of what other libraries have done and haven’t found anything useful. Maybe we should switch gears so we can get something concrete done tonight.”

To avoid the perception that group members are being rushed, a skilled expediter can demonstrate good active-listening skills by paraphrasing what has been discussed and summarizing what has been accomplished in such a way that makes it easier for group members to see the need to move on.

Information Provider

The information provider role includes behaviors that are more evenly shared compared to other roles, as ideally, all group members present new ideas, initiate discussions of new topics, and contribute their own relevant knowledge and experiences Burke, Georganta, & Marlow, 2019). When group members meet, they each possess different types of information. Early group meetings may consist of group members taking turns briefing each other on their area of expertise. In other situations, one group member may be chosen because of his or her specialized knowledge. This person may be the primary information provider for all other group members. For example, one of our colleagues was selected to serve on a university committee reviewing our undergraduate learning goals. Since her official role was to serve as the “faculty expert” on the subcommittee related to speaking, she played a more central information-provider function for the group during most of the initial meetings. Since other people on the subcommittee were not as familiar with speaking and its place within higher education curriculum, it made sense that information-providing behaviors were not as evenly distributed.

Information Seeker

The information seeker asks for more information, elaboration, or clarification on items relevant to the group’s task Burke, Georganta, & Marlow, 2019). The information sought may include facts or group member opinions. In general, information seekers ask questions for clarification, but they can also ask questions that help provide an important evaluative function. Most groups could benefit from more critically oriented information-seeking behaviors. As our discussion of groupthink notes, critical questioning helps increase the quality of ideas and group outcomes and helps avoid groupthink. By asking for more information, people have to defend (in a non-adversarial way) and/or support their claims, which can help ensure that the information is credible, relevant, and thoroughly considered. When information seeking or questioning occurs because of poor listening skills, it risks negatively affecting the group. Skilled information providers and seekers are also good active listeners. They increase all group members’ knowledge when they paraphrase and ask clarifying questions about the information presented.

The gatekeeper manages the flow of conversation in a group in order to achieve an appropriate balance so that all group members get to participate in a meaningful way Burke, Georganta, & Marlow, 2019). The gatekeeper may prompt others to provide information by saying something like “Let’s each share one idea we have for a movie to show during Black History Month.” He or she may also help correct an imbalance between members who have provided much information already and members who have been quiet by saying something like “Aretha, we’ve heard a lot from you today. Let us hear from someone else. Beau, what are your thoughts on Aretha’s suggestion?” Gatekeepers should be cautious about “calling people out” or at least making them feel that way. Instead of scolding someone for not participating, the gatekeeper should be ask a member to contribute something specific instead of just asking if that person has anything to add. Since gatekeepers make group members feel included, they also service the relational aspects of the group.

The recorder takes notes on the discussion and activities that occur during a group meeting. The recorder is the only role that is essentially limited to one person at a time since in most cases it would not be necessary or beneficial to have more than one person recording. At less formal meetings, there may be no recorder, while at formal meetings there is usually a person who records meeting minutes, which are an overview of what occurred at the meeting. Each committee will have different rules or norms regarding the level of detail within and availability of the minutes.

Maintenance Roles and Behaviors

Maintenance roles and their corresponding behaviors function to create and maintain social cohesion and fulfill the interpersonal needs of group members. All these role behaviors require strong and sensitive interpersonal skills. The maintenance roles we will discuss in this section include social-emotional leader, supporter, tension releaser, harmonizer, and interpreter.

Social-Emotional Leader

Photograph from behind of 4 people with their arms around each other, standing in a field.

The social-emotional leader within a group may perform a variety of maintenance roles and is generally someone who is well liked by the other group members and whose role behaviors complement but do not compete with the task leader. The social-emotional leader may also reassure and support the task leader when he or she is stressed (Koch, 2013). In general, the social-emotional leader is a reflective thinker who has good perception skills that he or she uses to analyze the group dynamics and climate and then initiate the appropriate role behaviors to maintain a positive climate. This is not a role that shifts from person to person. While all members of the group perform some maintenance role behaviors at various times, the socioemotional leader reliably functions to support group members and maintain a positive relational climate. Social-emotional leadership functions can actually become detrimental to the group and lead to less satisfaction among members when they view maintenance behaviors as redundant or as too distracting from the task (Pavitt, 1999).

The role of supporter is characterized by communication behaviors that encourage other group members and provide emotional support as needed (Koch, 2013). The supporter’s work primarily occurs in one-on-one exchanges that are more intimate and in-depth than the exchanges that take place during full group meetings. While many group members may make supporting comments publicly at group meetings, these comments are typically superficial and/or brief. A supporter uses active empathetic listening skills to connect with group members who may seem down or frustrated by saying something like “Tayesha, you seemed kind of down today. Is there anything you’d like to talk about?” Supporters also follow up on previous conversations with group members to maintain the connections they have already established by saying things like “Alan, I remember you said your mom is having surgery this weekend. I hope it goes well. Let me know if you need anything.”

Tension Releaser

The tension releaser is someone who is naturally funny and sensitive to the personalities of the group and the dynamics of any given situation and who uses these qualities to manage the frustration level of the group (Koch, 2013). Being funny is not enough to fulfill this role, as jokes or comments could indeed be humorous to other group members but are delivered at an inopportune time, which ultimately creates rather than releases tension. The healthy use of humor by the tension releaser performs the same maintenance function as the empathy employed by the harmonizer or the social-emotional leader, but it is less intimate and is typically directed toward the whole group instead of just one person.

Group members who help manage the various types of group conflict that emerge during group communication plays the harmonizer role (Koch, 2013). They keep their eyes and ears open for signs of conflict among group members and ideally intervene before it escalates. For example, the harmonizer may sense that one group member’s critique of another member’s idea was not received positively, and he or she may be able to rephrase the critique in a more constructive way, which can help diminish the other group member’s defensiveness. Harmonizers also deescalate conflict once it has already started—for example, by suggesting that the group take a break and then mediating between group members in a side conversation.

These actions can help prevent conflict from spilling over into other group interactions. In cases where the whole group experiences conflict, the harmonizer may help lead the group in perception-checking discussions that help members see an issue from multiple perspectives. For a harmonizer to be effective, he or she must be viewed as impartial and committed to the group as a whole rather than to one side, person, or faction within the larger group. A special kind of harmonizer that helps manage cultural differences within the group is the interpreter.

Interpreter

An interpreter helps manage the diversity within a group by mediating intercultural conflict, articulating common ground between different people, and generally creating a climate where difference is seen as an opportunity rather than as something to be feared (Koch, 2013). Just as an interpreter at the United Nations acts as a bridge between two different languages, the interpreter can bridge identity differences between group members. Interpreters can help perform the other maintenance roles discussed with a special awareness of and sensitivity toward cultural differences. Interpreters, because of their cultural sensitivity, may also take a proactive role to help address conflict before it emerges—for example, by taking a group member aside and explaining why his or her behavior or comments may be perceived as offensive.

Negative Roles and Behaviors

Group communication scholars began exploring the negative side of group member roles more than sixty years ago (Benne & Sheats, 1948). Studying these negative roles can help us analyze group interactions and potentially better understand why some groups are more successful than others are. It is important to acknowledge that we all perform some negative behaviors within groups but that those behaviors do not necessarily constitute a role. A person may temporarily monopolize a discussion to bring attention to his or her idea. If that behavior gets the attention of the group members and makes them realize they were misinformed or headed in a negative direction, then that behavior may have been warranted. Group members may enact negative behaviors with varying degrees of intensity and regularity, and their effects may range from mild annoyance to group failure. In general, the effects grow increasingly negative as they increase in intensity and frequency.

Self-Centered Roles Central Negative

The central negative argues against most of the ideas and proposals discussed in the group and often emerges because of a leadership challenge during group formation. The failed attempt to lead the group can lead to feelings of resentment toward the leader and/or the purpose of the group, which then manifest in negative behaviors that delay, divert, or block the group’s progress toward achieving its goal. This scenario is unfortunate because the central negative is typically a motivated and intelligent group member who can benefit the group if properly handled by the group leader or other members. Group communication scholars suggest that the group leader or leaders actively incorporate central negatives into group tasks and responsibilities to make them feel valued and to help diminish any residual anger, disappointment, or hurt feelings from the leadership conflict (Bormann & Bormann, 1988). Otherwise, the central negative will continue to argue against the proposals and decisions of the group, even when they may agree. In some cases, the central negative may unintentionally serve a beneficial function if his or her criticisms prevent groupthink.

Monopolizer

The monopolizer is a group member who makes excessive verbal contributions, preventing equal participation by other group members. In short, monopolizers like to hear the sound of their own voice and do not follow typical norms for conversational turn taking. Some people who are well-informed, charismatic, and competent communicators can get away with impromptu lectures and long stories, but monopolizers do not possess the magnetic qualities of such people. A group member’s excessive verbal contributions are more likely to be labeled as monopolizing when they are not related to the task or when they provide unnecessary or redundant elaboration. Some monopolizers do not intentionally speak for longer than they should. Instead, they think they are making a genuine contribution to the group. These folks likely lack sensitivity to nonverbal cues, or they would see that other group members are tired of listening or annoyed. Other monopolizers just like to talk and do not care what others think. Some may be trying to make up for a lack of knowledge or experience. This type of monopolizer is best described as a dilettante, or an amateur who tries to pass himself or herself off as an expert.

Several subgroups of behaviors fall under the monopolizer’s role. The “stage hog” monopolizes discussion with excessive verbal contributions and engages in one-upping and narcissistic listening. Gaining an advantage over is a spotlight-stealing strategy in which people try to verbally “out-do” others by saying something like “You think that’s bad? Listen to what happened to me!” They also listen to others in order to find something they can connect back to themselves, not to understand the message. The stage hog is like the diva that refuses to leave the stage to let the next performer begin. Unlike a monopolizer, who may engage in his or her behaviors unknowingly, stage hogs are usually aware of what they are doing.

The “egghead” monopolizes the discussion with excessive contributions based in actual knowledge. However, those contributions exceed the level of understanding of other group members or the needs of the group (Cragan & Wright, 1999). The egghead is different from the dilettante monopolizer discussed earlier because this person has genuine knowledge and expertise on a subject, which may be useful to the group. Nevertheless, like the monopolizer and stage hog, the egghead’s excessive contributions draw attention away from the task, slow the group down, and may contribute to a negative group climate. The egghead may be like an absentminded professor who is smart but lacks the social sensitivity to tell when he or she has said enough and is now starting to annoy other group members. This type of egghead naively believes that other group members care as much about the subject as he or she does.

The second type of egghead is more pompous and monopolizes the discussion to flaunt his or her intellectual superiority. While the group may tolerate the first type of egghead to a point, the group may perceive the second type of egghead more negatively and as one who will hurt the group. In general, the egghead’s advanced subject knowledge and excessive contributions can hurt the group’s potential for synergy, since other group members may defer to the egghead expert, which can diminish the creativity that comes from outside and non-expert perspectives.

13.2 Problem Solving and Decision Making in Groups

Group problem solving.

Common components of group problems: an undesirable situation, a desired situation, obstacles between undesirable and desirable situation.

The problem-solving process involves thoughts, discussions, actions, and decisions that occur from the first consideration of a problematic situation to the goal. The problems that groups face are varied, but some common problems include budgeting funds, raising funds, planning events, addressing customer or citizen complaints, creating or adapting products or services to fit needs, supporting members, and raising awareness about issues or causes. Problems of all sorts have three common components (Adams & Galanes, 2009):

An undesirable situation. When conditions are desirable, there is not a problem.
A desired situation. Even though it may only be a vague idea, there is a drive to better the undesirable situation. The vague idea may develop into a more precise goal that can be achieved, although solutions are not yet generated.
Obstacles between undesirable and desirable situation. These things stand in the way between the current situation and the group’s goal of addressing it. This component of a problem requires the most work, and it is the part where decision-making occurs. Some examples of obstacles include limited funding, resources, personnel, time, or information. Obstacles can also take the form of people who are working against the group, including people resistant to change or people who disagree.

Discussion of these three elements of a problem helps the group tailor its problem-solving process, as each problem will vary. While these three general elements are present in each problem, the group should also address specific characteristics of the problem. Five common and important characteristics to consider are task difficulty, number of possible solutions, group member interest in problem, group member familiarity with problem, and the need for solution acceptance (Adams & Galanes, 2009).

Task difficulty. Difficult tasks are also typically more complex. Groups should be prepared to spend time researching and discussing a difficult and complex task in order to develop a shared foundational knowledge. This typically requires individual work outside of the group and frequent group meetings to share information.
Number of possible solutions. There are usually multiple ways to solve a problem or complete a task, but some problems have more potential solutions than others do. Figuring out how to prepare a beach house for an approaching hurricane is fairly complex and difficult, but there are still a limited number of things to do—for example, taping and boarding up windows; turning off water, electricity, and gas; trimming trees; and securing loose outside objects. Other problems may require more creativity. For example, designing a new restaurant may entail using some standard solutions but could also entail many different types of innovation with layout and design.
Group member interest in problem. When group members are interested in the problem, they will be more engaged with the problem-solving process and invested in finding a quality solution. Groups with high interest in and knowledge about the problem may want more freedom to develop and implement solutions, while groups with low interest may prefer a leader who provides structure and direction.
Group familiarity with problem. Some groups encounter a problem regularly, while other problems are unique or unexpected. A family who has lived in hurricane alley for decades probably has a better idea of how to prepare its house for a hurricane than does a family that just recently moved from the Midwest. Many groups that rely on funding have to revisit a budget every year, and in recent years, groups have had to get more creative with budgets due to funding cuts in nearly every sector. When group members are not familiar with a problem, they will need to do background research on what similar groups have done. They may want to bring in outside experts.
Need for solution acceptance. In this step, groups must consider how many people the decision will affect and how much “buy-in” from others the group needs in order implement their solution successfully. Some small groups have many stakeholders on whom the success of a solution depends. Other groups are answerable only to themselves. In such cases, groups will want to poll those who will be affected by the solution. They may want to do a pilot implementation to see how people react. Imposing an excellent solution that does not have buy-in from stakeholders can still lead to failure.

Group Problem-Solving Process

There are several variations of similar problem-solving models based on scholar John Dewey’s reflective thinking process (Bormann & Bormann, 1988). As you read the steps in the process, think about how you can apply what we learned regarding the general and specific elements of problems.

Arrow pointing right connecting 5 boxes: define the problem, analyze the problem, generate possible solutions, evaluate solutions, implement and assess the solution

Step 1: Define the Problem

Define the problem by considering the three elements shared by every problem: the current undesirable situation, the goal or more desirable situation, and obstacles in the way (Adams & Galanes, 2009). At this stage, group members share what they know about the current situation, without proposing solutions or evaluating the information. Here are some questions to ask during this stage: What is the current difficulty? How did we come to know that the difficulty exists? Who or what is involved? Why is it meaningful/urgent/important? What have the effects been so far? What, if any, elements of the difficulty require clarification?

At the end of this stage, the group should be able to compose a single sentence that summarizes the problem called a problem statement . Avoid wording in the problem statement or question that hints at potential solutions. A small group formed to investigate ethical violations of city officials could use the following problem statement: “Our state does not currently have a mechanism for citizens to report suspected ethical violations by city officials.”

Step 2: Analyze the Problem

During this step, a group should analyze the problem and the group’s relationship to the problem. Whereas the first step involved exploring the “what” related to the problem, this step focuses on the “why.” At this stage, group members can discuss the potential causes of the difficulty. Group members may also want to begin setting out an agenda or timeline for the group’s problem-solving process, looking forward to the other steps. To analyze the problem, the group can discuss the five common problem variables discussed before. Here are two examples of questions that the group formed to address ethics violations might ask: Why doesn’t our city have an ethics reporting mechanism? Do cities of similar size have such a mechanism? Once the problem has been analyzed, the group can pose a problem question that will guide the group as it generates possible solutions. “How can citizens report suspected ethical violations of city officials and how will such reports be processed and addressed?” As you can see, the problem question is more complex than the problem statement, since the group has moved on to more in-depth discussion of the problem during step 2.

Step 3: Generate Possible Solutions

During this step, group members generate possible solutions to the problem. Again, do not evaluate solutions at this point, only propose and clarify. The question should be what could we do to address this problem, not what should we do to address it? It is perfectly OK for a group member to question another person’s idea by asking something like “What do you mean?” or “Could you explain your reasoning more?” Discussions at this stage may reveal a need to return to previous steps to better define or more fully analyze a problem. Since many problems are multifaceted, it is necessary for group members to generate solutions for each part of the problem separately, making sure to have multiple solutions for each part. Stopping the solution-generating process prematurely can lead to groupthink.

Step 4: Evaluate Solutions

During this step, solutions can be critically evaluated based on their credibility, completeness, and worth. Once the potential solutions have been narrowed based on differences in relevance and/or merit, the group should analyze each solution based on its potential effects—especially negative effects. Groups that are required to report the rationale for their decision or whose decisions may be subject to public scrutiny would be wise to make a set list of criteria for evaluating each solution.

Additionally, solutions can be evaluated based on how well they fit with the group’s charge and the abilities of the group. To do this, group members may ask, “Does this solution live up to the original purpose or mission of the group?” “Can the solution actually be implemented with our current resources and connections?” “How will this solution be supported, funded, enforced, and assessed?” Secondary tensions and substantive conflict, two concepts discussed earlier, emerge during this step of problem solving, and group members will need to employ effective critical thinking and listening skills.

Decision-making is part of the larger process of problem solving and it plays a prominent role in this step. While there are several similar models for problem solving, groups can use many varied decision-making techniques. For example, to narrow the list of proposed solutions, group members may decide by majority vote, by weighing the pros and cons, or by discussing them until they reach a consensus. There are also more complex decision-making models like the “six hats method,” which we will discuss later. Once the group reaches a final decision, the group leader or facilitator should confirm that the group agrees. It may be beneficial to let the group break for a while or even to delay the final decision until a later meeting to allow people time to evaluate it outside of the group context.

Step 5: Implement and Assess the Solution

Implementing the solution requires some advanced planning, and it should not be rushed unless the group is operating under strict time restraints or a delay may lead to some kind of harm. Although some solutions can be implemented immediately, others may take days, months, or years. As was noted earlier, it may be beneficial for groups to poll those who will be affected by the solution as to their opinion of it or even to do a pilot test to observe the effectiveness of the solution and how people react to it. Before implementation, groups should also determine how and when they would assess the effectiveness of the solution by asking, “How will we know if the solution is working or not?” Since solution assessment will vary based on whether or not the group is disbanded, groups should also consider the following questions: If the group disbands after implementation, who will be responsible for assessing the solution? If the solution fails, will the same group reconvene? Will a new group be formed?

Certain elements of the solution may need to be delegated to various people inside and outside the group. Group members may also be assigned to implement a particular part of the solution based on their role or because it connects to their area of expertise. Likewise, group members may be tasked with publicizing the solution or “selling” it to a particular group of stakeholders. Last, the group should consider its future. In some cases, the group will get to decide if it will stay together and continue working on other tasks or if it will disband. In other cases, outside forces determine the group’s fate.

Decision Making in Groups

We all engage in personal decision making daily, and we all know that some decisions are more difficult than others are. When we make decisions in groups, we face some challenges that we do not face in our personal decision-making, but we also stand to benefit from some advantages of group decision-making (Napier & Gershenfeld, 2004). Group decision making can appear fair and democratic but really only be a gesture that covers up the fact that certain group members or the group leader have already decided. Group decision making also takes more time than individual decisions and can be burdensome if some group members do not do their assigned work, divert the group with self-centered or unproductive role behaviors, or miss meetings.

Conversely, though, group decisions are often more informed, since all group members develop a shared understanding of a problem through discussion and debate. The shared understanding may also be more complex and deep than what an individual would develop, because group members expose themselves to a variety of viewpoints that can broaden their own perspectives. Group decisions also benefit from synergy, one of the key advantages of group communication that we discussed earlier. Most groups do not use a specific method of decision-making, perhaps thinking that they will work things out as they go. This can lead to unequal participation, social loafing, premature decisions, prolonged discussion, and a host of other negative consequences. Therefore, in this section we will learn some practices that will prepare us for good decision-making and some specific techniques we can use to help us reach a final decision.

Brainstorming Before Decision Making

Photo of a woman sitting at her laptop drinking coffee. Her finger is pointed up, eyebrows raised, mouth in an O shape, eyes widened, as if she has a good idea.

