2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--35701
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Work in Progress: Using Neuro-responses to Understand Creativity, the Engineering Design Process, and Concept Generation

Abstract: is a graduate student in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Oklahoma. Her interests include creativity, engineering education, and neuroimaging. Her research focuses on understanding creativity and divergent thinking in engineering students via the use of electroencephalography (EEG).

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The common condition had the least negative mean amplitude of 0.128μV, the mean amplitude for the creative condition was -0.677μV, and the nonsense condition had the greatest negative mean amplitude at -1.137μV. Although the differences in the means for all pairs were insignificant (common-creative: p=1, d=.32; common-nonsense: p=1, d=.42; creative-nonsense: p=1, d=.16), this follows the trends in previous studies [12], [13], [21], [22]. A linear trend in the modulation of the N400 for the factor condition was reported in the Rutter et al 2012 [12] study, but no significant linear trend (F (1,3) = 1.28; p = .339; ηp 2 = .3) for condition was observed in this study.…”
Section: The N400 Componentsupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The common condition had the least negative mean amplitude of 0.128μV, the mean amplitude for the creative condition was -0.677μV, and the nonsense condition had the greatest negative mean amplitude at -1.137μV. Although the differences in the means for all pairs were insignificant (common-creative: p=1, d=.32; common-nonsense: p=1, d=.42; creative-nonsense: p=1, d=.16), this follows the trends in previous studies [12], [13], [21], [22]. A linear trend in the modulation of the N400 for the factor condition was reported in the Rutter et al 2012 [12] study, but no significant linear trend (F (1,3) = 1.28; p = .339; ηp 2 = .3) for condition was observed in this study.…”
Section: The N400 Componentsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…As observed in previous studies, the signal displays a negative dip for creative and nonsense conditions in the N400 (300-500ms) time window, with similar amplitudes at their negative peaks. [12], [13], [21], [22]. The repeated measures ANOVA revealed significant main effects for the factor electrode (F(2,6) = 11.79; p = .033; ηp 2 = .797; ωp 2 = .09), however main effects were not significant for the factor condition (F(2,6) = .392; p = .663; ηp 2 = .116; ωp 2 = -.06) or the condition-electrode interaction (F(4,12) = 1.614; p = .234; ηp 2 = .35; ωp 2 = .00).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A significant amount of studies have been conducted from different perspectives in healthcare sectors [72][73][74]. Industry 4.0 enables technologies to make the healthcare sector more straightforward than before; for example, improving and enabling remote monitoring systems based on IoT.…”
Section: Industry 40 For Medical/healthcare Servicesmentioning
confidence: 99%