Main Article Content


Solving word problems with a thought jump shows flexibility and the ability to use alternative procedures that are important for students to master. The thought jump is a feature of the lateral thinking process and is needed to overcome the various difficulties in solving mathematical word problems. However, lateral thinking has not been widely linked with adversity quotient and reflective cognitive style. This study aimed to describe students' lateral thinking processes in solving word problems in terms of adversity quotient and reflective cognitive style. This research is a qualitative descriptive study. The subjects in this study were junior high school students in Gowa Regency, South Sulawesi Province. The research instrument used the MFFT diagnostic test, ARP questionnaire sheet, word problem text, and interview guidelines. The results of this study indicate that climber-reflective subjects can think laterally and use them to solve the first and second-word problems well. Camper-reflective subjects can only think laterally for situations that are still within reach, while for more complicated cases, camper subjects are easily distracted and even stop solving problems. Quitter subjects solve word problems very procedurally, follow rigid algorithms, and cannot work backward when faced with difficulties.


Adversity quotient Cognitive style Lateral thinking Reflective Word problems

Article Details

Author Biographies

Andi Saparuddin Nur, Universitas Musamus, Postgraduate Universitas Negeri Semarang

Department of Mathematics Education

Kartono Kartono, Universitas Negeri Semarang

Department of Mathematics Education

Zaenuri Zaenuri, Universitas Negeri Semarang

Department of Mathematics Education

Rochmad Rochmad, Universitas Negeri Semarang

Department of Mathematics Education


  1. De Bono, E. (1970). Lateral Thinking: a Textbook of Creativity. London: Penguin Book.

  2. Geiger, V., Stillman, G., Brown, J., Galbriath, P., & Niss, M. (2018). Using mathematics to solve real world problems: the role of enablers. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30(1), 7-19.

  3. Gusau, N. M. B., Mohamad, M., & Jamali, A. R. (2018). The effect of cognitive style on problem solving skills in final year undergraduate project. National Academy of Managerial Staff of Culture and Arts Herald(1), 498-506.

  4. Hadar, L. L., & Tirosh, M. (2019). Creative thinking in mathematics curriculum: An analytic framework. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33, 100585.

  5. Haghighi, M., Ghanavati, M., & Rahimi, A. (2015). The role of gender differences in the cognitive style of impulsivity/reflectivity and EFL success. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 467-474.

  6. Harisman, Y., Noto, M. S., & Hidayat, W. (2020). Experience student background and their behavior in problem solving. Infinity Journal, 9(1), 59-68.

  7. Hulaikah, M., Degeng, I., & Murwani, F. D. (2020). The effect of experiential learning and adversity quotient on problem solving ability. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 869-884.

  8. Johnston-Wilder, S., & Mason, J. (2005). Developing thinking in geometry. Sage Publications, Inc.

  9. Julita, J., Darhim, D., & Herman, T. (2019). Improving mathematical lateral thinking ability of high school students through quantum learning based on creative problem solving. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1315(1), 012061.

  10. Malik, I., Mulyono, M., & Mariani, S. (2019). Ability in mathematics problem solving based on adversity quotient. Jurnal Profesi Keguruan, 5(1), 90-95.

  11. Masfingatin, T., & Suprapto, E. (2020). Student's statistical literacy skills based on the reflective and impulsive cognitive styles. Al-Jabar: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 11(2), 273-286.

  12. Maulyda, M. A., Sukoriyanto, S., Hidayati, V. R., Erfan, M., & Umar, U. (2020). Student representation in solving story problems using polya steps. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 10(1), 25-34.

  13. Muliawati, N. E. (2016). Proses berpikir lateral siswa dalam memecahkan masalah berdasarkan gaya kognitif dan gender [Students' lateral thinking processes in solving problems based on cognitive style and gender]. JP2M (Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Matematika), 2(1), 55-68.

