Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42646013›Full record

ArticleJournal of Intelligence2026

Comparing Aha! Moments in Problem Solving and Generative Ideation.

Visheeta J Chandolia, Matthew A Kidd, Morgan S Paladino, Steven M Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Visheeta J ChandoliaDepartment of Psychological and Brain Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA.
Matthew A KiddDepartment of Psychological and Brain Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA.
Morgan S PaladinoDepartment of Psychological and Brain Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0881-3498
Steven M SmithDepartment of Psychological and Brain Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Responses that come to mind as aha! moments occur suddenly, rapidly, and without deliberate intention. Aha! moments are typically associated with insight, the sudden realization of a problem's solution, and have recently been reported in generative tasks, including divergent thinking and category generation. The present experiment compared the frequency and strength of aha! moments for responses in verbal problem solving (Compound Remote Associates and Polysemous Associates Test problems) with responses in ad hoc and taxonomic category generation. Comparisons were made using a two-step procedure in which each response was first reported as an aha! or non-aha! response, and, for aha! responses, rated in subjective strength. No difference in aha! strength was found between problem solutions and category responses, regardless of which task was given first, nor did aha! strength differ between ad hoc and taxonomic category members. In generative tasks, aha! strength, pre-response pause time, and response novelty increased over time during generation. Although fewer responses occurred over time, later responses were increasingly likely to be aha! responses. These results support the use of aha! reports during idea generation and link such reports to retrieval dynamics seen in many generative tasks, including divergent thinking.

Indexed as

ahagenerative ideationmetacognitionproblem solving

Identifiers

PMID42646013
PMCPMC13514830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.