Halima Ahmed

Evidence suggesting that episodic specificity induction improves divergent thinking performance in younger and older adults has been taken as indicative of the role of declarative memory processes in creativity. A series of studies were carried out to verify the specificity of such findings by investigating the effects of several novel episodic and semantic memory induction procedures on a widely employed measure of divergent creative thinking (the Alternate Uses Task), in comparison to a control induction and a no-induction baseline in both younger and older adults. There was no clear evidence for a specific role played by the induction of episodic or semantic memory processes in facilitating creative thinking across the three experiments, and the effects of the induction procedures (episodic, semantic and control) on divergent thinking were not comparable across age groups. On the other hand, higher levels of creativity were generally associated with older adults (60-80 years). In Experiments 2 and 3, older adults generated a greater number of responses (fluency), more unique responses (average originality, peak originality, creativity ratings) and more varied responses (flexibility) than younger adults (18-30 years). The findings are discussed in relation to the specificity of declarative memory operations and their impact on creative thinking, especially within the context of healthy ageing.

This chapter examines the role of declarative memory in creative cognition. Investigations of the contribution of semantic memory in creativity span several decades, whereas exploration into the role of episodic memory is fairly recent. In this review, we outline the existing evidence on the influence of semantic and episodic memory-relevant processes in creative idea generation. The available evidence confirms the contributory role of knowledge organization and retrieval processes in creative ideation. In addition, the evidence suggests that a constructive episodic memory system may allow for the recombination of previous experiences to support idea generativity. Limitations associated with the evidence to date, along with further directions to explore the role of declarative memory in creative cognition, are also discussed.

Metamemory refers to our ability to introspect about our own memory processes. It is often noted that the ability to monitor one’s own memory is crucial to effective learning. Yet, there is considerable discrepancy between laboratory findings and those obtained in applied contexts (i.e. education). For the first time, metamemory monitoring was measured in the lab and in a real-world learning situation within the same study using a judgements of learning (JOLs) paradigm. Undergraduate students (N > 100) made predictions about their memory performance in semantic and episodic JOL tasks in the lab, and also predicted their exam performance at various points of the semester. We tested the empirical question whether metamemory accuracy in the lab would be related to metamemory accuracy in the real world, and also identified the best predictors of exam performance. Findings are discussed with reference to theories of metacognitive monitoring.

Augmenting creative performance has the potential to benefit both the individual and our society. Several studies have evaluated the impact of different behavioral training or induction methods on creativity. However, the findings are mixed and sometimes contradictory. Four different short-term induction methods which differed along two information processing dimensions – modality and demand – were compared within a single experimental paradigm alongside a non-induction control condition to determine which was the most effective at improving creativity. A comparison on the experimental inductions revealed that low demand induction methods boosted creativity more than high demand induction methods. However, this pattern was not maintained when comparisons included the non-induction control. These findings provide insights on factors that need to be taken into account at the level of experimental design in order to be able to evaluate the efficacy of different induction and training methods on creativity.