  14. Mustofa, R. F., & Hidayah, Y. R. (2020). The effect of problem-based learning on lateral thinking skills. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 463-474.

  15. Nggaba, M., Herman, T., & Prabawanto, S. (2018). Students’ lateral mathematical thinking ability on trigonometric problems. In International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education of Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

  16. Nugroho, A. A., Nizaruddin, N., Dwijayanti, I., & Tristianti, A. (2020). Exploring students' creative thinking in the use of representations in solving mathematical problems based on cognitive style. Journal of Research and Advances in Mathematics Education, 5(2), 202-217.

  17. Nur, A. S., & Nurvitasari, E. (2017). Geometry skill analysis in problem solving reviewed from the difference of cognitive style students junior high school. Journal of Educational Science and Technology (EST), 3(3), 204-210.

  18. Oliveros, J. C. (2014). Adversity quotient and problem-solving skills in advanced algebra. JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research, 17(1), 65-75.

  19. Pradika, I. D., Amin, S. M., & Khabibah, S. (2019). Relational thinking in problem solving mathematics based on adversity quotient and visual learning style. International Journal of Trends in Mathematics Education Research, 2(4), 161-164.

  20. Qolfathiriyus, A., Sujadi, I., & Indriati, D. (2019). Students’ analytical thinking profile based on reflective cognitive style in solving mathematics problem. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1306(1), 012016.

  21. Sa'dijah, C., Kholid, M. N., Hidayanto, E., & Permadi, H. (2020). Reflective thinking characteristics: a study in the proficient mathematics prospective teachers. Infinity Journal, 9(2), 159-172.

  22. Sarjana, K., Hayati, L., & Wahidaturrahmi, W. (2020). Mathematical modelling and verbal abilities: How they determine students’ ability to solve mathematical word problems? Beta: Jurnal Tadris Matematika, 13(2), 117-129.

  23. Stoltz, P. G. (1997). Adversity quotient: Turning obstacles into opportunities. John Wiley & Sons.

  24. Subchan, S., Winarni, W., Mufid, M. S. u., Fahim, K., & Syaifudin, W. H. (2018). Matematika Kurikulum 2013 (Edisi Revisi 2018) [Mathematics Curriculum 2013 (Revised Edition 2018)]. Jakarta: Pusat Kurikulum dan Perbukuan, Balitbang, Kemendikbud.

  25. Sudia, M., & Lambertus, L. (2017). Profile of high school student Mathematical reasoning to solve the problem Mathematical viewed from cognitive style. International Journal of Education and Research, 5(6), 163-174.

  26. Sukestiyarno, Y. (2020). Metode penelitian pendidikan [Educational research methods]. Semarang: UNNES Press.

  27. Suryapuspitarini, B. K., & Adhi, N. R. D. N. (2018). Problem solving ability viewed from the adversity quotient on mathematics connected mathematics project learning (CMP) with etnomathematics nuanced. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 7(1), 123-129.

  28. Susilawati, W., Maryono, I., Widiastuti, T., & Abdullah, R. (2018, 2018/10). Improvement of mathematical lateral thinking skills and student character through challenge-based learning. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Islamic Education (ICIE 2018).

  29. Tasni, N., Saputra, A., & Adohar, O. (2020). Students’ difficulties in productive connective thinking to solve mathematical problems. Beta: Jurnal Tadris Matematika, 13(1), 33-48.

  30. Wahyuningtyas, F., Suyitno, H., & Asikin, M. (2020). Student's creative thinking skills viewed by adversity quotient and mathematics anxiety in grade VIII. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 9(2), 190-198.

  31. Wantika, R. R. (2019). Kemampuan berpikir lateral siswa smp pada pemecahan masalah geometri. In PRISMA, Prosiding Seminar Nasional Matematika.

  32. Yakoh, M., Chongrukasa, D., & Prinyapol, P. (2015). Parenting styles and adversity quotient of youth at pattani foster home. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 205, 282-286.