Alignment of Research on
CREATIVE COGNITION
Across Levels of Complexity and Ecological Validity
Steven M. Smith
Texas A&M University
NSF Workshop on the Science of Discovery
and Innovation
Washington, D.C., May 17-18, 2006
Topics of Today’s Presentation
Creativity
Creativity & The Mind
Research in Creative Cognition
Current State of Knowledge
Next Big Questions to Target
Definition: Creativity
Required Characteristics
Novelty
Practicality
Family Resemblance: Shared Characteristics
Ambiguity
Originality
Emergence
Meaningfulness
Insightfulness
Incongruity
Divergence
Flexibility
Levels of Creativity
Can
research
at these
levels be
aligned?
My research in
Creative Cognition
Creative Cognition
1. Cognitive processes and
structures underlie creative
thinking.
2. Cognition is inherently creative.
Creative Cognition
Concepts & Categories
Visualization
Memory
Problem Solving
Language
Cognitive processes &
structures underlie creative
thinking.
Cognition is inherently
creative.
An analogy for research on creativity:
Creativity is like memory.
Creativity, like memory, can be studied scientifically.
The term simple memory includes a variety of cognitive
structures and processes.
Likewise, the simple term creativity encompasses many
different cognitive structures and processes.
There is no unitary "creative process;"
the science of creative cognition deals
with the complex interacting
components of creative thinking, as is
done in other areas of cognitive
experimental science, such as memory,
language, or decision-making.
Personality vs. Process/Mechanism Approach
Our approach to research should lead to a better
understanding of how to improve or optimize creativity.
A personality approach is suited to identifying creative
people, or assessing their creative talents.
A more useful approach focuses on the processes &
mechanisms that lead to creativity.
The better we understand these processes &
mechanisms, the more we will be able to improve them.
Components of Creative Thinking
Combination:
Synthesis, Emergence
Ideation:
Divergent Thinking, Remote Association
Imagination:
Visualization, Restructuring, Insight
Incremental Work:
Learning, Memory, Computation
Ineffable Processes:
Intuition, Incubation
Logic:
Analogy, Inference, Induction
Example: The Hubble Fix
•
•
•
•
James Crocker
NASA Engineer
Fixation
Incubation
Insight
Conceptual
Combination
• Analogy
• Visualization
Example: The Hubble Fix
Fixation
Incubation
Insight
Visualization
Analogy
+
Conceptual Combination
Auguste Kekule
James Crocker
Benzene
Hubble Repair
Kary Mullis
PCR
Experimental Studies of
Fixation, Incubation & Insight
Henri Pioncare
Fuschian Functions
Beethoven
Canon for piano
Archimedes
Displacement Principle
Smith’s Research in Creative Cognition
Can
these
levels
be
aligned?
Blocked Memories
Fixation in Problem Solving
Conformity in Idea Generation
Design Fixation
Recovered Memories
Incubation in Problem Solving
Incubation in Design/Invention
Cognitive Blocks
R-1 Dominant Response
(Blocker)
Stimulus
R-2 Non-dominant Response
(Target)
Implicit Memory Blocks
ANALOGY
R-1 Dominant Response
(Blocker: ANALOGY)
A_L__GY
R-2 Non-dominant Response
(Target: ???????)
Implicit Memory Blocking
Blocker
ANALOGY
BRIGADE
Fragment
A_L__GY
B_G_A_E
Target
ALLERGY
BAGGAGE
Implicit Memory Blocking
Blocker
ANALOGY
BRIGADE
COTTAGE
CHARTER
CLUSTER
CRUMPET
DENSITY
FIXTURE
HOLSTER
TONIGHT
TRILOGY
VOYAGER
Fragment
A_L__GY
B_G_A_E
C _ TA_ _ G
CHAR_T_
C_U_TR_
CU_P__T
D__NITY
F_I_URE
H_ST_R_
T_NG__T
TR_G__Y
VO__AGE
Target
ALLERGY
BAGGAGE
CATALOG
CHARITY
COUNTRY
CULPRIT
DIGNITY
FAILURE
HISTORY
TANGENT
TRAGEDY
VOLTAGE
From Smith & Tindell (1997)
Conclusions
Blocks can be caused by implicit memory of
inappropriate responses.
These implicit memory blocks are
involuntary, and cannot be avoided.
Smith & Tindell (1997)
Fixation in Problem Solving
R-1 Dominant Response
(Blocker: Fixated Response)
Problem
R-2 Non-dominant Response
(Target: Correct Solution)
Stimuli from Smith & Blankenship (1991)
Remote Associates Test Problems
Blockers
Solutions
SALAD
lettuce
egg
HEAD
GOOSE
Stimuli from Smith & Blankenship (1991)
Remote Associates Test Problems
Blockers
Solutions
SALAD
HEAD
GOOSE
lettuce
egg
BED
DUSTER
WEIGHT
room
feather
APPLE
HOUSE
FAMILY
green
tree
CAT
SLEEP
BOARD
black
walk
WATER
SKATE
CUBE
sugar
ice
ARM
COAL
STOP
rest
pit
Findings of Smith & Blankenship
Seeing misleading hints and inappropriate
answers impeded problem solving.
Conclusion
Alignment of Memory & Problem Solving:
Fixation in creative problem solving, like blocking
or interference in memory, can be experimentally
induced by the introduction of misleading hints
and inappropriate answers.