Before groups can make a decision, they need to generate possible solutions to their problem. The most commonly used method is brainstorming, although most people do not follow the recommended steps of brainstorming. As you will recall, brainstorming refers to the quick generation of ideas free of evaluation. The originator of the term brainstorming said the following four rules must be followed for the technique to be effective (Osborn, 1959):

Evaluation of ideas is forbidden.
Wild and crazy ideas are encouraged.
Quantity of ideas, not quality, is the goal.
New combinations of ideas presented are encouraged.

To make brainstorming more of a decision-making method rather than an idea-generating method, group communication scholars have suggested additional steps that precede and follow brainstorming (Cragan & Wright, 1991).

Do a warm-up brainstorming session. Some people are more apprehensive about publicly communicating their ideas than others are, and a warm-up session can help ease apprehension and prime group members for task-related idea generation. Anyone in the group can initiate the short warm-up. To get things started, a person could ask, “If our group formed a band, what would we be called?” or “What other purposes could a mailbox serve?” In the previous examples, the first warm up gets the group’s creative juices flowing, while the second focuses more on practical and concrete ideas.
Do the actual brainstorming session. This session should not last more than thirty minutes and should follow the four rules of brainstorming mentioned previously. In order to realize the fourth rule, the facilitator could encourage people to piggyback off each other’s ideas.
Eliminate duplicate ideas. After the brainstorming session is over, group members can eliminate (without evaluating) ideas that are the same or very similar.
Clarify, organize, and evaluate ideas. Before evaluation, see if any ideas need clarification. Then try to theme or group ideas together in some orderly fashion. Since “wild and crazy” ideas are encouraged, some suggestions may need clarification. If it becomes clear that there is not really a foundation to an idea and that it is too vague or abstract, it may be eliminated. As a caution, though, it may be wise not to throw out off-the-wall ideas that are hard to categorize and instead put them in a miscellaneous or “wild and crazy” category.

Discussion Before Decision Making

The nominal group technique guides decision making through a four-step process that includes idea generation and evaluation and seeks to elicit equal contributions from all group members (Delbecq & Van de Ven, 1971). This method is useful because the procedure involves all group members systematically, which fixes the problem of uneven participation during discussions. Since everyone contributes to the discussion, this method can also help reduce instances of social loafing. To use the nominal group technique, do the following:

Silently and individually, list ideas.
Create a master list of ideas.
Clarify ideas as needed.
Take a secret vote to rank group members’ acceptance of ideas.

During the first step, have group members work quietly, in the same space, to write down every idea they have to address the task or problem they face. This should not take more than twenty minutes. Whoever is facilitating the discussion should remind group members to use brainstorming techniques, which means they should not evaluate ideas as they are generated. Ask group members to remain silent once they have finished their list so they do not distract others.

During the second step, the facilitator goes around the group in a consistent order asking each person to share one idea at a time. As the idea is shared, the facilitator records it on a master list that everyone can see. Keep track of how many times each idea comes up, as that could be an idea that warrants more discussion. Continue this process until all the ideas have been shared. As a note to facilitators, some group members may begin to edit their list or self-censor when asked to provide one of their ideas. To limit a person’s apprehension with sharing his or her ideas and to ensure that each idea is shared, I have asked group members to exchange lists with someone else so they can share ideas from the list they receive without fear of being judged.

During step three, the facilitator should note that group members could now ask for clarification on ideas on the master list. Do not let this discussion stray into evaluation of ideas. To help avoid an unnecessarily long discussion, it may be useful to go from one person to the next to ask which ideas need clarifying and then go to the originator(s) of the idea in question for clarification.

During the fourth step, members use a voting ballot to rank the acceptability of the ideas on the master list. If the list is long, you may ask group members to rank only their top five or so choices. The facilitator then takes up the secret ballots and reviews them in a random order, noting the rankings of each idea. Ideally, the highest ranked idea can then be discussed and decided on. The nominal group technique does not carry a group all the way through to the point of decision; rather, it sets the group up for a roundtable discussion or use of some other method to evaluate the merits of the top ideas.

Specific Decision-Making Techniques

Some decision-making techniques involve determining a course of action based on the level of agreement among the group members. These methods include majority, expert, authority, and consensus rule. Table 14.1 “Pros and Cons of Agreement-Based Decision-Making Techniques” reviews the pros and cons of each of these methods.

Majority rule is a commonly used decision-making technique in which a majority (one-half plus one) must agree before making a decision (Schippers & Rus, 2021). A show-of-hands vote, a paper ballot, or an electronic voting system can determine the majority choice. Many decision-making bodies, including the US House of Representatives, Senate, and Supreme Court, use majority rule to make decisions, which shows that it is often associated with democratic decision making, since each person gets one vote and each vote counts equally. Of course, other individuals and mediated messages can influence a person’s vote, but since the voting power is spread among all group members, it is not easy for one person or party to take control of the decision-making process. In some cases—for example, to override a presidential veto or to amend the constitution—a super majority of two-thirds may be required to make a decision.

Minority rule is a decision-making technique in which a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision and may or may not consider the input of other group members. When a designated expert makes a decision by minority rule, there may be buy-in from others in the group, especially if the members of the group did not have relevant knowledge or expertise. When a designated authority makes decisions, buy-in will vary based on group members’ level of respect for the authority. For example, decisions made by an elected authority may be more accepted by those who elected him or her than by those who did not. As with majority rule, this technique can be time saving. Unlike majority rule, one person or party can have control over the decision-making process.

This type of decision-making is more similar to that used by monarchs and dictators. An obvious negative consequence of this method is that the needs or wants of one person can override the needs and wants of the majority. A minority deciding for the majority has led to negative consequences throughout history. The white Afrikaner minority that ruled South Africa for decades instituted apartheid, which was a system of racial segregation that disenfranchised and oppressed the majority population. The quality of the decision and its fairness really depends on the designated expert or authority.

Consensus rule is a decision-making technique in which all members of the group must agree on the same decision. On rare occasions, a decision may be ideal for all group members, which can lead to unanimous agreement without further debate and discussion. Although this can be positive, be cautious that this is not a sign of groupthink. More typically, groups reach consensus only after lengthy discussion. On the plus side, consensus often leads to high-quality decisions due to the time and effort it takes to get everyone in agreement. Group members are also more likely to be committed to the decision because of their investment in reaching it. On the negative side, the ultimate decision is often one that all group members can live with but not one that is ideal for all members. Additionally, the process of arriving at consensus also includes conflict, as people debate ideas and negotiate the interpersonal tensions that may result.

[table id=10 /]

Influences on Decision Making

Many factors influence the decision-making process. For example, how might a group’s independence or access to resources affect the decisions they make? What potential advantages and disadvantages come with decisions made by groups that are more or less similar in terms of personality and cultural identities? In this section, we will explore how situational, personality, and cultural influences affect decision making in groups.

Situational Influences on Decision-Making

A group’s situational context affects decision-making (Franken & Muris, 2005). One key situational element is the degree of freedom that the group has to make its own decisions, secure its own resources, and initiate its own actions. Some groups have to go through multiple approval processes before they can do anything, while others are self-directed, self-governing, and self-sustaining. Another situational influence is uncertainty. In general, groups deal with more uncertainty in decision-making than do individuals because of the increased number of variables that comes with adding more people to a situation. Individual group members cannot know what other group members are thinking, whether they are doing their work, and how committed they are to the group. Therefore, the size of a group is a powerful situational influence, as it adds to uncertainty and complicates communication.

Access to information also influences a group. First, the nature of the group’s task or problem affects its ability to get information. Group members can more easily make decisions about a problem when other groups have similarly experienced it. Even if the problem is complex and serious, the group can learn from other situations and apply what it learns. Second, the group must have access to flows of information. Access to archives, electronic databases, and individuals with relevant experience is necessary to obtain any relevant information about similar problems or to do research on a new or unique problem. In this regard, group members’ formal and information network connections also become important situational influences.

The origin and urgency of a problem are also situational factors that influence decision-making. In terms of origin, problems usually occur in one of four ways:

Something goes wrong. Group members must decide how to fix or stop something. Example—a firehouse crew finds out that half of the building is contaminated with mold and must be closed down.
Expectations change or increase. Group members must innovate more efficient or effective ways of doing something. Example—a firehouse crew finds out that the district they are responsible for is being expanded.
Something goes wrong and expectations change or increase. Group members must fix/stop and become more efficient/effective. Example—the firehouse crew has to close half the building and must start responding to more calls due to the expanding district.
The problem existed from the beginning. Group members must go back to the origins of the situation, walk through and analyze the steps again to decide what can be done differently. Example—a firehouse crew has consistently had to work with minimal resources in terms of building space and firefighting tools.

In each of the cases, the need for a decision may be more or less urgent depending on how badly something is going wrong, how high the expectations have been raised, or the degree to which people are fed up with a broken system. Decisions must be made in situations ranging from crisis level to mundane.

Cultural Context and Decision-Making

Photo of 6 different hands on top of each other in a circle. Below the hands are papers and laptops on a table.

Just like neighborhoods, schools, and countries, small groups vary in terms of their degree of similarity and difference. Demographic changes in the United States and increases in technology that can bring different people together make it more likely that we will be interacting in more and more heterogeneous groups (Allen, 2011). Some small groups are more homogenous, meaning the members are more similar, and some are more heterogeneous, meaning the members are more different. Diversity and difference within groups has advantages and disadvantages. In terms of advantages, research finds that, in general, culturally heterogeneous groups perform better than more homogenous groups (Haslett & Ruebush, 1999).

Additionally, when group members have time to get to know each other and competently communicate across their differences, the advantages of diversity include better decision making due to different perspectives (Thomas, 1999). Unfortunately, groups often operate under time constraints and other pressures that make the possibility for intercultural dialogue and understanding difficult. The main disadvantage of heterogeneous groups is the possibility for conflict, but since all groups experience conflict, this is not solely due to the presence of diversity. We will now look more specifically at how some of the cultural value orientations we have learned about already in this text can play out in groups with international diversity and how domestic diversity in terms of demographics can influence group decision making.

International Diversity in Group Interactions

Cultural value orientations such as individualism/collectivism, power distance, and high-/low-context communication styles all manifest on a continuum of communication behaviors and can influence group decision making (Yates & de Oliveira, 2016). Group members from individualistic cultures are more likely to value task-oriented, efficient, and direct communication. This could manifest in behaviors such as dividing tasks into individual projects before collaboration begins and then openly debating ideas during discussion and decision-making. Additionally, people from cultures that value individualism are more likely to express dissent from a decision, essentially expressing their disagreement with the group. Group members from collectivistic cultures are more likely to value relationships over the task. Because of this, they also tend to value conformity and face-saving (i.e., indirect) communication. This could manifest in behaviors such as establishing norms that include periods of socializing to build relationships before task-oriented communication (like negotiations) begins or norms that limit public disagreement in favor of more indirect communication that doesn’t challenge the face of other group members or the group’s leader. In a group composed of people from a collectivistic culture, each member would likely play harmonizing roles, looking for signs of conflict and resolving them before they become public.

Power distance can also affect group interactions. Some cultures rank higher on power-distance scales, meaning they value hierarchy, make decisions based on status, and believe that people have a set place in society that is unchangeable. Group members from high-power-distance cultures would likely appreciate a strong designated leader who exhibits a more directive leadership style and prefer groups in which members have clear and assigned roles. In a group that is homogenous in terms of having a high-power-distance orientation, members with higher status would be able to openly provide information, and those with lower status may not provide information unless a higher status member explicitly seeks it from them. Low-power-distance cultures do not place as much value and meaning on status and believe that all group members can participate in decision-making. Group members from low-power-distance cultures would likely freely speak their mind during a group meeting and prefer a participative leadership style.

How much meaning is conveyed through the context surrounding verbal communication can also affect group communication. Some cultures have a high-context communication style in which much of the meaning in an interaction is conveyed through context such as nonverbal cues and silence. Group members from high-context cultures may avoid saying something directly, assuming that other group members will understand the intended meaning even if the message is indirect. Therefore, if someone disagrees with a proposed course of action, he or she may say, “Let’s discuss this tomorrow,” and mean, “I don’t think we should do this.” Such indirect communication is also a face-saving strategy that is common in collectivistic cultures. Other cultures have a low-context communication style that places more importance on the meaning conveyed through words than through context or nonverbal cues. Group members from low-context cultures often say what they mean and mean what they say. For example, if someone does not like an idea, they might say, “I think we should consider more options. This one doesn’t seem like the best we can do.”

In any of these cases, an individual from one culture operating in a group with people of a different cultural orientation could adapt to the expectations of the host culture, especially if that person possesses a high degree of intercultural communication competence (ICC). Additionally, people with high ICC can also adapt to a group member with a different cultural orientation than the host culture. Even though these cultural orientations connect to values that affect our communication in consistent ways, individuals may exhibit different communication behaviors depending on their own individual communication style and the situation.

Domestic Diversity and Group Communication

While it is becoming more likely that we will interact in small groups with international diversity, we are guaranteed to interact in groups that are diverse in terms of the cultural identities found within a single country or the subcultures found within a larger cultural group.

Gender stereotypes sometimes influence the roles that people play within a group. For example, the stereotype that women are more nurturing than men may lead group members (both male and female) to expect that women will play the role of supporters or harmonizers within the group (Hentschel, Heilman, & Peus, 2019). Since women have primarily performed secretarial work since the 1900s, it may also be expected that women will play the role of recorder. In both of these cases, stereotypical notions of gender place women in roles that are typically not as valued in group communication. The opposite is true for men. In terms of leadership, despite notable exceptions, research shows that men fill an overwhelmingly disproportionate amount of leadership positions. We are socialized to see certain behaviors by men as indicative of leadership abilities, even though they may not be. For example, men are often perceived to contribute more to a group because they tend to speak first when asked a question or to fill a silence and are perceived to talk more about task-related matters than relationally oriented matters.

Both of these tendencies create a perception that men are more engaged with the task. Men are also socialized to be more competitive and self-congratulatory, meaning that their communication may be seen as dedicated and their behaviors seen as powerful, and that when their work isn’t noticed they will be more likely to make it known to the group rather than take silent credit. Even though we know that the relational elements of a group are crucial for success, even in high-performance teams, that work is not as valued in our society as the task-related work.

Despite the fact that some communication patterns and behaviors related to our typical (and stereotypical) gender socialization affect how we interact in and form perceptions of others in groups, the differences in group communication that used to be attributed to gender in early group communication research seem to be diminishing. This is likely due to the changing organizational cultures from which much group work emerges, which have now had more than sixty years to adjust to women in the workplace. It is also due to a more nuanced understanding of gender-based research, which does not take a stereotypical view from the beginning as many of the early male researchers did.

Now, instead of assuming biological sex is a factor that creates inherent communication differences, group communication scholars see that men and women both exhibit a range of behaviors that are more or less feminine or masculine. It is these gendered behaviors, and not a person’s gender, that seem to have more of an influence on perceptions of group communication. Interestingly, group interactions are still masculinist in that male and female group members prefer a more masculine communication style for task leaders and that both males and females in this role are more likely to adapt to a more masculine communication style. Conversely, men who take on social-emotional leadership behaviors adopt a more feminine communication style. In short, it seems that although masculine communication traits are more often associated with high status positions in groups, both men and women adapt to this expectation and are evaluated similarly (Haslett & Ruebush, 1999).

An older man with a mask on using machinery in a workshop.

In terms of age, for the first time since industrialization began, it is common to have three generations of people (and sometimes four) working side by side in an organizational setting. Although four generations often worked together in early factories, they were segregated based on their age group, and a hierarchy existed with older workers at the top and younger workers at the bottom. Today, however, generations interact regularly, and it is common for an older person to have a leader or supervisor who is younger than him or her (Allen, 2011). The current generations in the US workplace and consequently in work-based groups include the following:

The Silent Generation. Born between 1925 and 1942, currently in their mid-60s to mid-80s, this is the smallest generation in the workforce right now, as many have retired or left for other reasons. This generation includes people who were born during the Great Depression or the early part of World War II, many of whom later fought in the Korean War (Clarke, 1970).
The Baby Boomers. Born between 1946 and 1964, currently in their late forties to mid-60s, this is the largest generation in the workforce right now. Baby boomers are the most populous generation born in US history, and they are working longer than previous generations, which means they will remain the predominant force in organizations for ten to twenty more years.
Generation X. Born between 1965 and 1981, currently in their early thirties to mid-40s, this generation was the first to see technology like cell phones and the Internet make its way into classrooms and our daily lives. Compared to previous generations, “Gen-Xers” are more diverse in terms of race, religious beliefs, and sexual orientation and have a greater appreciation for and understanding of diversity.
Generation Y. Born between 1982 and 2000, “Millennials” as they are also called are currently in their late teens up to about thirty years old. This generation is not as likely to remember a time without technology such as computers and cell phones. They are just entering into the workforce and have been greatly affected by recent economic crises. They are experiencing significantly high unemployment rates.

The benefits and challenges that come with diversity of group members are important to consider. Since we will all work in diverse groups, we should be prepared to address potential challenges in order to reap the benefits. Diverse groups may be wise to coordinate social interactions outside of group time in order to find common ground that can help facilitate interaction and increase group cohesion. We should be sensitive but not let sensitivity create fear of “doing something wrong” that then prevents us from having meaningful interactions.

Figure 13.1: Social-emotional leaders are reflective thinkers who use their perception skills to analyze group dynamics and maintain a positive climate. Dim Hou. 2019. Unsplash license . https://unsplash.com/photos/2P6Q7_uiDr0

Figure 13.2: Common components of group problems. Kindred Grey. 2022. CC BY 4.0 .

Figure 13.3: The group problem-solving process. Kindred Grey. 2022. CC BY 4.0 .

Figure 13.4: Brainstorming is a good way to generate possible solutions to a problem. Below are some suggestions to make brainstorming more of a decision-making method. Monstera. 2021. Pexels license . https://www.pexels.com/photo/excited-black-woman-using-laptop-9429552/

Figure 13.5: Culturally heterogeneous groups perform better than more homogenous groups. fauxels. 2019. Pexels license . https://www.pexels.com/photo/photo-of-people-near-wooden-table-3184418/

Figure 13.6: It is common to have different generations working together in an organizational setting. Rendy Novantino. 2021. Unsplash license . https://unsplash.com/photos/wJoRe38l8fc

Section 13.1

Benne, K. D., & Sheats, P. (1948). Functional roles of group members. Journal of Social Issues 4(2), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1948.tb01783.x

Bormann, E. G., & Bormann, N.C., (1988). Effective small group communication ( 4th ed.). Burgess International Group.

Burke, C. S., Georganta, E., & Marlow, S. (2019). A bottom up perspective to understanding the dynamics of team roles in mission critical teams. Frontiers in psychology , 10 , 1322. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01322

Cragan, J. F., & Wright, D. W. (1991). Communication in small group discussions: An integrated approach (3rd ed.). West Publishing.

Koch, A. (2013, October 24). Individual roles in groups . https://prezi.com/gmbfihtzyjg4/individual-roles-in-groups/

Pavitt, C. (1999). Theorizing about the group communication-leadership relationship. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), The handbook of group communication Theory and research (pp. 313-334). Sage.

Section 13.2

Adams, K., and Galanes, G. (2009). Communicating in groups: Applications and skills (7th ed.). McGraw Hill.

Allen, B. J. (2011). Difference matters: Communicating social identity (2nd ed.). Waveland Press.

Clarke, G. (1970, June 29). The silent generation revisited. Time, 95 (26), 38-40.

Delbecq, A. L., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1971). A group process model for problem identification and program planning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science , 7 (4), 466–492. https://doi.org/10.1177/002188637100700404

Franken, I. H. A., and Muris, P. (2005). Individual differences in decision-making. Personality and Individual Differences, 39 (5), 991–998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.04.004

Haslett, B.B., Ruebush, J. (1999). What differences do individual differences in groups make? The effects of individuals, culture, and group composition. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 115–138). Sage.

Hentschel, T., Heilman, M. E., & Peus, C. V. (2019). The multiple dimensions of gender stereotypes: A current look at men’s and women’s characterizations of others and themselves. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00011

Napier, R. W., & Gershenfeld, M. K. (2004). Groups: Theory and experience (7th ed.). Houghton Mifflin.

