skip to main content
10.1145/3450741.3467467acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesc-n-cConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Hacking the Creative Mind: An Insight Priming Tool to Facilitate Creative Problem-Solving

Published: 22 June 2021 Publication History

Abstract

People deal with problems every day, ranging from the banal to the piquant. On many occasions solutions to such problems occur in a moment of sudden comprehension called insight. Insight is a phenomenon that is often associated with high levels of intelligence and creativity and plays an important role in successful problem-solving. Due to its unpredictable occurrence, it has proven challenging to investigate insight systematically. This research explores a novel way to facilitate insight in creative problem-solving by activating processes that have been shown to be related to insight. Building on current research in Cognitive Neuroscience, the goal is to develop a creativity priming tool that would enable routine episodic boosts in creativity. For the on-going study, a computer interface is used to present a series of bespoke tasks created to modulate insight. The study is designed to help us understand better the dynamics of insight-based creative problem solving.

References

[1]
Nancy C Andreasen. 2005. The creating brain: The neuroscience of genius.Dana Press.
[2]
Pamela I Ansburg and Katherine Hill. 2003. Creative and analytic thinkers differ in their use of attentional resources. Personality and Individual Differences 34, 7 (2003), 1141–1152.
[3]
Zsolt Beda, Steven M Smith, and Joseph Orr. 2020. Creativity on demand–Hacking into creative problem solving. NeuroImage (2020), 116867.
[4]
Edward M Bowden, Mark Jung-Beeman, Jessica Fleck, and John Kounios. 2005. New approaches to demystifying insight. Trends in cognitive sciences 9, 7 (2005), 322–328.
[5]
Richard P Chi and Allan W Snyder. 2011. Facilitate insight by non-invasive brain stimulation. PloS one 6, 2 (2011), e16655.
[6]
Richard P Chi and Allan W Snyder. 2012. Brain stimulation enables the solution of an inherently difficult problem. Neuroscience Letters 515, 2 (2012), 121–124.
[7]
Nancy D Chiaravalloti and Guila Glosser. 2004. Memory for faces dissociates from memory for location following anterior temporal lobectomy. Brain and Cognition 54, 1 (2004), 35–42.
[8]
May I Conley, Danielle V Dellarco, Estee Rubien-Thomas, Alexandra O Cohen, Alessandra Cervera, Nim Tottenham, and BJ Casey. 2018. The racially diverse affective expression (RADIATE) face stimulus set. Psychiatry research 270(2018), 1059–1067.
[9]
Paul Egan and Jonathan Cagan. 2016. Human and computational approaches for design problem-solving. In Experimental Design Research. Springer, 187–205.
[10]
Jonas Frich, Lindsay MacDonald Vermeulen, Christian Remy, Michael Mose Biskjaer, and Peter Dalsgaard. 2019. Mapping the landscape of creativity support tools in HCI. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–18.
[11]
Ronald S Friedman and Jens Förster. 2005. Effects of motivational cues on perceptual asymmetry: Implications for creativity and analytical problem solving.Journal of personality and social psychology 88, 2(2005), 263.
[12]
Mark Jung-Beeman, Edward M Bowden, Jason Haberman, Jennifer L Frymiare, Stella Arambel-Liu, Richard Greenblatt, Paul J Reber, and John Kounios. 2004. Neural activity when people solve verbal problems with insight. PLoS Biol 2, 4 (2004), e97.
[13]
Geir Kaufmann. 2003. The effect of mood on creativity in the innovative process. International handbook on innovation 1 (2003), 191–203.
[14]
John Kounios and Mark Beeman. 2009. The Aha! moment: The cognitive neuroscience of insight. Current directions in psychological science 18, 4 (2009), 210–216.
[15]
John Kounios and Mark Beeman. 2014. The cognitive neuroscience of insight. Annual review of psychology 65 (2014).
[16]
