Are Speedy Brains Needed when Divergent Thinking is Speeded—or Unspeeded?

The Manic Idea Creator? A Review and Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Bipolar Disorder and Creative Cognitive Potential

Even though a relationship between psychopathology and creativity has been postulated since the time of ancient Greece, systematic meta-analyses on this topic are still scarce. Thus, the meta-analysis described here can be considered the first to date that specifically focuses on the relationship between creative potential, as measured by divergent thinking, and bipolar disorder, as opposed to psychopathology in general. An extensive literature search of 4670 screened hits identified 13 suitable studies, including a total of 42 effect sizes and 1857 participants. The random-effects model showed an overall significant, positive, yet diminutively small effect (d = 0.11, 95% CI: [0.002, 0.209], p = 0.045) between divergent thinking and bipolar disorder. A handful of moderators were examined, which revealed a significant moderating effect for bipolar status, as either euthymic (d = 0.14, p = 0.043), subclinical (d = 0.17, p = 0.001), manic (d = 0.25, p = 0.097), or depressed (d = -0.51, p < 0.001). However, moderator analyses should be treated with caution because of the observed confounding of moderators. Finally, none of the employed methods for publication-bias detection revealed any evidence for publication bias. We discuss further results, especially regarding the differences between subclinical and clinical samples.

Is Flexibility More than Fluency and Originality?

Flexibility (i.e., the number of categorically different ideas), fluency (i.e., the answer quantity), and originality (i.e., the quality of ideas) are essential aspects of the ability to think divergently. Theoretically, fluency and ideational flexibility tasks are akin to one another. However, flexibility was also considered to be uniquely related to working memory capacity due to the task requirements involved in generating diverse answers (e.g., self-monitoring, suppression, and category generation). Given that the role of working memory is strengthened in flexibility tasks relative to fluency and originality tasks, flexibility should be more strongly related with working memory. Additionally, mental speed should show a similar pattern of results because mental speed has been previously related to task complexity. Based on a sample of N = 409 adults (M_age = 24.01 years), we found in latent variable models that fluency/originality strongly predicts flexibility and accounts for 61% of its variance. Creative flexibility was unrelated to working memory and mental speed after controlling for fluency/originality. Additionally, the residual of a latent flexibility factor was unrelated to self-reported creative activities. We concluded that flexibility, as measured here, can be deemed primarily a method factor that did not show value over and above fluency/originality as assessed in traditional fluency and originality tasks. We discussed perspectives for disentangling trait and method variance in flexibility tasks.

The Relationship between Intelligence and Divergent Thinking-A Meta-Analytic Update

This paper provides a meta-analytic update on the relationship between intelligence and divergent thinking (DT), as research on this topic has increased, and methods have diversified since Kim’s meta-analysis in 2005. A three-level meta-analysis was used to analyze 849 correlation coefficients from 112 studies with an overall N = 34,610. The overall effect showed a significant positive correlation of r = .25. This increase of the correlation as compared to Kim’s prior meta-analytic findings could be attributed to the correction of attenuation because a difference between effect sizes prior-Kim vs. post-Kim was non-significant. Different moderators such as scoring methods, instructional settings, intelligence facets, and task modality were tested together with theoretically relevant interactions between some of these factors. These moderation analyses showed that the intelligence–DT relationship can be higher (up to r = .31–.37) when employing test-like assessments coupled with be-creative instructions, and considering DT originality scores. The facet of intelligence (g vs. g_f vs. g_c) did not affect the correlation between intelligence and DT. Furthermore, we found two significant sample characteristics: (a) average sample age was positively associated with the intelligence–DT correlation, and (b) the intelligence–DT correlation decreased for samples with increasing percentages of females in the samples. Finally, inter-moderator correlations were checked to take potential confounding into account, and also publication bias was assessed. This meta-analysis provides a comprehensive picture of current research and possible research gaps. Theoretical implications, as well as recommendations for future research, are discussed.

Need something different? Here's what's been done: Effects of examples and task instructions on creative idea generation

Creative idea generation involves search and retrieval of memory. There is a default tendency to rely too heavily on familiar or easily accessible information during idea generation, especially in tasks such as the alternate uses task (AUT) that involve generating novel uses for common objects. Knowing which obvious ideas to avoid may be important in creating more original ideas. The present experiments tested whether instructions encouraging participants to avoid a set of common example ideas would enhance originality or cause fixation on the AUT. The results of Experiment 1 demonstrated that presenting a verbal list of common example uses along with a warning to avoid those uses enhanced originality. In contrast, when the example ideas were presented in the absence of any "avoid" instructions, there was no benefit on originality, indicating that mere example exposure did not stimulate more creative idea generation. The design of Experiment 2 was parallel to that of Experiment 1, but the verbal examples were replaced with visually depicted examples. Exposure to the visual examples led to reduced originality, suggesting fixation. Although the "avoid" instruction helped to mitigate this fixation, it did not enhance originality beyond the no-example condition. The results suggest that under some conditions presenting unoriginal examples along with an "avoid" warning can allow people to shift their focus away from easily retrieved ideas and toward more novel approaches. The results are also consistent with prior work showing a negative impact of visual presentation of examples on creativity.

The Dynamics of Creative Ideation: Introducing a New Assessment Paradigm

Despite six decades of creative cognition research, measures of creative ideation have heavily relied on divergent thinking tasks, which still suffer from conceptual, design, and psychometric shortcomings. These shortcomings have greatly impeded the accurate study of creative ideation, its dynamics, development, and integration as part of a comprehensive psychological assessment. After a brief overview of the historical and current anchoring of creative ideation measurement, overlooked challenges in its most common operationalization (i.e., divergent thinking tasks framework) are discussed. They include (1) the reliance on a single stimulus as a starting point of the creative ideation process (stimulus-dependency), (2) the analysis of response quality based on a varying number of observations across test-takers (fluency-dependency), and (3) the production of "static" cumulative performance indicators. Inspired from an emerging line of work from the field of cognitive neuroscience of creativity, this paper introduces a new assessment framework referred to as "Multi-Trial Creative Ideation" (MTCI). This framework shifts the current measurement paradigm by (1) offering a variety of stimuli presented in a well-defined set of ideation "trials," (2) reinterprets the concept of ideational fluency using a time-analysis of idea generation, and (3) captures individual dynamics in the ideation process (e.g., modeling the effort-time required to reach a response of maximal uncommonness) while controlling for stimulus-specific sources of variation. Advantages of the MTCI framework over the classic divergent thinking paradigm are discussed in light of current directions in the field of creativity research.

Use or Consequences: Probing the Cognitive Difference Between Two Measures of Divergent Thinking

Recent studies have highlighted both similarities and differences between the cognitive processing that underpins memory retrieval and that which underpins creative thinking. To date, studies have focused more heavily on the Alternative Uses task, but fewer studies have investigated the processing underpinning other idea generation tasks. This study examines both Alternative Uses and Consequences idea generation with a methods pulled from cognitive psychology, and a novel method for evaluating the creativity of such responses. Participants were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk using a custom interface allowing for requisite experimental control. Results showed that both Alternative Uses and Consequences generation are well approximated by an exponential cumulative response time model, consistent with studies of memory retrieval. Participants were also slower to generate their first consequence compared with first responses to Alternative Uses, but inter-response time was negatively related to pairwise similarity on both tasks. Finally, the serial order effect is exhibited for both tasks, with Consequences earning more creative evaluations than Uses. The results have implications for burgeoning neuroscience research on creative thinking, and suggestions are made for future areas of inquiry. In addition, the experimental apparatus described provides an equitable way for researchers to obtain good quality cognitive data for divergent thinking tasks.