Osborn, A. F. (1959). Applied imagination. Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Schippers, M. C., & Rus, D. C. (2021). Majority decision-making works best under conditions of leadership ambiguity and shared task representations. Frontiers in Psychology , 12 , 519295. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.519295

Stanton, C. (2009, November 3). How to deliver group presentations: The unified team approach . http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/group-presentations-unified-team-approach/

Thomas, D. C. (1999). Cultural diversity and work group effectiveness: An experimental study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 30(2), 242–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022199030002006

Yates, J. F., & de Oliveira, S. (2016). Culture and decision making. Organizational behavior and human decision processes , 136 , 106–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.05.003

A task-related role that functions to keep the group on track toward completing its task by managing the agenda and setting and assessing goals in order to monitor the group’s progress

This role includes behaviors that are more evenly shared compared to other roles, as ideally, all group members present new ideas, initiate discussions of new topics, and contribute their own relevant knowledge and experiences

The person who has this task-related role asks for more information, elaboration, or clarification on items relevant to the group’s task

This person manages the flow of conversation in a group in order to achieve an appropriate balance so that all group members get to participate in a meaningful way

The person who takes notes on the discussion and activities that occur during a group meeting. This role is the only role that is limited to one person at a time

A maintenance role that is characterized by communication behaviors that encourage other group members and provide emotional support as needed

Group members who help manage the various types of group conflict that emerge during group communication, they keep their eyes and ears open for signs of conflict among group members and ideally intervene before it escalates

This person helps manage the diversity within a group by mediating intercultural conflict, articulating common ground between different people, and generally creating a climate where difference is seen as an opportunity rather than as something to be feared

A group member who makes excessive verbal contributions preventing equal participation by other group members. Can include the “egghead” and the “stage hog.”

This technique guides decision making through a four-step process that includes idea generation and evaluation and seeks to elicit equal contributions from all group members

A commonly used decision-making technique in which a majority (one-half plus one) must agree before making the decision

A decision making technique in which a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision and may or may not consider the input of other group members

A decision-making technique in which all members of the group must agree on the same decision

Communication in the Real World Copyright © by Faculty members in the School of Communication Studies, James Madison University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

4 Active Learning: Engaging People in the Learning Process

Introduction.

Active learning, as the name implies, is any type of learning that involves direct interaction with the content or materials. Active learning has seen increasing popularity over the past few decades, beginning in 1984 with a report from the National Institute of Education which identified student involvement in learning as a condition of success in education. The report promoted active learning as a way to encourage more student involvement and called on faculty to “make greater use of active modes of teaching and require that students take greater responsibility for their learning” (p. 38). Likewise, in 1987, Chickering and Gamson listed active learning as one of the seven principles to improve undergraduate education. In recent decades, proponents have recommended the integration of active learning techniques in virtually any learning environment and with all age groups, from preschool through higher education, as well as continuing education and professional development. This chapter begins with an overview of active learning, including arguments for implementing it throughout learning experiences, as well as some of the concerns or challenges to integrating the techniques into the classroom. The chapter concludes with examples of some common active learning approaches and techniques.

What Is Active Learning?

Active learning involves direct engagement with course material, such as discussion, debate, role playing, and hands-on practice. In contrast, passive learning does not directly involve the student; examples of passive learning include lecture or demonstration, where students listen and watch but do not actively participate. Bonwell and Eison (1991, p. iii) define active learning as “instructional activities involving students in doing things and thinking about what they are doing.” In other words, active learning includes direct interaction with content but also has a metacognitive element that promotes reflection on learning. While we can use active learning approaches with individual learners, many of the techniques emphasize group work and collaboration. In addition to classroom activities, active learning can take place outside the classroom through experiences like internships, service-learning opportunities, and assignments that involve interaction and reflection. However, this chapter will focus on instructor-designed active learning that takes place in venues such as classrooms, workshops, and webinars, as these are the experiences with which information professionals will most likely be involved.

Active learning has its roots in several of the theories described in Chapter 3. Humanists reject the notion that learners are blank slates that passively receive information transmitted from teachers. Constructivists believe that learners construct knowledge, which presupposes active engagement with information in order to create new meanings and understandings, while social constructivists emphasize the importance of interactions with other people in constructing knowledge. According to cognitive scientists, learners actively engage with material as they retrieve information from long-term memory and make connections between new information and existing knowledge.

Active learning approaches challenge the traditional, or “banking,” model of education, in which learners are generally passive; they are expected to listen and take notes, but they are not required to interact with or think deeply about the content. At most, students are asked to recall and repeat what they have learned in an exam or paper. Active learning centers on the learner and encourages interaction, engagement, and reflection. The emphasis with active learning is less on content and more on skills and concepts, or learning how to learn (Thomas, 2009). This does not mean that active learning does not involve content, but more time is typically devoted to solving problems, analyzing issues, and reflecting on learning than, say, learning rote facts.

Despite the history and current popularity of active learning, the concept remains somewhat elusive. There is no unified theory or single set of practices for active learning. In a sense, active learning is an umbrella term that encompasses a range of approaches to teaching and learning and a wide variety of specific techniques. Prince (2004) identifies three of the most common approaches to active learning as collaborative learning, cooperative learning, and problem-based learning, each of which has different applications and implementations. Collaborative learning, according to Prince, is any type of learning in which students work together on a project or toward the same learning outcome. Cooperative learning is also collaborative, but the emphasis is on joint incentives and common goals, whereas collaborative learning is sometimes centered on competition. In problem-based learning, the instructor presents students with a challenge or scenario, often drawn from the real world, and students must develop solutions to the problem. Problem-based learning is often self-directed, with the instructor acting as a guide and facilitator rather than an expert with answers. Cattaneo (2017) classifies active learning activities as problem-based learning, discovery-based learning, inquiry-based learning, project-based learning, and case-based learning. She finds that each of these approaches is student-centered, but they vary quite widely in their implementation.

Finally, Graffam (2007) suggests that active learning has three components: intentional engagement, purposeful observation, and critical reflection. Intentional engagement is hands-on practice, where students perform the tasks or engage the skills they are expected to learn. For instance, LIS students might role play a reference interview, or a library instructor might have a group of undergraduates evaluate a website. In purposeful observation, students watch demonstrations or observe interactions in order to learn skills, tasks, or procedures. Demonstrations are quite common in library instruction, as when library instructors walk students through Boolean searching. Another example is having LIS students watch a reference interview in order to learn techniques for clarifying questions. The difference between demonstration and purposeful observation is that purposeful observation shifts the focus from the instructor, or demonstrator, to the learner, putting responsibility on the learner to pay attention and glean important information. Instructors can facilitate the process by describing each step in a demonstration and debriefing or asking questions after a simulation to draw attention to the important aspects. Finally, critical reflection is a metacognitive act in which students reflect on their learning. This step is crucial because it encourages students to make connections and helps to deepen the learning.

Ultimately, we can think of active learning as a set of best practices based on these broad, student-centered approaches. We can implement active learning in both face to face and online classrooms using specific methods and techniques such as discussions, think-pair-share, role playing, case studies, and jigsaws, as described in more detail later in this chapter. Activity 4.1 is a reflective exercise on active learning.

Activity 4.1: Active Learning: What Has Been Your Experience?

Think back on some of the learning experiences you have had in the past one or two semesters. These might include lectures, discussions, debates, writing exercises, videos, readings, demonstrations, role plays, and presentations, and they might have taken place in face to face or online courses, workshops, and conferences.

Questions for Reflection and Discussion:

Would you characterize these various activities as active or passive?
Did you find one type of experience more engaging?
Did you feel as if you learned more with one type of experience than the other?
Do you prefer one type of learning experience over the other? If so, why?
Think about the different learning settings you’ve experienced: elementary school, high school, undergraduate, graduate, study abroad, professional development, workshops, online, face to face, and so on. Do you find that some of these experiences use active learning more than others? Why might that be?
Could you imagine ways of incorporating active learning into some of the more passive experiences you have had?

The Case for Active Learning

Support for active learning abounds, but does this approach really work to engage students and increase learning? Bonwell and Eison (1991) state that students prefer active learning and that students in active learning classrooms are more engaged and motivated than those who are required only to passively listen to a lecture. They also maintain that active learning can promote higher-order thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, while still achieving the same mastery of content as lectures. Overall, their claims seem to be supported. Prince (2004) found that collaborative and cooperative learning improved academic performance and led to better learning outcomes. Hake (1998) similarly found that active learning led to better test scores and increased problem-solving abilities, while Harris and Bacon (2019) indicate that active learning produces results at least as good as traditional, passive learning, and that it promotes both lower-order and higher-order critical thinking skills. Similarly, Freeman et al. (2014) found active learning to be beneficial, leading to improved exam scores. In fact, they went so far as to say that “if the experiments analyzed here had been conducted as randomized controlled trials of medical interventions, they may have been stopped for benefit—meaning that enrolling patients in the control condition might be discontinued because the treatment being tested was clearly more beneficial” (Freeman et al., 2014, p. 8413). The majority of studies on active learning have looked at children and young adults, but Uemura et al. (2018) found that active learning increased health literacy in older adults.

The benefits of active learning techniques do not seem to be limited to improved learning outcomes. For example, students in active learning classrooms tend to report more positive attitudes (Freeman et al., 2014), and there is some evidence that active learning reduces student attrition, meaning students are less likely to drop out of courses that utilize active learning techniques (Freeman et al., 2014: Prince, 2004). Prince (2004) also found evidence that cooperative learning improved students’ interpersonal skills and teamwork. Importantly, some evidence suggests that active learning might be more inclusive and benefit traditionally underrepresented and marginalized students in particular (Berry, 1991; Frederickson, 1998; Lorenzo et al., 2006; Rainey et al., 2019).

While the evidence for active learning seems positive, both Prince (2004) and Bernstein (2018) note that it is challenging to truly assess its impact because of the wide variety of approaches and techniques involved. Many studies assess only one small aspect of active learning or the implementation of a specific technique, and such studies are usually small and lack controlled variables, making comparisons across studies or generalizations of findings difficult. Bernstein (2018) suggests that rather than asking whether active learning works, instructors should consider which techniques work best under which circumstances. He finds that active learning needs to be highly structured and is most effective when students are required to engage, and suggests that instructors new to active learning take an incremental approach to integrating the techniques. In general, however, research suggests that in the best case, active learning leads to better performance, and at the very least, the performance of students in active learning classrooms is equivalent to their peers in more traditional contexts (Thomas, 2009).

Concerns and Challenges

Despite the popularity of active learning in the literature, and evidence of its effectiveness, lecture still seems to be the dominant form of instruction, especially in higher education. One reason for this might be familiarity. Most instructors teaching today learned through lecture, and it is natural for them to replicate what they know, especially if they have never been introduced to theories and pedagogies that promote other forms of learning. Bonwell and Eison (1991) identified a number of other barriers to adoption of active learning techniques. They note that change involves risk and can lead to uncertainty or anxiousness. New techniques rarely succeed perfectly on the first try, and instructors may have little incentive to innovate or try new teaching techniques, especially if they believe that their current approach is effective. Further, the lecture is familiar not just to instructors but also to students. Each is familiar with the role they are expected to play in a lecture-based classroom, making it comfortable, if not necessarily engaging.

Other common barriers to active learning include (Bonwell & Eison, 1991, p.59):

Pressure to cover content
Class sizes that are not conducive to active learning
Time and planning involved in active learning
Lack of materials or equipment

Instructors often feel that they have more material to cover than time in which to cover it. While this feeling is common across fields and grade levels, it is perhaps especially true of elementary and high school teachers, as well as college faculty in licensed fields such as nursing, all of whom need to teach specific content to prepare students to pass standardized exams. Lectures are a very efficient way of transmitting content. Active learning techniques, which require learner participation and often build in time for reflection, take up class time and leave less time to cover content. Librarians are not immune to this concern. In fact, because librarians generally have less time with students than a regular classroom teacher does, they might feel even more pressure to cram as much material as they can into the limited time that they have, resulting in sessions that are overpacked and rushed, as well as lacking in meaningful learning activities.

Active learning requires a shift in thinking as well as in techniques. The emphasis in active learning is on skills and competencies rather than on content. Through the various activities, students develop problem-solving, critical thinking, and reflection skills. In addition to learning specific content, students are putting skills into practice and learning how to learn. With that in mind, instructors may need to reduce the amount of material covered in class in order to make time for such skill building. However, this approach does not mean that the content is not covered at all. Rather, it might be delivered in different ways, often outside of regular classroom time. For instance, in a traditional classroom, instructors deliver content through lecture and demonstration, and then give students homework such as worksheets or other assignments where they practice or apply what they learned in class. However, instructors could have students read texts and watch videos outside of class that cover the same content the instructor might normally have delivered through an in-class lecture, then use class time for practice problems and skill building. This approach, sometimes referred to as the “flipped classroom,” is covered in more detail in Chapter 10.

Some instructors, especially at the college level, will find themselves in large classes of 100 or more students. Though such class sizes are less conducive to active learning than smaller classes are, it is not impossible to integrate some active learning even with hundreds of students (Harrington & Zakrajsek, 2017). One technique is a lecture pause, in which instructors stop the lecture and ask students to write down everything they remember from the lecture up to that point (or the two or three most important things they remember). The activity could end there, or the instructor could have students pair up to compare answers and perhaps fill in gaps in each other’s notes. This simple activity engages the students and entails the kind of retrieval practice that increases memory and retention of information.

Instructors can also be hesitant to try active learning because of the time involved or their own anxiety about trying a new activity. However, integrating active learning does not have to entail changing an entire workshop, session, or course; instructors can integrate active learning activities slowly over time. New activities will rarely work perfectly the first time through, so it makes sense to integrate a single activity, assess it, and make adjustments as necessary before adding more activities. Some experienced teachers might be able to add activities spontaneously. For instance, a confident and seasoned instructor might feel comfortable leading an unplanned discussion about a recent news story. But most instructors, especially those new to active learning, will find that each activity will take some time to plan ahead of its implementation. Ultimately, however, planning active learning activities is no more time-consuming than planning a detailed lecture.

Similarly, active learning does not have to depend on expensive materials and equipment. Technology can certainly enhance active learning, and many tools exist to increase student engagement. For example, many elearning platforms include online discussion boards, polling tools, document sharing, and even conferencing tools. However, many activities can be undertaken with few or no materials, such as the lecture pause described earlier that requires only a paper and pencil.

In addition to these four barriers, some teachers question the premise of active learning itself (Graffam, 2007; Thomas, 2009). Generally, these instructors are deeply rooted in traditional modes of teaching and understand instruction as the transmission of knowledge. This perspective can pose special challenges for academic and some school librarians, who are often guests in other teachers’ classrooms. If a librarian is invited to speak in the class of an instructor who does not view active learning as “real” teaching, the librarian might be hesitant to incorporate such techniques even if they support them. On the other hand, the librarian could view this as an opportunity to model good instructional practice. One or two judiciously chosen activities that engage students could demonstrate the effectiveness of active learning, and the librarian could enhance the technique by being transparent in their instruction. By explaining why they incorporated a particular activity, identifying its learning outcomes and the ways in which the activity achieves those outcomes, and by having students reflect on their learning, the librarian can help both the student and a reluctant instructor see how the techniques work.

Finally, students can also be resistant to active learning (Bonwell & Eison, 1991; Thomas, 2009). After all, active learning requires learners to engage and participate, and puts more responsibility on them. Students who are used to listening to lectures and taking notes might be confused or put off by active learning activities, at least at first. In fact, some students believe they learn less in active learning classrooms than they do from lectures, even though the research suggests the opposite (Miller, 2019). Just as engaging in active learning entails some risk for the instructor, it also can feel risky to the learner. Active learning often requires students to share thoughts, ideas, and answers in small and large groups, and some learners might be nervous about giving a “wrong” answer or sharing an unpopular idea. Further, the interaction with peers might be stressful for some people, especially shy, introverted, and neurodiverse students for whom social interaction can be anxiety-inducing (Cohen et al., 2019; Cooper et al., 2018; Monahan, 2017).

Certain active learning techniques, such as cold-calling, or randomly calling on a student who has not volunteered to answer a question, are particularly likely to be stressful for learners (Cooper et al., 2018). Most other techniques, however, can be implemented so as not to cause such anxiety. For instance, low-stakes activities that have little impact on a students’ grade reduce the potential for anxiety. Learners also tend to feel more comfortable when they are familiar with an activity (Bonwell & Eison, 1991), so introducing an activity by explaining its purpose, how it will be implemented, and what the expectations of students are can help ease fears. Bonwell and Eison (1991, p. 69) classify a range of instructional learning techniques according to the amount of risk they present to students. Activities that involve less speaking or presenting, such as lecture pauses, self-assessment activities, and structured small group discussions, are lower risk and lower stress. Higher risk, higher stress activities like role playing and presentations are more often group- or whole-class-based and require more speaking or interaction.

Developing trust between the instructor and students and among the students themselves can be crucial to successful active learning, especially when the activities will require students to interact with one another. Many of the techniques already mentioned, such as being clear about expectations and using low-stakes activities, can help build trust. We can also work with learners to establish ground rules for interactions—for example, encouraging active listening and respect during discussions. It can be helpful to give students time to get to know each other before assigning group work, and allowing students to choose their own groups so that they can find peers with whom they are comfortable (Cohen et al., 2019). Having people work in pairs rather than larger groups might also be less intimidating for some. Finally, simply allowing learners time to gather their thoughts before expecting them to join a discussion can be helpful. For instance, after asking a question of the class, try waiting a few extra seconds before choosing a volunteer, or give students time to reflect and jot down their thoughts before launching a discussion. Activity 4.2 addresses strategies to overcome faculty and student resistance to active learning.

Activity 4.2: Engaging Students in Active Learning

Read through the brief scenarios below and answer the questions that follow:

Scenario 1: Lisa is a user services librarian in a public library. She leads a popular series of job hunting workshops and has always had positive reviews. In the past, Lisa would mostly lecture, but recently she decided to incorporate some active learning. During one session, she had patrons pair off to practice answering interview questions and giving each other feedback on the answers. After the workshop, a patron complained that she had come to the workshop to learn from Lisa, not from other students who did not know any more than she did. She felt that Lisa was not “teaching” them how to do a good job interview.

Why might the patron feel this way?
Why might Lisa believe this is a good activity for this workshop?
What might Lisa do or say to persuade this patron that such peer interaction and role playing is a legitimate teaching and learning activity?

Scenario 2: Ben is a school librarian who believes in the value of active learning and peer-to-peer instruction. During class, he always asks students to come to the front of the room to demonstrate different skills and tasks like keyword and subject searching, rather than leading the demonstration himself. He likes the fact that the peers show each other how to do these tasks by explaining what they are doing and why they are doing it, and he can act as a coach, guiding and correcting them as needed. However, Ben has noticed that when he asks for volunteers, only a few students raise their hands, and it is usually the same students who volunteer every time.

Why might some learners be hesitant to volunteer in Ben’s class?
Even if more students volunteer, Ben probably has time to let only two or three students demonstrate in each class. Is there a way to structure this activity so more students could participate?
Some people might find demonstrating in front of the class stressful or scary. Are there ways in which Ben could structure his activity to make it less stressful or lower stakes?

Most of the literature suggests that best practice both for instructors and for students new to active learning is to ease into the practice. Bonwell and Eison (1991) recommend that, when possible, instructors assess students’ background knowledge on the topic ahead of time in order to plan activities at the appropriate knowledge and developmental level. Chapter 7 offers an overview of techniques for this kind of assessment. Bonwell and Eison also acknowledge that not all instructors are equally comfortable with all techniques, and advise instructors to begin with activities they find comfortable. Harris and Bacon (2019) note that more advanced learners find greater benefit from active learning, leading them to suggest that the activities should be scaffolded, meaning that the class should begin with easier, lower-risk activities while students are still learning basic content, and then gradually move to more complex tasks as learners develop mastery.

Examples of Active Learning Techniques and Strategies

Literally dozens of examples of active learning techniques and strategies exist. Part III of this textbook will offer more details about designing and implementing instruction sessions, including active learning strategies. This section provides short descriptions of some of the more popular activity examples, with a focus on those most suited to a typical library instruction session.

Think-Pair-Share

Perhaps one of the most widely recognized active learning techniques, think-pair-share can be used in classes of all sizes, with all different ages. Because it requires learners to interact only with one other person, it is relatively low risk even for introverted or anxious students. In this activity, instructors pose a question or provide another prompt such as a brief scenario. Next, they pause for a minute or two, giving students time to think about their responses. Students might just reflect or might jot down their thoughts. After a few minutes, learners pair up with a peer to share their responses and discuss their thoughts and reactions. Instructors might also encourage students to identify any questions that arose for them. Depending on the size of the class, the instructor might have each student share thoughts with the class or ask for a few volunteers to share ideas from their discussion with the whole group.

Discussions are another popular and well-known active learning technique. Discussions can be carried out in large- or small-group formats, although smaller groups are generally more conducive to in-depth discussions and allow for more student participation. During discussions, learners reflect on and respond to readings, questions, or other prompts. Specific implementation strategies are detailed in Chapter 10.

