The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science.
Abstract
This chapter reports an investigation of On-line Creativity. I present a new account of the cognitive and social mechanisms underlying complex thinking of creative scientists as they work on significant problems in contemporary science. I lay out an innovative methodology that I have developed for investigating creative and complex thinking in a realworld context. Using this method, I have discovered that there are a number of strategies that are used in contemporary science that increase scientists' likelihood of making discoveries. The findings reported in this chapter provide new insights into complex scientific thinking and will dispel many of the myths surrounding the generation of new concepts and scientific discoveries.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/5657.001.0001 · Cited by 3,537
Schema induction and analogical transfer
Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(83)90002-6 · Cited by 3,010 · cited 2×
“Psychological research has shown that subjects have great difficulty in going outside their current problem to make an analogy (e.g., Gick & Holyoak, 1983), yet the scientists are able to transcend this problem.”
BackgroundConfirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing
Klayman, J., & Ha, Y.-W. (1987) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.94.2.211 · Cited by 2,094
Dual space search during scientific reasoning
Klahr, D., & Dunbar, K. (1988) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1201_1 · Cited by 1,058
Self-citation
Cited by
When and where do we apply what we learn?: A taxonomy for far transfer
Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612 · Cited by 2,076
Barron, B. (2003) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1203_1 · Cited by 1,446
Darwin's mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds
Penn, D. C., Holyoak, K. J., & Povinelli, D. J. (2008) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x08003543 · Cited by 1,174
All Other Things Being Equal: Acquisition and Transfer of the Control of Variables Strategy
Chen, Z., & Klahr, D. (1999) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00081 · Cited by 736
Creativity and academic achievement: A meta-analysis
Gajda, A., Karwowski, M., & Beghetto, R. A. (2017) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/edu0000133 · Cited by 515
Metadata
- Authors
- Dunbar, K.
- Venue
- Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes.
- Publisher
- American Psychological Association
- Published
- 2004-10-27
- Pages
- 461-493
- OpenAlex
- W2491138228
- Cited by
- 480
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 69.34
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
