On pleasures of the mind related to humour and insight problem solving: an investigation of people’s awareness of what they like and why

References

• Amir, O., Biederman, I., Wang, Z., & Xu, X. (2015). Ha Ha! versus Aha! A direct comparison of humor to Non humorous insight for determining the neural correlates of mirth. Cerebral Cortex, 25(5), 1405–1413. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bht343
   Google Scholar
• Ball, L. J., Marsh, J. E., Litchfield, D., Cook, R. L., & Booth, N. (2015). When distraction helps: evidence that concurrent articulation and irrelevantspeech can facilitate insight problem solving. Think. Reas, 21, 76–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2014.934399
   Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
   Google Scholar
• Bianchi, I., Branchini, E., Burro, R., Capitani, E., & Savardi, U. (2020). Overtly prompting people to “think in opposites” supports insight problem solving. Thinking & Reasoning, 26(1), 31–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2018.1553738
   Google Scholar
• Bianchi, I., Canestrari, C., Roncoroni, A. M., Burro, R., Branchini, E., & Savardi, U. (2017). The effects of modulating contrast in verbal irony as a cue for giftedness. Humor - International Journal of Humor Research, 30(4), 383–415. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2017-0028
   Google Scholar
• Canestrari, C., Bianchi, I., & Cori, V. (2018a). De-polarizing verbal irony. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 30(1), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2017.1368525
   Google Scholar
• Canestrari, C., Branchini, E., Bianchi, I., Savardi, U., & Burro, R. (2018b). Pleasures of the mind: What makes jokes and insight problems enjoyable. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2297, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02297
   Google Scholar
• Canestrari, C., Dionigi, A., & Zuczkowski, A. (2014). Humor understanding and knowledge. Language and Dialogue, 4(2), 261–283. https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.4.2.05can
   Google Scholar
• Colston, H. L. (2002). Contrast and assimilation in verbal irony. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(2), 111–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)80008-X
   Google Scholar
• Danek, A. H., Fraps, T., & von Müller, A. (2014a). Working wonders? Investigating insight with magic tricks. Cognition, 130(2), 174–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.11.003
   Google Scholar
• Danek, A. H., Fraps, T., von Müller, A., Grothe, B., & Öllinger, M. (2014b). It’s a kind of magic – what self-reports can reveal about the phenomenology of insight problem solving. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1408, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01408
   Google Scholar
• Danek, A. H., & Kizilirmak, J. M. (2021). The whole is more than the sum of its parts – addressing insight problem solving concurrently from a cognitive and an affective perspective. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 33(6-7), 609–615. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2021.1967962
   Google Scholar
• Danek, A. H., & Wiley, J. (2017). What about false insights? Deconstructing the Aha! experience along its multiple dimensions for correct and incorrect solutions separately. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 2077, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02077
   Google Scholar
• Danek, A. H., Wiley, J., & Ollinger, M. (2016). Solving classical insight problems without Aha! experience: 9 Dot, 8 coin, and matchstick arithmetic problems. The Journal of Problem Solving, 9(1), 4, 47–57. https://doi.org/10.7771/1932-6246.1183
   Google Scholar
• De Bono, E. (1969). The mechanism of mind. Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Forabosco, G. (1992). Cognitive aspects of the humor process: The concept of incongruity. Humor - International Journal of Humor Research, 5(2), 45–68. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.1992.5.1-2.45
   Google Scholar
• Fox, J., & Weisberg, S. (2018). Visualizing fit and lack of fit in complex regression models with predictor effect plots and partial residuals. Journal of Statistical Software, 87(9), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v087.i09
   Google Scholar
• Fox, J., & Weisberg, S. (2019). An R companion to applied regression (third ed). Sage. https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion/.
   Google Scholar
• Gale, M., & Ball, L. J. (2012). Contrast class cues and performance facilitation in a hypothesis testing task: Evidence for an iterative counterfactual model. Memory & Cognition, 40(3), 408–419. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0159-z
   Google Scholar
• Gick, M. L., & Lockhart, R. S. (1995). Cognitive and affective components of insight. In R. J. Sternberg, & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 197–228). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilhooly, K. J., & Fioratou, E. (2009). Executive functions in insight versus non-insight problem solving: An individual differences approach. Thinking & Reasoning, 15(4), 355–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780903178615
   Google Scholar
• Halekoh, U., & Höjsgaard, S. (2014). A Kenward-Roger approximation and parametric bootstrap methods for tests in linear mixed models – The RPackage pbkrtes. Journal of Statistical Software, 59(9), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v059.i09
   Google Scholar
• Hedne, M. R., Norman, E., & Metcalfe, J. (2016). Intuitive feelings of warmth and confidence in insight and noninsight problem solving of magic tricks. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1314, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01314
   Google Scholar
• Heinz, S., & Ruch, W. (2018). Can self-defeating humor make you happy? Cognitive interviews reveal the adaptive side of the self-defeating humor style. Humor - International Journal of Humor Research, 31(3), 451–472. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2017-0089
   Google Scholar
• Hill, G., & Kemp, S. M. (2018). Uh-oh! what have we missed? A Qualitative Investigation Into Everyday Insight Experience. The Journal of Creative Behaviour, 52(3), 201–211. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.142
   Google Scholar
• Huang, L., Gino, F., & Galinsky, A. D. (2015). The highest form of intelligence: Sarcasm increases creativity for both expressers and recipients. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 131, 162–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.07.001
   Google Scholar
• Isen, A. M., Daubman, K. A., & Nowicki, G. P. (1987). Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1122–1131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1122
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, P. C. D. (2014). Extension of nakagawa & schielzeth’s R_GLMM² to random slopes models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 5(1), 44–946. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12225
   Google Scholar
• Katona, G. (1940). Organizing and memorizing: Studies in the psychology of learning and teaching. Columbia University.
