Academic Journal
Προβολή σε EDS
Συνδεδεμένο Πλήρες Κείμενο

Cognitive mechanism of creative thinking: Integrating the semantic network and spreading activation model.

Λεπτομέρειες βιβλιογραφικής εγγραφής
Τίτλος: Cognitive mechanism of creative thinking: Integrating the semantic network and spreading activation model.
Συγγραφείς: Chen J; School of Psychology, Southwest University, Beibei, Chongqing, 400715, China.; Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China.; Department of Human Development and Family Science, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA., Hou J; School of Psychology, Southwest University, Beibei, Chongqing, 400715, China.; Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China., Cao Y; Zurich Neuroscience Center, University of Zurich & ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland., Katz B; Department of Human Development and Family Science, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA., Yang L; School of Psychology, Southwest University, Beibei, Chongqing, 400715, China.; Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China., Liu C; School of Psychology, Southwest University, Beibei, Chongqing, 400715, China.; Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China., Wang X; School of Psychology, Southwest University, Beibei, Chongqing, 400715, China.; Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China., He L; School of Psychology, Southwest University, Beibei, Chongqing, 400715, China.; Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China., He R; School of Psychology, Southwest University, Beibei, Chongqing, 400715, China.; Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China., Chen Q; School of Psychology, Southwest University, Beibei, Chongqing, 400715, China. chenqunlin@swu.edu.cn.; Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China. chenqunlin@swu.edu.cn., Qiu J; School of Psychology, Southwest University, Beibei, Chongqing, 400715, China. qiuj318@swu.edu.cn.; Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (SWU), Ministry of Education, Chongqing, China. qiuj318@swu.edu.cn.; Southwest University Branch, Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment Toward Basic Education Quality, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China. qiuj318@swu.edu.cn.
Πηγή: Behavior research methods [Behav Res Methods] 2026 Jun 26; Vol. 58 (8). Date of Electronic Publication: 2026 Jun 26.
Τύπος έκδοσης: Journal Article
Γλώσσα: English
Στοιχεία περιοδικού: Publisher: Springer Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101244316 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1554-3528 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 1554351X NLM ISO Abbreviation: Behav Res Methods Subsets: MEDLINE
Imprint Name(s): Publication: 2010- : New York : Springer
Original Publication: Austin, Tex. : Psychonomic Society, c2005-
Ιατρικοί όροι (MeSH): Thinking*/physiology , Cognition*/physiology , Creativity* , Semantics* , Models, Psychological*, Problem Solving/physiology ; Humans ; Computer Simulation ; Male ; Female
Περίληψη: Computational modeling offers a principled way to link the structure of semantic networks to the processes that support creative problem solving. We combined item-level semantic network analyses (Experiment 1, behavioral method) with the Spreading Activation Model simulation (SAM; Experiment 2, computational modeling) for the Chinese Word Remote Associates Test (CWRAT). In Experiment 1, we built customized item-semantic networks based on the CWRAT-free association task and quantified network properties for each item. Results showed that greater network efficiency and higher modularity were associated with higher item pass rates, whereas larger network size was associated with lower item pass rates. In Experiment 2, we used SAM to simulate activation dynamics on each item's semantic network across a grid of retention (r, the proportion of activation retained at each time step) and decay (d, the proportion of activation lost at each time step) parameters. At the item level, we extracted target-activation metrics (mean maximum activation, mean activation, and mean activation retention duration), and the results showed that these metrics correlated positively with the empirical item pass rate and negatively with item response time. At the individual level, we estimated best-fitting parameter pairs (r, d) for each participant. Results showed that these parameters correlated negatively with individuals' performance in both full and high-difficulty item sets. Particularly on the high-difficulty subset, results showed that parameters correlated positively with individual ratings of insightfulness and interest. Together, these results describe how bottom-up spreading activation may interact with top-down control to shape and support the creative thinking process.
(© 2026. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.)
Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval: Permission to conduct the study was provided by the Ethics Board of the School of Psychology of Southwest University (application number: H23220). Consent to participate: All participants provided informed consent. Consent for publication: All authors have read the manuscript and approved of publication. Conflicts of interest/Competing interests: The authors declare no financial or non-financial competing interests related to this manuscript. Open practices statement: The data and materials for all experiments are available at [ https://osf.io/ex9mb/?view_only=9c8d55707db04d1f862cf8be51b9ebb4 ]. The experiment was not was preregistered. Open access: This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third-party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .
References: Abbott, J. T., Austerweil, J. L., & Griffiths, T. L. (2015). Random walks on semantic networks can resemble optimal foraging. Neural Information Processing Systems Conference; A Preliminary Version of This Work Was Presented at the Aforementined Conference., 122(3), 558. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038693.
Anderson, J. R. (1983). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(3), 261–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90201-3. (PMID: 10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90201-3)
Anderson, J. R., & Reder, L. M. (1999). The fan effect: New results and new theories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128(2), 186. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.128.2.186. (PMID: 10.1037/0096-3445.128.2.186)
Armbruster, B. B. (1989). Metacognition in creativity. Handbook of creativity (pp. 177–182). Springer.
Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Silvia, P. J., & Schacter, D. L. (2016). Creative cognition and brain network dynamics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(2), 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.004.
Beaty, R. E., Christensen, A. P., Benedek, M., Silvia, P. J., & Schacter, D. L. (2017). Creative constraints: Brain activity and network dynamics underlying semantic interference during idea production. NeuroImage, 148, 189–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.01.012. (PMID: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.01.012280821066083214)
Beaty, R., Kenett, Y., Hass, R., & Schacter, D. L. (2019). A fan effect for creative thought: Semantic richness facilitates idea quantity but constrains idea quality.
Becker, M., Sommer, T., & Kühn, S. (2020). Inferior frontal gyrus involvement during search and solution in verbal creative problem solving: A parametric fMRI study. NeuroImage, 206, Article 116294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116294. (PMID: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.11629431639509)
Benedek, M., Jauk, E., Sommer, M., Arendasy, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2014). Intelligence, creativity, and cognitive control: The common and differential involvement of executive functions in intelligence and creativity. Intelligence, 46, 73–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.007. (PMID: 10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.007252786404175011)
Benedek, M., Kenett, Y. N., Umdasch, K., Anaki, D., Faust, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2017). How semantic memory structure and intelligence contribute to creative thought: A network science approach. Thinking & Reasoning, 23(2), 158–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2016.1278034. (PMID: 10.1080/13546783.2016.1278034)
Borge-Holthoefer, J., & Arenas, A. (2010). Semantic networks: Structure and dynamics. Entropy, 12(5), 1264–1302. https://doi.org/10.3390/e12051264. (PMID: 10.3390/e12051264)
Bowden, E. M., Jung-Beeman, M., Fleck, J., & Kounios, J. (2005). New approaches to demystifying insight. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(7), 322–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.012. (PMID: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.01215953756)
Camarda, A., Borst, G., Agogué, M., Habib, M., Weil, B., Houdé, O., & Cassotti, M. (2018). Do we need inhibitory control to be creative? Evidence from a dual-task paradigm. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(3), 351. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000140. (PMID: 10.1037/aca0000140)
Chen, J., Shi, B., Chen, Q., & Qiu, J. (2023). Comparisons of convergent thinking: A perspective informed by culture and neural mechanisms. Thinking Skills and Creativity, Article 101343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101343. (PMID: 10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101343)
Chen, J., Xu, T., & Chen, Q. (2024). Development and preliminary exploration of Chinese word remote associates test. Psychology: Techniques and Application, 12(5), 283–295.
