The influence of implicit cue on information processing in anagram solving task

This article presents the results of a study, aimed at exploring the influence of implicit cues on early “automatic” processes (first 400 ms) in anagram solving task. During six experimental series participants were shown two type of stimuli: anagrams and pseudowords in random order. Participants had to discriminate the type of stimuli, solve the anagrams and response (by key pressing), whether it was insight solution or not. In the first five series pseudowords had a special cue (letters “A” and “O”). There were no such cues in anagrams. In the last experimental series there were no cues on both pseudowords and anagrams. The participants did not know about such differences. The electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded during this study. It was shown that discrimination time decreased from the first to the fifth series, but increase in the last series. The number of correct discriminations increased from the first to the fifth series, and decreased in the last one. EEG analysis showed significant difference in amplitude of late positive component on interval 200 to 300 ms after stimuli between anagrams and pseudowords. This findings may be explained by activation of semantic network, which is involved in anagram solution processing. This work was supported by grant RSCF № 14-18-03773.

1. Bowden E., Jung-Beeman M., Fleck J., Kounios J. New approaches to demystifying insight. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2005, vol. 9, no. 7, pp. 322–328. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.012
2. Bowden E.M., Jung-Beeman M. Aha! Insight experience correlates with solution activation in the right hemisphere. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2003, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 730–737. doi: 10.3758/BF03196539
3. Carreiras M., Vergara M., Barber H. Early event-related potential effects of syllabic  processing during visual word recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2005, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 1803–1817. doi: 10.1162/089892905774589217
4. Ellis J.J., Glaholt M.G., Reingold E.M. Eye movements reveal solution knowledge prior to insight. Consciousness and Cognition, 2011, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 768–776. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2010.12.007
5. Jung-Beeman M., Bowden E.M., Haberman J., Frymiare J.L., Arambel-Liu S., Greenblatt R., Reber P.J., Kounios J. Neural Activity When People Solve Verbal Problems with Insight. PLoS Biology, 2004, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 500–510. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0020097
6. Kounios  J.,  Frymiare  J.L.,  Bowden  E.M.,  Fleck  J.I.,  Subramaniam  K.,  Parrish  T.B.,  Jung-Beeman
7. M. The Prepared Mind. Psychological Science, 2006, vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 882–890. doi: 10.1111/j.1467- 9280.2006.01798.x
8. Lyashevskaya O.N., Sharov S.A. Chastotnyy slovar’ sovremennogo russkogo yazyka (na materialakh Natsional’nogo korpusa russkogo yazyka) [Frequency dictionary of the modern Russian language (based on National Corpus of the Russian language)]. Moscow: Azbukovnik Publ., 2009. 1087 p. (in Russ.).
9. Maier N.R.F. Reasoning in humans. II. The solution of a problem and its appearance in consciousness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 1931, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 181–194. doi: 10.1037/h0071361
10. Medyntsev A.A. Rol' avtomaticheskikh protsessov v «reshenii voprosov» v zadache resheniya anagramm [The role of automatic processes in insight solutions in anagram decision task]. In Materialy VI Mezhdunarod- noy konferentsii po kognitivnoy nauke (Kaliningrad, 23–27 iyunya) [Proceedings of The Sixth International Conference on Cognitive Science (Kaliningrad, June 23–27)]. Kaliningrad, 2014. p. 421 (in Russ.).
11. Novick L.R., Sherman S.J. On the nature of insight solutions: Evidence from skill differences in anagram solution. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 2003, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 351–382. doi: 10.1080/02724980244000288
12. Pammer K., Hansen P.C., Kringelbach M.L., Holliday I., Barnes G., Hillebrand A., Singh K.D., Cornelissen P.L. Visual word recognition: the first half second. NeuroImage, 2004, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1819– 1825. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.05.004
13. Ponomarev Ya.A. Psikhologiya tvorchestva [Psychology of creativity]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1976. 296 p. (in Russ.).
14. Posner M.I., Snyder C.R.R. Attention and cognitive control. In R. Solso (ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium, 1975, pp. 55–85.
15. Pulvermüller F., Assadollahi R., Elbert T. Neuromagnetic evidence for early semantic access in word recognition. European Journal of Neuroscience, 2001, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 201–205. doi: 10.1046/j.0953- 816X.2000.01380.x
16. Shaw G.A., Conway M. Individual differences in nonconscious processing: The role of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 1990, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 407–418. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(90)90224-F
17. Spiridonov V.F., Lifanova S.S. Insait i mentalnye operatory, ili vozmozhno li reshit' problemu pronitsatel'nosti shag za shagom [Insight and mental operators, or whether it is possible to solve an insight problem step by step]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Psychology. The journal of Higher School of Economics], 2013, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 54–63 (in Russ.; abstr. in Engl.).
18. Velichkovskiy B.M. Osnovy psikhologii poznaniya [Fundamentals of psychology of cognition]. In 2 vols. Moscow: Akademiya Publ., 2006. 448 p. (in Russ.).
19. Vergara-Martínez M., Perea M., Gómez P., Swaab T.Y. ERP correlates of letter identity and letter position are modulated by lexical frequency. Brain and Language, 2013, vol. 125, no. 1, pp. 11–27. doi: 10.1016/j. bandl.2012.12.009
20. Yin H., Li D., Yang J., Li W., Qiu J., Chen Y. Neural Bases of Unconscious Error Detection in a Chinese Anagram Solution Task: Evidence from ERP Study. PLOS ONE, 2016, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. e0154379. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154379