Aha Under Pressure Is the Aha Experience Constrained

Aha! Under Pressure: Is the Aha! Experience Constrained by Cognitive Load Hans Stuyck, Axel Cleeremans, & Eva Van den Bussche

Instructions You will be presented with three words. Your task is to find a fourth word that you can attach to each of these words to form three new meaningful words. 2 Faculteit Psychologie en Pedagogische Wetenschappen

STOP! 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 10 day dream day break day light 3 Faculteit Psychologie en Pedagogische Wetenschappen

Solving strategies daydream world boat day breakboat world day light Analysis or non-insight 4 day dream day break day light Aha! or insight BAPS 2019

Solving strategies Insight solutions are phenomenologically and behaviorally different • • Higher accuracy Stronger feeling of suddenness Greater confidence in solution More positive emotions Business-as-usual view • • • Insight = non-insight Conscious, step-by-step process Continuous Aha! = epiphenomenon Effortful, dependent on available cognitive resources e. g. , Mac. Gregor et al. (2001) 5 Special-process view • • • Insight ≠ non-insight Unconscious, implicit process Discontinuous Entails impasse and restructuring Less effortful, relies less on available cognitive resources e. g. , Sternberg & Davidson (1995) BAPS 2019

Does insight rely on cognitive resources? • 6 BAPS 2019

Does insight rely on cognitive resources? • The first received its name because of the size, the second prefers to be dressed, the third is known for its location, the fourth because of its ability to give additional information. How do we call the fifth? 7 VS 65 × 24 – 541 BAPS 2019

Research question Are insight and non-insight problem solving hampered differentially by limiting the available cognitive resources? 8 BAPS 2019

Method 2 s • • • n = 67 No, low or high load condition 70 word puzzles (CRAT) Insight or non-insight? Solution speed, accuracy, confidence rating (0 -100), # correctly solved puzzles • Study preregistered on osf. io • Only >70% accuracy on working memory task included 9 + 4 5 OR 6 9 1 4 Dream Break Light ? 25 s 10 s Solution? Confidence? Aha? Recall? BAPS 2019

Results 3 (memory load: no, low or high) x 2 (solution strategy: insight or non-insight) design Compared to non-insight solutions, insight solutions on average were § § more frequent (22 VS 14, F(1, 63) = 13. 98, p <. 001, ηp 2 =. 96, BFIncl = 2928. 41) found faster (6. 3 VS 8. 1 sec, F(1, 63) = 19. 06, p <. 001, ηp 2 =. 99, BFIncl = 773. 45) more often accurate (90 VS 69%, F(1, 63) = 77. 31, p <. 001, ηp 2 =. 99, BFIncl = 3. 16× 1011) accompanied by higher confidence (80 VS 60, F(1, 63) = 135. 14, p <. 001, ηp 2 =. 99, BFIncl = 9. 69× 1015) Solution strategy × memory load interaction for RTs (F(2, 63) = 3. 53, p =. 035, ηp 2 =. 64, BFIncl = 2. 57) 10 BAPS 2019

Results 11 BAPS 2019

Results Mean accuracy (p. IA =. 84) Mean confidence (p. IA =. 76) Mean # solved trials (p. IA =. 20) Error bars = 95% CI 12 BAPS 2019

Conclusion • • • Insight solutions are phenomenologically different from non-insight solutions Increasing memory load slowed down non-insight solutions, but not insight solutions Memory load had no impact on accuracy, confidence and number of correctly solved trials Insight solutions do not appear to be vulnerable to cognitive load An implicit process (Special-process view)? Differential deployment of cognitive resources? • • 13 Insight stable, low intensive use of cognitive resources Analysis incremental, intensive use of cognitive resources BAPS 2019

Contact Hans Stuyck hans. stuyck@kuleuven. be 14 BAPS 2019