Attentional focus is important for many cognitive processes, including problem solving. In this article, we discuss working memory capacity (WMC), a construct related to the ability to focus attention, and its differential effects on analytic and creative problem solving. One of the main ways in which WMC benefits analytic problem solving seems to be that it helps problem solvers to control their attention, resist distraction, and narrow their search through a problem space. Conversely, several lines of recent evidence have shown that too much focus can actually harm performance on creative problem-solving tasks.
AielloD.JaroszA. F.CushenP. J.WileyJ. (2012). Firing the executive: When an analytic approach does and does not help problem solving. Journal of Problem Solving, 4(2), Article 6.
2.
AnsburgP. I.HillK. (2003). Creative and analytic thinkers differ in their use of attentional resources. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1141–1152.
3.
AshI. K.WileyJ. (2006). The nature of restructuring in insight: An individual differences approach. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 66–73.
4.
AshI. K.WileyJ. (2008). Hindsight bias in insight and mathematical problem solving: Evidence of different retrospective reconstruction mechanisms for metacognitive vs. situational judgments. Memory & Cognition, 36, 822–837.
5.
AshcraftM. H.KrauseJ. A. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 243–248.
6.
BeilockS. L.CarrT. H. (2005). When high-powered people fail: Working memory and “choking under pressure” in math. Psychological Science, 16, 101–105.
7.
BeilockS. L.DeCaroM. S. (2007). From poor performance to success under stress: Working memory, strategy selection, and mathematical problem solving under pressure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 983–998.
8.
BialystokE.CraikF. I. M.GreenD. W.GollanT. H. (2009). Bilingual minds. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 10, 89–129.
9.
CaiD. J.MednickS. A.HarrisonE. M.KanadyJ. C.MednickS. C. (2009). REM, not incubation, improves creativity by priming associative networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 106, 10130–10134.
10.
CushenP. J.WileyJ. (2011). Aha! Voila! Eureka! Bilingualism and insightful problem solving. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 458–462.
11.
DeCaroM. S.BeilockS. L. (2010). The benefits and perils of attentional control. In CsikszentmihalyiM.BruyaB. (Eds.), Effortless attention: A new perspective in the cognitive science of attention and action (pp. 51–73). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
EngleR. W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 19–23.
13.
FleckJ. I. (2008). Working memory demands in insight versus analytic problem solving. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 20, 139–176.
14.
GearyD. C.HoardM. K.Byrd-CravenJ.DeSotoM. C. (2004). Strategy choices in simple and complex addition: Contributions of working memory and counting knowledge for children with mathematical disability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 121–151.
15.
GilhoolyK. J.FioratouE. (2009). Executive functions in insight versus non-insight problem solving: An individual differences approach. Thinking & Reasoning, 15, 355–376.
16.
HasherL.ZacksR. T. (1988). Working memory, comprehension, and aging: A review and a new view. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 22, 193–225.
17.
HitchG. J. (1978). The role of short-term working memory in mental arithmetic. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 302–323.
18.
JaroszA. F.ColfleshG. J. H.WileyJ. (2012). Uncorking the muse: Alcohol intoxication facilitates creative problem solving. Consciousness and Cognition, 21, 487–493. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2012.01.00210.1016/j.concog.2012.01.002
19.
KimS.HasherL.ZacksR. T. (2007). Aging and a benefit of distractibility. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 301–305.
20.
KouniosJ.Jung-BeemanM. (2009). Aha! The cognitive neuroscience of insight. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 210–216.
21.
MartindaleC. (1995). Creativity and connectionism. In SmithS. M.WardT. B.FinkR. A. (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 249–268). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22.
Mattarella-MickeA.BeilockS. L. (2010). Situating math word problems: The story matters. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 106–111.
23.
MendelsohnG. A. (1976). Associative and attentional processes in creative performance. Journal of Personality, 44, 341–369.
24.
ReverberiC.ToraldoA.D’AgostiniS.SkrapM. (2005). Better without (lateral) frontal cortex? Insight problems solved by frontal patients. Brain, 128, 2882–2890.
25.
RicksT. R.Turley-AmesK. J.WileyJ. (2007). Effects of working memory capacity on mental set due to domain knowledge. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1456–1462.
26.
RoweG.HirshJ. B.AndersonA. K. (2007). Positive affect increases the breadth of attentional selection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 104, 383–388.
27.
SeylerD. J.KirkE. P.AshcraftM. H. (2003). Elementary subtraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1339–1352.
28.
SmallwoodJ.SchoolerJ. W. (2006). The restless mind. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 946–958.
29.
SwansonH. L.CooneyJ. B.BrockS. (1993). The influence of working memory and classification ability on children’s word problem solution. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 55, 374–395.
30.
ThevenotC.OakhillJ. (2006). Representations and strategies for solving dynamic and static arithmetic word problems: The role of working memory capacities. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 18, 756–775.
31.
WiethM.ZacksR. (2011). Time of day effects on problem solving: When the non-optimal is optimal. Thinking & Reasoning, 17, 387–401.
32.
WileyJ. (1998). Expertise as mental set: The effects of domain knowledge in creative problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 26, 716–730.
33.
WileyJ.JaroszA. F. (2012). How working memory capacity affects problem solving. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 56, 185–227.
34.
WisemanR.WattC.GilhoolyK.GeorgiouG. (2011). Creativity and the ease of ambiguous figural reversal. British Journal of Psychology, 102, 615–622.
