What Your Eye Movements Reveal About Your “Eureka!” Moments

A “Eureka” moment, otherwise known as an insight, refers to an abrupt, conscious understanding of a concept that results from a change in one’s representation of the problem. These moments occur after a time of unconscious processing and, therefore, appear to occur all at once. This is in contrast to analytic processing, which is a step-by-step process that takes place in one’s consciousness. The sudden ability to restructure a problem in a way that yields an insight often follows the breaking of a mental block that arose from an initial fixation on an incorrect strategy. Past studies have shown that brain activity prior to problem solving differs between those who will solve the problem using insight versus those who will solve through analysis. For example, in preparation of the problem, there will be stronger activation in several areas including the anterior cingulate cortex and bilateral temporal cortices in someone who is about to solve the problem using insight, as seen with EEG and fMRI measurements (Kounios et al., 2006). Conversely, this same preparatory period will reveal stronger activity in the visual cortex for someone who is about to solve the problem analytically (Kounios et al., 2006). This suggests that insight involves a decrease in external visual input so that one can instead focus their attention internally.

Dr. Carola Salvi discussed several important findings that allow us to better understand the process of solving a problem using insight. One aspect of insight that she discussed was a study that utilized a speed-accuracy decomposition procedure to examine the time-course involved with processing insight solutions (Kounios & Beeman, 2014). The results of this study showed that there was no response information prior to solving a problem by insight, which reveals that insight is indeed a sudden arrival at a solution with no conscious buildup. Furthermore, in the paper by Kounios and Beeman that Dr. Salvi discussed, it was shown that when solution-related words are presented subliminally to participants in an experiment, they are more likely to solve using insight (2014). This result suggests that insight is accomplished by significant unconscious processing prior to arriving at the solution. Dr. Salvi also discussed neuroimaging studies that used EEG measurements to reveal an unexpected finding of a burst of alpha-band activity over the right occipital cortex, which immediately preceded the expected gamma-band activity. Because alpha-bands are suggestive of inhibition of neurons, this finding suggests inhibition of visual inputs prior to arriving at an insight solution (Kounios & Beeman, 2014). This result reveals a blocking of noise from the visual environment so that one can focus their attention internally to obtain a solution from beneath their consciousness. Together, all of these studies demonstrate that insight involves a spontaneous, conscious realization of a solution that follows a period of unconscious processing.

Dr. Salvi also discussed work she had done to better understand insight by examining eye movements and blinks. Her studies demonstrated that in the period prior to arriving at a solution via insight, participants blinked more frequently and for longer periods of time. Furthermore, she discovered that participants tended to avert their eyes and look away from the words in the problem presented to them. These results are consistent with the idea that insight solving involves an internal focus of attention, which is accomplished by filtering incoming visual information. Dr. Salvi also talked about her recent findings of pupil dilation occurring about one second before solving a problem by insight. She suggested that this may indicate the involvement of the locus coeruleus and norepinephrine system.

Similarly to the experiments that Dr. Salvi discussed, scientists at Ohio State University have begun to use eye-tracking and pupil dilation technology in order to better understand the mechanisms underlying the process of insight. Just as Dr. Salvi had discussed EEG measurements that are indicative of an insight, these Ohio State researchers could use eye movements to predict whether someone was about to have an insight. Their experiment involved having students play a computer game against an anonymous opponent. A screen would display a set of 11 numbers, and for each round the student and their opponent would pick one number. The best strategy for the game involved picking the lower number, so zero was the optimal choice. The participants played multiple rounds, and after each round the players were offered the option to commit to one number for the rest of the trials. The researchers ultimately wanted the players to reach an insight in which they realized that zero is the best number to commit to. The eye-tracking data revealed that the participants who arrived at an insight looked at zero and other low numbers more often, even if they ended up committing to a different number. This supports the idea that insight solutions involve a preceding period of unconscious processing. In terms of the option to commit to a number, participants who eventually reached an insight solution did not show an increase in the amount of times that they looked at the “Commit” button before choosing to commit, revealing that the insight arrives in one’s consciousness all at once. Together, these results are consistent with the findings that Dr. Salvi discussed because they reflect both the unconscious processing involved in insight, as well as the spontaneity of the arrival of the solution in consciousness.

The Ohio State research project also obtained results on pupil dilation that mirrored those that Dr. Salvi had discussed. Their results showed that the participants who solved the problem via insight showed significant pupil dilation prior to committing to zero. This pupil dilation then disappeared after the problem was solved. The fact that these findings correspond with those of Dr. Salvi reinforces the validity of the results, and suggests that this would be an interesting area of future research.

The findings of the Ohio State researchers complement those discussed by Dr. Salvi in relation to insight. Together, these results both confirm properties of insight such as the fact that insight occurs after a period of unconscious processing that likely involves an internal focus of attention, and that it appears suddenly in one’s consciousness. Furthermore, both studies reveal that utilizing eye movements to measure the process of insight has proved to be a valuable tool that should be used in future studies of insight. Because both of these studies are fairly novel, more work should be done to capitalize on their results and uncover more of the neural mechanisms underlying insight.

Sources:
Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2014). The Cognitive Neuroscience of Insight. Annual Review of 
Psychology, 65, 71-93.

Kounios, J., Frymiare, J. L., Bowden, E. M., Fleck, J. I., Subramaniam, K., Parrish, T. B., & 
Jung-Beeman, M. (2006). The Prepared Mind: Neural Activity Prior to Problem Presentation Predicts Subsequent Solution by Sudden Insight. Psychological Science, 17(10), 882–890. 

Ohio State University. (2017, April 17). Aha! Watching people as they are struck by sudden 
insight. ScienceDaily. Retrieved February 14, 2019 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/04/170417154847.htm


Salvi, C., Bricolo, E., Franconeri, S. L., Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2015). Sudden insight is 

associated with shutting out visual inputs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(6), 1814-1819.