From Smith & Blankenship (1989, 1991)
Idea Generation: Conceptual Extension
Imagine another planet similar to Earth…
…What sort of life forms evolve there?
Conformity Effects in Creative Idea
Generation
Smith, Ward & Schumacher (1993)
________________________________________________________________
R1 - Dominant Response
(Blocker, Examples)
Task
R2 - Non-Dominant Responses
(Creative Ideas)
Conformity Effects in Creative Idea Generation
Creative Idea Generation Tasks
1. Create, sketch, and label the parts of
new toys that you have never encountered
before.
2. Create, sketch, and label the parts of
new life forms that might evolve on a
planet similar to Earth.
Sample Creatures from Smith et al. (1993)
Creature Ideas: From Smith et al. (1993)
Sample Toys from Smith et al. (1993)
Toy Idea: Fixated Group from Smith et al. (1993)
Toy Idea: Non-Fixated Group from Smith et al. (1993)
Findings
Conformity (fixation) effects were experimentally
induced by the introduction of examples.
Like implicit memory blocking, conformity
(fixation) effects increased when blockers
(examples) were deliberately remembered, but
were not decreased by efforts to avoid examples.
Alignment Across Levels:
Conformity in creative ideation is similar to
blocking in memory & problem solving.
Fixation Effects in Creative
Engineering Design
Creative Design Tasks
1. Create, sketch, and label the parts of a
new measuring cup for blind people.
2. Create, sketch, and label the parts of a
new inexpensive spill-proof coffee cup. Do
not use drinking straws or mouthpieces.
Measuring Cup for Blind from Jansson & Smith (1991)
Results
Seeing the example design greatly
increased the number of designs that were:
Non-infinitely variable.
Lacking an overflow mechanism.
Spill-Proof Cup from Jansson & Smith (1991)
Create, sketch, and
label the parts of a new
inexpensive spill-proof
coffee cup. Do not use
drinking straws or
mouthpieces.
Results
Seeing the example design greatly
increased the number of designs that:
Have a straw or mouthpiece.
Leak.
Conclusions
Fixation/blocking affects the creative
conceptual design process.
Even explicitly identified negative features
of examples could not be avoided.
Evidence of Alignment: Both college
students and professional engineers
experienced design fixation.
Part 1: Blocking in Memory, Problem
Solving & Creative Ideation
Part 2: Recovery (Incubation) in
Memory, Problem Solving &
Creative Ideation.
Resolving Cognitive Blocks
-Incubated Reminiscence Effects
-Incubation in Resolving TOT states
-Incubation in Creative Problem Solving
-Incubation in Conceptual Design
Incubation & the Resolution of Tip-Of-the-Tongue (TOT) States
Choi & Smith (2005)
Incubation Effect
Incubation & Fixation in RAT Problem Solving
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
Incubation Effect
.5
.4
Fixated
.3
.2
Not Fixated
.1
.0
Immediate Retest
From Smith & Blankenship (1991)
Delayed Retest
Smith & Blankenship (1989)
Incubation Effect
Conclusions of Incubation Studies
Incubation effects are observed if a break or
delay occurs after initial fixation.
Forgetting blockers (misleading clues)
corresponds with bigger incubation effects.
Conclusions from Creative Cognition Studies
Creativity can be studied if it is broken
down into components:
Processes (e.g., implicit retrieval)
Structures (e.g., conceptual combination)
Phenomena (e.g., fixation, incubation)
Alignment can, and must be examined
across levels of complexity and levels of
ecological validity.
Research on Discovery & Innovation
The current state of knowledge.
1. Personality characteristics of creative people. (a lot!)
2. How individuals (case studies, anecdotes) innovate. (a lot!)
3. Cognitive components of creative thinking. (some)
4. Group dynamics and creative thinking. (some)
Research on Discovery & Innovation
The next big questions funding should target.
1. Principles of Creative Discovery & Innovation.
Across domains & levels of complexity
2. Mechanisms of Creative Discovery & Innovation.
Within domains & levels of complexity
3. Methods of Creative Discovery & Innovation.
Within domains
Individuals and groups
4. Tools to Augment & Support Creative Discovery & Innovation.
Information Technologies
Research on Discovery & Innovation
The next big questions funding should target.
1. Principles of Creative Discovery & Innovation.
Across domains & levels of complexity
Examples
Quantity begets quality (Darwinian Approach).
Combinations & remote associations yield emergence.
Avoid premature conceptualization.
Stand on the shoulders of giants.
Don’t get stuck in a rut.
Research on Discovery & Innovation
The next big questions funding should target.
2. Mechanisms of Creative Discovery & Innovation.
Within domains & levels of complexity
Examples
Diversity of team members (group)
Defocused attention (cognitive)
Cross activation among brain regions (biological)
Research on Discovery & Innovation
The next big questions funding should target.
3. Methods of Creative Discovery & Innovation.
Within domains
Individuals and groups
Examples
Brainstorming
Morphological synthesis
C-Sketch
Research on Discovery & Innovation
The next big questions funding should target.
4. Tools to Augment & Support Creative Discovery & Innovation.
Information Technologies
Examples
Electronic brainstorming
combinFormation
IdeaGen
Thank you for coming to my talk!
Our approach to research should lead to a
better understanding of how to improve or
optimize creativity.
Questions and Paradoxes of Creativity
Is creativity special or normal?
Use vs. Reject Prior Knowledge?
Imagination vs. Practicality?
Why can you do something creative only when
you stop trying?
Domain Specific vs. General Principles?