Attention Components and Creative Potential: An ERP Exploration Naba Ahsan, Kathy Van Benthem, Kasia Muldner Institute of Cognitive Science Carleton University

A definition for creativity Creativity = Novel and useful ideas Involves various forms of thinking Divergent thinking test of creativity = Alternative Uses Task; Incomplete figure drawing Convergent thinking test of creativity = Insight; RAT (Remote Associates Test)

Divergent thinking: Alternative Uses Task How many uses can you come up with for a paper clip? A shoe? A hanger? Etc. Incomplete figure drawing:

Convergent thinking: CRA Come up with a single word that links to each of the three words independently, to create three familiar compound words of phrases Swiss Cottage Brick

river note account

river note account BANK

teeth arrest start

teeth arrest start FALSE

Attentional Styles Creative individuals = focused/ defocused attention? Several models mention the importance of attention in creative performance i.e. Guilford (1950), Kris (1952) What kind of attention improves creativity? Defocused attention -> higher RAT scores (Mendelsohn, 1976) Focused attention -> higher performance on a standard creative thinking- drawing test (Groborz & Necka, 2003)

Temporal dynamics of creativity Why EEG? Allows for mapping time-sensitive aspects of creative cognition Ability to time-lock neural components with stimuli events Zabelina et al. (2015) investigated relationships among attention, divergent thinking based creativity and real-world creative achievement

P50 paradigm Observed 50 ms after stimulus onset

P50 = ability to filter out “irrelevant” information (represented by neural response to Tone 2 vs. Tone 1) Higher or equal response to second tone = leaky attention Lower response to second tone = selective attention Voltage (µV) Voltage (µV) 50 50 Time (ms) 50 50 Time (ms) Tone 1 Tone 2 Tone 1 Tone 2

Creativity + P50 (Zabelina et al. findings) Divergent thinking + P50 = negative correlation Real-world creative achievement + P50 = positive correlation Divergent thinkers show more selective attention Real-world creative achievers have leakier attention

Our aim Replicate Zabelina et al. (2015) Extend Correlate P50 responses and the divergent thinking test of creativity (ATTA) Extend A convergent thinking test of creativity – the Compound Remote Associates task (CRA) A non-creative, convergent task

Research questions What is the relationship between P50 responses and a convergent thinking test of creativity (CRA)? What is the relationship between P50 responses and a divergent thinking test of creativity (ATTA)? What is the relationship between P50 responses and a non- creative, convergent thinking task?

Methods

Methodology overview 1) 2) 3) Participants completed series of tasks – used to assess convergent, divergent and non-creative thinking Participants fitted with EEG net – to collect attentional data Analysis of EEG data

Task 1: Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults (ATTA) Divergent thinking test of creativity Scored on originality, fluency, elaboration and flexibility 1 verbal, 2 figural tasks

Task 2: Compound Remote Associates (CRA) Come up with a single word that combines with each of the 3 stimuli words independently, to create a familiar word or compound phrase [stimuli words] cottage Swiss brick [answer] Cheese

Task 3: Control task Find the difference between the number of consonants and the number of vowels across all 3 words [stimuli words] cottage Swiss brick [answer] 7

Methodology overview 1) 2) 3) Participants completed series of tasks – used to assess divergent, convergent and non-creative thinking Participants fitted with EEG net – to collect attentional data Analysis of EEG data

P50 Component Participants fitted with EEG net Remain still, refrain from blinking, moving, etc. 1 trial = 2 auditory tones, 500 ms apart 1 tone = 1 ms Inter-pair intervals pseudo-randomized at 6, 8 or 10 secs 100 tone pairs (14 minutes) 500 ms 6, 8, or 10 s Tone 1 Tone 2 Tone 1 Tone 2

Methodology overview 1) 2) 3) Participants completed series of tasks – used to assess divergent, convergent and non-creative thinking Participants fitted with EEG net – to collect attentional data Analysis of EEG data

Analysis methods N = 18 (original N = 36) Raw EEG data recorded in NetStation; processed in EEGLAB (MATLAB toolbox) Artifact cleaning (notch filtered at 58-62 Hz to remove line noise; removal of eye blinks, muscle movement, bad channels) Low-pass filter 1 Hz, high-pass filter 70 Hz Peak amplitudes extracted for P50

Results

Significant differences at P50 between tone 1 and tone 2 at p > 0

Results Research question 1: P50 and CRA r(16)=.178, p=.480 Research question 2: P50 and ATTA r(16)=.250, p=.317 Research question 3:P50 and Control r(16)=-.336, p=.173

Descriptive graphs P50 + CRA P50 + ATTA P50 + Control

Summary and future directions Have not found evidence that any form of creativity is associated with sensory gating (neither convergent, divergent, nor control) Both fails to replicate Zabelina, as well as not finding a Possible directions: Time-frequency analysis Relationships among other components associated with sensory gating – namely N100 and P200

P50 ratio vs. difference method Ratio (Tone2/ Tone 1) most commonly cited, but some literature suggests the difference method (Tone 2 – Tone 1) may offer better results – possible point of analysis

Thank you!