ArticleCreativity research journal2024
Creative Evaluation: The Role of Memory in Novelty & Effectiveness Judgements.
Article in Creativity research journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Semantic Memory Structure and Self-Evaluation of Creativity: Evidence Across Tasks and Dimensions.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Neural dynamics during the generation and evaluation of creative and non-creative ideas.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Semantic memory and creative evaluation.BMC psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
How do we assess the quality of an idea? Current theories suggest that episodic memory contributes to creative ideation, implicating memory retrieval and mental simulation in the generation of creative ideas; however, the role of memory in creative evaluation has not been systematically examined. Across two independent online samples (Study 1 n=50, Study 2 n=626), we explore how episodic retrieval supports the evaluation of two distinct aspects of creativity: novelty and effectiveness. In both studies, participants were presented with a series of creative ideas-responses on the alternate uses task-and were asked to independently rate them for novelty/effectiveness. Following each rating, participants were prompted to reflect on their process and type a brief description about how they made their evaluation. We apply computational linguistic analysis to quantify the prevalence of episodic/perceptual details (sights, sounds, etc.) in each evaluation, along with past-focused and future-focused words. Consistent with prior work, we observe a negative correlation (
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.