Brainstorm/Carousel Brainstorm

Brainstorming activities encourage students to identify anything they can think of related to a topic. These activities can be done individually, or students can work in groups to pool their knowledge. A fun variation on a collective brainstorm is the carousel brainstorm. In this version, the teacher identifies different aspects or subtopics of the subject under study, perhaps posted on large sheets around the room. Small groups of learners are assigned to brainstorm a single subtopic. After a few minutes, the groups rotate to a new subtopic and add what they can to the previous group’s work. When each group has had a turn at each subtopic, the original group reviews and synthesizes the full class brainstorm of their subtopic and presents the information to the class. Activity 4.3 is an example of a brainstorming activity.

Activity 4.3: Instruction Brainstorm

Choose an information setting in which you would like to work and a patron group you would likely encounter there. Brainstorm as many different instruction topics as you can that would be relevant to that group and setting. You might extend the brainstorm by thinking of active learning techniques that could be used to learn about those topics.

Pair up with a classmate and exchange brainstorms. Review your peer’s paper and see if you can add any additional topics or active learning techniques.

Concept Mapping

In concept mapping, learners create visual displays of the connections or relationships among ideas. Generally, a learner will begin with a single idea and brainstorm to identify other words and concepts, which they arrange around the original idea, with lines illustrating how the concepts relate. The new words might describe subtopics, broader topics, and related topics. Depending on the original idea, students might identify research questions on the topic, audiences concerned with or impacted by the topics, action steps, and so on. Concept maps are a great activity for students who are just beginning a research paper, as they can help identify areas of focus, as well as keywords and synonyms for searching. Concept mapping can be created by individuals or groups. Figure 4.1 shows a concept map of information literacy terms created by using the free tool MindMup .

Figure 4.1: Information Literacy Concept Map

Student Demonstration

Rather than lecturing or leading the class through a demonstration, we can turn the class over to the students to show one another how to work through a particular task or problem. For instance, a library instructor could ask learners to demonstrate the steps they took to locate a book or article, or to share the criteria they used to evaluate a website. This way, the learners take on a teaching role, and the instructor can act as a coach from the sidelines, offering feedback or suggestions if the learner gets stuck. One drawback of student demonstrations is that unless the class is very small or a significant amount of time is set aside, it is unlikely that all students will have a chance to demonstrate. A workaround might be to have students work in small groups or pairs.

The jigsaw activity has students assigned to groups, with each group working on a different aspect of a larger project. Once groups complete their assigned task, the instructor shuffles the students into new groups comprising at least one representative from each of the initial groups. In this new group, learners piece together the work from their original groups to complete the larger project. The jigsaw is a collaborative effort, and each student has a chance to act as an expert or instructor when bringing the knowledge from the original group to the new group. As an example, imagine a class of second graders doing a unit on the life cycle of the frog. The librarian could create groups and ask each group to research and describe one stage of the cycle. Once the groups have completed this task, the instructor would create new groups with at least one student from each of the stages. Now, the new groups could compile their research and present a completed life cycle.

Role Play and Skits

Role playing can be an effective way for learners to test their skills and abilities with the kinds of roles or positions they anticipate encountering in the real world. Role playing requires students to think on their feet and draw on the ideas or knowledge they have acquired to address a problem or issue. This technique is often associated with professional programs such as nursing, where students might take turns playing the nurse and patient roles to practice doing a patient intake. However, this technique can be effective in many classrooms. For instance, a public librarian leading a session on job hunting could have students pair off and answer sample interview questions. Because role playing requires spontaneous thinking and interacting with peers who might or might not be familiar, it can feel a little risky, especially for shy students. Giving people time to get to know one another and keeping the activity low stakes can help make the experience more comfortable. Skits are a variation on role playing, in which learners develop a brief play illustrating a relevant situation, scenario, or process to act out in front of the class. For instance, after having students role play a job interview in pairs, the instructor could have learners finalize a script and perform for the class, opening up opportunities for wider discussion and more peer feedback.

Lecture Pause

Described briefly earlier, the lecture pause is a relatively easy technique to integrate and can work well even in very large classes. Using this technique, the instructor will pause every so often during the lecture to allow students to reflect on their learning. During the pause, the instructor might ask students to jot down the key points of the lecture, answer a specific question, or generate their own questions about the material. Students can work individually or pair up to share their reflections and answers. Pairing up can be effective, as learners might be able to answer one another’s questions, or fill in gaps in each other’s recollections of key points.

Peer Instruction

Instructors will often find they have classes of mixed abilities. Some students will be familiar with certain content, while for others it will be completely new. Instructors can find it challenging in such circumstances to present material in a way that is not too advanced for some or too easy (and likely boring) for others. This is common in public libraries where learners self-select into a session, and in academic libraries, where library instruction often is not fully integrated into the curriculum. Because some faculty request library instruction regularly, while others might never have a librarian visit their class, in any one class we will find some students who have sat through multiple similar sessions and some for whom this is a first. Peer instruction can be effective for such mixed classrooms. Instructors can pair or group learners who have more experience with the content together with those who have less, allowing the experienced students to do some of the instruction. Not only is this approach more engaging for all involved, but it has the added benefit that teaching is actually a great way to reinforce knowledge. The students engaging in instruction are deepening their own learning even as they offer instruction. While this approach can be ideal for groups of mixed levels, it is not always necessary for the students doing instruction to be more knowledgeable or advanced. After introducing a new concept or skill, instructors could have students take turns explaining or demonstrating for one another what they have just learned. In all cases, the instructor should stay engaged and offer feedback or redirect if the peer instructors are providing inaccurate information.

Minute Paper

The minute paper is a brief activity that asks students to reflect on their learning by taking roughly one minute to react to the day’s lesson. Instructors often guide the reflection by asking students to recall one or two new things they have learned and/or to identify the “muddiest point” of the lesson, or the section they found most confusing or about which they still have questions. This activity can be done anonymously, thus keeping stakes low and allowing students to be more honest in their reflection. If time allows, the instructor can review the papers and address some of the outstanding questions before the class ends. Another option is to have students add their name to the paper, and then return the paper with comments and answers to questions. The minute paper takes very little class time and can be done in classes of any size.

Scavenger Hunt

A scavenger hunt can be a great way to introduce people to the layout, services, and materials of the library. As in any scavenger hunt, participants in a library scavenger hunt will receive a list of items to find within the physical library. Rather than objects, this list could include recording the call number of a certain item, getting a pass signed by a reference librarian, or checking out a book. Participants could work individually or in teams.

This list is only a small sampling of active learning activities, and each of these has many possible variations. One of the best things about active learning is that it is not only engaging for the students, but it allows the instructor to be creative as well. As discussed in Chapter 9, many active learning techniques can also double as assessment tools, as the activities require students to demonstrate knowledge and ability. See Activity 4.4 for a brief activity on implementing active learning techniques.

Activity 4.4: Integrating Active Learning Techniques

Below are several descriptions of library classroom settings. See if you can think of at least two active learning technique for each example. You do not have to limit yourself to the techniques described in this chapter. There are many more examples available online and in the literature. Do a quick web search and see what other ideas you can find.

A high school librarian is teaching a class on how to spot “fake news.” By the end of the session, he wants his students to check the domain name of the site, research the author or organization that created the site, and use additional sources to verify facts.
A public librarian is running a workshop on online safety and privacy, which includes setting up a password manager. Her audience is mostly adults with at least a high school education.
A college librarian is teaching a session for undergraduate students who have just been assigned a research paper. He plans to teach the students about Boolean operators and search limiters.
A librarian at a legal firm is running a session to train lawyers on a new version of Westlaw . A few of the staff members who graduated recently are already familiar with this version from their law school.

Active learning is widely considered a best practice in teaching and learning, and both instructors and learners find active instructional strategies more engaging. Although active learning shifts much of the responsibility for learning from the instructor to the student, these techniques take at least as much planning and involvement on the part of the instructor as more traditional strategies like lecture. However, the work involved in active learning can offer great returns in the form of increased motivation and learning.

The major takeaways from this chapter are:

Active learning techniques involve students directly with the content and can lead to deeper learning.
An array of active learning techniques exists, with varying levels of complexity, the amount of class time they require, and whether they are intended for group or individual work. This variety and flexibility mean that active learning can be integrated into virtually any lesson, regardless of the size of the group, the amount of content to be covered, or the length of the session.
Active learning techniques such as think-pair-share and lecture pause can be adopted even in large, lecture-based courses.
Instructors new to active learning might start with brief, more simple techniques such as think-pair-share.

Share This Book

Bipolar Disorder
Therapy Center
When To See a Therapist
Types of Therapy
Best Online Therapy
Best Couples Therapy
Best Family Therapy
Managing Stress
Sleep and Dreaming
Understanding Emotions
Self-Improvement
Healthy Relationships
Student Resources
Personality Types
Guided Meditations
Verywell Mind Insights
2024 Verywell Mind 25
Mental Health in the Classroom
Editorial Process
Meet Our Review Board
Crisis Support

What Is Problem-Solving Therapy?

Arlin Cuncic, MA, is the author of The Anxiety Workbook and founder of the website About Social Anxiety. She has a Master's degree in clinical psychology.

Daniel B. Block, MD, is an award-winning, board-certified psychiatrist who operates a private practice in Pennsylvania.

Verywell / Madelyn Goodnight

Problem-Solving Therapy Techniques

How effective is problem-solving therapy, things to consider, how to get started.

Problem-solving therapy is a brief intervention that provides people with the tools they need to identify and solve problems that arise from big and small life stressors. It aims to improve your overall quality of life and reduce the negative impact of psychological and physical illness.

Problem-solving therapy can be used to treat depression , among other conditions. It can be administered by a doctor or mental health professional and may be combined with other treatment approaches.

At a Glance

Problem-solving therapy is a short-term treatment used to help people who are experiencing depression, stress, PTSD, self-harm, suicidal ideation, and other mental health problems develop the tools they need to deal with challenges. This approach teaches people to identify problems, generate solutions, and implement those solutions. Let's take a closer look at how problem-solving therapy can help people be more resilient and adaptive in the face of stress.

Problem-solving therapy is based on a model that takes into account the importance of real-life problem-solving. In other words, the key to managing the impact of stressful life events is to know how to address issues as they arise. Problem-solving therapy is very practical in its approach and is only concerned with the present, rather than delving into your past.

This form of therapy can take place one-on-one or in a group format and may be offered in person or online via telehealth . Sessions can be anywhere from 30 minutes to two hours long.

Key Components

There are two major components that make up the problem-solving therapy framework:

Applying a positive problem-solving orientation to your life
Using problem-solving skills

A positive problem-solving orientation means viewing things in an optimistic light, embracing self-efficacy , and accepting the idea that problems are a normal part of life. Problem-solving skills are behaviors that you can rely on to help you navigate conflict, even during times of stress. This includes skills like:

Knowing how to identify a problem
Defining the problem in a helpful way
Trying to understand the problem more deeply
Setting goals related to the problem
Generating alternative, creative solutions to the problem
Choosing the best course of action
Implementing the choice you have made
Evaluating the outcome to determine next steps

Problem-solving therapy is all about training you to become adaptive in your life so that you will start to see problems as challenges to be solved instead of insurmountable obstacles. It also means that you will recognize the action that is required to engage in effective problem-solving techniques.

Planful Problem-Solving

One problem-solving technique, called planful problem-solving, involves following a series of steps to fix issues in a healthy, constructive way:

Problem definition and formulation : This step involves identifying the real-life problem that needs to be solved and formulating it in a way that allows you to generate potential solutions.
Generation of alternative solutions : This stage involves coming up with various potential solutions to the problem at hand. The goal in this step is to brainstorm options to creatively address the life stressor in ways that you may not have previously considered.
Decision-making strategies : This stage involves discussing different strategies for making decisions as well as identifying obstacles that may get in the way of solving the problem at hand.
Solution implementation and verification : This stage involves implementing a chosen solution and then verifying whether it was effective in addressing the problem.

Other Techniques

Other techniques your therapist may go over include:

Problem-solving multitasking , which helps you learn to think clearly and solve problems effectively even during times of stress
Stop, slow down, think, and act (SSTA) , which is meant to encourage you to become more emotionally mindful when faced with conflict
Healthy thinking and imagery , which teaches you how to embrace more positive self-talk while problem-solving

What Problem-Solving Therapy Can Help With

Problem-solving therapy addresses life stress issues and focuses on helping you find solutions to concrete issues. This approach can be applied to problems associated with various psychological and physiological symptoms.

Mental Health Issues

Problem-solving therapy may help address mental health issues, like:

Chronic stress due to accumulating minor issues
Complications associated with traumatic brain injury (TBI)
Emotional distress
Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
Problems associated with a chronic disease like cancer, heart disease, or diabetes
Self-harm and feelings of hopelessness
Substance use
Suicidal ideation

Specific Life Challenges

This form of therapy is also helpful for dealing with specific life problems, such as:

Death of a loved one
Dissatisfaction at work
Everyday life stressors
Family problems
Financial difficulties
Relationship conflicts

Your doctor or mental healthcare professional will be able to advise whether problem-solving therapy could be helpful for your particular issue. In general, if you are struggling with specific, concrete problems that you are having trouble finding solutions for, problem-solving therapy could be helpful for you.

Benefits of Problem-Solving Therapy

The skills learned in problem-solving therapy can be helpful for managing all areas of your life. These can include:

Being able to identify which stressors trigger your negative emotions (e.g., sadness, anger)
Confidence that you can handle problems that you face
Having a systematic approach on how to deal with life's problems
Having a toolbox of strategies to solve the issues you face
Increased confidence to find creative solutions
Knowing how to identify which barriers will impede your progress
Knowing how to manage emotions when they arise
Reduced avoidance and increased action-taking
The ability to accept life problems that can't be solved
The ability to make effective decisions
The development of patience (realizing that not all problems have a "quick fix")

Problem-solving therapy can help people feel more empowered to deal with the problems they face in their lives. Rather than feeling overwhelmed when stressors begin to take a toll, this therapy introduces new coping skills that can boost self-efficacy and resilience .

Other Types of Therapy

Other similar types of therapy include cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) . While these therapies work to change thinking and behaviors, they work a bit differently. Both CBT and SFBT are less structured than problem-solving therapy and may focus on broader issues. CBT focuses on identifying and changing maladaptive thoughts, and SFBT works to help people look for solutions and build self-efficacy based on strengths.

This form of therapy was initially developed to help people combat stress through effective problem-solving, and it was later adapted to address clinical depression specifically. Today, much of the research on problem-solving therapy deals with its effectiveness in treating depression.

Problem-solving therapy has been shown to help depression in:

Older adults
People coping with serious illnesses like cancer

Problem-solving therapy also appears to be effective as a brief treatment for depression, offering benefits in as little as six to eight sessions with a therapist or another healthcare professional. This may make it a good option for someone unable to commit to a lengthier treatment for depression.

Problem-solving therapy is not a good fit for everyone. It may not be effective at addressing issues that don't have clear solutions, like seeking meaning or purpose in life. Problem-solving therapy is also intended to treat specific problems, not general habits or thought patterns .

In general, it's also important to remember that problem-solving therapy is not a primary treatment for mental disorders. If you are living with the symptoms of a serious mental illness such as bipolar disorder or schizophrenia , you may need additional treatment with evidence-based approaches for your particular concern.

Problem-solving therapy is best aimed at someone who has a mental or physical issue that is being treated separately, but who also has life issues that go along with that problem that has yet to be addressed.

For example, it could help if you can't clean your house or pay your bills because of your depression, or if a cancer diagnosis is interfering with your quality of life.

Your doctor may be able to recommend therapists in your area who utilize this approach, or they may offer it themselves as part of their practice. You can also search for a problem-solving therapist with help from the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Society of Clinical Psychology .

If receiving problem-solving therapy from a doctor or mental healthcare professional is not an option for you, you could also consider implementing it as a self-help strategy using a workbook designed to help you learn problem-solving skills on your own.

During your first session, your therapist may spend some time explaining their process and approach. They may ask you to identify the problem you’re currently facing, and they’ll likely discuss your goals for therapy .

Keep In Mind

Problem-solving therapy may be a short-term intervention that's focused on solving a specific issue in your life. If you need further help with something more pervasive, it can also become a longer-term treatment option.

Get Help Now

We've tried, tested, and written unbiased reviews of the best online therapy programs including Talkspace, BetterHelp, and ReGain. Find out which option is the best for you.

Shang P, Cao X, You S, Feng X, Li N, Jia Y. Problem-solving therapy for major depressive disorders in older adults: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials . Aging Clin Exp Res . 2021;33(6):1465-1475. doi:10.1007/s40520-020-01672-3

Cuijpers P, Wit L de, Kleiboer A, Karyotaki E, Ebert DD. Problem-solving therapy for adult depression: An updated meta-analysis . Eur Psychiatry . 2018;48(1):27-37. doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2017.11.006

Nezu AM, Nezu CM, D'Zurilla TJ. Problem-Solving Therapy: A Treatment Manual . New York; 2013. doi:10.1891/9780826109415.0001

Owens D, Wright-Hughes A, Graham L, et al. Problem-solving therapy rather than treatment as usual for adults after self-harm: a pragmatic, feasibility, randomised controlled trial (the MIDSHIPS trial) . Pilot Feasibility Stud . 2020;6:119. doi:10.1186/s40814-020-00668-0

Sorsdahl K, Stein DJ, Corrigall J, et al. The efficacy of a blended motivational interviewing and problem solving therapy intervention to reduce substance use among patients presenting for emergency services in South Africa: A randomized controlled trial . Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy . 2015;10(1):46. doi:doi.org/10.1186/s13011-015-0042-1

Margolis SA, Osborne P, Gonzalez JS. Problem solving . In: Gellman MD, ed. Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine . Springer International Publishing; 2020:1745-1747. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39903-0_208

Kirkham JG, Choi N, Seitz DP. Meta-analysis of problem solving therapy for the treatment of major depressive disorder in older adults . Int J Geriatr Psychiatry . 2016;31(5):526-535. doi:10.1002/gps.4358

Garand L, Rinaldo DE, Alberth MM, et al. Effects of problem solving therapy on mental health outcomes in family caregivers of persons with a new diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment or early dementia: A randomized controlled trial . Am J Geriatr Psychiatry . 2014;22(8):771-781. doi:10.1016/j.jagp.2013.07.007

Noyes K, Zapf AL, Depner RM, et al. Problem-solving skills training in adult cancer survivors: Bright IDEAS-AC pilot study . Cancer Treat Res Commun . 2022;31:100552. doi:10.1016/j.ctarc.2022.100552

Albert SM, King J, Anderson S, et al. Depression agency-based collaborative: effect of problem-solving therapy on risk of common mental disorders in older adults with home care needs . The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry . 2019;27(6):619-624. doi:10.1016/j.jagp.2019.01.002

By Arlin Cuncic, MA Arlin Cuncic, MA, is the author of The Anxiety Workbook and founder of the website About Social Anxiety. She has a Master's degree in clinical psychology.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
My Account Login
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Review Article
Open access
Published: 11 January 2023

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature

Enwei Xu ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6424-8169 1 ,
Wei Wang 1 &
Qingxia Wang 1

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume 10 , Article number: 16 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

16k Accesses

16 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

Science, technology and society

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely embraced in the classroom instruction of critical thinking, which is regarded as the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education as well as a key competence for learners in the 21st century. However, the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking remains uncertain. This current research presents the major findings of a meta-analysis of 36 pieces of the literature revealed in worldwide educational periodicals during the 21st century to identify the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and to determine, based on evidence, whether and to what extent collaborative problem solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. The findings show that (1) collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster students’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z = 12.78, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]); (2) in respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem solving can significantly and successfully enhance students’ attitudinal tendencies (ES = 1.17, z = 7.62, P < 0.01, 95% CI[0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z = 11.55, P < 0.01, 95% CI[0.58, 0.82]); and (3) the teaching type (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01), subject area (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05), group size (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01) all have an impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. On the basis of these results, recommendations are made for further study and instruction to better support students’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Fostering twenty-first century skills among primary school students through math project-based learning

A meta-analysis to gauge the impact of pedagogies employed in mixed-ability high school biology classrooms

A guide to critical thinking: implications for dental education

Introduction.

