Comparing Business Experts and Novices in Complex Problem Solving

Weak and strong ties and its connection to experts' problem-solving styles in scaffolding students' PBL activities on social media

Background: Studies have acknowledged that social media enables students to connect with and learn from experts from different ties available in the students’ personal learning environment (PLE). Incorporating experts into formal learning activities such as scaffolding problem-solving tasks through social media, allows students to understand how experts solve real-world problems. However, studies that evaluate experts’ problem-solving styles on social media in relation to the tie strength of the experts with the students are scarce in the extant literature. This study aimed to explore the problem-solving styles that the experts portrayed based on their ties with the students in problem-based learning (PBL) on Facebook. Methods: This study employed a simultaneous within-subject experimental design which was conducted in three closed Facebook groups with 12 final year management students, six business experts, and one instructor as the participants. The experts were invited by the students from the weak and strong ties in their PLE. Hinging on the Strength of Weak Ties Theory (Granovetter, 1973) and problem-solving styles (Selby et al., 2004), this study employed thematic analysis using the ATLAS.ti qualitative data analysis software to map the experts’ comments on Facebook. Results:  The experts from strong and weak ties who had a prior relationship with the students showed people preference style by being more sensitive to the students' learning needs and demonstrating firmer scaffolding compared to the weak ties' experts who had no prior relationship with the students. Regardless of the types of ties, all experts applied all manner of processing information and orientation to change but the degree of its applications are correlated with the working experience of the experts. Conclusion: The use of weak or strong ties benefited the students as it expedited their problem-solving tasks since the experts have unique expertise to offer depending on the problem-solving styles that they exhibited.

How do task characteristics affect learning and performance? The roles of simultaneous, interactive, and continuous tasks

Why are some tasks more difficult to learn than others? Hoffman et al. (Accelerated expertise: training for high proficiency in a complex world. Psychology Press, New York, 2014) hypothesized that certain task characteristics-termed "dimensions of difficulty"-hindered learning and performance. Previously, we tested two dimensions: consistent vs. variably mapped and static vs. dynamic. Here, we test three more dimensions of difficulty: sequential vs. simultaneous, discrete vs. continuous, and separable vs. interactive. In each study, we manipulate a single task feature (dimension of difficulty) while holding all others constant. Tasks with continuous (rather than discrete) features slowed participants' performance but did not impair learning. Learning and performance were unimpaired in tasks with interactive (rather than largely separable) processes. By contrast, we found strong evidence that simultaneous tasks (i.e., those that demand multitasking) inhibit learning, slow performance, and increase task errors. Importantly, this occurred in the absence of perceptual and mechanical bottlenecks present in most other studies of multitasking. We also are the first to examine simultaneity on learning a new task while controlling for other dimensions of difficulty. We discuss the potential impact of these results on current theory and application to real-world domains.