Pain has been found in previous research to have a noticeable effect on people’s ability to perform creative tasks. While limited studies in this field exist, most of this work has focused on convergent thinking through the use of compound remote associates tasks (CRAT). In order to investigate how acute pain might affect divergent creative cognition involving a wider answer space, the current study was conducted using an alternate uses task (AUT) during an algometer-based pain intervention. It was found that acute pain did not have a significant effect on accuracy in the CRAT nor on problem solving abilities in the AUT but notably, participants in the pain condition were more likely to say that they solved problems in the CRAT through insight rather than by an analytical approach. This work demonstrates the need for more research in this field to better understand the relationship between creative cognition and pain.

The present study researched the systematic biases in working memory and how items interact with each other in working memory. The first goal of the study was to assess whether working memory representations of one another or systematically interact. This was tested by the repulsion bias in the representations. The second goal was to test whether the interaction is modulated by attentional priority. Attended items exhibited a weaker repulsion bias indicating that attention helped to protect the representation from the impact of the un-attended item.The average mean error for the unattended item was 3.68º while for the attended item it was 2.19º. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that items in working memory systematically interact with each other and further suggests that the main theories in working memory that do not assume interactions need to be updated.

After answering a test question, feedback of the correct answer provided after a brief delay can be more beneficial to learning than feedback provided immediately (Brackbill & Kappy, 1962; Kulhavy & Anderson, 1972). Several theoretical models have been proposed to explain this delay-of-feedback benefit, with the most well supported being that delaying feedback promotes anticipation of the correct answer, which has been examined using curiosity as a measure of answer anticipation (Mullaney et al. 2014). The present study tested this model across two task designs, one designed to elicit epistemic curiosity, and one designed to elicit perceptual curiosity, to determine if the relationship between curiosity and feedback delay is type-dependent. In Task 1, participants answered trivia questions, reported their subjective level of curiosity to know the answer, and then received correct answer feedback after a variable delay (0s, 4s, or 8s). Task 2 was identical to Task 1, except that participants learned and were tested on the identities of blurred pictures, rather than trivia question answers. A subsequent learning retention test demonstrated a significant effect of curiosity, but not feedback delay, on performance in the trivia task, and no significant effect of curiosity, but a negative effect of feedback delay, on performance in the blurred pictures task. Neither task found a significant interaction effect between curiosity and delay group, which fails to support the answer anticipation model of the delay-of-feedback benefit.