Whose insight is it anyway

Creativity and the brain: An editorial introduction to the special issue on the neuroscience of creativity.

A within-subjects experimental design examined differences in functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) assessment of prefrontal cortex (PFC) activation with two virtual reality (VR) drawing co...

Exploratory fNIRS Assessment of Differences in Activation in Virtual Reality Visual Self-Expression Including With a Fragrance Stimulus

To maximize marketing effectiveness, many conscious and unconscious elements are simultaneously employed within campaign advertising. However, little is known about the individual contributions that conscious and unconscious processes make to the cognitive effectiveness of creative advertisements, some of which may also induce insight experiences. To quantify the roles of conscious and unconscious processes in memory effectiveness within commercial advertising, a dual-process, signal-detection technique was adopted to separate the contributions of conscious recollection and unconscious discrimination induced by 80 printed advertisements, among which half were considered standard and the other half creative. A total of 51 participants completed immediate (5 min later) and delayed (3 days later) memory recognition tests. In contrast to standard advertising, creative advertising was found to enhance recognition and to demonstrate advantages in both conscious and unconscious memory, which decreased across the test-time intervals. Further analyses showed that a moment of insight induced by an advertisement, regardless of whether it is standard or creative, can consolidate unconscious memory, whereas advertisements that do not induce insight improve conscious memory. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Quantifying the roles of conscious and unconscious processing in insight-related memory effectiveness within standard and creative advertising

There are diverging operationalizations of insight in experimental research, especially when comparing behavioral and neuroimaging research. The question arises how comparable these types of insigh...

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/20445911.2021.1912049

Insight is not always the same: differences between true, false, and induced insights in the matchstick arithmetic task

An insight-related neural reward signal

Pre-stimulus brain oscillations predict insight versus analytic problem-solving in an anagram task.

Reasoning about verbal analogies requires selective retrieval of relevant relational information. A consequence of this may be that inhibitory processes in memory cause reduced recall of information associated with analogy-irrelevant relations. The current experiments apply the retrieval-induced forgetting framework to investigate the potential role of such inhibitory processes in analogical reasoning. Participants studied verbal analogies in A-B :: C-D form. Then, half of the A-B pairs from the study phase appeared in verbal analogy problems but with a new C term (A-B :: C-?), and half the items did not appear in verbal analogy problems. A final recall test was then administered for all the original analogies. When the new C term in the analogical reasoning phase conveyed a new relation that was inconsistent with the original relation, reduced recall for items appearing in analogies was observed (Experiment 1). However, when the new C term conveyed a relation that was consistent with the original relation, no forgetting effect was observed (Experiment 1). This forgetting effect occurred even when a hint of the original relation was provided at final recall (Experiment 2). These results indicate that reasoning about analogies may involve inhibitory processes that help reduce competition among competing relations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Christine Chesebrough

Papers

An insight-related neural reward signal

Pre-stimulus brain oscillations predict insight versus analytic problem-solving in an anagram task.

Retrieval dynamics in resolving relational inconsistency during verbal analogical reasoning.

Conceptual Change Induced by Analogical Reasoning sparks “Aha!” Moments