Chen, Q., Christensen, A. P., Kenett, Y. N., Ren, Z., Condon, D. M., Bilder, R. M., Qiu, J., & Beaty, R. E. (2023b). Mapping the creative personality: A psychometric network analysis of highly creative artists and scientists. Creativity Research Journal, 35(3), 455–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2023.2184558. (PMID: 10.1080/10400419.2023.2184558)
Christensen, A. P., Kenett, Y. N., Cotter, K. N., Beaty, R. E., & Silvia, P. J. (2018). Remotely close associations: Openness to experience and semantic memory structure. European Journal of Personality, 32(4), 480–492. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2157. (PMID: 10.1002/per.2157)
Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.82.6.407. (PMID: 10.1037/0033-295X.82.6.407)
Conradty, C., Sotiriou, S. A., & Bogner, F. X. (2020). How creativity in STEAM modules intervenes with self-efficacy and motivation. Education Sciences, 10(3), 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10030070. (PMID: 10.3390/educsci10030070)
de Abreu, P. M. E., Conway, A. R., & Gathercole, S. E. (2010). Working memory and fluid intelligence in young children. Intelligence, 38(6), 552–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.07.003. (PMID: 10.1016/j.intell.2010.07.003)
De Dreu, C. K., Nijstad, B. A., Baas, M., Wolsink, I., & Roskes, M. (2012). Working memory benefits creative insight, musical improvisation, and original ideation through maintained task-focused attention. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(5), 656–669. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211435795. (PMID: 10.1177/014616721143579522301457)
Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93(3), 283. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.283. (PMID: 10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.2833749399)
Deng, Y., Wang, Y., Qiu, C., Hu, Z., Sun, W., Gong, Y., Zhao, X., He, W., & Cao, L. (2021). A Chinese conceptual semantic feature dataset (CCFD). Behavior Research Methods, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01525-x.
Doebel, S. (2020). Rethinking executive function and its development. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(4), 942–956. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620904771. (PMID: 10.1177/174569162090477132348707)
Eysenck, M. W. (2020). Semantic memory and stored knowledge. Memory (pp. 207–235). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429449642-7.
Gabora, L. (2002). Cognitive mechanisms underlying the creative process. Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Creativity & Cognition, 126–133. https://doi.org/10.1145/581710.581730.
Gilhooly, K. (2024). AI vs humans in the AUT: Simulations to LLMs. Journal of Creativity, 34(1), Article 100071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjoc.2023.100071. (PMID: 10.1016/j.yjoc.2023.100071)
Goldstein, R., & Vitevitch, M. S. (2017). The influence of closeness centrality on lexical processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 274379. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01683. (PMID: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01683)
Griffiths, T. L., Steyvers, M., & Firl, A. (2007). Google and the mind. Psychological Science, 18(12), 1069–1076. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02027.x. (PMID: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02027.x18031414)
Hao, N., & Wu, Q. (2010). A review of the role of knowledge in creative thinking. Psychological Science, 33(5), 1089–1094. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2024.2322858. (PMID: 10.1080/10400419.2024.2322858)
He, L. (2022). The influence of central concepts in semantic networks on creative thinking and its cognitive neural mechanisms (Doctoral dissertation). Southwest University.
Hommel, B. (2015). Between persistence and flexibility: The yin and yang of action control. Advances in motivation science (Vol. Vol. 2, pp. 33–67). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.adms.2015.04.003.
Jia, X., & Li, W. (2019). The role of metacognitive components in creative thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 470461. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02404. (PMID: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02404)
Kajić, I., Gosmann, J., Stewart, T. C., Wennekers, T., & Eliasmith, C. (2017). A spiking neuron model of word associations for the remote associates test. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 225355. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00099. (PMID: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00099)
Kenett, Y. N. (2019). What can quantitative measures of semantic distance tell us about creativity? Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 27, 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.08.010. (PMID: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.08.010)
Kenett, Y. N., Anaki, D., & Faust, M. (2014). Investigating the structure of semantic networks in low and high creative persons. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 407. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00407. (PMID: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00407249591294051268)
Kenett, Y. N., & Austerweil, J. L. (2016). Examining search processes in low and high creative individuals with random walks. CogSci, 8, 313–318.
