The Role of Intuition in the Generation and Evaluation Stages of Creativity

Creativity Is Optimal Novelty and Maximal Positive Affect: A New Definition Based on the Spreading Activation Model

Creativity is commonly defined as a process that leads to a novel and useful outcome (an idea, product, or expression). However, two dilemmas about this definition remain unresolved: (1) A strict application of usefulness is difficult to apply to artistic works: who decides what artwork is useful, and how it is useful? (2) The implied boundary conditions of novelty are problematic: The default perspective is that novelty has a monotonic increasing relationship with creativity, or it is categorical-i.e., novel or not. To address these dilemmas, this paper proposes a spreading activation model of creativity (SAMOC), a model built on a brain-architecture-inspired vast interconnected network of nodes, each node representing information, and assigned meanings through interaction with the environment. Nodes are linked to each other according to principles of temporal contiguity (linking objects/events in time) and similarity (linking objects/events by shared features). A node activated by attention spreads through the network through previously linked nodes. Nodes that are well connected activate each other easily, while those that are weakly connected do not. Net total activation corresponds to positive affect (e.g., pleasure), and this is proposed as an essential criteria for a creative work of art, instead of usefulness. SAMOC also predicts that creativity will be optimized at an intermediate, not extreme, level of novelty. Too much activation will occur with the activation of preexisting ideas (hence reproduction rather than creativity), and too much novelty will not produce spread of activation. The two functions (spreading activation and the novelty curve) are superposed to demonstrate this optimal novelty hypothesis. Early evidence of the hypothesis comes from the data that some great works of art were critically rejected at premiers (suggesting excessive novelty), but after sufficient repetition (and therefore linking) became suitably associated and commenced generating activation. The hypothesis has important implications for future empirical research programs on creativity, and for the definition of creativity itself.

Are You Thinking What I’m Thinking?: The Influence of Leader Style, Distance, and Leader–Follower Mental Model Congruence on Creative Performance

Leaders have been classified as having charismatic, ideological, or pragmatic (CIP) leadership styles, each characterized by distinct patterns in cognition and interaction. Although each CIP style has been shown to facilitate certain aspects of the creative process for followers, questions remain regarding the impact of leadership style on overall follower creative performance. One factor likely to influence this relationship is leader distance, composed of the physical distance, perceived social distance, and perceived task interaction among leaders and followers. Past research has also emphasized the role of leaders’ mental models as they relate to follower performance. Less understood, however, is how the mental models of followers may affect this process. Using the CIP model of leadership, this study explores leader distance and leader–follower mental model congruence on follower creative performance. Results indicated that while leadership style does not directly influence follower creativity, it interacts with leader distance to shape creative outcomes. Results further indicated that while general mental model congruence is not predictive, alignment on specific mental model dimensions contributes to enhanced creative performance among followers. Implications and future research directions are discussed.

On the Science of Consciousness: Epistemological Reflections and Clinical Implications

Consciousness has been one of the most important and tantalizing issues ever since the origin of philosophy and medicine. The concept of consciousness and the so-called "hard problem" (i.e., the mind-brain relationship) are highly complex topics that have yet to be elucidated, involving the realms of both science and philosophy with profound epistemological implications. In the lively debate on the foundations of the science of consciousness there are several potential biases of an essentially philosophical nature, such as those related to the paradigm and axioms adopted, and the ostensible logical contradiction between monism and dualism. Their origin dates back largely to Descartes' thinking and the birth of the new sciences as a compromise with the Inquisition, but they have been handed down through the Enlightenment and Positivism. A proper investigation of consciousness and the world of subjectivity demands a careful reflection on the paradigm of scientific medicine to identify possible flaws and overcome the limits of the mechanistic-reductionist approach.