Talk:Problem solving

This article was nominated for deletion on 10 August 2022. The result of the discussion was keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Problem solving article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Template:Vital article

Common barriers to problem solving was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 21 May 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Problem solving. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Business C‑class High‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Education C‑class High‑importance

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Engineering C‑class High‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Invention C‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Invention, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Invention on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InventionWikipedia:WikiProject InventionTemplate:WikiProject InventionInvention
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Philosophy: Logic C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Psychology Start‑class High‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Systems: Systems engineering C‑class High‑importance

	Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the field of Systems engineering.

The contents of Collaborative problem-solving was merged into Problem solving on 1 January 2020. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

A member of the Guild of Copy Editors, Thinker78, reviewed a version of this article for copy editing on September 2018. However, a major copy edit was inappropriate at that time because of the issues specified below, or the other tags now found on this article. Once these issues have been addressed, and any related tags have been cleared, please tag the article once again for {{Copy edit}}. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English. Visit our project page if you are interested in joining!
Please address the following issues as well as any other cleanup tags before re-tagging this article with copyedit: Needs additional citations for verification

Archives

1

This article is the subject of a request emailed to the Volunteer Response Team (VRT).

Issues identified are: Confirming that article creator JoachimFunke is Joachim Funke, professor at the Department for Psychology, Heidelberg University, Germany, and legally entitled to release content from his own publications, including [1], onto Wikipedia under our standard license.

The VRTS ticket number is 2012012810012375.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 September 2019 and 18 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nigelmh.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reference farm

There are a huge number of "references" that have no citation in the text. I recommend we delete them all, keeping only those directly associated with a specific citation. -Do c t orW 07:46, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many of them are being used as reference, they're just formatted unexpectedly. I think the first step is to reformat all the Problem_solving#Reference-(NAME) references with <ref> formatting. --Ronz (talk) 17:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an example of how to reference them [2]. I copied the wikicite-formatted information from the References section into ref formatting, naming the reference for future use. --Ronz (talk) 20:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why only people?

I really think there should be information about problem solving as it relates to non-human species. This is supposed to be an article about "problem solving," not simply "human problem solving."

IMO there should be a summary of this current page, while the full contents should be moved to a new article named something like "Problem solving capability of humans." New sections should then be added to this article about problem solving as it relates to non-human life in general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.10.191.192 (talk) 10:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would think that one of the problems with problem solving is that there are too many different ways to solve the problem. How about: (1)What is the problem?, (2)What are the solutions to the problem?, (3)What is the best solution for the problem?, and (4)How do we implement the best solution? I forget where I learned that in a problem solving seminar, But I don't even know where it fits into this elaborate discussion.WFPM (talk) 17:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I came to this page because Finland is ranked the best worldwide in Math, Reading and Science, but only 2nd in Problem Solving. So what nation is ranked the highest in problem solving at the secondary education level?!?!?!

writting books does a great difference when using this topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.206.15.18 (talk) 09:23, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

,,,,

analyse world problems: choose an operation

to choose an operation for a problem, think about the action taking place... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.51.29.227 (talk) 14:21, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Problem Solving Techniques' needs refinement

A lot of the 33 techniques listed are actually the same or very similar, and one of the techniques is actually another list of techniques that seems to be focused on engineering/science rather than the general principle of solving a problem. And I seriously doubt that the 'WWXXD' method is either useful or practical -- I mean seriously, when has 'What Would Chuck Norris Do' ever solved a problem, let alone a real one?

I suggest that techniques be grouped into types, e.g. general, mathematical, logical, with AI, etc. Ideally, each item should link to another article and there should be no repeated items.

--Sg gower (talk) 04:04, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong agree. All what you say. Will you do the changes? BertSeghers (talk) 00:12, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some changes. Most notably, I've just about halved the number of items in the list... Anything that was repeated or didn't have a corresponding article is gone. I've also split the section up into 'problem-solving techniques' and 'problem-solving methodologies', as the things that I am now calling methodologies used other or combinations of techniques rather than something different. Since there are now so few things on the list, it no longer seems apt to subdivide it into general, mathematical, etc. Tomorrow, I intend to slim down the extensive 'see also' section. Some things already linked to in previous sections are also there (like TRIZ and Reduction), and I'm sure some of things in that list belong in techniques or methodologies instead. SG Gower (talk) 22:39, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've made all the changes that were really bugging me (more than halved 'see also'), but this article still could use some work. SG Gower (talk) 22:01, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

== Changing heading levels == (UTC)

== Is plaigarism an issue?== (UTC)

Grammatical errors in "Computer Science and alogorithmics" along with a lack of references.

There are a few grammatical errors at the end of the section entitled "Computer science and algorithmics". These petty errors should be fixed speedily. There are also no references for this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.44.119.89 (talk) 23:56, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Theory of problem solving

Should this redirect here? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:07, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Section "Collective problem solving"?

What do you think about a new section (or even article?) "Collective problem solving"?

It could feature relevant content from Collective intelligence.

It's relatively broad - just as the topic of "Problem solving" and could feature broad and diverse content on the topic of societal problem solving and other forms of collective problem solving...

Could anybody help out with it?

