Attentional Priming Effects on Creativity

The authors tested the hypothesis that a broad or narrow scope of perceptual attention engen- ders an analogously broad or narrow focus of concep- tual attention, which in turn bolsters or undermines creative generation. In the first two experiments, par- ticipants completed visual tasks that forced them to fo- cus perceptual attention on a comparatively broad or narrow visual area. As predicted, broad, compared to narrow initial focusing of perceptual attention subse- quently led to generation of more original uses for a brick (Experiment 1) and generation of more unusual category exemplars (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, participants were merely asked to contract their frontalis versus corrugator muscles, producing rudi- mentary peripheral feedback associated with broad versus narrow perceptual focus. As predicted, frontalis contraction, relative to corrugator contraction, led to the production of more original uses for a pair of scis- sors. Together, these three experiments provided con- verging initial support for our attentional priming hypothesis, suggesting that situationally induced vari- ations in the scope of perceptual attention (and simple cues associated with such variations) may corre- spondingly expand or constrict the focus of conceptual attention within the semantic network, thereby improv- ing or diminishing creativity.

[1]  S. Mednick The associative basis of the creative process. , 1962, Psychological review.

[2]  P. A. Williamson,et al.  Asymmetric neural control systems in human self-regulation. , 1984, Psychological review.

[3]  Michael C. Anderson,et al.  On the status of inhibitory mechanisms in cognition: memory retrieval as a model case. , 1995, Psychological review.

[4]  C. Martindale Creativity and connectionism. , 1995 .

[5]  Steven M. Smith,et al.  The creative cognition approach. , 1995 .

[6]  W. Trammell Neill,et al.  Selective attention and the suppression of cognitive noise. , 1987 .

[7]  J. Förster,et al.  The influence of approach and avoidance motor actions on creative cognition. , 2002 .

[8]  Barry H. Cohen,et al.  Muscle tension patterns during auditory attention , 1992, Biological Psychology.

[9]  M. Posner,et al.  Selective attention and cognitive control , 1987, Trends in Neurosciences.

[10]  Michael C. Anderson,et al.  Interference and inhibition in memory retrieval. , 1996 .

[11]  J. Vaidya,et al.  The two general activation systems of affect: Structural findings, evolutionary considerations, and psychobiological evidence , 1999 .

[12]  D. Tucker,et al.  Motivating the focus of attention. , 1994 .

[13]  R. Friedman,et al.  The effects of promotion and prevention cues on creativity. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  C. Martindale,et al.  Cognition and Consciousness , 2021, The Science of Consciousness.

[15]  B. DeSchepper,et al.  An inhibition-based fan effect : Evidence for an active suppression mechanism in selective attention , 1992 .