Kenett, Y. N., & Faust, M. (2019). A semantic network cartography of the creative mind. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(4), 271–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.01.007. (PMID: 10.1016/j.tics.2019.01.00730803872)
Kenett, Y. N., Levi, E., Anaki, D., & Faust, M. (2017). The semantic distance task: Quantifying semantic distance with semantic network path length. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(9), 1470–1489. (PMID: 28240936)
Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2014). The cognitive neuroscience of insight. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115154.
Kumar, A. A., Steyvers, M., & Balota, D. A. (2022). A critical review of network-based and distributional approaches to semantic memory structure and processes. Topics in Cognitive Science, 14(1), 54–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.1254. (PMID: 10.1111/tops.125434092042)
Li, Y., Kenett, Y. N., Hu, W., & Beaty, R. E. (2021). Flexible semantic network structure supports the production of creative metaphor. Creativity Research Journal, 33(3), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2021.1879508. (PMID: 10.1080/10400419.2021.1879508)
Lloyd-Cox, J., Pickering, A. D., Beaty, R. E., & Bhattacharya, J. (2023). Toward greater computational modeling in neurocognitive creativity research. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000627. (PMID: 10.1037/aca0000627)
Lopez-Persem, A., Moreno-Rodriguez, S., Ovando-Tellez, M., Bieth, T., Guiet, S., Brochard, J., & Volle, E. (2023). How subjective idea valuation energizes and guides creative idea generation. American Psychologist. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001165. (PMID: 10.1037/amp000116537578760)
Lorch, R. F., Jr. (1982). Priming and search processes in semantic memory: A test of three models of spreading activation. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21(4), 468–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(82)90736-8.
Luft, C. D. B., Zioga, I., Thompson, N. M., Banissy, M. J., & Bhattacharya, J. (2018). Right temporal alpha oscillations as a neural mechanism for inhibiting obvious associations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(52), E12144–E12152. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1811465115. (PMID: 10.1073/pnas.1811465115305418906310824)
Mak, M. H., Hsiao, Y., & Nation, K. (2021). Lexical connectivity effects in immediate serial recall of words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 47(12), 1971. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001089. (PMID: 10.1037/xlm000108934735167)
Massara, G. P., Di Matteo, T., & Aste, T. (2016). Network filtering for big data: Triangulated maximally filtered graph. Journal of Complex Networks, 5(2), 161–178. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1505.02445. (PMID: 10.48550/arXiv.1505.02445)
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Spreading activation versus compound cue accounts of priming: Mediated priming revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(6), 1155. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.18.6.1155. (PMID: 10.1037/0278-7393.18.6.11551447546)
Mednick, S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3), 220. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048850. (PMID: 10.1037/h004885014472013)
Mednick, S. A., & Mednick, M. T. S. (1967). Examiner’s manual: Remote associates test. Houghton Mifflin.
Mekern, V. N., Sjoerds, Z., & Hommel, B. (2019). How metacontrol biases and adaptivity impact performance in cognitive search tasks. Cognition, 182, 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.10.001. (PMID: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.10.00130368066)
Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G. S., Dean, J. (2013). Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. Paper presented at the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1310.4546.
Miller, P. H. (2016). Theories of developmental psychology (6th ed.). Worth Publishers.
Olteţeanu, A.-M., & Falomir, Z. (2015). ComRAT-C: A computational compound remote associates test solver based on language data and its comparison to human performance. Pattern Recognition Letters, 67, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2015.05.015. (PMID: 10.1016/j.patrec.2015.05.015)
Rastelli, C., Greco, A., & Finocchiaro, C. (2020). Revealing the role of divergent thinking and fluid intelligence in children’s semantic memory organization. Journal of Intelligence, 8(4), Article 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence8040043. (PMID: 10.3390/jintelligence8040043333275647768431)
Razumnikova, O. M. (2007). Creativity related cortex activity in the remote associates task. Brain Research Bulletin, 73(1–3), 96–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2007.02.008. (PMID: 10.1016/j.brainresbull.2007.02.00817499642)
Rhodes, T., & Turvey, M. T. (2007). Human memory retrieval as Lévy foraging. Physica a: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 385(1), 255–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2007.07.001. (PMID: 10.1016/j.physa.2007.07.001)
Roediger III, H. L., Balota, D. A., & Watson, J. M. (2001). Spreading activation and arousal of false memories. https://doi.org/10.1037/10394-006.