   Google Scholar
• Klein, G., & Jarosz, A. (2011). A naturalistic study of insight. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 5(4), 335–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555343411427013
   Google Scholar
• Klein, G., Phillips, J. K., Rall, E., & Peluso, D. A. (2007). A data/frame theory of sensemaking. In R. R. Hoffman (Ed.), Expertise out of context (pp. 113–155). Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Klein, G. A., Calderwood, R., & MacGregor, D. (1989). Critical decision method for eliciting knowledge. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 19(3), 462–472. https://doi.org/10.1109/21.31053
   Google Scholar
• Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., Haider, H., & Rhenius, D. (1999). Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25, 1534–1555. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.6.1534
   Google Scholar
• Köhler, W. (1969). The task of gestalt psychology. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Korovkin, S., Savinova, A., Padalka, J., & Zhelezova, A. (2021). Beautiful mind: Grouping of actions into mental schemes leads to a full insight Aha! experience. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 33(6–7), 620–630. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2020.1847124
   Google Scholar
• Korovkin, S. Y., & Nikiforova, O. S. (2015, September 25–27). Humor as a facilitator of insight problem solving. [Poster presentation]. EuroAsianPacific Joint Conference on Cognitive Science, Torino, IT. http://www.eapcogsci2015.it/.
   Google Scholar
• Kozbelt, A., & Nishioka, K. (2010). Humor comprehension, humor production, and insight: An exploratory study. Humor - International Journal of Humor Research, 23(3), 375–401. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.2010.017
   Google Scholar
• Kubovy, M. (1999). On the pleasures of the mind. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & D. N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundation of hedonic psychology (pp. 134–154). Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Laukkonen, R. E., & Tangen, J. M. (2017). Can observing a necker cube make you more insightful? Consciousness and Cognition, 48, 198–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.11.011
   Google Scholar
• Lenth, R. V. (2022). emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka Least-squares means. R package version 1.7.2. https://cran.r-project.org/package = emmeans.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R. A., Puhlik-Doris, P., Larsen, G., Gray, J., & Weir, K. (2003). Individual differences in uses of humor and their relation to psychological well-being: Development of the humor styles questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 48–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00534-2
   Google Scholar
• McGhee, P. (1974). Cognitive mastery and children’s humor. Psychological Bulletin, 81(10), 721–730. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037015
   Google Scholar
• Murray, M. A., & Byrne, R. M. J. (2013). Cognitive change in insight problem solving: Initial model errors and counterexamples. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2012.743986
   Google Scholar
• Nakagawa, S., Johnson, P. C. D., & Schielzeth, H. (2017). The coefficient of determination R² and intra-class correlation coefficient from generalized linear mixed-effects models revisited and expanded. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 14(134), 20170213, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2017.0213
   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
   Google Scholar
• Noordewier, M. K., & van Dijk, E. (2017). Curiosity and time: From not knowing to almost knowing. Cognition and Emotion, 31(3), 411–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2015.1122577
   Google Scholar
• Öllinger, M., Jones, G., Faber, A. H., & Knoblich, G. (2013). Cognitivemechanisms of insight: The role of heuristics and representational change in solving the eight-coin problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 931–939. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029194
   Google Scholar
• Öllinger, M., Jones, G., & Knoblich, G. (2006). Heuristics and representational change in two-move matchstick arithmetic tasks. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 2(4), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10053-008-0059-3
   Google Scholar
• Öllinger, M., Jones, G., & Knoblich, G. (2008). Investigating the effect of mental Set On insight problem solving. Experimental Psychology, 55(4), 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.55.4.269
   Google Scholar
• Ormerod, T. C., Macgregor, J. N., & Chronicle, E. P. (2002). Dynamics andconstraints in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 791–799. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.28.4.791
   Google Scholar
• Ozono, H., Komiya, A., Kuratomi, K., Hatano, A., Fastrich, G., Raw, J. A. L., Haffey, A., Meliss, S., Lau, J. K. L., & Murayama, K. (2021). Magic curiosity arousing tricks (MagicCATs): A novel stimulus collection to induce epistemic emotions. Behavior Research Methods, 53(1), 188–215. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01431-2
   Google Scholar
• Perchtold-Stefan, C. M., Papousek, I., Rominger, C., Schertler, M., Weiss, E. M., & Fink, A. (2020). Humor comprehension and creative cognition: Shared and distinct neurocognitive mechanisms as indicated by EEG alpha. NeuroImage, 213, 116695, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116695
   Google Scholar
