Successful problem-solving and enhanced creative ability may improve physical health, cognitive well-being, and overall independence of older adults. In general, older adults who are more creative, may be better able to cope with cognitive decline and navigate everyday tasks. While previous research on creative performance in older adulthood showed age-related stability, open questions remain regarding the specific underlying cognitive basis for this invariability across the lifespan. Mediation analyses showed that intelligence measures served as underlying cognitive mechanisms for the stability of creative thinking in older age. The broader implications of these findings provide insight into the complex relationships supporting age-related preservation in creativity.

Metaphor is crucial in human cognition and creativity, facilitating abstract thinking, analogical reasoning, and idea generation. Typically, human raters manually score the originality of responses to creative thinking tasks - a laborious and error-prone process. Previous research sought to remedy these risks by scoring creativity tasks automatically using semantic distance and large language models (LLMs). Here, we extend research on automatic creativity scoring to metaphor generation - the ability to creatively describe episodes and concepts using nonliteral language. Metaphor is arguably more abstract and naturalistic than prior targets of automated creativity assessment. We collected 4,589 responses from 1,546 participants to various metaphor prompts and corresponding human creativity ratings. We fine-tuned two open-source LLMs (RoBERTa and GPT-2) - effectively teaching them to score metaphors like humans - before testing their ability to accurately assess the creativity of new metaphors. Results showed both models reliably predicted new human creativity ratings (RoBERTa r = .72, GPT-2 r = .70), significantly more strongly than semantic distance (r = .42). Importantly, the fine-tuned models generalized accurately to metaphor prompts they had not been trained on (RoBERTa r = .68, GPT-2 r = .63). We provide open access to the fine-tuned models, allowing researchers to assess metaphor creativity in a reproducible and timely manner.

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.

Women reliably perform worse than men on measures of spatial ability, particularly those involving mental rotation. At the same time, females also report higher levels of spatial anxiety than males. What remains unclear, however, is whether and in what ways gender differences in these cognitive and affective aspects of spatial processing may be interrelated. Here, we tested for robust gender differences across six different datasets in spatial ability and spatial anxiety (N = 1257, 830 females). Further, we tested for bidirectional mediation effects. We identified indirect relations between gender and spatial skills through spatial anxiety, as well as between gender and spatial anxiety through spatial skills. In the gender → spatial anxiety → spatial ability direction, spatial anxiety explained an average of 22.4% of gender differences in spatial ability. In the gender → spatial ability → spatial anxiety direction, spatial ability explained an average of 25.9% of gender differences in spatial anxiety. Broadly, these results support a strong relation between cognitive and affective factors when explaining gender differences in the spatial domain. However, the nature of this relation may be more complex than has been assumed in previous literature. On a practical level, the results of this study caution the development of interventions to address gender differences in spatial processing which focus primarily on either spatial anxiety or spatial ability until such further research can be conducted. Our results also speak to the need for future longitudinal work to determine the precise mechanisms linking cognitive and affective factors in spatial processing.

We propose expanding the authors' shared novelty-seeking basis for creativity and curiosity by emphasizing an underlying computational principle: Minimizing prediction errors (mismatch between predictions and incoming data). Curiosity is tied to the anticipation of minimizing prediction errors through future, novel information, whereas creative AHA moments are connected to the actual minimization of prediction errors through current, novel information.

Fostering creativity is vital for tackling 21st-century challenges, and education plays a key role in nurturing this skill. According to the associative theory, creativity involves connecting distant concepts in semantic memory. Here, we explore how semantic memory changes following an educational intervention intended to promote creativity. Specifically, we examine how a scientific education curriculum-Scientific Creativity in Practice (SCIP) program-impacts the semantic memory networks of 10-18-year-old students in a chemistry class (n = 176). Students in an Intervention group who received the SCIP intervention, and a Control group who did not, completed creative thinking tests, as well as verbal fluency tasks to estimate semantic networks in science-specific (chemistry) and domain-general (animal) categories. Results showed that the SCIP intervention enhanced performance on one test of scientific creative thinking but showed no significant difference on another. Using network science methods, we observed increased interconnectedness in both science-specific and domain-general categories, with lower path distances between concepts and reduced modularity. These traits define a 'small-world' network, balancing connections between closely related and remote concepts. Notably, the chemistry semantic network showed substantially more reorganization, consistent with the chemistry contents of the SCIP intervention. The findings suggest that semantic memory reorganization may be a cognitive mechanism underlying successful creativity interventions in science education.

The visual modality is central to both reception and expression of human creativity. Creativity assessment paradigms, such as structured drawing tasks Barbot (2018), seek to characterize this key modality of creative ideation. However, visual creativity assessment paradigms often rely on cohorts of expert or naive raters to gauge the level of creativity of the outputs. This comes at the cost of substantial human investment in both time and labor. To address these issues, recent work has leveraged the power of machine learning techniques to automatically extract creativity scores in the verbal domain (e.g., SemDis; Beaty & Johnson 53, 757-780, 2021). Yet, a comparably well-vetted solution for the assessment of visual creativity is missing. Here, we introduce AuDrA - an Automated Drawing Assessment platform to extract visual creativity scores from simple drawing productions. Using a collection of line drawings and human creativity ratings, we trained AuDrA and tested its generalizability to untrained drawing sets, raters, and tasks. Across four datasets, nearly 60 raters, and over 13,000 drawings, we found AuDrA scores to be highly correlated with human creativity ratings for new drawings on the same drawing task (r = .65 to .81; mean = .76). Importantly, correlations between AuDrA scores and human raters surpassed those between drawings' elaboration (i.e., ink on the page) and human creativity raters, suggesting that AuDrA is sensitive to features of drawings beyond simple degree of complexity. We discuss future directions, limitations, and link the trained AuDrA model and a tutorial (https://osf.io/kqn9v/) to enable researchers to efficiently assess new drawings.

Crystallized intelligence (Gc)-knowledge acquired through education and experience-supports creativity. Yet whether Gc contributes to creativity beyond providing access to more knowledge, remains unclear. We explore the role of a flexible semantic memory network structure as a potential shared mechanism of Gc and creativity. Across two studies (N = 506 and N = 161) participants completed Gc tests of vocabulary knowledge and were divided into low, medium, and high Gc groups. They also completed two alternate uses task, to assess verbal creativity, and a semantic fluency task, to estimate semantic memory networks. Across both studies, the semantic memory network structure of the high Gc group was more flexible-less structured, more clustered, and more interconnected-than that of the low Gc group. The high Gc group also outperformed the low Gc group on the creativity tasks. Our results suggest that flexible access to semantic memory supports both verbal intelligence and creativity. Educational relevance statement: Crystallized intelligence (Gc)-knowledge acquired through education and experience-supports creativity, yet whether Gc contributes to creativity beyond providing access to more knowledge (semantic memory), remains unclear. In this two-part study, we find that individuals with higher Gc tended to have a more flexible semantic memory structure, which in turn supported greater verbal creativity. This finding suggests that building students' vocabulary knowledge and verbal skills may not just expand their knowledge base, but also increase creativity through enabling more flexible access to that knowledge. If supported by further research, this could mean educational interventions targeting growth in Gc and semantic flexibility may foster students' creative capacities beyond just improving content mastery. Overall, this research highlights the interplay between building domain knowledge and cultivating creative thinking, suggesting educators should aim to develop both abilities in tandem rather than treating them separately.

The standard definition of creativity as novel and useful describes creative products, but creativity is constituted by processes. This misalignment contributes to the oft-noted challenges of operationalizing creativity. Here, we distinguish creativity as a process from creativity as an attribute (i.e. creative-ness). Operating from a priori premises of creativity theory, we develop a process definition of creativity. Specifically, creativity is defined as internal attention constrained by a generative goal. This definition comprises three criteria: 1) attention is directed internally (toward mental representations); 2) attentional operations (e.g. search, manipulation) are constrained to fit parameters of a to-be-achieved goal state (whether or not a goal is actually achieved); and 3) the goal state is generative (not already precisely held in memory). We illustrate how these three definitional process elements align with insights yielded by creativity neuroscience, clarify ontological distinctions (e.g. from mind-wandering and retrieval), and relate the process definition to process-based models. The process definition provides minimal necessity and sufficiency criteria for whether a process should be considered creativity, but does not exclude the many other perceptual, emotional, etc. elements that can contribute to creativity processes. Researchers should specify whether they are studying creativity-as-process vs. creative-ness, and consider including process-focused assessments.

Across development, experience has a strong impact on the way we think and adapt. School experience affects academic and social-emotional outcomes, yet whether differences in pedagogical experience modulate underlying brain network development is still unknown. In this study, we compared the brain network dynamics of students with different pedagogical backgrounds. Specifically, we characterized the diversity and stability of brain activity at rest by combining both resting-state fMRI and diffusion-weighted structural imaging data of 87 4-18 years old students experiencing either the Montessori pedagogy (i.e., student-led, trial-and-error pedagogy) or the traditional pedagogy (i.e., teacher-led, test-based pedagogy). Our results revealed spatiotemporal brain dynamics differences between students as a function of schooling experience at the whole-brain level. Students from Montessori schools showed overall higher functional integration (higher system diversity) and neural stability (lower spatiotemporal diversity) compared to traditionally schooled students. Higher integration was explained mainly through the cerebellar (CBL) functional network. In contrast, higher temporal stability was observed in the ventral attention, dorsal attention, somatomotor, frontoparietal, and CBL functional networks. This study suggests a form of experience-dependent dynamic functional connectivity plasticity, in learning-related networks.