Associative theories of creativity argue that creative cognition involves the abilities to generate remote associations and make useful connections between unrelated concepts in one’s semantic memory. Yet, whether and how real-life creative behavior relies on semantic memory structure and its neural substrates remains unclear. We acquired multi-echo functional magnetic resonance imaging data while participants underwent a semantic relatedness judgment task. These ratings were used to estimate their individual semantic memory networks, whose properties significantly predicted their real-life creativity. Using a connectome predictive modeling approach, we identified patterns of task-based functional connectivity that predicted creativity-related semantic memory network properties. Furthermore, these properties mediated the relationship between functional connectivity and real-life creativity. These results provide new insights into how brain connectivity patterns support real-life creative behavior via the structure of semantic memory. We also show how computational network science can be used to couple behavioral, cognitive, and neural levels of analysis.

Creative ideas likely result from searching and combining semantic memory knowledge, yet the mechanisms acting on memory to yield creative ideas remain unclear. Here, we identified the neurocognitive correlates of semantic search components related to creative abilities. We designed an associative fluency task based on polysemous words and distinguished two search components related to clustering and switching between the different meanings of the polysemous words. Clustering correlated with divergent thinking, while switching correlated with the ability to combine remote associates. Furthermore, switching correlated with semantic memory structure and executive abilities, and was predicted by connectivity between the default, control, and salience neural networks. In contrast, clustering relied on interactions between control, salience, and attentional neural networks. Our results suggest that switching captures interactions between memory structure and control processes guiding the search whereas clustering may capture attentional controlled processes for persistent search, and that alternations between exploratory search and focused attention support creativity.