Advertisement

Personality Metatraits, Neurocognitive Networks, and Reasoning Norms for Creative Decision-Making

Chapter
  • 82 Downloads
Part of the Studies in Rhythm Engineering book series (SRE)

Abstract

Creative decision-making can be viewed as comprising two elements—generative and evaluative thinking (Guilford, 1967; Paulus, Coursey, & Kenworthy, 2019; Sunstein & Hastie, 2015). Generative thinking produces a large number of alternatives. Evaluative thinking eliminates less-promising options (and revises them) for a small number of high-quality solutions. Iterative generative-evaluative thinking is discussed in light of dual personality metatraits, neurocognitive networks, and reasoning modes; these three themes—progressing from creative personal motivation to individual cognition to group norms—provide consistent perspectives for generative-evaluative thinking in terms of plasticity–stability metatraits, default-executive brain networks, and abductive–deductive/inductive modes of reasoning, respectively.

References

  1. Abraham, A. (2018). The forest versus the trees: Creativity, cognition and imagination. In R. E. Jung & O. Vartanian (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of the neuroscience of creativity (pp. 195–210). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316556238.012
  2. Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 123–167.Google Scholar
  3. Anthony, E. (1987). Risk, vulnerability, and resilience: An overview. In E. Anthony & B. Cohler (Eds.), The invulnerable child (pp. 3–48). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  4. Anticevic, A., Cole, M. W., Murray, J. D., Corlett, P. R., Wang, X. J., & Krystal, J. H. (2012). The role of default network deactivation in cognition and disease. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(12), 584–592.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.10.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ashby, F. G., & Isen, A. M. (1999). A neuropsychological theory of positive affect and its influence on cognition. Psychological Review, 106(3), 529.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.3.529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 150–166.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868306294907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baas, M., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2008). A meta-analysis of 25 years of mood-creativity research: Hedonic tone, activation, or regulatory focus? Psychological Bulletin, 134, 779–806.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barron, F., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 439–476.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.002255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Kaufman, S. B., & Silvia, P. J. (2015). Default and executive network coupling supports creative idea production. Scientific Reports, 5(1), 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep10964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Benedek, M., Jauk, E., Fink, A., Koschutnig, K., Reishofer, G., Ebner, F., & Neubauer, A. C. (2014). To create or to recall? Neural mechanisms underlying the generation of creative new ideas. NeuroImage, 88, 125–133.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blasi, G., Goldberg, T. E., Weickert, T., Das, S., Kohn, P., Zoltick, B., Bertolino, A., Callicott, J.H., Weinberger, D.R., & Mattay, V.S. (2006). Brain regions underlying response inhibition and interference monitoring and suppression. European Journal of Neuroscience, 23(6), 1658–1664.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.04680.x.
  13. Block, J. (2010). The five-factor framing of personality and beyond: Some ruminations. Psychological Inquiry, 21, 2–25.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10478401003596626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bransford, J. D., & Stein, B. S. (1984). The IDEAL problem solver: A guide for improving thinking, learning, and creativity. New York: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  15. Brown, T. (2009). Change by design. New York, NY: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  16. Cai, D. J., Mednick, S. A., Harrison, E. M., Kanady, J. C., & Mednick, S. C. (2009). REM, not incubation, improves creativity by priming associative networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 106, 10130.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0900271106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Camacho, L. M., & Paulus, P. B. (1995). The role of social anxiousness in group brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(6), 1071–1080.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.6.1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carne, G. C., & Kirton, M. J. (1982). Styles of creativity: Test-score correlations between Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Psychological Reports, 50, 31–36.  https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1982.50.1.31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Carson, S., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. (2003). Decreased latent inhibition is associated with increased creative achievement in high-functioning individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 499–506.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Reply to Eysenck. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(8), 861–865.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90002-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cramer-Petersen, C. L., Christensen, B. T., & Ahmed-Kristensen, S. (2019). Empirically analyzing design reasoning patterns: Abductive-deductive reasoning patterns dominate design idea generation. Design Studies, 60, 39–70.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2018.10.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York. NY: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  23. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Sawyer, K. (2014). Shifting the Focus from Individual to Organizational Creativity. In M. Csikszentmihalyi (Ed.), The Systems Model of Creativity (pp. 67–71). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9085-7_6
  24. Depue, R. A., & Collins, P. F. (1999). Neurobiology of the structure of personality: Dopamine, facilitation of incentive motivation, and extraversion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 491–569.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x99002046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multi-informant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1138–1151.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. DeYoung, C. G. (2013). The neuromodulator of exploration: A unifying theory of the role of dopamine in personality. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 1–26.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. DeYoung, C. G. (2014). Openness/intellect: A dimension of personality reflecting cognitive exploration. In M. L. Cooper & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology: Personality processes and individual differences (Vol. 4, pp. 369–399). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.  https://doi.org/10.1037/14343-017
  28. DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2002). Higher-order factors of the Big Five predict conformity: Are there neuroses of health? Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 533–552.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0191-8869(01)00171-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 497–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.497.
