ArticleScientific reports2025
Mind wandering during creative incubation predicts increases in creative performance in a writing task.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies suggest that taking breaks from creative problem solving (i.e., incubation periods) enhances subsequent performance, possibly due to mind wandering during these breaks. The present preregistered study investigated whether different types of incubation periods, designed to either promote or suppress mind wandering, influence creativity in a writing task. Participants wrote two fictional short stories based on a prompt, separated by a 10-min incubation task (0-back task, 2-back task, mindfulness meditation, or no-break control). To distinguish story-specific incubation effects from more general cognitive benefits, some participants received the same prompt after the break while others received a new prompt. Mind wandering during incubation was assessed with a validated retrospective questionnaire and story creativity was evaluated by both human raters and a semantic distance-based measure. Results showed no significant differences in creative improvement (pre- to post-incubation) across incubation tasks. However, regardless of task, greater mind wandering during incubation predicted greater within-subject creative improvement, as assessed by semantic distance, for participants who received the same prompt after the break but not for those who received a new prompt. Notably, this benefit was specific to mind wandering and did not extend to other types of thought during incubation, including explicit thought about the story. The relationship remained significant after controlling for dispositional mind wandering and was corroborated by creativity ratings from GPT-4. These findings suggest a potentially beneficial role of mind wandering during the incubation of a creative writing task.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.