Although critical thinking has a long history in research, the concept of critical thinking, which is regarded as an essential competence for learners in the 21st century, has recently attracted more attention from researchers and teaching practitioners (National Research Council, 2012 ). Critical thinking should be the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education (Peng and Deng, 2017 ) because students with critical thinking can not only understand the meaning of knowledge but also effectively solve practical problems in real life even after knowledge is forgotten (Kek and Huijser, 2011 ). The definition of critical thinking is not universal (Ennis, 1989 ; Castle, 2009 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). In general, the definition of critical thinking is a self-aware and self-regulated thought process (Facione, 1990 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). It refers to the cognitive skills needed to interpret, analyze, synthesize, reason, and evaluate information as well as the attitudinal tendency to apply these abilities (Halpern, 2001 ). The view that critical thinking can be taught and learned through curriculum teaching has been widely supported by many researchers (e.g., Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), leading to educators’ efforts to foster it among students. In the field of teaching practice, there are three types of courses for teaching critical thinking (Ennis, 1989 ). The first is an independent curriculum in which critical thinking is taught and cultivated without involving the knowledge of specific disciplines; the second is an integrated curriculum in which critical thinking is integrated into the teaching of other disciplines as a clear teaching goal; and the third is a mixed curriculum in which critical thinking is taught in parallel to the teaching of other disciplines for mixed teaching training. Furthermore, numerous measuring tools have been developed by researchers and educators to measure critical thinking in the context of teaching practice. These include standardized measurement tools, such as WGCTA, CCTST, CCTT, and CCTDI, which have been verified by repeated experiments and are considered effective and reliable by international scholars (Facione and Facione, 1992 ). In short, descriptions of critical thinking, including its two dimensions of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, different types of teaching courses, and standardized measurement tools provide a complex normative framework for understanding, teaching, and evaluating critical thinking.

Cultivating critical thinking in curriculum teaching can start with a problem, and one of the most popular critical thinking instructional approaches is problem-based learning (Liu et al., 2020 ). Duch et al. ( 2001 ) noted that problem-based learning in group collaboration is progressive active learning, which can improve students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Collaborative problem-solving is the organic integration of collaborative learning and problem-based learning, which takes learners as the center of the learning process and uses problems with poor structure in real-world situations as the starting point for the learning process (Liang et al., 2017 ). Students learn the knowledge needed to solve problems in a collaborative group, reach a consensus on problems in the field, and form solutions through social cooperation methods, such as dialogue, interpretation, questioning, debate, negotiation, and reflection, thus promoting the development of learners’ domain knowledge and critical thinking (Cindy, 2004 ; Liang et al., 2017 ).

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely used in the teaching practice of critical thinking, and several studies have attempted to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature on critical thinking from various perspectives. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of collaborative problem-solving on critical thinking. Therefore, the best approach for developing and enhancing critical thinking throughout collaborative problem-solving is to examine how to implement critical thinking instruction; however, this issue is still unexplored, which means that many teachers are incapable of better instructing critical thinking (Leng and Lu, 2020 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). For example, Huber ( 2016 ) provided the meta-analysis findings of 71 publications on gaining critical thinking over various time frames in college with the aim of determining whether critical thinking was truly teachable. These authors found that learners significantly improve their critical thinking while in college and that critical thinking differs with factors such as teaching strategies, intervention duration, subject area, and teaching type. The usefulness of collaborative problem-solving in fostering students’ critical thinking, however, was not determined by this study, nor did it reveal whether there existed significant variations among the different elements. A meta-analysis of 31 pieces of educational literature was conducted by Liu et al. ( 2020 ) to assess the impact of problem-solving on college students’ critical thinking. These authors found that problem-solving could promote the development of critical thinking among college students and proposed establishing a reasonable group structure for problem-solving in a follow-up study to improve students’ critical thinking. Additionally, previous empirical studies have reached inconclusive and even contradictory conclusions about whether and to what extent collaborative problem-solving increases or decreases critical thinking levels. As an illustration, Yang et al. ( 2008 ) carried out an experiment on the integrated curriculum teaching of college students based on a web bulletin board with the goal of fostering participants’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These authors’ research revealed that through sharing, debating, examining, and reflecting on various experiences and ideas, collaborative problem-solving can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking in real-life problem situations. In contrast, collaborative problem-solving had a positive impact on learners’ interaction and could improve learning interest and motivation but could not significantly improve students’ critical thinking when compared to traditional classroom teaching, according to research by Naber and Wyatt ( 2014 ) and Sendag and Odabasi ( 2009 ) on undergraduate and high school students, respectively.

The above studies show that there is inconsistency regarding the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking. Therefore, it is essential to conduct a thorough and trustworthy review to detect and decide whether and to what degree collaborative problem-solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. Meta-analysis is a quantitative analysis approach that is utilized to examine quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. This approach characterizes the effectiveness of its impact by averaging the effect sizes of numerous qualitative studies in an effort to reduce the uncertainty brought on by independent research and produce more conclusive findings (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ).

This paper used a meta-analytic approach and carried out a meta-analysis to examine the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking in order to make a contribution to both research and practice. The following research questions were addressed by this meta-analysis:

What is the overall effect size of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills)?

How are the disparities between the study conclusions impacted by various moderating variables if the impacts of various experimental designs in the included studies are heterogeneous?

This research followed the strict procedures (e.g., database searching, identification, screening, eligibility, merging, duplicate removal, and analysis of included studies) of Cooper’s ( 2010 ) proposed meta-analysis approach for examining quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. The relevant empirical research that appeared in worldwide educational periodicals within the 21st century was subjected to this meta-analysis using Rev-Man 5.4. The consistency of the data extracted separately by two researchers was tested using Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and a publication bias test and a heterogeneity test were run on the sample data to ascertain the quality of this meta-analysis.

Data sources and search strategies

There were three stages to the data collection process for this meta-analysis, as shown in Fig. 1 , which shows the number of articles included and eliminated during the selection process based on the statement and study eligibility criteria.

This flowchart shows the number of records identified, included and excluded in the article.

First, the databases used to systematically search for relevant articles were the journal papers of the Web of Science Core Collection and the Chinese Core source journal, as well as the Chinese Social Science Citation Index (CSSCI) source journal papers included in CNKI. These databases were selected because they are credible platforms that are sources of scholarly and peer-reviewed information with advanced search tools and contain literature relevant to the subject of our topic from reliable researchers and experts. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the Web of Science was “TS = (((“critical thinking” or “ct” and “pretest” or “posttest”) or (“critical thinking” or “ct” and “control group” or “quasi experiment” or “experiment”)) and (“collaboration” or “collaborative learning” or “CSCL”) and (“problem solving” or “problem-based learning” or “PBL”))”. The research area was “Education Educational Research”, and the search period was “January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2021”. A total of 412 papers were obtained. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the CNKI was “SU = (‘critical thinking’*‘collaboration’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘collaborative learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘CSCL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem solving’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem-based learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘PBL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem oriented’) AND FT = (‘experiment’ + ‘quasi experiment’ + ‘pretest’ + ‘posttest’ + ‘empirical study’)” (translated into Chinese when searching). A total of 56 studies were found throughout the search period of “January 2000 to December 2021”. From the databases, all duplicates and retractions were eliminated before exporting the references into Endnote, a program for managing bibliographic references. In all, 466 studies were found.

Second, the studies that matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were chosen by two researchers after they had reviewed the abstracts and titles of the gathered articles, yielding a total of 126 studies.

Third, two researchers thoroughly reviewed each included article’s whole text in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meanwhile, a snowball search was performed using the references and citations of the included articles to ensure complete coverage of the articles. Ultimately, 36 articles were kept.

Two researchers worked together to carry out this entire process, and a consensus rate of almost 94.7% was reached after discussion and negotiation to clarify any emerging differences.

Eligibility criteria

Since not all the retrieved studies matched the criteria for this meta-analysis, eligibility criteria for both inclusion and exclusion were developed as follows:

The publication language of the included studies was limited to English and Chinese, and the full text could be obtained. Articles that did not meet the publication language and articles not published between 2000 and 2021 were excluded.

The research design of the included studies must be empirical and quantitative studies that can assess the effect of collaborative problem-solving on the development of critical thinking. Articles that could not identify the causal mechanisms by which collaborative problem-solving affects critical thinking, such as review articles and theoretical articles, were excluded.

The research method of the included studies must feature a randomized control experiment or a quasi-experiment, or a natural experiment, which have a higher degree of internal validity with strong experimental designs and can all plausibly provide evidence that critical thinking and collaborative problem-solving are causally related. Articles with non-experimental research methods, such as purely correlational or observational studies, were excluded.

The participants of the included studies were only students in school, including K-12 students and college students. Articles in which the participants were non-school students, such as social workers or adult learners, were excluded.

The research results of the included studies must mention definite signs that may be utilized to gauge critical thinking’s impact (e.g., sample size, mean value, or standard deviation). Articles that lacked specific measurement indicators for critical thinking and could not calculate the effect size were excluded.

Data coding design

In order to perform a meta-analysis, it is necessary to collect the most important information from the articles, codify that information’s properties, and convert descriptive data into quantitative data. Therefore, this study designed a data coding template (see Table 1 ). Ultimately, 16 coding fields were retained.

The designed data-coding template consisted of three pieces of information. Basic information about the papers was included in the descriptive information: the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper.

The variable information for the experimental design had three variables: the independent variable (instruction method), the dependent variable (critical thinking), and the moderating variable (learning stage, teaching type, intervention duration, learning scaffold, group size, measuring tool, and subject area). Depending on the topic of this study, the intervention strategy, as the independent variable, was coded into collaborative and non-collaborative problem-solving. The dependent variable, critical thinking, was coded as a cognitive skill and an attitudinal tendency. And seven moderating variables were created by grouping and combining the experimental design variables discovered within the 36 studies (see Table 1 ), where learning stages were encoded as higher education, high school, middle school, and primary school or lower; teaching types were encoded as mixed courses, integrated courses, and independent courses; intervention durations were encoded as 0–1 weeks, 1–4 weeks, 4–12 weeks, and more than 12 weeks; group sizes were encoded as 2–3 persons, 4–6 persons, 7–10 persons, and more than 10 persons; learning scaffolds were encoded as teacher-supported learning scaffold, technique-supported learning scaffold, and resource-supported learning scaffold; measuring tools were encoded as standardized measurement tools (e.g., WGCTA, CCTT, CCTST, and CCTDI) and self-adapting measurement tools (e.g., modified or made by researchers); and subject areas were encoded according to the specific subjects used in the 36 included studies.

The data information contained three metrics for measuring critical thinking: sample size, average value, and standard deviation. It is vital to remember that studies with various experimental designs frequently adopt various formulas to determine the effect size. And this paper used Morris’ proposed standardized mean difference (SMD) calculation formula ( 2008 , p. 369; see Supplementary Table S3 ).

Procedure for extracting and coding data

According to the data coding template (see Table 1 ), the 36 papers’ information was retrieved by two researchers, who then entered them into Excel (see Supplementary Table S1 ). The results of each study were extracted separately in the data extraction procedure if an article contained numerous studies on critical thinking, or if a study assessed different critical thinking dimensions. For instance, Tiwari et al. ( 2010 ) used four time points, which were viewed as numerous different studies, to examine the outcomes of critical thinking, and Chen ( 2013 ) included the two outcome variables of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, which were regarded as two studies. After discussion and negotiation during data extraction, the two researchers’ consistency test coefficients were roughly 93.27%. Supplementary Table S2 details the key characteristics of the 36 included articles with 79 effect quantities, including descriptive information (e.g., the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper), variable information (e.g., independent variables, dependent variables, and moderating variables), and data information (e.g., mean values, standard deviations, and sample size). Following that, testing for publication bias and heterogeneity was done on the sample data using the Rev-Man 5.4 software, and then the test results were used to conduct a meta-analysis.

Publication bias test

When the sample of studies included in a meta-analysis does not accurately reflect the general status of research on the relevant subject, publication bias is said to be exhibited in this research. The reliability and accuracy of the meta-analysis may be impacted by publication bias. Due to this, the meta-analysis needs to check the sample data for publication bias (Stewart et al., 2006 ). A popular method to check for publication bias is the funnel plot; and it is unlikely that there will be publishing bias when the data are equally dispersed on either side of the average effect size and targeted within the higher region. The data are equally dispersed within the higher portion of the efficient zone, consistent with the funnel plot connected with this analysis (see Fig. 2 ), indicating that publication bias is unlikely in this situation.

This funnel plot shows the result of publication bias of 79 effect quantities across 36 studies.

Heterogeneity test

To select the appropriate effect models for the meta-analysis, one might use the results of a heterogeneity test on the data effect sizes. In a meta-analysis, it is common practice to gauge the degree of data heterogeneity using the I 2 value, and I 2 ≥ 50% is typically understood to denote medium-high heterogeneity, which calls for the adoption of a random effect model; if not, a fixed effect model ought to be applied (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ). The findings of the heterogeneity test in this paper (see Table 2 ) revealed that I 2 was 86% and displayed significant heterogeneity ( P < 0.01). To ensure accuracy and reliability, the overall effect size ought to be calculated utilizing the random effect model.

The analysis of the overall effect size

This meta-analysis utilized a random effect model to examine 79 effect quantities from 36 studies after eliminating heterogeneity. In accordance with Cohen’s criterion (Cohen, 1992 ), it is abundantly clear from the analysis results, which are shown in the forest plot of the overall effect (see Fig. 3 ), that the cumulative impact size of cooperative problem-solving is 0.82, which is statistically significant ( z = 12.78, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]), and can encourage learners to practice critical thinking.

This forest plot shows the analysis result of the overall effect size across 36 studies.

In addition, this study examined two distinct dimensions of critical thinking to better understand the precise contributions that collaborative problem-solving makes to the growth of critical thinking. The findings (see Table 3 ) indicate that collaborative problem-solving improves cognitive skills (ES = 0.70) and attitudinal tendency (ES = 1.17), with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 7.95, P < 0.01). Although collaborative problem-solving improves both dimensions of critical thinking, it is essential to point out that the improvements in students’ attitudinal tendency are much more pronounced and have a significant comprehensive effect (ES = 1.17, z = 7.62, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]), whereas gains in learners’ cognitive skill are slightly improved and are just above average. (ES = 0.70, z = 11.55, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

The analysis of moderator effect size

The whole forest plot’s 79 effect quantities underwent a two-tailed test, which revealed significant heterogeneity ( I 2 = 86%, z = 12.78, P < 0.01), indicating differences between various effect sizes that may have been influenced by moderating factors other than sampling error. Therefore, exploring possible moderating factors that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis, such as the learning stage, learning scaffold, teaching type, group size, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, in order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking. The findings (see Table 4 ) indicate that various moderating factors have advantageous effects on critical thinking. In this situation, the subject area (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05), group size (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01), learning scaffold (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01), and teaching type (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05) are all significant moderators that can be applied to support the cultivation of critical thinking. However, since the learning stage and the measuring tools did not significantly differ among intergroup (chi 2 = 3.15, P = 0.21 > 0.05, and chi 2 = 0.08, P = 0.78 > 0.05), we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These are the precise outcomes, as follows:

Various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively, without significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 3.15, P = 0.21 > 0.05). High school was first on the list of effect sizes (ES = 1.36, P < 0.01), then higher education (ES = 0.78, P < 0.01), and middle school (ES = 0.73, P < 0.01). These results show that, despite the learning stage’s beneficial influence on cultivating learners’ critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is essential for cultivating critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Different teaching types had varying degrees of positive impact on critical thinking, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05). The effect size was ranked as follows: mixed courses (ES = 1.34, P < 0.01), integrated courses (ES = 0.81, P < 0.01), and independent courses (ES = 0.27, P < 0.01). These results indicate that the most effective approach to cultivate critical thinking utilizing collaborative problem solving is through the teaching type of mixed courses.

Various intervention durations significantly improved critical thinking, and there were significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01). The effect sizes related to this variable showed a tendency to increase with longer intervention durations. The improvement in critical thinking reached a significant level (ES = 0.85, P < 0.01) after more than 12 weeks of training. These findings indicate that the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated, with a longer intervention duration having a greater effect.

Different learning scaffolds influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01). The resource-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.69, P < 0.01) acquired a medium-to-higher level of impact, the technique-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.63, P < 0.01) also attained a medium-to-higher level of impact, and the teacher-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.92, P < 0.01) displayed a high level of significant impact. These results show that the learning scaffold with teacher support has the greatest impact on cultivating critical thinking.

Various group sizes influenced critical thinking positively, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05). Critical thinking showed a general declining trend with increasing group size. The overall effect size of 2–3 people in this situation was the biggest (ES = 0.99, P < 0.01), and when the group size was greater than 7 people, the improvement in critical thinking was at the lower-middle level (ES < 0.5, P < 0.01). These results show that the impact on critical thinking is positively connected with group size, and as group size grows, so does the overall impact.

Various measuring tools influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 0.08, P = 0.78 > 0.05). In this situation, the self-adapting measurement tools obtained an upper-medium level of effect (ES = 0.78), whereas the complete effect size of the standardized measurement tools was the largest, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 0.84, P < 0.01). These results show that, despite the beneficial influence of the measuring tool on cultivating critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Different subject areas had a greater impact on critical thinking, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05). Mathematics had the greatest overall impact, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 1.68, P < 0.01), followed by science (ES = 1.25, P < 0.01) and medical science (ES = 0.87, P < 0.01), both of which also achieved a significant level of effect. Programming technology was the least effective (ES = 0.39, P < 0.01), only having a medium-low degree of effect compared to education (ES = 0.72, P < 0.01) and other fields (such as language, art, and social sciences) (ES = 0.58, P < 0.01). These results suggest that scientific fields (e.g., mathematics, science) may be the most effective subject areas for cultivating critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

According to this meta-analysis, using collaborative problem-solving as an intervention strategy in critical thinking teaching has a considerable amount of impact on cultivating learners’ critical thinking as a whole and has a favorable promotional effect on the two dimensions of critical thinking. According to certain studies, collaborative problem solving, the most frequently used critical thinking teaching strategy in curriculum instruction can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking (e.g., Liang et al., 2017 ; Liu et al., 2020 ; Cindy, 2004 ). This meta-analysis provides convergent data support for the above research views. Thus, the findings of this meta-analysis not only effectively address the first research query regarding the overall effect of cultivating critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills) utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving, but also enhance our confidence in cultivating critical thinking by using collaborative problem-solving intervention approach in the context of classroom teaching.

Furthermore, the associated improvements in attitudinal tendency are much stronger, but the corresponding improvements in cognitive skill are only marginally better. According to certain studies, cognitive skill differs from the attitudinal tendency in classroom instruction; the cultivation and development of the former as a key ability is a process of gradual accumulation, while the latter as an attitude is affected by the context of the teaching situation (e.g., a novel and exciting teaching approach, challenging and rewarding tasks) (Halpern, 2001 ; Wei and Hong, 2022 ). Collaborative problem-solving as a teaching approach is exciting and interesting, as well as rewarding and challenging; because it takes the learners as the focus and examines problems with poor structure in real situations, and it can inspire students to fully realize their potential for problem-solving, which will significantly improve their attitudinal tendency toward solving problems (Liu et al., 2020 ). Similar to how collaborative problem-solving influences attitudinal tendency, attitudinal tendency impacts cognitive skill when attempting to solve a problem (Liu et al., 2020 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ), and stronger attitudinal tendencies are associated with improved learning achievement and cognitive ability in students (Sison, 2008 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ). It can be seen that the two specific dimensions of critical thinking as well as critical thinking as a whole are affected by collaborative problem-solving, and this study illuminates the nuanced links between cognitive skills and attitudinal tendencies with regard to these two dimensions of critical thinking. To fully develop students’ capacity for critical thinking, future empirical research should pay closer attention to cognitive skills.

The moderating effects of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

In order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking, exploring possible moderating effects that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis. The findings show that the moderating factors, such as the teaching type, learning stage, group size, learning scaffold, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, could all support the cultivation of collaborative problem-solving in critical thinking. Among them, the effect size differences between the learning stage and measuring tool are not significant, which does not explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

In terms of the learning stage, various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively without significant intergroup differences, indicating that we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking.

Although high education accounts for 70.89% of all empirical studies performed by researchers, high school may be the appropriate learning stage to foster students’ critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving since it has the largest overall effect size. This phenomenon may be related to student’s cognitive development, which needs to be further studied in follow-up research.

With regard to teaching type, mixed course teaching may be the best teaching method to cultivate students’ critical thinking. Relevant studies have shown that in the actual teaching process if students are trained in thinking methods alone, the methods they learn are isolated and divorced from subject knowledge, which is not conducive to their transfer of thinking methods; therefore, if students’ thinking is trained only in subject teaching without systematic method training, it is challenging to apply to real-world circumstances (Ruggiero, 2012 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Teaching critical thinking as mixed course teaching in parallel to other subject teachings can achieve the best effect on learners’ critical thinking, and explicit critical thinking instruction is more effective than less explicit critical thinking instruction (Bensley and Spero, 2014 ).

