Normative Data for 84 UK English Rebus Puzzles

Abstract

Recent investigations have established the value of using rebus puzzles in studying the insight and analytic processes that underpin problem solving. The current study sought to validate a pool of 84 rebus puzzles in terms of their solution rates, solution times, error rates, solution confidence, self-reported solution strategies, and solution phrase familiarity. All of the puzzles relate to commonplace English sayings and phrases in the United Kingdom. Eighty-four rebus puzzles were selected from a larger stimulus set of 168 such puzzles and were categorized into six types in relation to the similarity of their structures. The 84 selected problems were thence divided into two sets of 42 items (Set A and Set B), with rebus structure evenly balanced between each set. Participants (N = 170; 85 for Set A and 85 for Set B) were given 30 s to solve each item, subsequently indicating their confidence in their solution and self-reporting the process used to solve the problem (analysis or insight), followed by the provision of ratings of the familiarity of the solution phrases. The resulting normative data yield solution rates, error rates, solution times, confidence ratings, self-reported strategies and familiarity ratings for 84 rebus puzzles, providing valuable information for the selection and matching of problems in future research.

Background music stints creativity: Evidence from compound remote associate tasks

“…Problem solving performance on RATs and CRATs has been found to correlate with performance on other creative tasks such as rebus puzzles (MacGregor & Cunningham, ; see Threadgold, Marsh, & Ball, , for further discussion) and classic insight tasks (Schooler & Melcher, ; but see Webb, Little, Cropper, & Ruze, ). Such patterns of association suggest that RATs and CRATs represent effective tests of creativity.…”

Getting a grip on insight: An embodied measure of Aha! and metacognition during problem solving

“…It is an intriguing prospect that a feeling can somehow predict the discovery of a good idea in one's own head. Although anecdotes of such sudden discoveries abound, it is only in the last decade that scientists have been able to show that humans can-and perhaps therefore should-trust their feelings of insight (Danek et al, 2014bDanek & Wiley, 2017;Hedne et al, 2016;Salvi et al, 2016a;Threadgold et al, 2018;Webb et al, 2016. In this experiment, we aimed to develop a new tool for measuring insight moments that captures both the cognitive (suddenness) and phenomenological (Aha) dimensions of insight.…”

“…Indeed, an exciting recent finding is that Aha experiences tend to correlate with accurate solutions to problems (Danek et al, 2014bDanek & Wiley, 2017;Hedne et al, 2016;Salvi et al, 2016a;Threadgold et al, 2018;Webb et al, 2016), which we discuss further below.…”

“…Retrospective self-reports are also problematic for experiments interested in comparing Aha phenomenology to other behavioral or metacognitive outcomes. Several recent studies have found that when Aha moments occur-particularly with creative problems-the solution is likely to be correct (Danek et al, 2014bDanek & Wiley, 2017;Hedne et al, 2016;Salvi et al, 2016a;Threadgold et al, 2018;Webb et al, 2016. However, the positive association between verbally reported Aha moments and accuracy could be influenced by the relationship between confidence and accuracy, or some other metacognitive reflection prior to reporting (although see below discussion and Danek & Salvi, 2018).…”

Computationally resurrecting the functional Remote Associates Test using cognitive word associates and principles from a computational solver

“…Human creativity [1,2] is a complex set of cognitive processes, assessed in a multitude of ways, with different creativity tests measuring its various and sometimes overlapping aspects [3,4,5,6,7,8,9]. The Remote Associates Test [10] -RAT for short -aims to measure a participant's creativity as their ability to make associations.…”