Neural representations for the generation of inventive conceptions inspired by adaptive feature optimization of biological species

Relating Inter-Individual Differences in Verbal Creative Thinking to Cerebral Structures: An Optimal Voxel-Based Morphometry Study

“…For instance, a previous fMRI study suggested that the left IFG is recruited in the selection of more semantically distant demand [62]. The finding is in line with the idea that the generation of creative ideas involves remote conceptual association [23]. In another fMRI study (Fink et al, 2009), Alternative Use Task and name invention task asking for generating as original names as possible were applied.…”

“…As mentioned above, the prefrontal cortex is known to play an important role in creative thinking. A recent study associated the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) activation with novelty-based representations originating from the development and selection of semantic relatedness [23]. In addition, language production and comprehension are known to be mediated by Broca’s area (BA44 and BA45), which is a part of the left IFG [24-26].…”

Where do bright ideas occur in our brain? Meta-analytic evidence from neuroimaging studies of domain-specific creativity

“…Concerning specific-domain activations, we found that verbal creativity consistently activated the left inferior frontal gyrus. Since verbal creativity has been reported to require the ability to integrate distant semantic concepts or ideas in a new fashion ( Benedek et al, 2012 ; Benedek and Neubauer, 2013 ; Zhang et al, 2014 ), by means of semantic retrieval and selection of stored knowledge ( Thompson-Schill et al, 1997 ; Seger et al, 2000 ; Badre et al, 2005 ; Moss et al, 2005 ; Badre and Wagner, 2007 ), these processes may well have entailed the activation of the left inferior frontal gyrus. On the other hand, attentional processes ( Zhang and Li, 2012 ) and successful response inhibition (e.g., Aron et al, 2014 ) may entail activations of the right inferior frontal gyrus.…”

“…The AUT was also contrasted with the object characteristic task (find typical characteristics of objects), the Incubation-AUT (reflect on ideas and elaborate them) with the standard AUT and vice versa, the Stimulation-AUT (the stimulus word was presented with three other people’s ideas) with the standard AUT ( Fink et al, 2010 ); the Stimulation-AUT (original/common ideas of other people) with the control condition (the stimulus word was presented with two pseudowords) and the Stimulation-AUT (original) with Stimulation-AUT (common), ( Fink et al, 2012 ). In addition, the generation of metaphor was contrasted with the production of literal responses (synonyms of adjectives; Benedek et al, 2014a ); the unusual or creative generation of verbs in response to specific nouns with the generation of verbs that first came to mind ( Seger et al, 2000 ) or with uncreative verbs ( Green et al, 2015 ); the generation of creative stories from three words with uncreative stories and the generation of stories from unrelated words with stories from related words in the set ( Howard-Jones et al, 2005 ); the creative writing was contrasted with the copying of a given text ( Shah et al, 2013 ); the generation of inventive conceptions (biological functional feature associations) with ordinary conceptions (non-biological functional feature associations) and with baseline ( Zhang et al, 2014 ).…”

发明问题解决中的蔡格尼克效应

“…例如, 如果没有宇航服问题的"构造-功能目标"的表征的 "启动效应", 被试对虾子也不会形成"环状连接"与 "既坚硬又可以弯曲"的连结(一种"构造-功能"式的表 征) [14] . 柴可夫斯基也曾形象地说: "灵感是这样一位 客人, 他不爱拜访懒惰者" [41] . 这充分说明对问题记 忆和原型的表征对于利用原型去解决问题至关重要.…”