In terms of the intervention duration, with longer intervention times, the overall effect size shows an upward tendency. Thus, the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated. Critical thinking, as a key competency for students in the 21st century, is difficult to get a meaningful improvement in a brief intervention duration. Instead, it could be developed over a lengthy period of time through consistent teaching and the progressive accumulation of knowledge (Halpern, 2001 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Therefore, future empirical studies ought to take these restrictions into account throughout a longer period of critical thinking instruction.

With regard to group size, a group size of 2–3 persons has the highest effect size, and the comprehensive effect size decreases with increasing group size in general. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a group composed of two to four members is most appropriate for collaborative learning (Schellens and Valcke, 2006 ). However, the meta-analysis results also indicate that once the group size exceeds 7 people, small groups cannot produce better interaction and performance than large groups. This may be because the learning scaffolds of technique support, resource support, and teacher support improve the frequency and effectiveness of interaction among group members, and a collaborative group with more members may increase the diversity of views, which is helpful to cultivate critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

With regard to the learning scaffold, the three different kinds of learning scaffolds can all enhance critical thinking. Among them, the teacher-supported learning scaffold has the largest overall effect size, demonstrating the interdependence of effective learning scaffolds and collaborative problem-solving. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a successful strategy is to encourage learners to collaborate, come up with solutions, and develop critical thinking skills by using learning scaffolds (Reiser, 2004 ; Xu et al., 2022 ); learning scaffolds can lower task complexity and unpleasant feelings while also enticing students to engage in learning activities (Wood et al., 2006 ); learning scaffolds are designed to assist students in using learning approaches more successfully to adapt the collaborative problem-solving process, and the teacher-supported learning scaffolds have the greatest influence on critical thinking in this process because they are more targeted, informative, and timely (Xu et al., 2022 ).

With respect to the measuring tool, despite the fact that standardized measurement tools (such as the WGCTA, CCTT, and CCTST) have been acknowledged as trustworthy and effective by worldwide experts, only 54.43% of the research included in this meta-analysis adopted them for assessment, and the results indicated no intergroup differences. These results suggest that not all teaching circumstances are appropriate for measuring critical thinking using standardized measurement tools. “The measuring tools for measuring thinking ability have limits in assessing learners in educational situations and should be adapted appropriately to accurately assess the changes in learners’ critical thinking.”, according to Simpson and Courtney ( 2002 , p. 91). As a result, in order to more fully and precisely gauge how learners’ critical thinking has evolved, we must properly modify standardized measuring tools based on collaborative problem-solving learning contexts.

With regard to the subject area, the comprehensive effect size of science departments (e.g., mathematics, science, medical science) is larger than that of language arts and social sciences. Some recent international education reforms have noted that critical thinking is a basic part of scientific literacy. Students with scientific literacy can prove the rationality of their judgment according to accurate evidence and reasonable standards when they face challenges or poorly structured problems (Kyndt et al., 2013 ), which makes critical thinking crucial for developing scientific understanding and applying this understanding to practical problem solving for problems related to science, technology, and society (Yore et al., 2007 ).

Suggestions for critical thinking teaching

Other than those stated in the discussion above, the following suggestions are offered for critical thinking instruction utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

First, teachers should put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, to design real problems based on collaborative situations. This meta-analysis provides evidence to support the view that collaborative problem-solving has a strong synergistic effect on promoting students’ critical thinking. Asking questions about real situations and allowing learners to take part in critical discussions on real problems during class instruction are key ways to teach critical thinking rather than simply reading speculative articles without practice (Mulnix, 2012 ). Furthermore, the improvement of students’ critical thinking is realized through cognitive conflict with other learners in the problem situation (Yang et al., 2008 ). Consequently, it is essential for teachers to put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, and design real problems and encourage students to discuss, negotiate, and argue based on collaborative problem-solving situations.

Second, teachers should design and implement mixed courses to cultivate learners’ critical thinking, utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving. Critical thinking can be taught through curriculum instruction (Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), with the goal of cultivating learners’ critical thinking for flexible transfer and application in real problem-solving situations. This meta-analysis shows that mixed course teaching has a highly substantial impact on the cultivation and promotion of learners’ critical thinking. Therefore, teachers should design and implement mixed course teaching with real collaborative problem-solving situations in combination with the knowledge content of specific disciplines in conventional teaching, teach methods and strategies of critical thinking based on poorly structured problems to help students master critical thinking, and provide practical activities in which students can interact with each other to develop knowledge construction and critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Third, teachers should be more trained in critical thinking, particularly preservice teachers, and they also should be conscious of the ways in which teachers’ support for learning scaffolds can promote critical thinking. The learning scaffold supported by teachers had the greatest impact on learners’ critical thinking, in addition to being more directive, targeted, and timely (Wood et al., 2006 ). Critical thinking can only be effectively taught when teachers recognize the significance of critical thinking for students’ growth and use the proper approaches while designing instructional activities (Forawi, 2016 ). Therefore, with the intention of enabling teachers to create learning scaffolds to cultivate learners’ critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem solving, it is essential to concentrate on the teacher-supported learning scaffolds and enhance the instruction for teaching critical thinking to teachers, especially preservice teachers.

Implications and limitations

There are certain limitations in this meta-analysis, but future research can correct them. First, the search languages were restricted to English and Chinese, so it is possible that pertinent studies that were written in other languages were overlooked, resulting in an inadequate number of articles for review. Second, these data provided by the included studies are partially missing, such as whether teachers were trained in the theory and practice of critical thinking, the average age and gender of learners, and the differences in critical thinking among learners of various ages and genders. Third, as is typical for review articles, more studies were released while this meta-analysis was being done; therefore, it had a time limit. With the development of relevant research, future studies focusing on these issues are highly relevant and needed.

Conclusions

The subject of the magnitude of collaborative problem-solving’s impact on fostering students’ critical thinking, which received scant attention from other studies, was successfully addressed by this study. The question of the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking was addressed in this study, which addressed a topic that had gotten little attention in earlier research. The following conclusions can be made:

Regarding the results obtained, collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster learners’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z = 12.78, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]). With respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem-solving can significantly and effectively improve students’ attitudinal tendency, and the comprehensive effect is significant (ES = 1.17, z = 7.62, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z = 11.55, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

As demonstrated by both the results and the discussion, there are varying degrees of beneficial effects on students’ critical thinking from all seven moderating factors, which were found across 36 studies. In this context, the teaching type (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01), subject area (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05), group size (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01) all have a positive impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. Since the learning stage (chi 2 = 3.15, P = 0.21 > 0.05) and measuring tools (chi 2 = 0.08, P = 0.78 > 0.05) did not demonstrate any significant intergroup differences, we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included within the article and its supplementary information files, and the supplementary information files are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IPFJO6 .

Bensley DA, Spero RA (2014) Improving critical thinking skills and meta-cognitive monitoring through direct infusion. Think Skills Creat 12:55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.001

Article Google Scholar

Castle A (2009) Defining and assessing critical thinking skills for student radiographers. Radiography 15(1):70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2007.10.007

Chen XD (2013) An empirical study on the influence of PBL teaching model on critical thinking ability of non-English majors. J PLA Foreign Lang College 36 (04):68–72

Google Scholar

Cohen A (1992) Antecedents of organizational commitment across occupational groups: a meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130602

Cooper H (2010) Research synthesis and meta-analysis: a step-by-step approach, 4th edn. Sage, London, England

Cindy HS (2004) Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev 51(1):31–39

Duch BJ, Gron SD, Allen DE (2001) The power of problem-based learning: a practical “how to” for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline. Stylus Educ Sci 2:190–198

Ennis RH (1989) Critical thinking and subject specificity: clarification and needed research. Educ Res 18(3):4–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x018003004

Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations. Eric document reproduction service. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed315423

Facione PA, Facione NC (1992) The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI) and the CCTDI test manual. California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA

Forawi SA (2016) Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Think Skills Creat 20:52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.02.005

Halpern DF (2001) Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. J Gen Educ 50(4):270–286. https://doi.org/10.2307/27797889

Hu WP, Liu J (2015) Cultivation of pupils’ thinking ability: a five-year follow-up study. Psychol Behav Res 13(05):648–654. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628.2015.05.010

Huber K (2016) Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 86(2):431–468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917

Kek MYCA, Huijser H (2011) The power of problem-based learning in developing critical thinking skills: preparing students for tomorrow’s digital futures in today’s classrooms. High Educ Res Dev 30(3):329–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.501074

Kuncel NR (2011) Measurement and meaning of critical thinking (Research report for the NRC 21st Century Skills Workshop). National Research Council, Washington, DC

Kyndt E, Raes E, Lismont B, Timmers F, Cascallar E, Dochy F (2013) A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educ Res Rev 10(2):133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002

Leng J, Lu XX (2020) Is critical thinking really teachable?—A meta-analysis based on 79 experimental or quasi experimental studies. Open Educ Res 26(06):110–118. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2020.06.011

Liang YZ, Zhu K, Zhao CL (2017) An empirical study on the depth of interaction promoted by collaborative problem solving learning activities. J E-educ Res 38(10):87–92. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2017.10.014

Lipsey M, Wilson D (2001) Practical meta-analysis. International Educational and Professional, London, pp. 92–160

Liu Z, Wu W, Jiang Q (2020) A study on the influence of problem based learning on college students’ critical thinking-based on a meta-analysis of 31 studies. Explor High Educ 03:43–49

Morris SB (2008) Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organ Res Methods 11(2):364–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106291059

Article ADS Google Scholar

Mulnix JW (2012) Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educ Philos Theory 44(5):464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x

Naber J, Wyatt TH (2014) The effect of reflective writing interventions on the critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today 34(1):67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.002

National Research Council (2012) Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

Niu L, Behar HLS, Garvan CW (2013) Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev 9(12):114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002

Peng ZM, Deng L (2017) Towards the core of education reform: cultivating critical thinking skills as the core of skills in the 21st century. Res Educ Dev 24:57–63. https://doi.org/10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2017.24.011

Reiser BJ (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J Learn Sci 13(3):273–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2

Ruggiero VR (2012) The art of thinking: a guide to critical and creative thought, 4th edn. Harper Collins College Publishers, New York

Schellens T, Valcke M (2006) Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Comput Educ 46(4):349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.07.010

Sendag S, Odabasi HF (2009) Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 53(1):132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008

Sison R (2008) Investigating Pair Programming in a Software Engineering Course in an Asian Setting. 2008 15th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 325–331. https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2008.61

Simpson E, Courtney M (2002) Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. Mary Courtney 8(2):89–98

Stewart L, Tierney J, Burdett S (2006) Do systematic reviews based on individual patient data offer a means of circumventing biases associated with trial publications? Publication bias in meta-analysis. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, pp. 261–286

Tiwari A, Lai P, So M, Yuen K (2010) A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Med Educ 40(6):547–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02481.x

Wood D, Bruner JS, Ross G (2006) The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 17(2):89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Wei T, Hong S (2022) The meaning and realization of teachable critical thinking. Educ Theory Practice 10:51–57

Xu EW, Wang W, Wang QX (2022) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of programming teaching in promoting K-12 students’ computational thinking. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11445-2

Yang YC, Newby T, Bill R (2008) Facilitating interactions through structured web-based bulletin boards: a quasi-experimental study on promoting learners’ critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 50(4):1572–1585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.006

Yore LD, Pimm D, Tuan HL (2007) The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. Int J Sci Math Educ 5(4):559–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4

Zhang T, Zhang S, Gao QQ, Wang JH (2022) Research on the development of learners’ critical thinking in online peer review. Audio Visual Educ Res 6:53–60. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2022.06.08

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the graduate scientific research and innovation project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region named “Research on in-depth learning of high school information technology courses for the cultivation of computing thinking” (No. XJ2022G190) and the independent innovation fund project for doctoral students of the College of Educational Science of Xinjiang Normal University named “Research on project-based teaching of high school information technology courses from the perspective of discipline core literacy” (No. XJNUJKYA2003).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Educational Science, Xinjiang Normal University, 830017, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China

Enwei Xu, Wei Wang & Qingxia Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Enwei Xu or Wei Wang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary tables, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Xu, E., Wang, W. & Wang, Q. The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Download citation

Received : 07 August 2022

Accepted : 04 January 2023

Published : 11 January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Impacts of online collaborative learning on students’ intercultural communication apprehension and intercultural communicative competence.

Hoa Thi Hoang Chau
Hung Phu Bui
Quynh Thi Huong Dinh

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: a meta-analysis

Sustainable electricity generation and farm-grid utilization from photovoltaic aquaculture: a bibliometric analysis.

A. A. Amusa
M. Alhassan

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2024)

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

6.3 Types of Consumer Decisions

As you read through the stages of the decision making process, did you think “Wait a minute. I do this sometimes but not all the time”? That is indicative of the different levels of involvement within the decision making process. In this section, we will examine this difference in more detail and how it may impact the marketing strategy.

Levels of Involvement in Decision Making

Consumers often engage in routine, or habitual, behavior when they make low-involvement decisions—that is, they make automatic purchase decisions based on limited information or information they have gathered in the past. For example, if you always order a Diet Coke at lunch, you’re engaging in routine response behavior. You may not even think about other drink options at lunch because your routine is to order a Diet Coke, and you simply do it. Similarly, if you run out of Diet Coke at home, you may buy more without any information search.

Some low-involvement purchases are made with no planning or previous thought. These buying decisions are called impulse buying. While you’re waiting to check out at the grocery store, perhaps you see a magazine with the latest celebrity or influencer on the cover and buy it on the spot simply because you want it. You might see a roll of tape at a check-out stand and remember you need one or you might see a bag of chips and realize you’re hungry or just want them.

By contrast, high-involvement decisions carry a higher risk to buyers if they fail, are complex, and/or have high price tags. A car, a house, and an insurance policy are examples. These items are not purchased often but are relevant and important to the buyer. Buyers don’t engage in routine response behavior when purchasing high-involvement products. Instead, consumers engage in what’s called extended problem solving where they spend a lot of time comparing different aspects such as the features of the products, prices, and warranties.

High-involvement decisions can cause buyers a great deal of cognitive (postpurchase) dissonance (anxiety) if they are unsure about their purchases or if they had a difficult time deciding between two alternatives. Companies that sell high-involvement products are aware that dissonance can be a problem. Frequently, they try to offer consumers a lot of information about their products, including why they are superior to competing brands and how they won’t let the consumer down. Salespeople may be utilized to answer questions and do a lot of customer “hand-holding.”

Allstate’s “You’re in Good Hands” advertisements are designed to convince consumers that the insurance company won’t let them down.

Mike Mozart – Allstate, – CC BY 2.0.

Products, such as chewing gum, which may be low-involvement for many consumers, often use advertising such as commercials and sales promotions such as coupons to reach many consumers at once. Companies also try to sell products such as gum in as many locations as possible. Many products that are typically high-involvement such as automobiles may use more personal selling to answer consumers’ questions. Brand names can also be very important regardless of the consumer’s level of purchasing involvement. Consider a low- versus high-involvement decision—say, purchasing a tube of toothpaste versus a new car. You might routinely buy your favorite brand of toothpaste, not thinking much about the purchase (engage in routine response behavior), but not be willing to switch to another brand either. Having a brand you like saves you “search time” and eliminates the evaluation period because you know what you’re getting.

You Try It!

Share This Book

Studying the student’s perceptions of engagement and problem-solving skills for academic achievement in chemistry at the higher secondary level

Published: 29 August 2023
Volume 29 , pages 8347–8368, ( 2024 )

Cite this article

Sankar E. 1 &
A. Edward William Benjamin 1

210 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Student engagement has emerged as a crucial factor in higher education, playing a vital role in shaping the overall quality of learning outcomes. It refers to the active involvement and participation of students in specific activities that research has consistently linked to improved academic achievements. The pervasiveness of the term ‘student engagement’ has significantly shaped the higher education landscape, reinforcing its importance in fostering effective learning environments. In the realm of higher education, educators are continuously exploring diverse pedagogical approaches to enhance student engagement through active learning. This study focuses on the problem-solving learning model and its implementation to foster a deeper understanding of student engagement, including their positive behaviour, participation in activities, and cognitive capabilities. In this study, a quasi-experimental design was employed, incorporating pre-test, post-test, and non-equivalent control group elements. This specific design was chosen due to the constraints of randomly assigning students to groups. Instead, intact classes were randomly selected and assigned to either the control or experimental groups. The sample study was 476 higher secondary-level chemistry students collected from different higher secondary schools. A multi-stage sampling technique was used to select schools from the target population. Initially, schools were selected using a purposive sampling technique, focusing on those with fully equipped chemistry laboratories and qualified chemistry teachers. Additionally, consideration was given to including both female and male students in co-educational chemistry classes, as gender was considered a relevant variable for the study. This study adopts a quasi-experimental design, utilizing an achievement and retention test in chemistry as its primary instrument. The validity of this instrument was ensured through face validation by three expert evaluators. To eliminate the errors of non-equivalence arising from the non-randomization of the research subjects, the analysis of covariance (ANOVA) was used in analysing the data and to remove the error of initial differences in ability levels among the research subjects. The findings of the study demonstrated that students in the experimental group experienced a notable increase in problem-solving success compared to their counterparts in the control group, a difference that became evident right from the first intervention. This study establishes a positive correlation between student engagement and their learning outcomes, indicating that higher engagement leads to better academic performance. Additionally, it observes that the correlation between boys’ and girls’ problem-solving skills and their learning outcomes is comparatively weaker, suggesting potential variations in how problem-solving abilities impact academic achievement among genders. It also reveals that there is a positive influence on student engagement and problem-solving skills in students’ academic achievement. Despite the challenges encountered, the results demonstrated the vital role of the problem-solving learning model, when coupled with student engagement, in fostering students’ critical thinking skills concerning reaction rate material. These instructional practices were observed to foster higher levels of student engagement, ultimately resulting in enhanced academic achievement among students.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Problem-Solving in Biology Teaching: Students’ Activities and Their Achievement

Construct validity of a questionnaire for measuring student engagement in problem-based learning tutorials

All better than being disengaged: Student engagement patterns and their relations to academic self-concept and achievement

Data availability.

Data sharing does not apply to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Adeyeye, B., Ojih, S. E., Bello, D., Adesina, E., Yartey, D., Ben-Enukora, C., & Adeyeye, Q. (2022). Online learning platforms and Covenant University students’ academic performance in practical related courses during COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability , 14 (2), 878.

Article Google Scholar

Allah, A. A. I. H., & Hewary, O. A. A. (2023, March). The Effectiveness of Using Mobile Phone Applications in Virtual Laboratories On Academic Achievement in Chemistry for Students of the Department of Chemistry College of Education Omdurman Islamic University. In Proceeding of International Conference On Education, Society and Humanity (Vol. 1, pp. 59–71).

Aquino, J. E., & Bautista, R. G. (2022). CHEMIKA and Students’ Academic Achievement in Chemistry. American Journal of Educational Research , 10 (8), 501–507.

Asvio, N. (2022). The influence of learning motivation and learning environment on undergraduate students’ learning achievement of management of islamic education, study program of IAIN Batusangkar in 2016.

Ayyıldız, Y., Tarhan, L., & Gil, A. (2022). Comparing the effectiveness of the learning material and the learning method in students’ achievement in chemistry lesson on chemical changes. Research in Science & Technological Education , 1–22.

Banda, H. J., & Nzabahimana, J. (2023). The impact of physics education technology (PhET) interactive simulation-based learning on motivation and academic achievement among malawian physics students. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 32 (1), 127–141.

da Silva Júnior, J. N., Castro, G. D. L., Melo Leite Junior, A. J., Monteiro, A. J., & Alexandre, F. S. O. (2022). Gamification of an entire introductory organic chemistry course: A strategy to enhance the students’ engagement. Journal of Chemical Education , 99 (2), 678–687.

Foong, C. C., Liew, P. Y., & Lye, A. J. (2022). Changes in motivation and its relationship with academic performance among first-year chemical engineering students. Education for Chemical Engineers , 38 , 70–77.

Huang, Y. M., Silitonga, L. M., & Wu, T. T. (2022). Applying a business simulation game in a flipped classroom to enhance engagement, learning achievement, and higher-order thinking skills. Computers & Education , 183 , 104494.

Kanwal, W., Qamar, A. M., Nadeem, H. A., Khan, S. A., & Siddique, M. (2022). Effect of conceptual understanding of Mathematical Principles on academic achievement of secondary Level Chemistry Students. Multicultural Education , 8 (3), 242–254.

Google Scholar

Lee, K. S., Rix, B., & Spivey, M. Z. (2023). Predictions of success in organic chemistry based on a mathematics skills test and academic achievement. Chemistry Education Research and Practice , 24 (1), 176–191.

