TY - GEN
T1 - The impact of stimulus diversity on creative solution generation
T2 - 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2003
AU - Santanen, E. L.
AU - Briggs, R. O.
AU - De Vreede, G. J.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2003 IEEE.
PY - 2003
Y1 - 2003
N2 - Creativity is essential to an organization's survival. In order to remain productive and adaptive, an organization's members must devise creative solutions - solutions that work, and that fall outside the set of known solutions. The cognitive network model (CNM) of creativity proposes a cognitive explanation of the mechanisms that cause creative solutions to occur in the human mind. This paper reports the results of an experimental test of CNM. Sixty-one four-person groups used either the FreeBrainstorming thinkLet or the DirectedBrainstorming thinkLet to generate solutions for one of two ill-structured tasks. In FreeBrainstorming, participants generate creative solutions without intervention from a moderator. In DirectedBrainstorming, a moderator presents a series of oral prompts at fixed intervals to stimulate new lines of thinking. To gain more insight into the mechanisms underlying creativity, we tested three levels of variety among the moderator's prompts. In both tasks, people using DirectedBrainstorming produced solutions with higher average creativity ratings, and higher concentrations of creative solutions than did people using FreeBrainstorming. Significant differences were also found among the three levels of variety used for DirectedBrainstorming.
AB - Creativity is essential to an organization's survival. In order to remain productive and adaptive, an organization's members must devise creative solutions - solutions that work, and that fall outside the set of known solutions. The cognitive network model (CNM) of creativity proposes a cognitive explanation of the mechanisms that cause creative solutions to occur in the human mind. This paper reports the results of an experimental test of CNM. Sixty-one four-person groups used either the FreeBrainstorming thinkLet or the DirectedBrainstorming thinkLet to generate solutions for one of two ill-structured tasks. In FreeBrainstorming, participants generate creative solutions without intervention from a moderator. In DirectedBrainstorming, a moderator presents a series of oral prompts at fixed intervals to stimulate new lines of thinking. To gain more insight into the mechanisms underlying creativity, we tested three levels of variety among the moderator's prompts. In both tasks, people using DirectedBrainstorming produced solutions with higher average creativity ratings, and higher concentrations of creative solutions than did people using FreeBrainstorming. Significant differences were also found among the three levels of variety used for DirectedBrainstorming.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84969506218&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84969506218&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1109/HICSS.2003.1174598
DO - 10.1109/HICSS.2003.1174598
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:84969506218
T3 - Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2003
BT - Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2003
A2 - Sprague, Ralph H.
Y2 - 6 January 2003 through 9 January 2003
ER -