Rossmann, E., & Fink, A. (2010). Do creative people use shorter associative pathways? Personality and Individual Differences, 49(8), 891–895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.025. (PMID: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.025)
Rubinov, M., & Sporns, O. (2010). Complex network measures of brain connectivity: Uses and interpretations. NeuroImage, 52(3), 1059–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.10.003. (PMID: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.10.00319819337)
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092. (PMID: 10.1080/10400419.2012.650092)
Schubert, E. (2021). Creativity is optimal novelty and maximal positive affect: A new definition based on the spreading activation model. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 15, 612379. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2021.612379. (PMID: 10.3389/fnins.2021.612379341132288185022)
Siew, C. S. (2019). Spreadr: An R package to simulate spreading activation in a network. Behavior Research Methods, 51(2), 910–929. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1186-5. (PMID: 10.3758/s13428-018-1186-5307888006478646)
Sowa, J. F. (1992). Semantic networks. Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence, 2, 1493–1511.
Volle, E. (2018). Associative and controlled cognition in divergent thinking: Theoretical, experimental, neuroimaging evidence, and new directions. The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity, 333–362. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316556238.020.
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought (Vol. Vol. 24). Harcourt, Brace.
Wang, X., Wu, W., Ling, Z., Xu, Y., Fang, Y., Wang, X., Binder, J. R., Men, W., Gao, J.-H., & Bi, Y. (2018). Organizational principles of abstract words in the human brain. Cerebral Cortex, 28(12), 4305–4318. (PMID: 10.1093/cercor/bhx28329186345)
Wu, C. L., Huang, S. Y., Chen, P. Z., & Chen, H. C. (2020). A systematic review of creativity-related studies applying the remote associates test from 2000 to 2019. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 573432. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.573432. (PMID: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.573432331928717644781)
Yan, T., Zhuang, K., He, L., Liu, C., Zeng, R., & Qiu, J. (2021). Left temporal pole contributes to creative thinking via an individual semantic network. Psychophysiology, 58(8), Article e13841. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13841. (PMID: 10.1111/psyp.1384134159607)
Yu, Y., Oh, Y., Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2022). Dynamics of hidden brain states when people solve verbal puzzles. NeuroImage, 255, 119202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119202. (PMID: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.11920235427772)
Zemla, J. C., & Austerweil, J. L. (2018). Estimating semantic networks of groups and individuals from fluency data. Computational Brain and Behavior, 1, 36–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42113-018-0003-7. (PMID: 10.1007/s42113-018-0003-7311794366555428)
Zhang, W., Sjoerds, Z., & Hommel, B. (2020). Metacontrol of human creativity: The neurocognitive mechanisms of convergent and divergent thinking. NeuroImage, 210, Article 116572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116572. (PMID: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.11657231972282)
Zhuang, K., Yang, W., He, L., Yan, T., Zeng, R., Liu, C., & Qiu, J. (2021). Research status and prospects of creative cognitive mechanisms based on semantic networks. Psychological Science, 5, 1104. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001675. (PMID: 10.1037/xge0001675)
Contributed Indexing: Keywords: Creative process; Creativity; Remote associates test; Semantic network; Spreading activation model
Entry Date(s): Date Created: 20260626 Date Completed: 20260627 Latest Revision: 20260729
Update Code: 20260729
DOI: 10.3758/s13428-026-03083-0
PMID: 42362851
Βάση Δεδομένων: MEDLINE
Περιγραφή
ISSN:1554-3528
DOI:10.3758/s13428-026-03083-0