Munene, T. S., Mutsotso, S. N., & Masibo, E. N. (2023). Integration of Information Communication Technology Instructional Resources on students’ motivation and achievement in Chemistry practical in secondary schools in Kenya. Journal of Education and Practice , 7 (1), 12–39.

Naibert, N., & Barbera, J. (2022). Investigating Student Engagement in General Chemistry active learning activities using the activity Engagement Survey (AcES). Journal of Chemical Education , 99 (7), 2620–2629.

Naibert, N., Vaughan, E. B., Brevick, K., & Barbera, J. (2022). Exploring student perceptions of behavioral, cognitive, and Emotional Engagement at the activity level in General Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education , 99 (3), 1358–1367.

Nofrialdi, R. (2022). The Effect of Student’S Creativity and Learning Interest on Learning Achievement in Economic Students Class Xi Ips SMA Ekasakti Padang. Journal International on Global Education , 1 (1), 37–46.

Nzomo, C., Rugano, P., Njoroge, M., & Gitonga, C. (2023). Inquiry-based learning and students’ self-efficacy in chemistry among secondary schools in Kenya. Heliyon , e12672.

Onah, K. T. (2022). Effect of scaffolding teaching approach on students’ academic achievement in Quantum Physics in Enugu Education Zone. Greener Journal of Educational Research , 12 (1), 13–21.

Onah, K. T., & Anamezie, R. C. (2022). Academic interest as predictor of academic achievement of secondary School Physics Students. African Journal of Science Technology and Mathematics Education , 8 (4), 320–326.

Paristiowati, M., Rahmawati, Y., Fitriani, E., Satrio, J. A., & Putri Hasibuan, N. A. (2022). Developing preservice chemistry teachers’ engagement with sustainability education through an online project-based learning summer course program. Sustainability , 14 (3), 1783.

Rahmawati, Y., Taylor, E., Taylor, P. C., Ridwan, A., & Mardiah, A. (2022). Students’ engagement in education as sustainability: Implementing an ethical dilemma-STEAM teaching model in chemistry learning. Sustainability , 14 (6), 3554.

Tempelman, C. H., Rijgersberg, A., & van der Eijk, M. (2023). Introducing theory in practice: The Beneficiary Effects of Teaching Chemistry in the Laboratory on Student Success. Journal of Chemical Education .

van Dulmen, T. H., Visser, T. C., Pepin, B., & McKenney, S. (2022). Teacher and student engagement when using learning materials based on the context of cutting-edge chemistry research. Research in Science & Technological Education , 1–22.

Wang, Y., Xia, M., Guo, W., Xu, F., & Zhao, Y. (2022). Academic performance under COVID-19: The role of online learning readiness and emotional competence. Current Psychology , 1–14.

Yağcı, M. (2022). Educational data mining: Prediction of students’ academic performance using machine learning algorithms. Smart Learning Environments , 9 (1), 11.

Zhang, L., Carter Jr, R. A., Qian, X., Yang, S., Rujimora, J., & Wen, S. (2022). Academia’s responses to crisis: A bibliometric analysis of literature on online learning in higher education during COVID-19. British Journal of Educational Technology , 53 (3), 620–646.

Download references

Not Applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Education, Bharathidasan University, Thiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India

Sankar E. & A. Edward William Benjamin

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sankar E. .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no Conflict of Interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

E., S., Benjamin, A.E.W. Studying the student’s perceptions of engagement and problem-solving skills for academic achievement in chemistry at the higher secondary level. Educ Inf Technol 29 , 8347–8368 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12165-x

Download citation

Received : 11 July 2023

Accepted : 22 August 2023

Published : 29 August 2023

Issue Date : May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12165-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Student Engagement
Problem-solving skills
Higher secondary level
Chemistry Learning Students
Quasi-Experimental Design
Multi-stage sampling technique
And academic achievement
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Reference Manager
Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, problem solving and collaborative involvement among adolescents with spinal cord injury and their caregivers.

1 Department of Psychology, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
2 Advocate Aurora Research Institute, Advocate Aurora Health, Downers Grove, IL, United States
3 Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago, IL, United States
4 Ryerson Espino Evaluation and Development Consulting, Arlington Heights, IL, United States
5 American Academy of Pediatrics, Itasca, IL, United States
6 Department of Disability & Human Development, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
7 Shriners Children's Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
8 Department of Pediatrics, Rush Medical College, Chicago, IL, United States
9 Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States

Objective: To determine the relationship between constructive adolescent problem solving (positive problem-solving orientation and rational problem-solving style) and caregiver problem solving and collaborative involvement with primary caregiver among adolescents with spinal cord injuries (SCIs). Positive constructive adolescent problem solving was hypothesized to be predicted by more effective caregiver problem solving and higher collaborative involvement.

Methods: Participants in this cross-sectional study were 79 adolescent and primary caregiver dyads recruited from a pediatric rehabilitation care system in North America. All participants completed a standardized problem-solving instrument and adolescent participants completed an adapted measure of collaborative parent involvement.

Results: More effective caregiver problem solving and adolescent perceptions of more collaboration with caregivers around SCI care were significantly associated with higher positive problem-solving orientation and higher rational problem-solving style among adolescents.

Conclusions: Results underscore the importance of caregiver problem-solving skills and their collaboration with adolescents with SCI when addressing care needs. Clinically, findings highlight opportunities for parent involvement and skill-building as an important factor of rehabilitation for adolescents with SCI.

1. Introduction

Adolescents with spinal cord injuries (SCIs) may face a variety of medical, physical, and psychological challenges owing to their injury. Youth with SCI must navigate functional limitations, motor and sensory impairments, autonomic dysfunction including bowel, bladder, and sexual dysfunction, accessibility issues, and the need for ongoing therapies, superimposed on the typical developmental challenges of adolescence ( 1 ). These challenges affect a variety of functional domains across several contexts and may change as the youth ages, necessitating frequent attempts to solve problems related to impairments. For youth with SCI, caregivers play an especially important role in their lives by helping to navigate the unique set of challenges related to their SCI-specific care ( 2 – 5 ). As a result, youth with SCI may rely on caregivers to manage more of their needs, or at the very least look to them for guidance on how to problem-solve the unique needs of their SCI, as compared to adolescents without extra healthcare needs. Understanding contributors to problem-solving abilities in youth with SCI is especially important.

Problem solving is the process of understanding and responding to problems to change a difficult situation and to reduce emotional stress ( 6 ). Constructive problem-solving includes a positive orientation and a rational style and is associated with adaptive functioning and positive psychological wellbeing. In contrast, dysfunctional problem-solving is associated with maladaptive functioning and psychological distress and involves negative orientation, impulsivity/carelessness, and avoidant style ( 7 , 8 ). Parent problem-solving has been shown to be associated with health-related quality of life among children with SCI ( 7 ), suggesting that caregiver problem-solving may also impact adolescent self-management of medical needs. Exploring the association between caregiver problem-solving approaches, particularly ones that support constructive problem-solving among adolescents with SCI as they navigate varied challenges, is crucial.

While the association between parent and adolescent problem-solving has not been established among adolescents with SCI, problem solving among youth with other chronic conditions and adults with SCI can inform hypotheses. Among adolescents with traumatic brain injury (TBI), problem-solving interventions have been shown to be associated with improved long-term executive function ( 10 ) and reduction in behavioral problems ( 11 ). Further, among adults with SCI, positive problem-solving has been associated with adaptive and protective wellness behaviors, increased assertiveness and disability acceptance, and less depression and psychosocial impairment ( 12 – 14 ). In contrast, negative problem-solving has been associated with increased risk behaviors among adults with SCI ( 12 ). Caregivers, often parents, play an important role in the lives of adolescents with spinal cord injury or dysfunction ( 3 – 5 ). Given the multidimensionality of pediatric SCI and because there is limited research regarding problem solving among adolescents with SCI, a better understanding of the relationship between constructive problem-solving in adolescents with SCI specifically and their parents' problem-solving approaches, constructive or dysfunctional, as well as adolescents' perceptions of their involvement in care, is necessary.

Development of independence and a sense of responsibility are critical developmental characteristics of adolescence. These characteristics are often achieved through repeated efforts to solve problems. In adolescents with SCI, these problems may include those associated with managing their care, including managing health-related medical regimens and activity adjustments ( 12 ). Collaboration between caregivers and adolescents around SCI care, which may support problem-solving in these situations, entails discussing care needs, assessing and developing care strategies together, and anticipating challenges in multiple settings [home, school and peer contexts; ( 15 )]. Indeed, among adolescents with type 1 diabetes who perceived a collaborative approach to care with their parents, a protective role in health care management and health-related quality of life for collaborative parent involvement was identified ( 16 ). Youth with SCI, because of the complexity and variety of challenges associated (e.g., medical, mobility, psychosocial), may necessitate further parent involvement to support appropriate care management and activity modification. However, little is known about the role of collaborative care among adolescents with SCI and their caregivers. A collaborative approach to care, the ability of caregivers and adolescents to work together regarding adolescent healthcare in a fashion that supports transition of responsibility to the adolescent, may parallel processes of adolescent problem-solving in their daily lives ( 16 ). A supportive and collaborative approach may foster developmentally appropriate independence while ensuring that medical care needs are met.

This cross-sectional study investigates individual and combined associations between caregiver problem-solving approaches and adolescent-reported collaborative involvement in care (predictors) and constructive problem-solving in adolescents with SCI (outcome). More effective overall caregiver problem solving and higher levels of collaborative parent involvement were hypothesized to each significantly predict positive (Hypothesis 1) and rational (Hypothesis 2) adolescent problem solving.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. participants.

Adolescents aged 13 to 18 years with a traumatic SCI of at least one-year duration and their primary caregivers, mostly parents, were included in the present study. Participants were recruited as part of a larger study assessing relationships among psychosocial outcomes in youth with SCI between the ages of one and 18 years and their primary caregivers ( Table 1 ). Of the 150 caregiver-child dyads who participated in the larger study, 71 dyads were excluded as the child was younger than 13 years of age. Adolescent participants received care at one of three specialty hospitals in the same healthcare system, located across the United States. Adolescents and caregivers were excluded if they had significant cognitive impairment as identified by their treating physician, psychologist, social worker, or medical chart review. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained and ethical treatment of human subjects was followed throughout the research process. Caregivers and adolescents who were at least 18 years old provided consent, and adolescents who were 17 years old or younger provided assent. This was an observational study using a convenience sample. There was only one target group (adolescents with SCI and their caregiver); therefore, the sample was not randomized, and researchers were not blinded. Moreover, a power analysis was not conducted.

Table 1 . Demographic and injury characteristics of adolescent and caregiver participants.

Participants were recruited during inpatient or outpatient visits. Seventy-nine adolescent-caregiver participant dyads completed measures of problem-solving (adolescent and caregiver) and collaborative parent involvement (adolescent only). Research assistants were available if participants requested help completing the measures, which were available in both paper on online versions. Participants completed surveys at home if time did not allow during their visit. Total survey administration typically took 45–75 min. The surveys examined in the current study were completed in approximately 20 min.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. demographic information.

Adolescents' age, sex, and injury-related information were obtained from their medical records. Caregiver sex, relationship to adolescent, marital status, and educational attainment were gathered from a project specific questionnaire.

2.2.2. Problem solving

The Social Problem-Solving Inventory , revised, short form (SPSI-R:S) was completed by both adolescents and caregivers. The SPSI-R:S is a 25-item self-report measure yielding five subscale scores, including two assessing problem-solving orientation (Positive and Negative) and three assessing problem-solving style (Rational, Impulsivity/Carelessness, and Avoidance ( 6 );. Positive problem-solving orientation (PPO) and rational problem-solving style (RPS) are conceptualized as constructive problem-solving dimensions, and negative problem-solving orientation (NPO), impulsivity/carelessness style (ICS) and avoidance style (AS) as dysfunctional dimensions. A total problem-solving score is computed by adding the positive orientation and rational style subscale scores to reversed-scored negative orientation, impulsivity/carelessness, and avoidance style subscale scores; this total score allows for an overall indicator of problem-solving effectiveness, with a higher score indicating more effective problem-solving. The SPSI-R:S has been found to be reliable and valid ( 17 ). Subscales and total scores demonstrated acceptable internal consistency reliability with the current sample of adolescents and primary caregivers (α = .78-.85), except for caregiver avoidant problem-solving style (α = .62) and adolescent impulsivity/carelessness problem-solving style (α = .59). For the purposes of this study, all subscale scores and the total score were explored among caregivers, and only constructive subscales, specifically PPO and RPS subscales, were explored among adolescents.

2.2.3. Collaborative parent involvement in SCI care (CPI-SCI)

The CPI-SCI was adapted from the Collaborative Parent Involvement Scale (CPI ( 16 ); and was completed by adolescents. The CPI is a 12-item Likert scale measure developed to assess adolescent perceptions of collaborative parental behavior in diabetes management from the perspective of youth with type I diabetes. The CPI was adapted for the current study by maintaining the intent of each of the CPI items but modified for pediatric SCI (e.g., “diabetes care” was changed to “spinal cord injury care”) and to better match the care needs of youth with SCI (e.g., “…talks with me about how to adjust my insulin, eating, and exercise” was changed to “…talks with me about how to adjust my schedule to ensure personal needs related to my spinal cord injury are met”). See Figure 1 for all adapted items included in the CPI-SCI. When completing the CPI-SCI, adolescents were given the following prompt: “These questions ask about your spinal cord injury care, such as bowel and bladder management, skin care, transfers, and dressing.” For each question, adolescents rated their parent involvement on a scale of 1 ( Almost Never ) to 5 ( Always ). Total scores ranged from 12 to 60 and means were used to assess overall level of collaboration with primary caregiver, with higher scores indicating a greater adolescent-reported level of collaboration between the caregiver and adolescent with SCI. The CPI-SCI demonstrated excellent reliability with the current sample of adolescents (α = .95).

Figure 1 . The collaborative Parent Involvement in Spinal Cord Injury (CPI-SCI Care measure, adapted from et al., 2009.

2.3. Data analysis

Descriptive statistics examined demographic variables ( Table 1 ). Pearson correlation coefficients were then computed to assess bivariate relationships between subscale and total caregiver SPSI:R-S scores and CPI-SCI scores (predictors), and adolescent positive problem-solving orientation and rational problem-solving style (outcomes; Table 2 ). Paired sample t-tests examined mean difference scores across parent and adolescent report of positive problem-solving orientation and rational problem-solving styles.

Table 2 . Correlations among adolescent problem-solving, caregiver problem-solving, and collaborative parent involvement.

Multivariable linear regression models using caregiver problem-solving and adolescent-report of caregiver collaborative involvement as predictors of (1) adolescent positive problem-solving orientation ( Table 3 ) and (2) adolescent rational problem-solving style ( Table 4 ) were then conducted. Crude relationships between adolescent and caregiver problem solving are described, as well as models subsequently adjusted for adolescent-report of caregiver collaborative involvement. The data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 27; IBM Corp, 2020).

Table 3 . Multivariable linear regression predicting adolescent positive problem-solving orientation.

Table 4 . Multivariable linear regression predicting adolescent rational problem-solving style.

Seventy-nine adolescent-caregiver dyads were included in analyses ( Table 1 ). Adolescent participants were primarily male (55.7%), Caucasian (68.4%), with paraplegia (65.8%), and a mean age of 8.7 years at time of injury (SD = 5.6) and 15.8 years at time of interview (SD = 1.6). Caregiver participants were primarily female (87.3%), Caucasian (67.5%), married (53.8%), with at least some college (76.0%), and a mean age of 45.1 years at time of interview (SD = 6.5).

Table 2 presents descriptive statistics for adolescent problem-solving, caregiver problem-solving, and collaborative parent involvement. Both caregivers and adolescents reported moderate mean scores on the scales assessing positive and rational problem solving, with means ranging from 10.7–13.2. Caregivers reported low mean scores on negative problem-solving orientation ( M = 4.5, SD = 3.9, Range = 0–19), impulsive/careless style ( M = 4.5, SD = 4.1, Range = 0–20), and avoidant problem-solving style ( M = 3.6, SD = 3.0, Range = 0–12). Adolescents reported low mean scores on negative problem-solving orientation ( M = 4.7, SD = 4.3, Range = 0–18), as well as on impulsive/careless style ( M = 6.2, SD = 3.5, Range = 0–15), and avoidant problem-solving style ( M = 5.4, SD = 4.2, Range = 0–18). On average, adolescent participants reported high mean CPI-SCI scores, representing perceptions of care collaboration with their primary caregiver ( M = 4.3, SD = .93, Range = 1–5).

Higher scores on caregiver positive or rational problem-solving subscales were weakly and positively correlated with higher scores on both adolescent positive and rational problem-solving subscales ( r = .26 to.34, p < .05; Table 2 ). In addition, higher scores on caregiver negative and avoidant problem-solving subscales were significantly correlated with lower scores on adolescent rational problem-solving style ( r = −.22 to -.33, p < .05). Further, higher scores on caregiver total problem-solving were significantly correlated with higher scores on adolescent PPO and RPS subscale scores ( r = .33, p < .01; r = .40, p < .01, respectively). There was no significant correlation between caregiver NPO, ICS or AS subscale scores and adolescent PPO subscale scores. Greater adolescent perception of collaborative caregiver involvement in SCI care was significantly associated with higher scores on both adolescent positive and rational problem-solving orientation ( r = .27, p < .05; r = .29, p < .05, respectively). Adolescent perceptions of CPI-SCI were not significantly associated with caregiver problem-solving subscales.

In general, significant differences across parent and adolescent report of problem-solving orientations were not identified. On average, adolescent report of positive problem-solving orientation was .61 points higher than caregiver report of positive problem-solving orientation (95% CI [−.58, 1.80]). Conversely, adolescent report of rational problem-solving orientation was .83 points lower than caregiver report of rational problem-solving orientation (95% CI [−2.06,.40]).

Multivariable linear regression analyses are shown in Tables 3 , 4 . Bivariate correlations across caregiver SPSI:R-S subscales justified use of the total caregiver SPSI:R-S score in regression models. Effective caregiver problem-solving and adolescent perceptions of collaborative parent involvement were each associated with positive problem-solving orientation in adolescents. Specifically, for each one unit increase in adolescent perceptions of collaborative parent involvement, there was a .27 unit increase in adolescent PPO scores when controlling for caregiver problem-solving ( p < .05). The model with caregiver problem-solving as the sole predictor had an R 2 value of .09 and the full adjusted model including both predictors had an R 2 value of .16.

Effective caregiver problem-solving and adolescent perceptions of collaborative parent involvement were each associated with increased rational problem solving in adolescents. For each one unit increase in adolescent perceptions of collaborative parent involvement, there was a .25 unit increase in adolescent rational problem-solving scores when controlling for parent problem-solving ( p < .05). The model with caregiver problem solving as the sole predictor has an R 2 value of .14 and the full adjusted model including both predictors had an R 2 value of .22.

4. Discussion

The current study is the first published account to examine predictors of constructive problem solving among adolescents with SCI. Results revealed that higher levels of adolescent positive problem-solving orientation and rational problem-solving style are both predicted by more effective problem solving by their caregivers, as well as adolescents perceiving more collaboration with caregivers. These findings provide a more nuanced understanding of the relationships between caregiver problem solving, collaborative involvement in SCI care, and constructive problem solving among adolescents with SCI, and have important implications for the development of effective problem-solving interventions for adolescents and caregivers. At present, there are few such interventions ( 15 ). Although this is a cross-sectional study, it is plausible that primary caregivers of adolescents with SCI who model effective problem solving, such as proactive engagement with a problem, can influence the development of those same skills in their adolescent. Pediatric rehabilitation programs could therefore consider the development of programming to help foster and reinforce these skills among caregivers.

This study is also the first to include an adapted measure of the perception of collaborative involvement of caregivers for adolescents with SCI. Collaboration could also entail flexibility such as modifying the caregiver's involvement in personal care assistance depending on the child's evolving care needs and development. In the current study, adolescents who perceived caregivers as their partners in meeting the care demands of living with SCI tended to have more constructive problem solving. These data may suggest that adolescents not only develop skills by observing their caregivers' approach to problem solving, but also through direct hands-on-learning as they work through care tasks together. These findings suggest the utility of an applied learning context in SCI care, where problem-solving strategies are modeled, shared, and developed.

4.1. Implications for clinical practice and intervention

Data suggest the potential promise of caregiver interventions aimed at fostering effective problem-solving skills and collaborative approaches to their child's care. This can be done during initial rehabilitation, and reinforced through long-term follow-up care and by all members of the adolescent's care team. For instance, staff can work to involve parents in treatment decisions, such as evaluating options and possible consequences. Staff can reinforce the importance of a growth mindset, including embracing and persisting through challenges, for parents by modeling persistence when trying new things and encouraging caregivers to approach problems as challenges to be solved. A growth mindset can help adolescents acquire more effective problem solving, and ideally improve quality of life. Guidelines for pediatric rehabilitation advocate for parent-involvement and family-centered care, though implementation has been limited ( 2 , 20 ).

