Normative data for 144 compound remote associate problems

Abstract

We have developed and tested 144 compound remote associate problems. Across eight experiments, 289 participants were given four time limits (2 sec, 7 sec, 15 sec, or 30 sec) for solving each problem. This paper provides a brief overview of the problems and normative data regarding the percentage of participants solving, and mean time-to-solution for, each problem at each time limit. These normative data can be used in selecting problems on the basis of difficulty or mean time necessary for reaching a solution.

References

  1. Ansburg, P. I. (2000). Individual differences in problem solving via insight.Current Psychology,19, 143–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Baba, Y. (1982). An analysis of creativity by means of the remote associates test for adults revised in Japanese (Jarat Form-A).Japanese Journal of Psychology,52, 330–336.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Beeman, M. J., &Bowden, E. M. (2000). The right hemisphere maintains solution-related activation for yet-to-be-solved problems.Memory & Cognition,28, 1231–1241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Beeman, M. J., Bowden, E. M., & Haberman, J. (2002, April).The Aha!experience and semantic activation in the cerebral hemispheres. Poster presented at 9th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, San Francisco.

  5. Beeman, M. J., Haberman, J., & Bowden, E. M. (2002, November).fMRI signal at the moment of insight, during insight-like verbal problems. Paper presented at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Kansas City.

  6. Ben-Zur, H. (1989). Automatic and directed search processes in solving simple semantic-memory problems.Memory & Cognition,17, 617–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bowden, E. M., &Beeman, M. J. (1998). Getting the right idea: Semantic activation in the right hemisphere may help solve insight problems.Psychological Science,9, 435–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bowden, E. M., &Jung-Beeman, M. J. (2003). Aha! Insight experience correlates with solution activation in the right hemisphere.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,10, 730–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bowers, K. S., Regehr, G., Balthazard, C., &Parker, K. (1990). Intuition in the context of discovery.Cognitive Psychology,22, 72–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dallob, P. I., & Dominowski, R. L. (1993, April).Erroneous solutions to verbal insight problems: Effects of highlighting critical material. Paper presented at the 73rd annual meeting of the Western Psychological Association, Portland, OR.

  11. Dorfman, J., Shames, V. A., &Kihlstrom, J. F. (1996). Intuition, incubation, and insight: Implicit cognition in problem solving. In G. D. M. Underwood (Ed.),Implicit cognition (pp. 257–296). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fodor, E. M. (1999). Subclinical inclination toward manic-depression and creative performance on the Remote Associates Test.Personality & Individual Differences,27, 1273–1283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hamilton, M. A. (1982). “Jamaicanizing” the Mednick Remote Associates Test of creativity.Perceptual & Motor Skill,55, 321–322.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kounios, J., Beeman, M. J., Liu, S., Frymiare, J., Angelakis, E., & Stathopoulou, T. (2003, March).The spark of insight: Electrophysiological correlates of the Aha!experience in problem solving. Poster presented at the 10th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, New York.

  15. McFarlin, D. B., &Blascovich, J. (1984). On the Remote Associates Test (RAT) as an alternative to illusory performance feedback—A methodological note.Basic & Applied Social Psychology,5, 223–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process.Psychological Review,69, 220–232.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mednick, S. A. (1968). Remote Associates Test.Journal of Creative Behavior,2, 213–214.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mednick, S. A., &Mednick, M. P. (1967).Examiner’s manual: Remote Associates Test. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Mikulincer, M., &Sheffi, E. (2000). Adult attachment style and cognitive reactions to positive affect: A test of mental categorization and creative problem solving.Motivation & Emotion,24, 149–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Nevo, B. &Levin, I. (1978). Remote Associates Test: Assessment of creativity in Hebrew.Megamot,24, 87–98.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schooler, J. W., &Melcher, J. (1995). The ineffability of insight. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.),The creative cognition approach (pp. 249–268). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Shames, V. A. (1994).Is there such a thing as implicit problem-solving? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona.

  23. Smith, S. M., &Blankenship, S. E. (1989). Incubation effects.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,27, 311–314.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Vohs, K. D., &Heatherton, T. F. (2001). Self-esteem and threats to self: Implications for self-construals and interpersonal perceptions.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,81, 1103–1118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Edward M. Bowden or Mark Jung-Beeman.

Additional information

The data were collected while the authors were at the Department of Neurology, Cognitive Neuroscience Section, Rush Medical Center, Chicago, IL, and the Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bowden, E.M., Jung-Beeman, M. Normative data for 144 compound remote associate problems. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 35, 634–639 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195543

Download citation

Keywords

  • Target Word
  • Problem Word
  • Compound Word
  • fMRI Experiment
  • Insight Problem