Abstract

Idea generation, the process of creating and developing candidate solutions that when implemented can solve ill-defined and complex problems, plays a pivotal role in creativity and innovation. The algorithms that underlie classical evolutionary, cognitive, and process models of idea generation, however, appear too inefficient to effectively help solve the ill-defined and complex problems for which one would engage in idea generation. To address this, these classical models have recently been redesigned as forward models, drawing heavily on the “predictive mind” literature. These pose that more efficiency can be achieved by making predictions based on heuristics, previous experiences, and domain knowledge about what material to use to generate ideas with, and evaluate these subsequently generated ideas based on whether they indeed match the initial prediction. When a discrepancy occurs between prediction and evaluation, new predictions are made, and thus shaping what actions, and how these actions, are undertaken. Although promising, forward models of idea generation remain theoretical and thus no empirical evidence exists about whether such predictions and evaluations indeed form part of the idea generation process. To take a first empirical look at this, a mixed-methods study was conducted by analyzing people’s self-reports for the reasons of the actions that they take during an idea generation task. The results showed that predictions and evaluations are pervasive in the idea generation process. Specifically, switching between concept selection and conceptual combination and idea generation, as well as repeating idea generation based on earlier selected conceptual combination, and possibly (but to a lesser extent) concept selection and the repetition thereof, are likely to be driven by predictions and evaluations. Moreover, the frequencies of the predictions and evaluations that drive these actions influenced the amount of ideas generated, amount of concepts used, and within-concept fluency (the ratio of the amount of ideas generated per concept used). Therefore, the contribution of this paper is the first empirical evidence that indicates that the idea generation process is driven by both predictions and evaluations.

Highlights

  • Idea generation, the process of creating and developing candidate solutions that when implemented can solve ill-defined and complex problems, plays a pivotal role in creativity and innovation (Isaksen et al, 2010; Mumford et al, 2012)

  • Opportunities for future work lie in the further investigation of the function of predictions and evaluations in the idea generation process. Related to this opportunity, we propose that future work should investigate the typology of predictions and evaluations that occur

  • No differences were found for the amount of ideas generated per concept between participants that reported both predictions and evaluations, with reporting predictions or reporting evaluations only

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The process of creating and developing candidate solutions that when implemented can solve ill-defined and complex problems, plays a pivotal role in creativity and innovation (Isaksen et al, 2010; Mumford et al, 2012). Cognitive, and creative process models that aim to explain the idea generation process, have recently been argued to have limited explanatory power (Gabora, 2011; Dietrich, 2015; Dietrich and Haider, 2015; Yang and Li, 2018). To address their limitations, a recent trend has been to redesign these classical models as forward models by explicitly including prediction and evaluation as part of the idea generation process (Abraham, 2018). Discrepancies between prediction and evaluation, in turn, determine if and how an action is taken

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call