intellectual vanities… about close to everything

Different Patterns Of Brain Activity In Creative And Noncreative Problem Solvers

with 3 comments

Why do some people solve problems more creatively than others? Are people who think creatively somehow different from those who tend to think in a more methodical fashion?

These questions are part of a long-standing debate, with some researchers arguing that what we call “creative thought” and “noncreative thought” are not basically different. If this is the case, then people who are thought of as creative do not really think in a fundamentally different way from those who are thought of as noncreative. On the other side of this debate, some researchers have argued that creative thought is fundamentally different from other forms of thought. If this is true, then those who tend to think creatively really are somehow different.

A new study led by John Kounios, professor of psychology at Drexel University and Mark Jung-Beeman of Northwestern University addresses these questions by comparing the brain activity of creative and noncreative problem solvers. The study published in the journal Neuropsychologia, reveals a distinct pattern of brain activity, even at rest, in people who tend to solve problems with a sudden creative insight — an “Aha! Moment” — compared to people who tend to solve problems more methodically.

At the beginning of the study, participants relaxed quietly for seven minutes while their electroencephalograms (EEGs) were recorded to show their brain activity. The participants were not given any task to perform and told they could think about whatever they wanted. Later, they were asked to solve a series of anagrams — scrambled letters that can be rearranged to form words [MPXAELE = EXAMPLE]. These can be solved by deliberately and methodically trying out different letter combinations, or they can be solved with a sudden insight or “Aha!” in which the solution pops into awareness. After each successful solution, participants indicated in which way the solution had come to them.

The participants were then divided into two groups — those who reported solving the problems mostly by sudden insight, and those who reported solving the problems more methodically — and resting-state brain activity for these groups was compared. As predicted, the two groups displayed strikingly different patterns of brain activity during the resting period at the beginning of the experiment — before they knew they would have to solve problems or even knew what the study was about.

One difference was that the creative solvers exhibited greater activity in several regions of the right hemisphere. Previous research has suggested that the right hemisphere of the brain plays a special role in solving problems with creative insight, likely due to right-hemisphere involvement in the processing of loose or “remote” associations between the elements of a problem, which is understood to be an important component of creative thought. The current study shows that greater right-hemisphere activity occurs even during a “resting” state in those with a tendency to solve problems by creative insight. This finding suggests that even the spontaneous thought of creative individuals, such as in their daydreams, contains more remote associations.

Second, creative and methodical solvers exhibited different activity in areas of the brain that process visual information. The pattern of “alpha” and “beta” brainwaves in creative solvers was consistent with diffuse rather than focused visual attention. This may allow creative individuals to broadly sample the environment for experiences that can trigger remote associations to produce an Aha! Moment. For example, a glimpse of an advertisement on a billboard or a word spoken in an overheard conversation could spark an association that leads to a solution. In contrast, the more focused attention of methodical solvers reduces their distractibility, allowing them to effectively solve problems for which the solution strategy is already known, as would be the case for balancing a checkbook or baking a cake using a known recipe.

Thus, the new study shows that basic differences in brain activity between creative and methodical problem solvers exist and are evident even when these individuals are not working on a problem. According to Kounios, “Problem solving, whether creative or methodical, doesn’t begin from scratch when a person starts to work on a problem. His or her pre-existing brain-state biases a person to use a creative or a methodical strategy.”

In addition to contributing to current knowledge about the neural basis of creativity, this study suggests the possible development of new brain imaging techniques for assessing potential for creative thought, and for assessing the effectiveness of methods for training individuals to think creatively.

Neuropsychologia. 2008;46(1):281-91. Epub 2007 Jul 27.
The origins of insight in resting-state brain activity.
Department of Psychology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
People can solve problems in more than one way. Two general strategies involve (A) methodical, conscious, search of problem-state transformations, and (B) sudden insight, with abrupt emergence of the solution into consciousness. This study elucidated the influence of initial resting brain-state on subjects’ subsequent strategy choices. High-density electroencephalograms (EEGs) were recorded from subjects at rest who were subsequently directed to solve a series of anagrams. Subjects were divided into two groups based on the proportion of anagram solutions derived with self-reported insight versus search. Reaction time and accuracy results were consistent with different cognitive problem-solving strategies used for solving anagrams with versus without insight. Spectral analyses yielded group differences in resting-state EEG supporting hypotheses concerning insight-related attentional diffusion and right-lateralized hemispheric asymmetry. These results reveal a relationship between resting-state brain activity and problem-solving strategy, and, more generally, a dependence of event-related neural computations on the preceding resting state.

see also:

Cognitive Insight And Its Neural Mechanism



Written by huehueteotl

January 31, 2008 at 11:59 am

3 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I had nearly finished my “Introduction to the Philosophy of 20yh century”. It claims a right of true philosophy, to reassume any branch it created…
    Reading your article, I rewrote it, insisting on the fact that brain exploration should be done inside ourselves. Like any exploration requires dead, it’s normal to risk mental death but all the pioneers of psychology had a “grain”, James, Biran, Jung, Comte. Should we train “people with problems” ?
    My article could be a revolution and the end of “kioskosophers” and “kawasophers”, and “ministrosophers”.

    Is it difficult to understand? Send it round, please
    Retires, ex-expert OIL, NCC…

    Guy Lelarge

    February 17, 2008 at 10:03 am

  2. We should congratulate each other.
    as our “papers” are classified firt and second out of 493
    I waited a bit to show the difference between
    “treating a psy-problem on a big machine”
    and “solving it as a philosopher”
    ex expert IOL, (Geneva), etc…

    Guy Lelarge

    May 21, 2008 at 4:48 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: