alignment of research on creative cognition across levels of complexity and ecological validity...
TRANSCRIPT
Alignment of Research on
CREATIVE COGNITIONAcross 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
Creativity
Creativity & The Mind
Research in Creative Cognition
Current State of Knowledge
Next Big Questions to Target
Topics of Today’s Presentation
Required Characteristics
Novelty
Practicality
Family Resemblance: Shared Characteristics
Definition: Creativity
Ambiguity
Meaningfulness
Emergence
IncongruityDivergence
Originality
Flexibility
Insightfulness
Levels of Creativity
My research in Creative Cognition
Can research at these levels be aligned?
Creative Cognition
1. Cognitive processes and structures underlie creative thinking.
2. Cognition is inherently creative.
Concepts & Categories
Visualization
Memory
Problem Solving
Language
Creative Cognition
Cognitive processes & structures underlie creative
thinking.
Cognition is inherently
creative.
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.
An analogy for research on creativity:
Creativity is like memory.
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.
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.
Personality vs. Process/Mechanism Approach
The better we understand these processes & mechanisms, the more we will be able to improve them.
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
Components of Creative Thinking
Example: The Hubble Fix
• Fixation
• Incubation
• Insight
• Conceptual Combination
• Analogy
• VisualizationJames Crocker
NASA Engineer
Example: The Hubble Fix
+
Fixation
Incubation
Insight
Conceptual Combination
Analogy
Visualization
James Crocker
Hubble Repair
Auguste Kekule
BenzeneKary Mullis
PCR
Archimedes
Displacement PrincipleBeethoven
Canon for piano
Henri Pioncare
Fuschian Functions
Experimental Studies of Fixation, Incubation & Insight
Blocked Memories
Fixation in Problem Solving
Conformity in Idea Generation
Design Fixation
Smith’s Research in Creative Cognition
Recovered Memories
Incubation in Problem Solving
Incubation in Design/Invention
Can these levels be aligned?
Cognitive Blocks
R-1 Dominant Response
(Blocker)
Stimulus
R-2 Non-dominant Response
(Target)
Implicit Memory BlocksANALOGY
R-1 Dominant Response
(Blocker: ANALOGY)
A _ L _ _ G Y
R-2 Non-dominant Response
(Target: ???????)
Implicit Memory BlockingBlocker Fragment ANALOGY A _ L _ _ G YBRIGADE B _ G _ A _ E
Target ALLERGY
BAGGAGE
Implicit Memory BlockingBlocker Fragment ANALOGY A _ L _ _ G YBRIGADE B _ G _ A _ ECOTTAGE C _ T A _ _ GCHARTER C H A R _ T _CLUSTER C _ U _ T R _CRUMPET C U _ P _ _ TDENSITY D _ _ N I T YFIXTURE F _ I _ U R EHOLSTER H _ S T _ R _TONIGHT T _ N G _ _ TTRILOGY T R _ G _ _ YVOYAGER V O _ _ A G E
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 HEAD GOOSE lettuce egg
Stimuli from Smith & Blankenship (1991)
Remote Associates Test Problems Blockers Solutions
SALAD HEAD GOOSE lettuce
BED DUSTER WEIGHT room
APPLE HOUSE FAMILY green
CAT SLEEP BOARD black
WATER SKATE CUBE sugar
ARM COAL STOP rest
egg
feather
tree
walk
ice
pit
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.
Findings of Smith & BlankenshipSeeing misleading hints and inappropriate answers impeded problem solving.
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.
-Incubated Reminiscence Effects
-Incubation in Resolving TOT states
-Incubation in Creative Problem Solving
-Incubation in Conceptual Design
Resolving Cognitive Blocks
Incubation & the Resolution of Tip-Of-the-Tongue (TOT) States
Choi & Smith (2005)
Incubation Effect
Incubation & Fixation in RAT Problem Solving
Immediate Retest Delayed Retest
R e .5 s o .4 l u .3 t i .2 o n .1 .0
Fixated
Not Fixated
From Smith & Blankenship (1991)
Incubation Effect
Incubation Effect
Smith & Blankenship (1989)
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.
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
Research on Discovery & Innovation
Thank you for coming to my talk!
Is creativity special or normal?
Use vs. Reject Prior Knowledge?
Why can you do something creative only when you stop trying?
Imagination vs. Practicality?
Domain Specific vs. General Principles?
Our approach to research should lead to a better understanding of how to improve or
optimize creativity.
Questions and Paradoxes of Creativity