In a series of studies led by John Kounios and Mark Beeman, it was found that different attention-related regions of the brain are activated when individuals solve problems analytically in comparison to solving problems with insight. To differentiate between the two, a series of challenging word problems were given to individuals to solve, who were immediately put in an fMRI scanner afterwards. Participants were presented with three words on a screen (ex. Crab, pine, sauce) and the idea was to form a forth common compound word (sauce) that could proceed or come prior to the word. Upon completion of each word problem, individuals were to report whether insight or analysis was used. The fMRI scans revealed that participants who experienced insight in problem solving, activated the anterior temporal lobe of the right hemisphere. Furthermore these individuals had a greater degree of answering correctly when problems were solved through insight, rather than analysis.
Kounios, Beeman and Salvi extended their hypothesis to induce insight into participants through the method of applying tDCS, in anticipation that insight would be drawn more quicker and easier. To put this into perspective, It was demonstrated that participants were able to solve more problems with applied tDCS, in comparison to none. These results became a primary factor in linking eye movements to cognitive processes of attention and cognitive control. This was further tested by using eye tracking to record eye movements during the process of solving word problems. These results marked the grounds of this theory that if visual attention decreases a sudden insight can emerge when problem solving.
A lead study in insight and creativity conducted by Bernardi Luft et.al had revealed that by suppressing activity in the area of the brain that is involved in planning and reasoning can increase an individual's ability to think creatively and problem solve. Similar to Kounios and Beemans study, an on-screen computer test was conducted in which individuals were presented with puzzles composed of matchsticks.
The idea behind the matchsticks was to produce an equation. This task proved to be difficult due to underlying fixed notions of mathematical principles that individuals have been exposed to and must stray away from during the experiment. Upon completion of 12 matchstick problems, tDCS was applied on the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (located on the left side of the brain) and participants were split into three groups in which the puzzle was presented again. The “Sham” (i.e setup) group experienced current that was switched on and off with no stimulation, and the other groups either received positive or negative electrical stimulation.
It was evident that participants tend to perform better when receiving negative stimulation in comparison to being in a positive stimulation state or sham. The essence of Lufts study was to illustrate that by manipulating the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, one can accommodate new rules and engage in creative problem-solving tasks.
Overall both studies depict that by applying non-invasive techniques such as tDCS to certain regions of the brain, there is higher degree of performance in creatively solving problems and using insight approaches rather than analytical. Insight and problem solving studies are ongoing and with the aid of electrical stimulation the age of technological consciousness is expanding and building foundations of cognitive mapping for individuals to understand their creative abilities.
ARTICLE
Davis, Nicola. “Suppressing the Reasoning Part of the Brain Stimulates Creativity, Scientists Find.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 7 June 2017.
No comments:
Post a Comment