• Perkins, D. N. (1981). The mind’s best work. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ruch, W. (2008). Psychology of humor. In V. Raskin (Ed.), The primer of humor research (pp. 17–100). Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Ruch, W., & Heintz, S. (2013). Humour styles, personality, and psychological well-being: What’s humour got to do with it? European Journal of Humour Research, 1(4), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-96340
   Google Scholar
• Ruch, W., & Rath, E. (1993). The nature of humor appreciation: Toward an integration of perception of stimulus properties and affective experience. Humor - International Journal of Humor Research, 6(4), 363–384. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.1993.6.4.363
   Google Scholar
• Rummel, J., Iwan, F., Steindorf, L., & Danek, A. H. (2021). The role of attention for insight problem solving: Effects of mindless and mindful incubation periods. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 33(6–7), 757–769. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2020.1841779
   Google Scholar
• Salvi, C., Bricolo, E., Kounios, J., Bowden, E., & Beeman, M. (2016). Insight solutions are correct more often than analytic solutions. Thinking & Reasoning, 22(4), 443–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2016.1141798
   Google Scholar
• Schiller, P. (1938). A configurational theory of puzzles and jokes. Journal of General Psychology, 18(2), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1938.9709976
   Google Scholar
• Schooler, J. W., Ohlsson, S., & Brooks, K. (1993). Thoughts beyond words: When language overshadows insight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 166–183. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.122.2.166
   Google Scholar
• Shade, R. (1991). Verbal humor in gifted students and students in the general population: A comparison of spontaneous mirth and comprehension. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14(2), 134–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235329101400203
   Google Scholar
• Shen, W., Yuan, Y., Liu, C., & Luo, J. (2016). In search of the ‘Aha!’ experience: Elucidating the emotionality of insight problem-solving. British Journal of Psychology, 107(2), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12142
   Google Scholar
• Siew, C. S. Q., Engelthaler, T., & Hills, T. (2021). Nymph piss and gravy orgies: Local and global contrast effects in relational humor. PsyArxiv, https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/3r7fw
   Google Scholar
• Skaar, ØO, & Reber, R. (2020). The phenomenology of Aha-experiences. Motivation Science, 6(1), 49–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000138
   Google Scholar
• Skaar, ØO, & Reber, R. (2021). Motivation through insight: The phenomenological correlates of insight and spatial ability tasks. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 33(6–7), 631–643. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2020.1844721
   Google Scholar
• Spiridonov, V., Loginov, N., & Ardislamov, V. (2021). Dissociation between the subjective experience of insight and performance in the CRA paradigm. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 33(6–7), 685–699. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2021.1900198
   Google Scholar
• Suls, J. M. (1972). A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons. In J. H. Goldstein, & P. E. McGhee (Eds.), The psychology of humor (pp. 81–100). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tian, F., Hou, Y., Zhu, W., Dietrich, A., Zhang, Q., Yang, W., Chen, Q., Sun, J., Jiang, Q., & Cao, G. (2017). Getting the joke: Insight during humor comprehension – Evidence from an fMRI study. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1835. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01835
   Google Scholar
• Topolinski, S., & Reber, R. (2010). Gaining insight into the “aha” experience. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(6), 402–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410388803
   Google Scholar
• Webb, M. E., Little, D. R., & Cropper, S. J. (2016). Insight is not in the problem: Investigating insight in problem solving across task types. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1424. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01424
   Google Scholar
• Webb, M. E., Little, D. R., & Cropper, S. J. (2021). Unusual uses and experiences are good for feeling insightful, but not for problem solving: Contributions of schizotypy, divergent thinking, and fluid reasoning, to insight moments. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 33(6-7), 770–792. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2021.1929254
   Google Scholar
• Webb, M. E., Little, D. R., Cropper, S. J., & Roze, K. (2017). The contributions of convergent thinking, divergent thinking, and schizotypy to solving insight and non-insight problems. Thinking & Reasoning, 23(3), 235–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2017.1295105
   Google Scholar
• World Medical Association. (2013). World Medical Association declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 310(20), 2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053.
   Google Scholar
• Wyer, R. S., & Collins, J. E. (1992). A theory of humor elicitation. Psychological Review, 99(4), 663–688. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.99.4.663
   Google Scholar
• Zhou, Z., Wu, J., Luo, H., Guo, Y., Tu, M., Yu, Q., & Zhang, L. (2021). The effect of humor on insight problem-solving. Personality and Individual Differences, 183, 111105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111105
   Google Scholar