ArticleScientific reports2025
Introducing the fusion innovation test as a new paradigm for studying realworld creative problem solving.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Studying creative problem-solving requires tasks with real-world relevance and minimal domain-specific knowledge. The widely used alternative uses test (AUT) meets these criteria but primarily measures divergent thinking-generating many ideas without immediate judgment. However, creative problem-solving also requires convergent thinking to narrow down options and select the most effective solution. We introduce the fusion innovation test (FIT), a task that integrates both divergent and convergent thinking. In the FIT, participants combine two randomly assigned elements (e.g., objects or technologies) to achieve either a self-improvement goal or a sustainable development goal. Each FIT solution is evaluated based on the novelty and feasibility of combining the elements, and the effectiveness in achieving the intended goal. We collected behavioral data from 144 participants and used ratings from 122 human evaluators to train an automated scoring system based on a large language model. Participants also completed the AUT and two real-life creativity questionnaires. Results show that the FIT captures a unique aspect of creativity-goal-directed innovation-not assessed by the AUT. Moreover, FIT performance correlates with scientific creativity, whereas AUT performance aligns more with artistic creativity. These findings suggest that the FIT is an initially promising and complementary tool for studying real-world creative problem-solving.
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.