Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39014108›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2024

Sparking creativity: Encouraging creative idea generation through automatically generated word recommendations.

Talia A Wise, Yoed N Kenett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Talia A WiseFaculty of Data and Decision Sciences, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, 3200003, Haifa, Israel.
Yoed N KenettFaculty of Data and Decision Sciences, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, 3200003, Haifa, Israel. yoedk@technion.ac.il.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3872-7689

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Creative block is a familiar foe to any who attempt to create and is especially related to "writers block". While significant effort has been focused on developing methods to break such blocks, it remains an active challenge. Here, we focus on the role of semantic memory structure in driving creative block, by having people get "stuck" in a certain part of their semantic memory network. We directly examine whether we can "pull out" a participant from where they got "stuck" in their semantic memory, breaking their creative impasse. Our Associative Creativity Sparker (ACS) is a cognitive network science-based online tool that aims to spark creative ideas and break creative impasse: Once a participant runs out of ideas in a creative idea generation task, word recommendations are suggested to prime new ideas. These word recommendations are either towards or away from previous ideas, as well as close or far from the target object, based on a conceptual space extracted from the participants responses using online text analysis. In Study 1, 121 participants use the ACS to generate creative alternative uses for five different objects and completed creativity and Gf tasks. In Study 2, we repeat the design of Study 1, but further examine the impact of writing experience on the ACS, by examining 120 novice and 120 experienced writers. Across both studies, our results indicate that the location of word recommendations affects the fluency and originality of one's ideas, and that novice and experienced writers differently benefit from these word recommendations.

Indexed as

CreativityAdultFemaleHumansMaleMemorySemanticsWritingYoung Adult·CreativityExpertiseSemantic networksWord recommendations

Identifiers

PMID39014108
PMCPMC11362362

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.