John Kounios, Jennifer L Frymiare, Edward M Bowden, Jessica I Fleck, Karuna Subramaniam, Todd B Parrish, and Mark Jung-Beeman. 2006. The prepared mind: Neural activity prior to problem presentation predicts subsequent solution by sudden insight. Psychological science 17, 10 (2006), 882–890.
[17]
Scott E Lipson, Oliver Sacks, and Orrin Devinsky. 2003. Selective emotional detachment from family after right temporal lobectomy. Epilepsy & Behavior 4, 3 (2003), 340–342.
[18]
Ksenija Marinkovic, Sharelle Baldwin, Maureen G Courtney, Thomas Witzel, Anders M Dale, and Eric Halgren. 2011. Right hemisphere has the last laugh: neural dynamics of joke appreciation. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience 11, 1(2011), 113–130.
[19]
Ingrid R Olson, Alan Plotzker, and Youssef Ezzyat. 2007. The enigmatic temporal pole: a review of findings on social and emotional processing. Brain 130, 7 (2007), 1718–1731.
[20]
Antti Oulasvirta and Kasper Hornbæk. 2016. Hci research as problem-solving. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 4956–4967.
[21]
Gorana Pobric, Nira Mashal, Miriam Faust, and Michal Lavidor. 2008. The role of the right cerebral hemisphere in processing novel metaphoric expressions: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Journal of cognitive neuroscience 20, 1 (2008), 170–181.
[22]
Jiang Qiu, Hong Li, Jerwen Jou, Zhenzhen Wu, and Qinglin Zhang. 2008. Spatiotemporal cortical activation underlies mental preparation for successful riddle solving: an event-related potential study. Experimental brain research 186, 4 (2008), 629–634.
[23]
S Ian Robertson. 2016. Problem solving: Perspectives from cognition and neuroscience. Psychology Press.
[24]
Carola Salvi, Mark Beeman, Marom Bikson, Richard McKinley, and Jordan Grafman. 2020. TDCS to the right anterior temporal lobe facilitates insight problem-solving. Scientific reports 10, 1 (2020), 1–10.
[25]
Carola Salvi, Emanuela Bricolo, Steven L Franconeri, John Kounios, and Mark Beeman. 2015. Sudden insight is associated with shutting out visual inputs. Psychonomic bulletin & review 22, 6 (2015), 1814–1819.
[26]
Jonathan W Schooler and Joseph Melcher. 1995. The ineffability of insight.(1995).
[27]
Robert J Sternberg and Janet E Davidson. 1995. The nature of insight.The MIT Press.
[28]
Fang Tian, Yuling Hou, Wenfeng Zhu, Arne Dietrich, Qinglin Zhang, Wenjing Yang, Qunlin Chen, Jiangzhou Sun, Qiu Jiang, and Guikang Cao. 2017. Getting the joke: Insight during humor comprehension–Evidence from an fMRI study. Frontiers in psychology 8 (2017), 1835.
[29]
F Tian, S Tu, J Qiu, JY Lv, DT Wei, YH Su, and QL Zhang. 2011. Neural correlates of mental preparation for successful insight problem solving. Behavioural brain research 216, 2 (2011), 626–630.
[30]
Suzanne K Vosburg. 1998. The effects of positive and negative mood on divergent-thinking performance. Creativity research journal 11, 2 (1998), 165–172.
[31]
Jennifer Walinga, J Barton Cunningham, and James N MacGregor. 2011. Training insight problem solving through focus on barriers and assumptions. The Journal of Creative Behavior 45, 1 (2011), 47–58.
[32]
Robert W Weisberg. 2015. Toward an integrated theory of insight in problem solving. Thinking & Reasoning 21, 1 (2015), 5–39.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
C&C '21: Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Creativity and Cognition
June 2021
581 pages
ISBN:9781450383769
DOI:10.1145/3450741
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 22 June 2021

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. creative problem-solving
  2. insight
  3. insight facilitation

Qualifiers

  • Extended-abstract
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

C&C '21
Sponsor:
C&C '21: Creativity and Cognition
June 22 - 23, 2021
Virtual Event, Italy

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 108 of 371 submissions, 29%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 182
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)18
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 13 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media