Journal Article Summary
Article reference
Dewhurst, S. s., Thorley, C., Hammond, E. R., & Ormerod, T. C. (2011). Convergent, but not divergent, thinking predicts susceptibility to associative memory illusions. Personality & Individual Differences, 51(1), 73-76. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.018
Purpose of the study
The aim of the study was to examine the link between creativity and is prone to associative memory delusions in the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) method and this was further explored utilizing a multiple regression analysis.
Hypothesis (es)
The authors of the study hypothesized that erroneous identification of censorious temptations would be anticipated by how individuals do on the RAT, as both include the production of semantic …show more content…
Every list consisted of 12 affiliates of an absent critical lure. Additionally the recognition test was used in this study, with it containing a printed sheet with 8 learned words (containing one for every list), 8 critical lures of the learned lists, with an additional 8 list items, and 8 critical lures from the unlearned lists. The stimuli for the RAT (Remote Associates Task) that employed in this study was 24 three-item questions. Furthermore participants were made compulsory to name different applications for a brick, in accordance to the Alternative Uses Task …show more content…
Results indicated that convergent thinking was a significant prognosticator of critical lure false identification (b = .32, p < .05), while divergent thinking did not showcase the same effect (b = .14, p = .27). Furthermore, the results indicated that convergent thinking foresaw both of critical lure false identification and distractor item identification. As for the simultaneous multiple regression for critical lure and distractor item identification, it was found that both critical lure false identification (β= .29, p < .05) and distractor item recognition (recognition (β = .37, p < .01) were significant foreseers of convergent thinking, with the values of β showing that distracter item identification was somewhat of a stronger foreseer. For the multiple regression analyses done on studied words, it was found that both convergent (β = .06, p = .65) and divergent thinking (β = -.02, p = .88) were not significant foreseers of accurate
Article reference
Dewhurst, S. s., Thorley, C., Hammond, E. R., & Ormerod, T. C. (2011). Convergent, but not divergent, thinking predicts susceptibility to associative memory illusions. Personality & Individual Differences, 51(1), 73-76. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.018
Purpose of the study
The aim of the study was to examine the link between creativity and is prone to associative memory delusions in the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) method and this was further explored utilizing a multiple regression analysis.
Hypothesis (es)
The authors of the study hypothesized that erroneous identification of censorious temptations would be anticipated by how individuals do on the RAT, as both include the production of semantic …show more content…
Every list consisted of 12 affiliates of an absent critical lure. Additionally the recognition test was used in this study, with it containing a printed sheet with 8 learned words (containing one for every list), 8 critical lures of the learned lists, with an additional 8 list items, and 8 critical lures from the unlearned lists. The stimuli for the RAT (Remote Associates Task) that employed in this study was 24 three-item questions. Furthermore participants were made compulsory to name different applications for a brick, in accordance to the Alternative Uses Task …show more content…
Results indicated that convergent thinking was a significant prognosticator of critical lure false identification (b = .32, p < .05), while divergent thinking did not showcase the same effect (b = .14, p = .27). Furthermore, the results indicated that convergent thinking foresaw both of critical lure false identification and distractor item identification. As for the simultaneous multiple regression for critical lure and distractor item identification, it was found that both critical lure false identification (β= .29, p < .05) and distractor item recognition (recognition (β = .37, p < .01) were significant foreseers of convergent thinking, with the values of β showing that distracter item identification was somewhat of a stronger foreseer. For the multiple regression analyses done on studied words, it was found that both convergent (β = .06, p = .65) and divergent thinking (β = -.02, p = .88) were not significant foreseers of accurate