# Formulating or Fixating: Effects of Examples on Problem Solving Vary as a Function of Example Presentation Interface Design

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.11022 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.11022/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 19 Jan 2024.

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [DiscipLink: Unfolding Interdisciplinary Information Seeking Process via Human-AI Co-Exploration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.00447/) (2024)
- ["The Diagram is like Guardrails": Structuring GenAI-assisted Hypotheses Exploration with an Interactive Shared Representation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.16791/) (2025)
- [Words as Bridges: Exploring Computational Support for Cross-Disciplinary Translation Work](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.18471/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Interactive systems that facilitate exposure to examples can augment problem solving performance. However designers of such systems are often faced with many practical design decisions about how users will interact with examples, with little clear theoretical guidance. To understand how example interaction design choices affect whether/how people benefit from examples, we conducted an experiment where 182 participants worked on a controlled analog to an exploratory creativity task, with access to examples of varying diversity and presentation interfaces. Task performance was worse when examples were presented in a list, compared to contextualized in the exploration space or shown in a dropdown list. Example lists were associated with more fixation, whereas contextualized examples were associated with using examples to formulate a model of the problem space to guide exploration. We discuss implications of these results for a theoretical framework that maps design choices to fundamental psychological mechanisms of creative inspiration from examples.