The phenomenon of problem-solving through insight is often described by the sudden ‘ah-ha’ moment that occurs in our minds. In recent years, research has evaluated insight occurring outside of consciousness. Researchers have considered how the body's physiological response could be a signal indicating to the conscious mind that the problem was solved. This study aimed to expand upon the findings of
Shen and colleagues (2018) regarding the relationship between insight responses and arousal, measured by GSR. The utilized sample was fifty-five students who were predominately white and female. Although most problems showed no significant association between accuracy and peak amplitude, one insight problem reached significance for both peak presence and amplitude. Also, the intensity of peaks in arousal were not associated with problem accuracy, indicating that it did not matter whether individuals solved insight problems correctly or incorrectly; peaks in arousal were equally likely to occur. Results from this study highlighted discrepancies between findings within the field and addressed the need for additional research.
AshI. K.WileyJ. (2006). The nature of restructuring in insight: An individual-differences approach. Journal Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(1), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193814
2.
BaasM.De DreuC. K.NijstadB. A. (2008). A meta-analysis of 25 years of mood-creativity research: Hedonic tone, activation, or regulatory focus?Psychological Bulletin, 134(6), 779–806. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012815
3.
BatchelderW. H.AlexanderG. E. (2012). Insight problem solving: A critical examination of the possibility of formal theory. The Journal of Problem Solving, 5(1), 1–45. https://doi.org/10.7771/1932-6246.1143
4.
BeckerM.SommerT.KühnS. (2019). Verbal insight revisited: FMRI evidence for early processing in bilateral insulae for solutions with AHA! experience shortly after trial onset. Human Brain Mapping, 41(1), 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24785
5.
Candia-RiveraD.CatramboneV.ThayerJ. F.GentiliC.ValenzaG. (2021). Cardiac sympathetic-vagal activity initiates a functional brain-body response to emotional arousal. Neuroscience Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, 119(21), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2119599119
6.
ChuY.MacGregorJ. (2011). Human performance on insight problem solving: A review. The Journal of Problem Solving, 3(2), 119–150. https://doi.org/10.7771/1932-6246.1094
DanekA. H.WileyJ. (2017). What about false insights? Deconstructing the aha! experience along its multiple dimensions for correct and incorrect solutions separately. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(2077), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02077
9.
DemeyerF.StuyckH.GillebertC.Van den BusscheE. (2023). Better insight when growing older? Adult age differences in insight and analytical problem solving [Conference presentation]. Annual meeting of the Belgian Association for Psychological Sciences (BAPS), Mons, Belgium.
DijksterhuisA.StrickM. (2016). A case for thinking without consciousness. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(1), 117–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615615317
12.
DowG. T.MayerR. E. (2004). Teaching students to solve insight problems: Evidence for domain specificity in creativity training. Creativity Research Journal, 16(4), 389–402. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1604_2
FieldA. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
15.
HallgrenK. A. (2012). Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: An overview and tutorial. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 8(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.08.1.p023
16.
IBM Corp. (2023). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows. [Version 29.0.2.0]. IBM Corp.
17.
iMotions. (2017). Galvanic skin response: The complete pocket guide. iMotions – Biometric Research Platform.
KatonaG. (1940). Organizing and memorizing: Studies in the psychology of learning and teaching. Columbia University Press.
20.
KnoblichG.OhlssonS.HaiderH.RheniusD. (1999). Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 25(6), 1534–1555. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.6.1534
21.
KnoblichG.OhlssonS.RaneyG. (2001). An eye movement study of insight problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 29(7), 1000–1009. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195762
MacGregorJ. N.OrmerodT. C.ChronicleE. P. (2001). Information processing and insight: A process model of performance on the nine-dot and related problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(1), 176–201. PMID: 11204097. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.176
24.
MetcalfeJ.WiebeD. (1987). Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving. Journal of Memory and Cognition, 15(3), 283–246. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03197722
25.
NamB.ParomitaP.ChuS. L.ChaspariT.WolteringS. (2021). Moments of insight in problem-solving relate to bodily arousal. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(4), 1004–1014. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.497
26.
ÖllingerM.JonesG.KnoblichG. (2014). Insight and search in Katona’s five-square problem. Experimental Psychology, 61(4), 263–272. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000245
27.
OsmanM. (2010). Controlling uncertainty: A review of human behavior in complex dynamic environments. Psychological Bulletin, 136(1), 65–86. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017815
28.
Osuna-MascaróA. J.AuerspergA. M. (2021). Current understanding of the “insight” phenomenon across disciplines. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(2021), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.791398
29.
PatelN.BakerS. G.SchererL. D. (2019). Evaluating the cognitive reflection test as a measure of intuition/reflection, numeracy, and insight problem solving, and the implications for understanding real-world judgments and beliefs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(12), 2129–2153. https://doi.org/https://doiorg.libproxy.nau.edu/10.1037/xge0000592
30.
RobertsonS. I. (2016). Problem solving: Perspectives from cognition and neuroscience (2nd ed.). Psychology Press.
31.
ShenW.TongY.YuanY.ZhanH.LiuC.LuoJ.CaiH. (2017). Feeling the insight: Uncovering somatic markers of the “aha” experience. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 43(1), 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-017-9381-1
32.
ShenW.YuanY.TangC.ShiC.LiuC.LuoJ.ZhangX. (2018). In search of somatic precursors of spontaneous insight. Journal of Psychophysiology, 32(3), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1027/0269-8803/a000188
33.
StuyckH.AbenB.CleeremansA.Van de BusscheE. (2021). The aha! moment: Is insight a different form of problem solving?Consciousness and Cognition, 90(103055), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2020.103055
34.
VandervertL. R.SchimpfP. H.LiuH. (2007). How working memory and the cerebellum collaborate to produce creativity and innovation. Creativity Research Journal, 19(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410709336873
35.
VandervertL.Vandervert-MoebK. J. (2020). The cerebellum’s predominant role in creativity. In RuncoM. A.PritzkerS. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 211e215)). Elsevier.
36.
WangC. A.BairdT.CoutinhoJ. D.BrienD. C.MunozD. P. (2018). Arousal effects on pupil size, heart rate, and skin conductance in an emotional face task. Frontiers in Neurology, 9(1029), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.01029
37.
WebbM. E.LittleD. R.CropperS. J. (2016). Insight is not in the problem: Investigating insight in problem solving across task types. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1424), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01424
38.
WigertB. G.MurugavelV. R.Reiter-PalmonR. (2022). The utility of divergent and convergent thinking in the problem construction processes during creative problem-solving. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 18(5), 858–868. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000513
39.
WileyJ.DanekA. H. (2024). Restructuring processes and Aha! experiences in insight problem solving. Nature Reviews Psychology, 3(1), 42–55. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-023-00257-x