  30. Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246–1256.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dong, A., Lovallo, D., & Mounarath, R. (2015). The effect of abductive reasoning on concept selection decisions. Design Studies, 37, 37–58.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2014.12.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Dunne, D., & Martin, R. (2006). Design thinking and how it will change management education: An interview and discussion. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(4), 512–523.  https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2006.23473212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ellamil, M., Dobson, C., Beeman, M., & Christoff, K. (2012). Evaluative and generative modes of thought during the creative process. Neuroimage, 59(2), 1783–1794.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.08.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Eysenck, H. J. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Fann, K. T. (2012). Peirce’s theory of abduction. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  38. Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 290–309.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  40. Fürst, G., Ghisletta, P., & Lubart, T. (2016). Toward an integrative model of creativity and personality: Theoretical suggestions and preliminary empirical testing. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 50(2), 87–108.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2001). When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 513–524.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gerhardt, M. W., Rode, J. C., & Peterson, S. J. (2007). Exploring mechanisms in the personality-performance relationship: Mediating roles of self-management and situational constraints. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1344–1355.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.04.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42. https://dx.doi.org/  https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26
  44. Gough, H. G. (1979). A creative personality scale for the Adjective Check List. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1398–1405.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.8.1398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Green, A. E., Cohen, M. S., Raab, H. A., Yedibalian, C. G., & Gray, J. R. (2015). Frontopolar activity and connectivity support dynamic conscious augmentation of creative state. Human Brain Mapping, 36(3), 923–934.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Guilford, J. P. (1957). Creative abilities in the arts. Psychological Review, 64(2), 110–118.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  48. Guncer, B., & Oral, G. (1993). Relationship between creativity and nonconformity to school discipline as perceived by teachers of Turkish elementary school children, by controlling for their grade and sex. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 20, 208–214.Google Scholar
  49. Habermas, J. (1978). Knowledge and human interests (2nd ed.) (J. Shapiro, Trans.). London: Heinemann.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2149243.
  50. Hadamard, J. (1954). An essay on the psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Courier Corporation.Google Scholar
  51. Harvey, S. (2013). A different perspective: The multiple effects of deep level diversity on group creativity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(5), 822–832.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Hunter, S. T., & Cushenbery, L. (2015). Is being a jerk necessary for originality? Examining the role of disagreeableness in the sharing and utilization of original ideas. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30, 621–639.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9386-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Jauk, E. (2019). A bio-psycho-behavioral model of creativity. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 27, 1–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.08.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1995). Mental models, deductive reasoning, and the brain. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences (pp. 999–1008). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  55. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2009). How we reason. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2015). Problem solving and reasoning, Psychology of. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed., Vol. 19, pp. 61–67). Amsterdam: Elsevier.  https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.43076-x.
  57. Joullié, J. E. (2016). The philosophical foundations of management thought. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(1), 157–179.  https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2012.0393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  59. Kaufman, S. B., Quilty, L. C., Grazioplene, R. G., Hirsh, J. B., Gray, J. R., Peterson, J. B., & DeYoung, C. G. (2016). Openness to experience and intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Personality, 84(2), 248–258.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kelley, T. (2001). The art of innovation: lessons in creativity from IDEO, America’s leading design firm. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  61. King, L. A., Walker, L. M., & Broyles, S. J. (1996). Creativity and the five-factor model. Journal of Research in Personality, 30, 189–203.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1996.0013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Klahr, D. (2000). Exploring science: The cognition and development of discovery processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  63. Klein, G. (2013). Seeing what others don’t: The remarkable ways we gain insights. New York, NY: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
  64. Kroll, E., & Koskela, L. (2015). On abduction in design. In J. S. Gero (Ed.), Design computing and cognition ’14 (pp. 327–344). London, UK: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14956-1_19.
  65. Liu, S., Erkkinen, M. G., Healey, M. L., Xu, Y., Swett, K. E., Chow, H. M., & Braun, A. R. (2015). Brain activity and connectivity during poetry composition: Toward a multidimensional model of the creative process. Human Brain Mapping, 36(9), 3351–3372.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lubow, R. E. (1989). Latent inhibition and conditioned attention theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.  https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Martin, R. (2009). The design of business: Why design thinking is the next competitive advantage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  69. Mayseless, N., Eran, A., & Shamay-Tsoory, S. G. (2015). Generating original ideas: The neural underpinning of originality. Neuroimage, 116, 232–239.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.05.030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. McBurney, J. H. (1936). The place of the enthymeme in rhetorical theory. Communication Monographs, 3(1), 49–74.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03637753609374841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1258–1265.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81–90.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Meltzer, H. Y. (1990). Role of serotonin in depression. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 600, 400–486.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1990.tb16904.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Moraru, A., Memmert, D., & Van der Kamp, J. (2016). Motor creativity: The roles of attention breadth and working memory in a divergent doing task. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 28, 856–867.  https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2016.1201084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Mount, M. K., & Barrick, M. R. (1995). The Big Five personality dimensions: Implications for research and practice in human resources management. In K. M. Rowland & G. Ferris (Vol. Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management. Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 13, pp. 153–200). Greenwich, CT: JAI.  https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2016.1201084.
  76. Nemeth, C. J., & Staw, B. M. (1989). The tradeoffs of social control and innovation in small groups and organizations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 22, pp. 75–210). New York: Academic Press.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60308-1.
  77. Newell, A., Shaw, J., & Simon, H. (1962). The processes of creative thinking. In H. Gruber, G. Terrell & M. Wertheimer (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to creative thinking (pp. 63–119). New York: Atherton Press.  https://doi.org/10.1037/13117-003
  78. Nijstad, B. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2002). Creativity and group innovation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 401–407.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Nijstad, B. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., Rietzschel, E. F., & Baas, M. (2010). The dual pathway to creativity model: Creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence. European Review of Social Psychology, 21(1), 34–77.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10463281003765323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Nijstad, B. A., & Levine, J. M (2007). Group creativity and the stages of creative group problem solving. In M. Hewstone, H. A. W. Schut, J. B. F. de Wit, K. van den Bos, & M. S. Stroebe (Eds.), The scope of social psychology: Theory and applications (pp. 159–172). New York: Psychology Press.  https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203965245
  81. Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2006). How the group affects the mind: A cognitive model of idea generation in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 186–213.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking (1st ed.). New York, NY: Scribner.Google Scholar
  83. Panksepp, J. (1999). Affective neuroscience. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Paulus, P. B., & Brown, V. R. (2007). Toward more creative and innovative group idea generation: A cognitive-social-motivational perspective of brainstorming. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1(1), 248–265.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00006.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Paulus, P. B., Coursey, L. E., & Kenworthy, J. B. (2019). Divergent and convergent collaborative creativity. In I. Lebuda & V. P. Glǎveanu (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Social Creativity Research (pp. 245–262). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Peirce, C. S. (1931–1958). Collected papers (Vols. 1–8, C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss, & A. Burks, Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  87. Perkins, R. M. (1993). Personality variables and implications for critical thinking. College Student Journal, 27(1), 106–111.Google Scholar
