Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T00:10:13.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is a wandering mind a novelty-seeking mind? The curious case of incubation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2024

Myrthe Faber Open the ORCID record for Myrthe Faber [Opens in a new window]  and
Alwin de Rooij Open the ORCID record for Alwin de Rooij [Opens in a new window]
Myrthe Faber*
Affiliation:
Department of Cognitive Science and Artificial Intelligence, Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands m.faber@tilburguniversity.edu Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Alwin de Rooij
Affiliation:
Department of Communication and Cognition, Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands alwinderooij@tilburguniversity.edu Centre of Applied Research for Art, Design and Technology, Avans University of Applied Sciences, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Novelty-Seeking Model can explain incubation's effect on creativity by assuming an adaptive decision threshold. During an impasse, the threshold for novelty becomes too high and biased to previous neural activity, hindering progress. Incubation “resets” this threshold through attentional decoupling, allowing for spontaneous ideas to emerge from subsequent mind wandering or other activities that attract attention, facilitating progress.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 47 , 2024 , e97
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aston-Jones, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2005). An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: Adaptive gain and optimal performance. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 28, 403–450. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.28.061604.135709CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beda, Z., & Smith, S. M. (2022). Unfixate your creative mind: Forgetting fixation and its applications. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 8(1), 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Rooij, A. (2023). Inner speaking and uncertainty during idea generation. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 57(3), 376–396. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Rooij, A., Atef, A., & Faber, M. (2023, November 7). A wandering mind is not always a creative mind: How thought dynamics explain the relationship between mind wandering and creativity. Retrieved from https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/w45hfCrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Rooij, A., Vromans, R. D., & Dekker, M. (2018). Noradrenergic modulation of creativity: Evidence from pupillometry. Creativity Research Journal, 30(4), 339–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2018.1530533Google Scholar
Faber, M., Krasich, K., Bixler, R. E., Brockmole, J. R., & D'Mello, S. K. (2020). The eye–mind wandering link: Identifying gaze indices of mind wandering across tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 46(10), 1201. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000743Google ScholarPubMed
Gauselmann, P., Frings, C., Schmidt, M., & Tempel, T. (2023). Protecting against mental impasses: Evidence of selective retrieval mitigating the impact of fixation in creative problem solving. Cognition, 239, 105547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105547CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mittner, M., Hawkins, G. E., Boekel, W., & Forstmann, B. U. (2016). A neural model of mind wandering. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(8), 570–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poincaré, H. (2022). The foundations of science: Science and hypothesis, the value of science, science and method. Digicat. (Original work published 1904).Google Scholar
Ritter, S. M., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2014). Creativity – the unconscious foundations of the incubation period. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 000215. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00215CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salvi, C., Simoncini, C., Grafman, J., & Beeman, M. (2020). Oculometric signature of switch into awareness? Pupil size predicts sudden insight whereas microsaccades predict problem-solving via analysis. NeuroImage, 217, 116933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116933CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simonton, D. K. (2023). The blind-variation and selective-retention theory of creativity: Recent developments and current status of BVSR. Creativity Research Journal, 35(3), 304–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2022.2059919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar