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