Raising a child with a disability heightens the dynamic nature of challenges faced by caregivers of typically developing children, in terms of balancing the desire to care for and protect their child with the need to foster independence. This may be particularly salient for youth who had already assumed some independence with regard to self-care behaviors at the time of injury. While there is no perfect “manual” for any parent, providing caregivers of youth with SCI with appropriate guidance specific to their child's age and level of impairment, as well as developmentally appropriate anticipatory guidance, can help caregivers prioritize competing demands, bolster rational problem solving, increase collaborative behaviors, and model effective problem solving for their youth and other family members.

Findings suggest a potential benefit of bolstering support for parents in development of problem-solving skills and constructive collaboration with their adolescent with SCI. Problem-solving interventions have demonstrated promise in other pediatric populations, including among caregivers of adolescents with chronic pain ( 21 ) and among caregivers of adults with SCI ( 14 , 22 , 19 ). Clinically, problem-solving interventions demonstrate feasibility and effectiveness in the context of pediatric chronic conditions and improve outcomes for both youth with chronic conditions and their parents, as well as for families of adults with disabilities ( 21 , 22 ).

4.2. Strengths, limitations & suggestions for future research

This study examines predictors of constructive problem-solving among adolescents with SCI and describes the relationship between caregiver problem-solving approaches and constructive adolescent problem-solving. The results of the current study provide insight into factors that contribute to effective problem-solving for adolescents with SCI. This study includes the perspectives of both adolescents with SCI and their caregivers, which contributes to a more thorough understanding of the roles of problem-solving and perceptions of collaboration. Further, this study includes an adapted measure of the collaborative parent involvement survey specific to SCI. Not only can this adapted measure be used among other samples with SCI, but it also provides a model for how this measure can be adapted to other conditions.

The cross-sectional nature of the data limits the ability to evidence causation. Future research should employ longitudinal methods to further explore the temporal relations between caregiver problem-solving, collaborative parent involvement, and adolescent constructive problem-solving. Further, while all participants were part of the same health care system, they were recruited from three sites spanning a wide geographical area and varied socioeconomic status, which improves generalizability. Future research should seek to recruit a more diverse sample to enhance understanding of the role of contextual and social factors in family relationships, parent involvement, and problem solving skills.

Although adolescent perceptions of collaboration were related to adolescent problem-solving, caregiver perceptions of their own problem-solving strategies did not relate to collaborative involvement perceived by their adolescents. Future research should utilize diverse methods, such as observations and qualitative interviews, to assess parents' perceptions of collaboration to better understand the nature of collaboration, as well as barriers and facilitators to collaboration within the family context.

5. Conclusion

The current study highlights the important roles of caregiver problem-solving and collaboration around SCI care in constructive adolescent problem-solving. The results have important implications for interventions aimed at fostering effective problem-solving skills among caregivers and implementing collaborative approaches to SCI care.

Data availability statement

The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because; Shriners Children's does not allow for sharing of the dataset. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to; [email protected].

Ethics statement

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Institutional Review Board at Rush University Medical Center. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardian/next of kin.

Author contributions

OC, AR, AM contributed to method, formal analysis, investigation, and writing. SE contributed to conceptualization, supervision, and writing. EK, LV, and KZ contributed to conceptualization, resources, writing, reviewing, editing, supervision, and funding acquisition. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

This research was supported by Shriners Hospitals for Children.

Conflict of interest

The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The reviewer CS declared a past co-authorship with the authors KZ and LV to the handling Editor.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

1. Chevalier Z, Kelly E, Jones K. An overview of psychosocial adjustment after pediatric spinal cord injury. In: Vogel L, Zebracki K, Betz RR, Mulcahey MJ, editors. Spinal cord injury in the child and young adult . London, UK: Mac Keith Press (2014). p. 343–58.

2. Elliot TR, Shewchuk RM. Recognizing the family caregiver: integral and formal members of the rehabilitation process. J Vocat Rehabil . (1998) 10:123–32. doi: 10.1016/S1052-2263(98)00007-5

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Kelly EH, Anderson CJ, Garma SI, Russell HF, Klaas SJ, Gorzkowski JA, et al. Relationships between the psychological characteristics of youth with spinal cord injury and their primary caregivers. Spinal Cord . (2011) 49:200–5. doi: 10.1038/sc.2010.78

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

4. Boyer B, Knolls M, Kafkalas C, Tollen L. Prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder in patients with pediatric spinal cord injury: relationship to functional independence. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil . (2000) 6:S125–133. doi: 10.1310/4FJ8-3VCH-EE0N-HNCD

5. Friedman D, Holmbeck G, Delucia C, Jandasek B, Zebracki K. Trajectories of autonomy development across the adolescent transition in children with spina bifida. Rehabil Psychol . (2009) 54:16–27. doi: 10.1037/a0014279

6. D'Zurilla T. J., Nezu A. M., Maydeu-Olivares A. Social problem solving: theory and assessment. Social problem solving: Theory, research, and training . Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. (2004)

7. D'Zurilla TJ, Nezu AM. Problem-solving therapy: A social competence approach to clinical intervention . (2nd ed.). New York: Springer (1999). 246 p.

Google Scholar

8. D'Zurilla TJ, Nezu AM, Maydeu-Olivares A. Social problem-solving inventory - revised (SPSI-R™) [database record] . Washington, DC: APA PsycTests. (2019). doi: 10.1037/t05068-000

9. Kelly EH, Riordan AL, Zebracki K, Thorpe S, Vogel LC. Relationships between caregiver characteristics and health-related quality of life among youth with spinal cord injury. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil . (2016) 22:149–57. doi: 10.1310/sci2016-00012

10. Kurowski BG, Wade SL, Kirkwood MW, Brown TM, Stancin T, Taylor HG. Long-term benefits of an early online problem-solving intervention for executive dysfunction after traumatic brain injury in children: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr . (2014) 168:523–31. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.5070

11. Wade SL, Kurowski BG, Kirkwood MW, Zhang N, Cassedy A, Brown TM, et al. Online problem-solving therapy after traumatic brain injury: a randomized controlled trial. Pediatrics . (2015) 135:e487–95. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-1386

12. Dreer LE, Elliott TR, Tucker E. Social problem-solving abilities and health behaviors among persons with recent-onset spinal cord injury. J Clin Psychol Med Settings . (2004) 11:7–13. doi: 10.1023/B:JOCS.0000016265.62022.82

13. Elliott TR, Godshall FJ, Herrick SM, Witty TE, Spruell M. Problem-solving appraisal and psychological adjustment following spinal cord injury. Cognit Ther Res . (1991) 15:387–98. doi: 10.1007/BF01173033

14. Elliott TR, Shewchuk RM, Richards JS. Caregiver social problem-solving abilities and family member adjustment to recent-onset physical disability. Rehabil Psychol . (1999) 44:104–23. doi: 10.1037/0090-5550.44.1.104

15. Russell H, Kelly EH, Morrison M, Mulcahey MJ, Betz R, Vogel LC. Problem solving: Relationships with psychosocial outcomes in youth with spinal cord injury. (Oral Presentation). Society of Pediatric Psychology . (2014). p. 27–29; Philadelphia, PA.

16. Nansel TR, Anderson BJ, Laffel LM, Simons-Morton BG, Weissberg-Benchell J, Wysocki T, et al. A multisite trial of a clinic-integrated intervention for promoting family management of pediatric type 1 diabetes: feasibility and design. Pediatr Diabetes . (2009) 10:105–15. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-5448.2008.00448.x

17. Dreer LE, Berry J, Rivera P, Snow M, Elliott TR, Miller D, et al. Efficient assessment of social problem-solving abilities in medical and rehabilitation settings: a rasch analysis of the social problem-solving inventory-revised. J Clin Psychol . (2009) 65:653–69. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20573

18. Rivelli AL, Kelly EH, Espino SR, Vogel LC. Development of the parent forum: an in-person approach to supporting caregivers of youth with spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med . (2019) 42:545–56. doi: 10.1080/10790268.2019.1609873

19. Dweck CS. Mindset: the new psychology of success . New York: Ballantine Books (2008). 277 p.

20. King G, Williams L, Hahn Goldberg S. Family-oriented services in pediatric rehabilitation: a scoping review and framework to promote parent and family wellness. Child Care Health Dev . (2017) 43:334–47. doi: 10.1111/cch.12435

21. Palermo TM, Law EF, Essner B, Jessen-Fiddick T, Eccleston C. Adaptation of problem-solving skills training (PSST) for parent caregivers of youth with chronic pain. Clin Pract Pediatr Psychol . (2014) 2:212–23. doi: 10.1037/cpp0000067

22. Elliott TR, Berry JW, Grant JS. Problem-solving training for family caregivers of women with disabilities: a randomized clinical trial. Behav Res Ther . (2009) 47:548–58. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2009.03.006

23. Elliott TR, Shewchuk RM, Richards JS. Family caregiver social problem-solving abilities and adjustment during the inital year of the caregiving role. J Couns Psychol . (2001) 48:223–32. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.48.2.223

Keywords: spinal cord injury, pediatric, adolescent, caregiver, problem solving, collaboration, rehabilitation

Citation: Clark OE, Rivelli AL, Mroczkowski AL, Espino SR, Kelly EH, Vogel LC and Zebracki K (2023) Problem solving and collaborative involvement among adolescents with spinal cord injury and their caregivers. Front. Rehabil. Sci. 4:1100707. doi: 10.3389/fresc.2023.1100707

Received: 17 November 2022; Accepted: 12 June 2023; Published: 26 June 2023.

Reviewed by:

© 2023 Clark, Rivelli, Mroczkowski, Espino, Kelly, Vogel and Zebracki. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Kathy Zebracki [email protected]

This article is part of the Research Topic

Topics in Pediatric Spinal Cord Injury: Challenging Current Models and Maximizing outcomes

Experiences of participating in a problem-solving intervention with workplace involvement in Swedish primary health care: a qualitative study from rehabilitation coordinator's, employee's, and manager's perspectives

Affiliations.

1 Institute of Environmental Medicine, Unit of Intervention and Implementation Research for Worker Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. [email protected].
2 Institute of Environmental Medicine, Unit of Intervention and Implementation Research for Worker Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
3 Department of Occupational Health Sciences and Psychology, Faculty of Health and Occupational Studies, University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden.
4 Department of Health Sciences, Community and Occupational Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
5 Department of Health and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
PMID: 37226167
PMCID: PMC10206539
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-15899-y

Background: Work-directed interventions that include problem-solving can reduce the number of sickness absence days. The effect of combining a problem-solving intervention with involvement of the employer is currently being tested in primary care in Sweden for employees on sickness absence due to common mental disorders (PROSA trial). The current study is part of the PROSA trial and has a two-fold aim: 1) to explore the experiences of participating in a problem-solving intervention with workplace involvement aimed at reducing sickness absence in employees with common mental disorders, delivered in Swedish primary health care, and 2) to identify facilitators of and barriers to participate in the intervention. Both aims targeted rehabilitation coordinators, employees on sickness absence, and first-line managers.

Methods: Data were collected from semi-structured interviews with participants from the PROSA intervention group; rehabilitation coordinators (n = 8), employees (n = 13), and first-line managers (n = 8). Content analysis was used to analyse the data and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to group the data according to four contextual domains. One theme describing the participation experiences was established for each domain. Facilitators and barriers for each domain and stakeholder group were identified.

Results: The stakeholders experienced the intervention as supportive in identifying problems and solutions and enabling a dialogue between them. However, the intervention was considered demanding and good relationships between the stakeholders were needed. Facilitating factors were the manual and work sheets which the coordinators were provided with, and the manager being involved early in the return-to-work process. Barriers were the number of on-site meetings, disagreements and conflicts between employees and first-line managers, and symptom severity.

Conclusions: Seeing the workplace as an integral part of the intervention by always conducting a three-part meeting enabled a dialogue that can be used to identify and address disagreements, to explain CMD symptoms, and how these can be handled at the workplace. We suggest allocating time towards developing good relationships, provide RCs with training in handling disagreements, and additional knowledge about factors in the employee's psychosocial work environment that can impair or promote health to increase the RCs ability to support the employee and manager.

Keywords: Adjustment disorder; Anxiety; Common mental disorders; Depression; Primary care; Problem-solving; Sickness absence.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Health Promotion*
Primary Health Care
Qualitative Research

IMAGES

Problem Solving Methods Steps Process Examples
Problem-Solving Strategies: Definition and 5 Techniques to Try
Introduction to Problem Solving Skills
Group Problem Solving
Problem-Solving Steps
Problem Solving Stages Powerpoint Template Slidemodel

VIDEO

Making a Maths Mat with Matt
Academic Tournaments
Problem solving
Exploring Bethlehem
Increasing Women's Involvement in Community Problem Solving (English Subtitles)
Relationship Building Will Solves the Problem

COMMENTS

3.2 Low-Involvement Versus High-Involvement Buying Decisions and the
Limited problem solving falls somewhere between low-involvement (routine) and high-involvement (extended problem solving) decisions. Consumers engage in limited problem solving when they already have some information about a good or service but continue to search for a little more information. Assume you need a new backpack for a hiking trip.
What is Problem Solving? Steps, Process & Techniques
These steps support the involvement of interested parties, the use of factual information, comparison of expectations to reality, and a focus on root causes of a problem. ... Problem solving, and the techniques used to gain clarity, are most effective if the solution remains in place and is updated to respond to future changes. Problem Solving ...
How to Involve Others in Problem Solving Effectively
5 The best practices of involvement. When considering the best practices for involving others in your problem solving process, it is important to be respectful and appreciative of their ...
Involvement Levels
Limited problem solving falls somewhere between low-involvement (routine) and high-involvement (extended problem solving) decisions. Consumers engage in limited problem solving when they already have some information about a good or service but continue to search for a little more information. Assume you need a new backpack for a hiking trip.
Section 7. Engaging People Most Affected by the Problem
Encouraging Involvement in Community Work » Section 7. Engaging People Most Affected by the Problem » Main Section. Chapter 7. ← Table of Contents. ... There are a few things you can do to bring people who are affected by a problem into the problem-solving effort. These will help whether you wait to recruit them to participate in listening ...
How to improve your problem solving skills and strategies
6. Solution implementation. This is what we were waiting for! All problem solving strategies have the end goal of implementing a solution and solving a problem in mind. Remember that in order for any solution to be successful, you need to help your group through all of the previous problem solving steps thoughtfully.
Leadership, Roles, and Problem Solving in Groups
Step 2: Analyze the Problem. During this step, a group should analyze the problem and the group's relationship to the problem. Whereas the first step involved exploring the "what" related to the problem, this step focuses on the "why.". At this stage, group members can discuss the potential causes of the difficulty.
4 Active Learning: Engaging People in the Learning Process
Hake (1998) similarly found that active learning led to better test scores and increased problem-solving abilities, while Harris and Bacon (2019) indicate that active learning produces results at least as good as traditional, passive learning, and that it promotes both lower-order and higher-order critical thinking skills.
Problem-Solving Therapy: Definition, Techniques, and Efficacy
Problem-solving therapy is a brief intervention that provides people with the tools they need to identify and solve problems that arise from big and small life stressors. It aims to improve your overall quality of life and reduce the negative impact of psychological and physical illness. Problem-solving therapy can be used to treat depression ...
The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting
Collaborative problem-solving has been widely embraced in the classroom instruction of critical thinking, which is regarded as the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field ...
6.3 Types of Consumer Decisions
Limited problem solving falls somewhere between low-involvement (routine) and high-involvement (extended problem solving) decisions. Consumers engage in limited problem solving when they already have some information about a good or service but continue to search for a little more information. Assume you need a new backpack for a hiking trip.
Situational theory of problem solving
Involvement Recognition: "a perceived connection between the self and the problem situation." This variable has the same concept of the level of involvement in the situational theory of publics. Referent Criterion: "any knowledge or subjective judgmental system that influences the way in which one approaches problem solving ...
How To Put Problem-Solving Skills To Work in 6 Steps
Here are the basic steps involved in problem-solving: 1. Define the problem. The first step is to analyze the situation carefully to learn more about the problem. A single situation may solve multiple problems. Identify each problem and determine its cause. Try to anticipate the behavior and response of those affected by the problem.
PDF Problem-Solving Tips
2nd Edition. The following guide will assist readers in their efforts to reduce crime and disorder through problem-solving partnerships. It may be reproduced and distributed. This guide was compiled by former COPS Office staff members Karin Schmerler, Matt Perkins, Scott Philips, Tammy Rinehart, and Meg Townsend.
Full article: Ethical challenges from a problem-solving intervention
First, on the employee to take part in the problem-solving process by identifying problems, think about and implement solutions, agree to manager involvement, and participate in a three-party meeting. Second, on the first-line manager, to participate in a problem inventory, a three-party meeting, and arrange work accommodations.
Involvement and outcomes in short-term interpersonal cognitive problem
Abstract. This study examined the extent to which patterns of involvement in interpersonal cognitive problem solving (ICPS) groups were predictive of improvements in ICPS skills. Thirty-one 7 8 ...
Studying the student's perceptions of engagement and problem-solving
The first two indicate student involvement, learning environments, and problem-solving abilities. It utilised a study approach. The following two are impediments to teaching and learning for both students and teachers, and the final two are, respectively, academic accomplishment and learning outcomes for students.
Involvement and outcomes in short-term interpersonal cognitive problem
This study examined the extent to which patterns of involvement in interpersonal cognitive problem solving (ICPS) groups were predictive of improvements in ICPS skills. Thirty-one 7-8-year-old children were assigned to experimental or control groups. Participants in the experimental group participated in six sessions of ICPS group work.
The involvement of decomposition and composition processes in
The involvement of both decomposition and composition processes in restructuring during insight problem-solving By its definition, restructuring, as a fundamental cognitive process of insight problem solving, is referred as the transformation process from old representations/Gestalt to new representations/Gestalt by reconfiguring internal ...
Frontiers
ObjectiveTo determine the relationship between constructive adolescent problem solving (positive problem-solving orientation and rational problem-solving style) and caregiver problem solving and collaborative involvement with primary caregiver among adolescents with spinal cord injuries (SCIs). Positive constructive adolescent problem solving was hypothesized to be predicted by more effective ...
Experiences of participating in a problem-solving intervention with
Background: Work-directed interventions that include problem-solving can reduce the number of sickness absence days. The effect of combining a problem-solving intervention with involvement of the employer is currently being tested in primary care in Sweden for employees on sickness absence due to common mental disorders (PROSA trial).

3.2 Low-Involvement Versus High-Involvement Buying Decisions and the Consumer’s Decision-Making Process

Stages in the Buying Process

Stage 1. Need Recognition

Stage 2. Search for Information

Stage 3. Product Evaluation

Stage 4. Product Choice and Purchase

Stage 5. Postpurchase Use and Evaluation

Stage 6. Disposal of the Product

Key Takeaways

Review Questions

Share This Book

15 Involvement Levels

Low Involvement Consumer Decision Making

High Involvement Consumer Decision Making

Limited Problem Solving

Ways to Increase Involvement Levels

1. Customization

2. Engagement

3. Incentives

4. Appealing to Hedonic Needs

5. Creating Purpose

6. Representation

Media Attributions

Text Attributions

Share This Book

How to improve your problem solving skills and build effective problem solving strategies

Design your next session with SessionLab

Recommended Articles

What is a problem solving process?

Problem solving strategies

What are the problem solving steps I need to follow?

1. Problem identification

2. Problem analysis

3. Solution generation

4. Solution development

5. Decision making

6. Solution implementation

7. Solution evaluation

Problem solving workshops made easy

Use a workshop to lead a team through a group process

Problem solving workshop

Run a design sprint

Break problems down into smaller issues

Use guiding frameworks or try new methodologies

LEGO Serious Play

Card Decks and Method Kits

Source external advice

Mastermind Group

Coaching and mentoring

Active listening

Analytical skills

Collaboration

Communication

Critical thinking

Data analysis

Decision making

Dependability

Emotional intelligence

Facilitation

Flexibility

Initiative

Impartiality

Planning

Prioritization

Project management

Record keeping

Research skills

Risk management

Team-building

Time management

Share best practices

Ask for help and attend training

Learn a process

Create a feedback loop

Use expert exercises and methods

Try new ways of thinking and change your mindset

Want to design better group processes?

Over to you

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Design your next workshop with SessionLab