Mareike B. Wieth

Time of day effects on problem solving: When the non-optimal is optimal

In a study examining the effects of time of day on problem solving, participants solved insight and analytic problems at their optimal or non-optimal time of day. Given the presumed differences in the cognitive processes involved in solving these two types of problems, it was expected that the reduced inhibitory control associated with non-optimal times of the day would differentially impact performance on the two types of problems. In accordance with this expectation, results showed consistently greater insight problem solving performance during non-optimal times of day compared to optimal times of day but no consistent time of day effects on analytic problem solving. The findings indicate that tasks involving creativity might benefit from a non-optimal time of day.

The collider principle in causal reasoning: Why the Monty Hall dilemma is so hard

The authors tested the thesis that people find the Monty Hall dilemma (MHD) hard because they fail to understand the implications of its causal structure, a collider structure in which 2 independent causal factors influence a single outcome. In 4 experiments, participants performed better in versions of the MHD involving competition, which emphasizes causality. This manipulation resulted in more correct responses to questions about the process in the MHD and a counterfactual that changed its causal structure. Correct responses to these questions were associated with solving the MHD regardless of condition. In addition, training on the collider principle transferred to a standard version of the MHD. The MHD taps a deeper question: When is knowing about one thing informative about another?

Incentives improve performance on both incremental and insight problem solving

An increasing number of studies are showing a connection between emotion and motivation and cognitive processes. Most of these studies, however, have been correlational in nature, limiting the conclusions that can be drawn. We directly manipulated motivation through the use of an incentive and investigated its effects on insight and incremental problem solving. In four experiments we found that an incentive (the opportunity to leave the experiment early) increased problem-solving performance for all problems presented, regardless of problem type. Additionally, we found evidence that the incentive increased recall memory, indicating more thorough processing for participants in the incentive condition. This study provides evidence that incentives influence problem solving and implies that motivation should not be ignored when investigating cognitive processes.

When higher working memory capacity hinders insight.

Higher working memory capacity (WMC) improves performance on a range of cognitive and academic tasks. However, a greater ability to control attention sometimes leads individuals with higher WMC to persist in using complex, attention-demanding approaches that are suboptimal for a given task. We examined whether higher WMC would hinder insight problem solving, which is thought to rely on associative processes that operate largely outside of close attentional control. In addition, we examined whether characteristics of the insight problems influence whether this negative relationship will be revealed. In Experiment 1, participants completed matchstick arithmetic problems, which require a similar initial problem representation for all problems. Higher WMC was associated with less accurate insight problem solving. In Experiment 2, participants completed insight word problems, which require substantially different representations for each problem. Higher WMC was again negatively associated with insight, but only after statistically controlling for shared variance between insight and incremental problem-solving accuracy. These findings suggest that WMC may benefit performance on fundamental processes common to both incremental and insight problem solving (e.g., initial problem representation), but hinder performance on the processes that are unique to insight (e.g., solution and restructuring). By considering the WMC of the individual, and the nature of the insight task, we may better understand the process of insight and how to best support it. (PsycINFO Database Record

Rewarding Multitasking: Negative Effects of an Incentive on Problem Solving under Divided Attention.

Research has consistently shown negative effects of multitasking on tasks such as problem solving. This study was designed to investigate the impact of an incentive when solving problems in a multitasking situation. Incentives have generally been shown to increase problem solving (e.g., Wieth and Burns, 2006), however, it is unclear whether an incentive can increase problem solving while attentional resources are divided. Participants were either given an incentive or not and asked to complete incremental and insight problems while either in a dual-task or single task condition. After solving the problems participants were given a surprise memory test. Results showed that the incentive only led to increases in problem solving in the single task condition but not the dual-task condition. Furthermore, results showed that an incentive in the dual-task condition led to an increase in recall of irrelevant information. These findings indicate that an incentive cannot ameliorate the detrimental effects of multitasking when problem solving and may even lead to an increase in irrelevant information processing.

Not all musicians are creative: Creativity requires more than simply playing music:

Musical training has been found to be associated with increased creativity. However, it is not clear whether increased creativity, particularly divergent thinking, is associated with music expertise due to knowledge and skill, or if increased creativity arises from participation in the creation of music through practices such as improvisation and composition. This study investigated how level of music expertise and engagement in the creation of music relate to divergent thinking in musically trained adults (musicians). Sixty participants of varying music expertise were tested for divergent thinking using a modified version of Guilford’s (1967) alternative uses task, in which participants listed creative uses for two music items and two non-music items. Results indicate that musicians who create music listed more creative uses for music items than non-musicians and musicians who do not create music. For non-music items, participants did not display differences in divergent thinking.

Conflicts and Consistencies in Creativity Research and Teaching

The interdisciplinary topic of creativity is both fascinating and controversial. In this review, we begin by highlighting the many ways that researchers conceptualize and define creativity, focusing in particular on the difference between everyday creativity and creativity associated with exceptional breakthroughs in thinking. In addition, we discuss the role of divergent and convergent creativity and the role that domain knowledge plays in creativity. Furthermore, we highlight how specific factors such as individual differences and time of day influence creativity. We conclude by discussing the impact of current educational practices on creativity in psychology classrooms.