--Fixuture (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fixuture: "Collective problem solving" sounds interesting, but also note the section titles "Computer science and algorithmics", "Engineering", and "Military science", which are all collective endeavors. And some of the methods listed in the section titled "Problem-solving methods" are used in collective problem solving, no doubt. Before creating an article titled "Collective problem solving" you would need to be prepared to prove that the topic is sufficiently notable to merit an article separate from this one. For example, I created the article on problem structuring methods, and I am confident that that topic meets the general notability guidelines. Notability is less of an issue for a new section. Biogeographist (talk) 18:27, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Biogeographist: Thanks for your reply. However, I could not find any content on collective problem solving in any of the three sections you named. There are many things that the section might cover, including crowdsourcing and from a quick research it looks like it meets WP:N. --Fixuture (talk) 18:48, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fixuture: I meant that computer science, engineering, and military science are all collective endeavors (not just the work of one person), and so could be considered examples of collective problem solving in general. I didn't intend to imply that those sections would substitute for a section on "collective problem solving", only that they are related. If you think you have enough content for a new section, be bold and start it. You may not get a lot of help, as this article doesn't appear to receive much attention. This article and the article on decision-making share, I think, the similar problem of applying to such a large range of behavior and areas of study that both articles are rather diffuse and neglected (in need of intensive attention from multiple experts but perhaps unlikely to receive it). Biogeographist (talk) 20:30, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Problem structuring methods (PSMs) section

Following the problem-solving methods, I think it would be helpful to add a short section about Problem structuring methods. Problem-solving is a broad topic, and not all problem-solving methods are valid/useful/possible in a given problem space. The Cynefin framework is an example of a tool to help problem-solvers determine what methods they can use. It would useful if we can research more PSMs apart from the Cynefin framework and expand on existing references given in the PSM wiki page (i.e. 'soft systems methodology, the strategic choice approach, and strategic options development and analysis (SODA)'). LithiumEnergy (talk) 09:49, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@LithiumEnergy: I created the article on PSMs. I am not sure that inserting a section about PSMs would help this article; the article has more serious issues that need to be addressed. I consider the Cynefin framework to be not a PSM but an aid to decide (among other things) when to use PSMs. There is a link in this article's See also section to the article on PSMs. In the most recent edit I added Template:See also links to Category:Problem solving skills, Category:Problem solving methods, Category:Problem structuring methods. Biogeographist (talk) 17:06, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, there is no mention of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_planning in the problem-solving article, although they're both closely related! Oliver siegel (talk) 22:07, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

merge from collaborative problem-solving: proposal

collaborative p. s. adds nothing in terms of new insights or different perspectives. if collective p. s. is not collaborative, what is? -- Kku (talk) 13:16, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 21:02, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Descriptive versus prescriptive problem solving methods

This article fails to distinguish between descriptive studies of problem solving in psychology and prescriptive studies in other disciplines. Logperson (talk) 08:48, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RELEVANCY

The definition of the word problem solving is the process or act of finding a solution to a problem.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/problem-solving

Under the section DEFINITION it states the following:

The term problem solving means slightly different things depending on the discipline. For instance, it is a mental process in psychology and a computerized process in computer science. There are two different types of problems, ill-defined and well-defined: different approaches are used for each. Well-defined problems have specific goals and clear expected solutions, while ill-defined problems do not. Well-defined problems allow for more initial planning than ill-defined problems.[1] Solving problems sometimes involves dealing with pragmatics, the way that context contributes to meaning, and semantics, the interpretation of the problem. The ability to understand what the goal of the problem is, and what rules could be applied, represents the key to solving the problem. Sometimes the problem requires abstract thinking or coming up with a creative solution.

There is a clear inconsistency in the true definition of the word and the definition shared on this page.

With regard to the inconsistent and false definition of the word PROBLEM SOLVING

I agree that the word problem solving means something different to different people but that does not mean the definition of the WORD is different.

THEREFOR, the Top section, should begin with the definition of the term. And the definition of the word problem solving should stay true to the true definition.

Problem solving is the process or act of finding a solution to a problem.

Next, the section below should STATE

PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS

The Problem Solving process consists of a sequence of sections that fit together depending on the type of problem to be solved. These are:

Problem Definition. Problem Analysis. Generating possible Solutions. Analyzing the Solutions. Selecting the best Solution(s). Planning the next course of action (Next Steps) — Preceding unsigned comment added by StarkeSolutions (talk • contribs) 20:59, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Organization and Clarity

Problem solving is such a broad topic. It can involve a number of things and subtopics. There either needs to be better organization of the sections, or this page should focus solely on cognitive psychology/human problem solving. That would make this article, better and more clear. Having less topics in each section will bring clarity.

The lead includes many different techniques to problem solving, such as, philosophy or medicine, but then they are hardly mentioned at all in the rest of the article. They could be added if they do support the topic, but otherwise it is better off to rewrite the lead. The focus is to write about what is mentioned in the rest of the article. Otherwise it may cause confusion for readers. The lead can also include how the article mentions specifically the definition, strategies, etc. There can be references to other methods of problem solving, but make it breif.

I don't see the need to add the military science, engineering, and computer science as part of the definition. Military science wasn't even mentioned in the lead. All these changes I suggest only enhance the article. --Aheuer15 (talk) 20:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! Also, there is no mention of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_planning which is closely related, especially in methodologies. Oliver siegel (talk) 22:08, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"General Problem Solver" is not mentioned as a method

I tried to make an edit to list it as a problem-solving method, but it got rejected. Not sure why!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Problem_Solver Oliver siegel (talk) 23:14, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You added a link to Global Positioning System, not that article. I removed it rather than fixing the link because I do not believe that adding a link to an obsolete software program from 1959 is an improvement to this article. MrOllie (talk) 00:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Human Cognition SP23

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 January 2023 and 15 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jeo.xo (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Emily1Sandoval (talk) 20:25, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]