  88. Peterson, J. B., Smith, K. W., & Carson, S. (2002). Openness and extraversion are associated with reduced latent inhibition: Replication and commentary. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1137–1147.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00004-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Pickering, A. D., Smillie, L. D., & DeYoung, C. G. (2016). Neurotic individuals are not creative thinkers. Trends in Cognitive Science, 20(1), 1–2.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Pinho, A. L., de Manzano, Ö., Fransson, P., Eriksson, H., & Ullén, F. (2014). Connecting to create: Expertise in musical improvisation is associated with increased functional connectivity between premotor and prefrontal areas. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(18), 6156–6163.  https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4769-13.2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Raichle, M. E. (2015). The brain’s default mode network. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 38, 433–447.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-071013-014030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Reynolds, J., McClelland, A., & Furnham, A. (2014). An investigation of cognitive test performance across conditions of silence, background noise and music as a function of neuroticism. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 27(4), 410–421.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2013.864388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Rietzschel, E. F., De Dreu, C. K., & Nijstad, B. A. (2009). What are we talking about, when we talk about creativity? Group creativity as a multifaceted, multistage phenomenon. Research on Managing Groups and Teams, 12, 1–28.  https://doi.org/10.1108/S1534-0856(2009)0000012004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Roozenburg, N. F. (1993). On the pattern of reasoning in innovative design. Design Studies, 14(1), 4–18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(05)80002-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Roozenburg, N. F., & Eekels, J. (1995). Product design: Fundamentals and methods (Vol. 2). Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  96. Salgado, J. F. (1997). The five-factor model of personality and job performance in the European community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 30–43.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.1.30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Sawyer, R. K. (2011). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Schacter, D. L., Addis, D. R., & Buckner, R. L. (2007). Remembering the past to imagine the future: The prospective brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8(9), 657–661.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Schacter, D. L., Addis, D. R., Hassabis, D., Martin, V. C., Spreng, R. N., & Szpunar, K. K. (2012). The future of memory: Remembering, imagining, and the brain. Neuron, 76(4), 677–694.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.11.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Seeley, W. W., Menon, V., Schatzberg, A. F., Keller, J., Glover, G. H., Kenna, H., Reiss, A. L., & Greicius, M. D. (2007). Dissociable intrinsic connectivity networks for salience processing and executive control. Journal of Neuroscience, 27(9), 2349–2356.  https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5587-06.2007.
  101. Serra, A. M., Jones, S. H., Toone, B., & Gray, J. A. (2001). Impaired associative learning in chronic schizophrenics and their first-degree relatives: A study of latent inhibition and the Kamin blocking effect. Schizophrenia Research, 48(2), 273–289.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-9964(00)00141-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Silvia, P. J., Kaufman, J. C., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Wigert, B. (2011). Cantankerous creativity: Honesty-humility, agreeableness, and the HEXACO structure of creative achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 687–689.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.06.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Simon, H. A. (2001). Problem Solving and Reasoning, Psychology of. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 12120–12123). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.  https://doi.org/10.1016/b0-08-043076-7/00543-x.
  104. Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(2), 108–131.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_01.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Sunstein, C. R., & Hastie, R. (2015). Wiser: Getting beyond groupthink to make groups smarter. Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  106. Sutton, R. I., & Hargadon, A. (1996). Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4), 685–718.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2393872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Tork, I. (1990). Anatomy of the serotonergic system. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 600, 9–35.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1990.tb16870.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Vartanian, O., Beatty, E. L., Smith, I., Blackler, K., Lam, Q., & Forbes, S. (2018). One-way traffic: The inferior frontal gyrus controls brain activation in the middle temporal gyrus and inferior parietal lobule during divergent thinking. Neuropsychologia, 118, 68–78.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.02.024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt-Brace.Google Scholar
  110. West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology, 51(3), 355–387.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Communication Arts, University of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations