Search

Performance in elementary cognitive tasks is moderately correlated with fluid intelligence and working memory capacity. These correlations are higher for more complex tasks, presumably due to increased demands on working memory capacity. In accordance with the binding hypothesis, which states that working memory capacity reflects the limit of a person's ability to establish and maintain temporary bindings (e.g., relations between items or relations between items and their context), we manipulated binding requirements (i.e., 2, 4, and 6 relations) in three choice reaction time paradigms (i.e., two comparison tasks, two change detection tasks, and two substitution tasks) measuring mental speed. Response time distributions of 115 participants were analyzed with the diffusion model. Higher binding requirements resulted in generally reduced efficiency of information processing, as indicated by lower drift rates. Additionally, we fitted bi-factor confirmatory factor analysis to the elementary cognitive tasks to separate basal speed and binding requirements of the employed tasks to quantify their specific contributions to working memory capacity, as measured by Recall-1-Back tasks. A latent factor capturing individual differences in binding was incrementally predictive of working memory capacity, over and above a general factor capturing speed. These results indicate that the relation between reaction time tasks and working memory capacity hinges on the complexity of the reaction time tasks. We conclude that binding requirements and, therefore, demands on working memory capacity offer a satisfactory account of task complexity that accounts for a large portion of individual differences in ability.

Creative fluency and originality are pivotal indicators of creative potential. Both have been embedded in hierarchical intelligence models as part of the ability to retrieve information from long‐term memory; an ability that is often measured with indicators of retrieval fluency. Creative fluency and retrieval fluency, both expressed by the count of correct responses, are procedurally highly similar. This raises the question how creative fluency and originality are related with retrieval fluency and how both are predicted by other cognitive abilities. In a multivariate study (N = 320), we found that retrieval fluency is very strongly related with creative fluency (r =.87) and substantially related with originality (r =.59). A combined fluency factor still fitted the data well. Cognitive abilities accounted for 63% variance in fluency and 47% variance in originality. After controlling for established cognitive abilities, latent variables for fluency and originality were unrelated with one another. This suggests that the procedural proximity of the ability to fluently generate either information from long‐term memory or ad‐hoc solutions to unusual tasks and the ability to come up with original ideas needs reconsideration. Locating originality below an overarching retrieval factor is contradicted by the present data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Automated scoring is a current hot topic in creativity research. However, most research has focused on the English language and popular verbal creative thinking tasks, such as the alternate uses task. Therefore, in this study, we present a large language model approach for automated scoring of a scientific creative thinking task that assesses divergent ideation in experimental tasks in the German language. Participants are required to generate alternative explanations for an empirical observation. This work analyzed a total of 13,423 unique responses. To predict human ratings of originality, we used XLM‐RoBERTa (Cross‐lingual Language Model‐RoBERTa), a large, multilingual model. The prediction model was trained on 9,400 responses. Results showed a strong correlation between model predictions and human ratings in a held‐out test set (n = 2,682; r = 0.80; CI‐95% [0.79, 0.81]). These promising findings underscore the potential of large language models for automated scoring of scientific creative thinking in the German language. We encourage researchers to further investigate automated scoring of other domain‐specific creative thinking tasks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Broad retrieval ability (Gr) posits an essential factor of human cognitive abilities. Previous literature indicates Gr is best modeled as a higher-order factor model with lower-level factors such as ideational fluency (IF), word fluency (WF), expressional fluency (EF), or figural fluency (FF). However, the dimensionality of Gr is not well studied. Furthermore, it remains unclear whether specific retrieval affordances such as differing retrieval time periods (e.g., short vs. long) can be psychometrically separated from more general retrieval affordances. Such a distinction would imply differential associations between specific retrieval, general retrieval, and other cognitive abilities, which, in turn, depict a vital part of explanatory models of individual differences in Gr. To test these assumptions, we conducted a multivariate study ( N = 331) and evaluated competing latent variable measurement models for a variety of Gr tests. We then regressed the best measurement model onto working memory capacity, secondary memory, mental speed, and crystallized intelligence in order to evaluate the distinctiveness of Gr. Our results suggest that no specific retrieval affordances with regard to time periods can be distinguished. A higher-order model, with a second-order Gr factor above three first-order factors (IF, WF, EF, and FF) fitted the data best, extending previous literature by increasing construct coverage through the implementation of FF. All covariates show incremental predictive validity, beyond their communality. Summarizing, our results endorse a perspective on Gr as a strong and discriminant factor of cognitive abilities that is not affected by time constraints, and show that Gr is more than a linear combination of its parts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Research on self-reported knowledge and overclaiming in children is sparse. With the current study, we aim to close this gap by developing an overclaiming questionnaire measuring self-reported knowledge and overclaiming that is tailored to children. Moreover, we examine the nomological net of self-reported knowledge and overclaiming in childhood discussing three perspectives: Overclaiming as (a) a result of deliberate self-enhancement tendencies, (b) a proxy for declarative knowledge, and (c) an indicator of creative engagement. We juxtaposed overclaiming, as indicated by claiming familiarity with non-existent terms, and self-reported knowledge with fluid and crystallized intelligence, creativity, and personality traits in a sample of 897 children attending third grade. The results of several latent variable analyses were similar to findings known from adult samples: We found no strong evidence for any of the competing perspectives on overclaiming. Just like in adults, individual differences in self-reported knowledge were strongly inflated by overclaiming, and only weakly related to declarative knowledge.