What inspires us? An experimental analysis of the semantic meaning of irrelevant information in creative ideation

References

• Abraham, A. (2014). Creative thinking as orchestrated by semantic processing vs. cognitive control brain networks. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 95. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00095
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agnoli, S., Franchin, L., Rubaltelli, E., & Corazza, G. E. (2015). An eye-tracking analysis of irrelevance processing as moderator of openness and creative performance. Creativity Research Journal, 27(2), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2015.1030304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agnoli, S., Franchin, L., Rubaltelli, E., & Corazza, G. E. (2019). The emotionally intelligent use of attention and affective arousal under creative frustration and creative success. Personality and Individual Differences, 142, 242–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.04.041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agnoli, S., Mastria, S., Zanon, M., & Corazza, G. E. (2022). Dopamine supports idea originality: The role of spontaneous eye blink rate on divergent thinking. Psychological Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01658-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., & Watson, J. M. (2008). Beyond mean response latency: Response time distributional analyses of semantic priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 495–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbot, B., & Lubart, T. (2012). Creative thinking in music: Its nature and assessment through musical exploratory behaviors. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(3), 231–242. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027307
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaty, R. E., Seli, P., & Schacter, D. L. (2019). Network neuroscience of creative cognition: mapping cognitive mechanisms and individual differences in the creative brain. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 27, 22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.08.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, D. M., White, H., & Diaz, D. L. (1987). Semantic priming in young and older adults: Evidence for age constancy in automatic and attentional processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 79–88.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson, S., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. (2003). Decreased latent inhibition is associated with increased creative achievement in high-functioning individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 499–506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, P. R., Guilford, J. P., & Wilson, R. C. (1957). Relations of creative responses to working time and instructions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53(2), 82–88.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.82.6.407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corazza, G. E. (2016). Potential originality and effectiveness: The dynamic definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 28(3), 258–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2016.1195627
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corazza, G. E., Agnoli, S., & Mastria, S. (2022). The dynamic creativity framework: Theoretical and empirical investigations. European Psychologist 27(3), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000473
   Google Scholar
• Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory and NEO five-factor inventory professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
   Google Scholar
• den Heyer, K., Briand, K., & Dannenbring, G. L. (1983). Strategic factors in a lexical-decision task: Evidence for automatic and attention-driven processes. Memory & Cognition, 11(4), 374–381. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Favreau, M., & Segalowitz, N. S. (1983). Automatic and controlled processes in the first- and second-language reading of fluent bilinguals. Memory & Cognition, 11(6), 565–574. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03198281
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Forthmann, B., Holling, H., Çelik, P., Storme, M., & Lubart, T. (2017). Typing speed as a confounding variable and the measurement of quality in divergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 29(3), 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2017.1360059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forthmann, B., Paek, S. H., Dumas, D., Barbot, B., & Holling, H. (2020). Scrutinizing the basis of originality in divergent thinking tests: On the measurement precision of response propensity estimates. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 683–699.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foss, D. J. (1982). A discourse on semantic priming. Cognitive Psychology, 14(4), 590–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(82)90020-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gruszka, A., & Necka, E. (2002). Priming and acceptance of close and remote associations by creative and less creative people. Creativity Research Journal, 14(2), 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1402_6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guilford, J. P. (1959). Traits of creativity. In H. H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation (pp. 142–161). Harper and Row.
   Google Scholar
• Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Harding, R. E. M. (1948). An anatomy of inspiration: And an essay on the creative mood. W. Heffer.
   Google Scholar
• Hass, R. W., Rivera, M., & Silvia, P. J. (2018). On the dependability and feasibility of layperson ratings of divergent thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1343. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johns, G. A., Morse, L. W., & Morse, D. T. (2001). An analysis of early vs. later responses on a divergent production task across three time press conditions. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 35(1), 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2001.tb01222.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, S. B. (2013). Opening up openness to experience: A four-factor model and relations to creative achievement in the arts and sciences. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(4), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.33
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenett, Y. N. (2019). What can quantitative measures of semantic distance tell us about creativity? Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 27, 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.08.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenett, Y. N., Levi, E., Anaki, D., & Faust, M. (2017). The semantic distance task: Quantifying semantic distance with semantic network path length. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(9), 1470–1489.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). Wuggy: A multilingual pseudoword generator. Behavior Research Methods, 42(3), 627–633.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Y., Kenett, Y. N., Hu, W., & Beaty, R. E. (2021). Flexible semantic network structure supports the production of creative metaphor. Creativity Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2021.1879508
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubow, R. E. (1989). Latent inhibition and conditioned attention theory. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mastria, S., Agnoli, S., Zanon, M., Acar, S., Runco, M. A., & Corazza, G. E. (2021). Clustering and switching in divergent thinking: Neurophysiological correlates underlying flexibility during idea generation. Neuropsychologia, 158, 107890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2021.107890
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mednick, S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3), 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048850
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mednick, M. T., Mednick, S. A., & Jung, C. C. (1964). Continual association as a function of level of creativity and type of verbal stimulus. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69(5), 511–515. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0041086
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendelsohn, G. A. (1976). Associative and attentional processes in creative performance. Journal of Personality, 44, 341–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1976.tb00127.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendelsohn, G. A., & Griswold, B. B. (1966). Assessed creative potential, vocabulary level, and sex as predictors of the use of incidental cues in verbal problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(4), 423–431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milgram, R. M., & Rabkin, L. (1980). Developmental test of Mednick’s associative hierarchies of original thinking. Developmental Psychology, 16(2), 157–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.16.2.157
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montefinese, M., Ambrosini, E., Fairfield, B., & Mammarella, N. (2013). Semantic memory: A feature-based analysis and new norms for Italian. Behavior Research Methods, 45(2), 440–461.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakagawa, S., & Schielzeth, H. (2013). A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed‐effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 4(2), 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Necka, E. (1999). Creativity and attention. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 30, 85–97.
