Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38849461›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2024

Semantic associative abilities and executive control functions predict novelty and appropriateness of idea generation.

Xueyang Wang, Qunlin Chen, Kaixiang Zhuang, Jingyi Zhang, Robert A Cortes, Daniel D Holzman, Li Fan, Cheng Liu, Jiangzhou Sun, Xianrui Li and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Xueyang Wang *Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Qunlin Chen *Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Kaixiang Zhuang *Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Jingyi Zhang *Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Robert A CortesDepartment of Psychology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Daniel D HolzmanDepartment of Psychology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Li FanKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Cheng LiuKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Jiangzhou SunKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Xianrui LiKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Yu LiKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Qiuyang FengKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Hong ChenKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Tingyong FengKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Xu LeiKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Qinghua HeKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.
Adam E GreenDepartment of Psychology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA. aeg58@Georgetown.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4178-836X
Jiang QiuKey Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China. qiuj318@swu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0003-0269-5910

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China (National Science Foundation of China) 31771231, 32071070
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Novelty and appropriateness are two fundamental components of creativity. However, the way in which novelty and appropriateness are separated at behavioral and neural levels remains poorly understood. In the present study, we aim to distinguish behavioral and neural bases of novelty and appropriateness of creative idea generation. In alignment with two established theories of creative thinking, which respectively, emphasize semantic association and executive control, behavioral results indicate that novelty relies more on associative abilities, while appropriateness relies more on executive functions. Next, employing a connectome predictive modeling (CPM) approach in resting-state fMRI data, we define two functional network-based models-dominated by interactions within the default network and by interactions within the limbic network-that respectively, predict novelty and appropriateness (i.e., cross-brain prediction). Furthermore, the generalizability and specificity of the two functional connectivity patterns are verified in additional resting-state fMRI and task fMRI. Finally, the two functional connectivity patterns, respectively mediate the relationship between semantic association/executive control and novelty/appropriateness. These findings provide global and predictive distinctions between novelty and appropriateness in creative idea generation.

Indexed as

CreativityExecutive FunctionMagnetic Resonance ImagingSemanticsAdultBrainConnectomeFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38849461
PMCPMC11161622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.