Paving the Way to Eureka—Introducing “Dira” as an Experimental Paradigm to Observe the Process of Creative Problem Solving

Abstract

“Dira” is a novel experimental paradigm to record combinations of behavioral and metacognitive measures for the creative process. This task allows assessing chronological and chronometric aspects of the creative process directly and without a detour through creative products or proxy phenomena. In a study with 124 participants we show that (a) people spend more time attending to selected vs. rejected potential solutions, (b) there is a clear connection between behavioral patterns and self-reported measures, (c) the reported intensity of Eureka experiences is a function of interaction time with potential solutions, and (d) experiences of emerging solutions can happen immediately after engaging with a problem, before participants explore all potential solutions. The conducted study exemplifies how “Dira” can be used as an instrument to narrow down the moment when solutions emerge. We conclude that the “Dira” experiment is paving the way to study the process, as opposed to the product, of creative problem solving.

The Dynamics of Creative Ideation: Introducing a New Assessment Paradigm

“…Regrettably, it has resulted in overly constrained paradigms, imposing rigid time-structures for different phases of CI (e.g., 15 s “think time”, 10 s response time; Ellamil et al, 2012; Perchtold et al, 2018; Rominger et al, 2018) or requiring subjects to actively “signal” an idea (Heinonen et al, 2016; Boot et al, 2017). Consistent with recent computerized assessments (Hart et al, 2017; Loesche et al, 2018), log-analysis of test-takers’ interactions with MTCI tasks can inform a more realistic chronology of broad, qualitatively distinct phases of CI (Figure 1): (1) Exploration – response formulation, or “thinking” phase, measured by the time between stimulus presentation (timestamp a) and the onset of the response marked by the first interaction with the digital-platform (e.g., screen-touch, or typing; timestamp b) – (2) Production : response production phase, measured by the time between the first (timestamp b) and the last (timestamp c) interaction with the platform in producing the response (e.g., finger-doodling for graphic responses, typing text for verbal responses) – (3) Verification : “control” phase in which the produced response is being validated or discarded, measured by the time between the last interaction to produce the response (timestamp c), and the action (e.g., click) to validate the response/move on to next item (timestamp d).…”

“…Pioneering work in this line analyzed free-association switches using idiographic methods (Binet, 1900), real-time associative sequences measured by kymographic recordings (Bousfield and Sedgewick, 1944), or relations between ideas’ uncommonness and response time (Christensen et al, 1957). Presently, similar questions are tackled by coupling CI tasks with think-aloud protocols (Gilhooly et al, 2007; Pringle and Sowden, 2017), eye-tracking (Jankowska et al, 2018), systematic observation (Barbot and Lubart, 2012), or log-analysis of digital assessments (Hart et al, 2017; Loesche et al, 2018; Rominger et al, 2018). All of these methods attempt to track the chronology of CI, partition-out distinct activities (generating versus producing ideas) and capture their neurocognitive underpinning (Ellamil et al, 2012; Boot et al, 2017; Rominger et al, 2018; Benedek et al, in press).…”

“…Because these dynamic aspects seem particularly robust (e.g., Beaty and Silvia, 2012), assessments designed to directly measure them at the person-level are needed (Hart et al, 2017; Hass, 2017; Jankowska et al, 2018; Loesche et al, 2018). Time-based measurement approaches hold great promise toward this end (Hass, 2015; Sowden et al, 2015) and could address questions such as: What is the “baseline” effort-time provided by a person in generating ideas across a range of situations?…”

Sustaining Innovation: Creativity among Employees of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises and Students in Higher Education Institutions in Brunei Darussalam

“…Subsequently, a creative idea suddenly emerges as they illuminate on strategies and concepts, often at the most unlikely times. This "eureka" effect has been widely reported in creative problem solving [16,17]. It is a necessity to explain why creativity is difficult, so participants knew the challenges they faced.…”

Educational Consequences of Creativity: A Creative Learning Perspective

“…Theories -Research -Applications 5(2) 2018 portant for understanding creative learning, but generalize to creativity science as a whole. In recent years, creativity researchers have recognized this and started using a variety of more sensitive and dynamic techniques, including: ecological momentary assessment (Czerwonka, 2019;Karwowski, Lebuda, Szumski, & Firkowska -Mankiewicz, 2017;Silvia et al, 2014), passive automatized measurement (D'Mello, Dieterle, & Duckworth, 2017), rigorous observational studies Katz-Buonincontro & Anderson, 2018), and blended approaches that link solid cognitive measures with a look into individuals' strategies, while dealing with creative tasks (Jankowska, Czerwonka, Lebuda, & Karwowski, 2018;Loesche, Goslin, & Bugmann, 2018).…”