   Google Scholar
• Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In D. Besner & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition (pp. 264–336). Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Neely, J. H. (1977). Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: Roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 106(3), 226–254. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.106.3.226
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2011). Are intelligence and creativity really so different?: Fluid intelligence, executive processes, and strategy use in divergent thinking. Intelligence, 39(1), 36–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oleynick, V. C., Thrash, T. M., LeFew, M. C., Moldovan, E. G., & Kieffaber, P. D. (2014). The scientific study of inspiration in the creative process: Challenges and opportunities. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 436.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, J. B., & Carson, S. (2000). Latent inhibition and openness to experience in a high-achieving student population. Personality and Individual Differences, 28(2), 323–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00101-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, J. B., Smith, K. W., & Carson, S. (2002). Openness and Extraversion are associated with reduced latent inhibition: Replication and commentary. Personality and Individual Differences, 33(7), 1137–1147. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00004-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, V. K., & Torrance, E. P. (1977). Levels of originality at earlier and later stages of creativity test tasks. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 11(2), 147–147. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1977.tb00602.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puryear, J. S., Kettler, T., & Rinn, A. N. (2017). Relationships of personality to differential conceptions of creativity: A systematic review. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rawlings, D. (1985). Psychoticism, creativity and dichotic shadowing. Personality and Individual Differences, 6(6), 737–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(85)90084-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiter-Palmon, R., Forthmann, B., & Barbot, B. (2019). Scoring divergent thinking tests: A review and systematic framework. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 13(2), 144–152. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000227
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossmann, E., & Fink, A. (2010). Do creative people use shorter associative pathways? Personality and Individual Differences, 49(8), 891–895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., Willse, J. T., Barona, C. M., Cram, J. T., Hess, K. I., Martinez, J. L., & Richard, C. A. (2008). Assessing creativity with divergent thinking tasks: Exploring the reliability and validity of new subjective scoring methods. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(2), 68–85. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.68
   Google Scholar
• Sowden, P. T., Pringle, A., & Gabora, L. (2015). The shifting sands of creative thinking: Connections to dual-process theory. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(1), 40–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2014.885464
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thrash, T. M. (2021). The creation and curation of all things worthy: Inspiration as vital force in persons and cultures. Advances in Motivation Science, 8, 181–244.
   Google Scholar
• Thrash, T. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2003). Inspiration as a psychological construct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 871–889.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thrash, T. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2004). Inspiration: Core characteristics, component processes, antecedents, and function. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), 957–973.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thrash, T. M., Maruskin, L. A., Moldovan, E. G., Oleynick, V. C., & Belzak, W. C. (2017). Writer-reader contagion of inspiration and related states: Conditional process analyses within a cross-classified writer × reader framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3), 466–491.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volle, E. (2018). Associative and controlled cognition in divergent thinking: Theoretical, experimental, neuroimaging evidence, and new directions. In R. E. Jung, & O. Vartanian (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of the neuroscience of creativity (pp. 333–362). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, R. C., Guilford, J. P., & Christensen, P. R. (1953). The measurement of individual differences in originality. Psychological Bulletin, 50(5), 362–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, L. (2009). Mixed effects models for complex data. CRC press.
   Google Scholar
• Xu, R. (2003). Measuring explained variation in linear mixed effects models. Statistics in Medicine, 22(22), 3527–3541. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1572
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, W., Sjoerds, Z., & Hommel, B. (2020). Metacontrol of human creativity: The neurocognitive mechanisms of convergent and divergent thinking. NeuroImage, 210, 116572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116572
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar