Cognitive and neural mechanisms of insightful solutions

1. Cognitive and neural mechanisms of insightful solutions Mark Jung-Beeman, Northwestern University In collaboration with: John Kounios, Ed Bowden, Karuna Subramaniam, Ezra Wegbreit Thanks to: Todd Parrish, Paul Reber, Jason Haberman, Zoe Clancy, Jennifer Frymaire, and many others….

2. Left Hemisphere Relatively fine semantic coding Good for strong activation, rapid selection, categorization Might miss distant associations Right Hemisphere Relatively coarse semantic coding Weak, diffuse activation, not easily accessible (unconscious?) Better able to detect semantic overlap from distant associations

3. Insight as creative problem solving Generally considered a type of creative thought Requires cognitive flexibility (restructuring) Divergent thinking (plus convergent) Correlated with other creative processes distinct marker ~ instance of creative thinking

4. Cognitive Neuroscience of Insight Objective measure of subjective experience Covert measure / Access to unconscious processing Brain structures, type of activity can inform theories of cognitive processing

5. Cognitive Neuroscience of Insight Objective measure of subjective experience Covert measure / Access to unconscious processing Brain structures, type of activity can inform theories of cognitive processing Methodological Constraints • Need many trials for adequate signal:: noise • Need proper control condition

6. Short insight-like problems, based on the Remote Associates Test: RAT (Mednick, 1962) RAT Compound Remote Associate Problems Bowden & Jung Beeman, 1998 child tennis scan bird strike same

7. Short insight-like problems, based on the Remote Associates Test: RAT (Mednick, 1962) RAT Compound Remote Associate Problems Bowden & Jung Beeman, 1998 child tennis BRAIN scan bird MATCH strike same

8. RATCRAP More flexibility Less Unknown type of association Compound Harder Easier Solve more analytic possible (still insight>analytic)

9. Unconscious processing?Behavioral methods testing solution activation • Primary task: try to solve problems • After time limit (or after solving), target word appears • Solution or unrelated word (priming?) • lvf-RH or rvf-LH

10. Left visual field Right visual field Left Hemisphere Right Hemisphere

11. time box free

12. + lunch

13. lunch time lunch box free lunch

14. Conclusions from behavioral studies of insight-like problem solving • Solution priming for unsolved problems • “Unconscious” solution activation prior to solving • Especially in RH (lvf) • RH solution activation useful for recognizing solutions • Faster solution decisions for lvf-RH than rvf-LH! • More priming, faster recognition with insight > analytic • Especially in RH (lvf)

15. What happens duringsolving? Our behavioral methods require presenting solution * FMRI or EEG allow covert measure during solving * Neural correlates of insight • Really sudden?

16. Neural correlates during solving? Area of activation helps constrain cognitive theories • Is insight really different? • How? • Semantic/lexical integration - making new connections: RH anterior temporal lobe • Cognitive control, switching: ACC? DLPFC?

17. Cognitive Neuroscience of Insight:Methodological Constraints Controlling for difficulty AND general strategies, cognitive processes • Analytic solving - high WM demand • Different processes, nothing to do with insight

18. Event-related neuroimaging design(solution-locked potentials) • Insight solutions versus noninsight solutions • Very “tight” comparison • Not reveal whole network of problem solving • Highlights just components that are uniquely engaged (emphasized) for insight solutions

19. CRA Trial Jittered Times + Tooth Heart Potato Preparation period Solution? Problem onset Analytic or Insight? Variable solving time 2-8s 0-30s 2s 2s

20. Eureka! or Aha! experience • Solution appears sudden and obvious • As soon as you think of solution, you “just know” it works for all three words • Comes as a whole, not part by part • (vs strategic, step-by-step testing, etc)

21. CRA Trial Jittered Times + Tooth Heart Potato Preparation period Solution? Problem onset Analytic or Insight? Variable solving time 2-8s 0-30s 2s 2s

23. Replication from converging methods Electroencephalography (EEG) • Parallel & simultaneous experiment, different subs • Better temporal resolution • Type of activity informative

24. Gamma band insight effects

25. Replication from converging methods

26. Replication from converging methods

27. Replication with fMRI • more subs • better scanning • better design to separate sequential processes • shorter solving time (15s)

28. p < .0025 p < .001 Neural correlates of insight solutions R L Right middle/superior temporal lobe • lexical / semantic integration of distant relations - making new connections Also: Hippocampus/ parahippocampal gyrus • distinct memory retrieval Posterior cingulate cortex • visual attention

29. p < .0025 p < .001 Neural correlates of insight solutions R L Dorsal anterior cingulate/ medial frontal gyrus(BA 24, 32, 9) Cognitive control: • Detecting competing “activations” (solution candidates), i.e., something to switch attention to

30. What factors influence ability to achieve insight solutions? Fluctuations in attention (Kounios) Individual differences (Kounios)

31. What factors influence ability to achieve insight solutions? Fluctuations in attention (Kounios) Individual differences, resting state (Kounios) Mood (affect) - assessed or induced Attention state - assessed or induced

32. Positive Affect facilitates insight • Solving RAT probs, medical diagnoses, other (Isen, many papers) • Solving RAT problems & global attention(Anderson et al., 2006) • Work place diaries (Amabile, 2005) How? Specifically facilitate insight solving? Facilitate use of analytic strategy on “insight problems”? “Activate” right hemisphere? Modulate cognitive control, interacting w/ other processes

33. Positive affect modulates attention • Biases a global or broader focus of attention? 1 • Facilitates integrating distant elements of problems? 2 • Facilitates switching between solving strategies, 3 or between global and local attention? • Facilitates detecting competing solution candidates? 4 1Gasper et al, 2002, Anderson et al. 2006 2Fedemeier et al, 2001 3 Dreisbach et al, 2004 4 Baumann & Kuhl., 2005

34. Behavioral Results - I * * p < .05

35. Behavioral Results - I * * * * p < .05

36. Behavioral Summary Subjects higher in positive mood • solve more (insight-like) problems overall • solve more with insight Subjects higher in anxiety • solve fewer problems with insight

37. Neuroimaging Evidence Does positive affect alter approach to problem (vs reaction to it?) Multiple analyses examining relation between positive mood, insight solving, insight preparation, and overall preparation in brain activity Anatomical overlap across all analyses?

38. CRA Trial Jittered Times + Tooth Heart Potato Preparation Period Solution? Problem onset Analytical or Insight? Variable solving time 2-8s 0-15s 2s 2s

39. Analysis I : Signal increased during prep in ACC, PCC (some) ONLY prep activity in ACC increased with positive affect across all 27 subs Preparatory activity in ACC (t = 4.5, v = 2940 mm)

40. Neuroimaging Summary: Convergent Analysis Only ACC region showedfunctional overlap (black) with: positive affect states (red) active preparatory region (blue) insight solution-related effect (yellow) ACC: (i) = (preparatory activity) + (insight effect) (ii) = (preparatory activity)+ (positive affect) (iii) = (preparatory activity) + (positive affect) + (insight effect)

41. Conclusions from assessing Affect Positive affect alters preparatory activity in the ACC to predispose solving with insight by: (i) enhancing detection of competing alternatives? (ii) enhancing predisposition to switch b/w strategies? (iii) enhancing selection?

42. Inducing pos affect & anxiety, w/in subs * * * p < .05

43. Attention and insight • ACC part of attention & cognitive control • Distractibility and insight, creativity • Less “latent inhibition” - ability to suppress • Global attention, global processing • Pos mood -> inc’d insight & inc’d attentional breadth

44. Attention and insight • Attention battery: 20 tasks, 4 correlated • Rapid Identification - more solved, more insight • Central focus - less insight • Global motion - more solved • Multiple object (ball) tracking

45. Inducing attention for insight • Set 1 CRA problems • all 4 attention tasks, - Central Focus --> Rapid ID (less to more insight) • Set 2 CRA problmes Correlations? Changes in performance

46. Inducing attention for insight • Set 1 CRA problems • 1 attention tasks X 4 groups - Central Focus - Rapid ID - Ball tracking - Global motion • Set 2 CRA problems Changes in performance?

47. Inducing attention for insight Changes in performance? • Central Focus - solving, analytic, insight • Rapid ID - solving, analytic, insight • Ball tracking & Global motion - ns diffs

48. Conclusions Insight emphasizes different cognitive and neural components than does analytic processing • Right aSTG - integrate distant elements • ACC readiness to detect/switch to competing candidates • overall more top-down approach; disengage from input Mood and attentional states modulate component processes conducive to insight • Pos affect enhances, anxiety impedes: • ACC, readiness to detect competing candidates - which are more likely to be (weakly) active in RH

49. Conclusions Insight emphasizes different cognitive and neural components than does analytic processing • Right aSTG - integrate distant elements • ACC readiness to detect/switch to competing candidates • overall more top-down approach; disengage from input Mood and attentional states modulate component processes conducive to insight • Pos affect enhances, anxiety impedes: • ACC, readiness to detect competing candidates - which are more likely to be (weakly) active in RH Neural evidence can be used to constrain and expand theories of insight & creative cognition

50. General vs specific mechanisms - Visual Aha!