Cited by 649Creativity in Education and NeuroscienceCognitive Abilities and TestingPsychological Testing and Assessment

Normative data for 144 compound remote associate problems

Open access
Bowden, Edward M., Jung-Beeman, Mark·2003·Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers

Abstract

We have developed and tested 144 compound remote associate problems. Across eight experiments, 289 participants were given four time limits (2 sec, 7 sec, 15 sec, or 30 sec) for solving each problem. This paper provides a brief overview of the problems and normative data regarding the percentage of participants solving, and mean time-to-solution for, each problem at each time limit. These normative data can be used in selecting problems on the basis of difficulty or mean time necessary for reaching a solution.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/bf03195543

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The RAT dataset from Bowden and Jung-Beeman is widely used.

    “For the Remote Associates Test (RAT), we employed a widely-used dataset from Bowden and Jung-Beeman [11].”

    From Human Creativity in the Age of LLMs: Randomized Experiments on Divergent and Convergent Thinking (2025) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Abstract (page not available in our copy) says Bowden and Jung-Beeman developed 144 RAT-like problems and made them available with normative data, supporting the identification of the dataset. It describes RAT and RAT-like problems as used in many studies, but does not establish that their particular dataset was already widely used. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Convergent thinking involves narrowing down possibilities to find a single correct solution.

    “convergent thinking involves narrowing down these possibilities to find a single correct solution [11, 12, 13, 60].”

    From Decoupling of Usefulness and Novelty: Evaluating the Impact of Generative AI on Design Outputs and Novice Designers' Creative Thinking (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Results and Discussion section says each compound remote associate problem has a single-word, unambiguous solution, supporting the single-solution part of the claim. The paper does not define convergent thinking or say that it involves narrowing down possibilities. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Baba, Y. (1982). An analysis of creativity by means of the remote as- sociates test for adults revised in Japanese (Jarat Form-A). Japanese Journal of Psychology, 52, 330-336.
  2. Mednick, S. A. (1968). Remote Associates Test. Journal of Creative Behavior, 2, 213-214.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bowden, E. M., & Jung-Beeman, M.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Bowden, Edward M.
Venue
Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers
Published
2003-11
Volume
35
Issue
4
Pages
634-639
ISSN
  • 0743-3808 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5970
OpenAlex
W2013214147
Cited by
649
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 56 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 23
FWCI
2.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
reference values, solution time, problem difficulty, problem selection, divergent thinking, creative problem solving
MeSH terms
Association Learning, Humans, Problem Solving, Reference Values, Time Factors

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