Billet publié sur Twitter/X le 17/10/2021 03:55

Résumé

Research finds that creative ideas are generated by two cognitive pathways: insight and persistence. However, emerging research suggests people’s lay beliefs may not adequately reflect both routes. We propose that people exhibit an insight bias, such that they undervalue persistence and overvalue insight in the creative process. Research finds that creative ideas are generated by two cognitive pathways: insight and persistence. However, emerging research suggests people’s lay beliefs may not adequately reflect both routes. We propose that people exhibit an insight bias, such that they undervalue persistence and overvalue insight in the creative process. ‘Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something.’ – Steve Jobs‘Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration.’ – Thomas EdisonCreative idea generationCreativity is the generation of ideas that are both novel and appropriate [1.Amabile T.M. Pratt M.G. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: making progress, making meaning.Res. Organ. Behav. 2016; 36: 157-183Crossref Scopus (502) Google Scholar,2.Kaufman J.C. Sternberg R.J. The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press, 2010Crossref Google Scholar] and it is the crucial first step of the broader creativity–innovation process, which also includes idea evaluation, selection, and the implementation of ideas into final products, solutions, or outcomes [1.Amabile T.M. Pratt M.G. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: making progress, making meaning.Res. Organ. Behav. 2016; 36: 157-183Crossref Scopus (502) Google Scholar]. For the past century, researchers have studied creativity with the goal of answering the question: how are creative ideas generated? More recently, researchers have begun to turn their attention to people’s beliefs about creativity. In other words, how do people think creative ideas are generated? Do people think, like Steve Jobs, that creativity is simply noticing things? Or, like Thomas Edison, do they think creativity requires effort and hard work? In this forum we describe recent research on people’s beliefs about how creativity works and examine why these beliefs matter.Research finds that creative ideas are often generated via two cognitive pathways: persistence and insight. Persistence refers to the effortful, deliberate, and sustained search for creative solutions [1.Amabile T.M. Pratt M.G. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: making progress, making meaning.Res. Organ. Behav. 2016; 36: 157-183Crossref Scopus (502) Google Scholar,3.Nijstad B.A. et al.The dual pathway to creativity model: creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence.Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 2010; 21: 34-77Crossref Google Scholar]. In contrast, insight refers to the effortless and unexpected comprehension of new ideas or solutions, colloquially called the ‘A-ha!’ moment [4.Kounios J. Beeman M. The aha! moment: the cognitive neuroscience of insight.Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2009; 18: 210-216Crossref Scopus (280) Google Scholar,5.Schooler J.W. Melcher J. The ineffability of insight.in: Smith S.M. The Creative Cognition Approach. MIT Press, 1995: 97-133Google Scholar]. People report both pathways in their subjective experiences of creativity and both pathways promote creative performance [3.Nijstad B.A. et al.The dual pathway to creativity model: creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence.Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 2010; 21: 34-77Crossref Google Scholar,4.Kounios J. Beeman M. The aha! moment: the cognitive neuroscience of insight.Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2009; 18: 210-216Crossref Scopus (280) Google Scholar]. Yet, emerging research suggests that people’s beliefs about the creative process do not reflect these dual pathways. It appears that people associate creativity with effortless insight and undervalue persistence; a phenomenon we refer to as an insight bias. We next present evidence for an insight bias, consider the mechanisms behind it, and discuss the implications of these (faulty) beliefs.From performance to perceptionWhat might an insight bias look like? We propose that an insight bias would be supported by evidence that people’s beliefs about creativity systematically mispredict creative performance such that people undervalue persistence and overvalue insight.Initial evidence of an insight bias comes from research that compared people’s beliefs about the value of persistence for creativity against actual performance. After an initial period of idea generation, people predicted how many more ideas they would generate during a second round of idea generation and then they actually generated ideas a second time. This research found that people consistently underestimated how many ideas they would generate during the second round [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google Scholar]. That is, they underestimated the value of persisting. Building on this finding, other research investigated people’s beliefs about how creativity changes over time. People were asked to predict the trajectory of their creativity across an ideation session and then to actually complete the session. These studies found that whereas creativity actually increased or stayed the same across the session, people consistently predicted their creativity would decline [7.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. The creative cliff illusion.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020; 117: 19830-19836Crossref PubMed Google Scholar]. Finally, problem solving research has found that people overestimate how quickly they exhaust a problem’s solution space (i.e., the set of reasonable solutions to a problem). In one study, people estimated that they generated 75% of the solution space when in fact their ideas covered only 20–30% [8.Gettys C.F. et al.An evaluation of human act generation performance.Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1987; 39: 23-51Crossref Scopus (98) Google Scholar].Other research more directly compares beliefs about insight and persistence. For instance, people believe creative ideas are more likely to be produced by cognitive processes related to insight (e.g., cognitive flexibility) than processes related to persistence (e.g., deliberate, persistent thinking) [9.Baas M. et al.Conceiving creativity: the nature and consequences of lay people’s beliefs about the realization of creativity.Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 2015; 9: 340-354Crossref Scopus (27) Google Scholar]. One study found that people believe creativity is stimulated more by defocusing (i.e., not working on the problem) than by focusing (i.e., deliberately working) on the task. However, when asked to recall and describe a recent idea generation experience, they reported the opposite: their idea was more often preceded by focusing than defocusing [9.Baas M. et al.Conceiving creativity: the nature and consequences of lay people’s beliefs about the realization of creativity.Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 2015; 9: 340-354Crossref Scopus (27) Google Scholar]. The preference for insight resonates with research on beliefs about the origins of talent. This research finds that people favor entrepreneurs whose ideas stem from innate talents (e.g., from traits related to genius and insight) over entrepreneurs whose ideas result from effort and hard work. In one study, people even preferred an innately talented entrepreneur with fewer achievements over a hard-working entrepreneur with more achievements [10.Tsay C.J. Privileging naturals over strivers: the costs of the naturalness bias.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2016; 42: 40-53Crossref PubMed Scopus (15) Google Scholar].The studies summarized above provide evidence that people undervalue persistence and overvalue insight. Understanding these (faulty) beliefs is important because they how people to in creative work. For instance, persistence and ideas people to from creative more which creativity [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google B.J. Nordgren L.F. The creative cliff illusion.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020; 117: 19830-19836Crossref PubMed Google Scholar]. insight people to more creativity when in the than [9.Baas M. et al.Conceiving creativity: the nature and consequences of lay people’s beliefs about the realization of creativity.Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 2015; 9: 340-354Crossref Scopus (27) Google Scholar] and to the value of whose on persistence than innate genius [10.Tsay C.J. Privileging naturals over strivers: the costs of the naturalness bias.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2016; 42: 40-53Crossref PubMed Scopus (15) Google the insight One to the subjective of idea generation the of ideas called S. insight into the Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2010; Scopus Google Scholar]. ideas via insight and than ideas via persistence. This more of people to think and feel more about insight [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google S. insight into the Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2010; Scopus Google Scholar]. For the research people underestimated how many ideas they would generate [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google Scholar] found that the of during initial idea generation for the and performance. people’s that creativity across an ideation session [7.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. The creative cliff illusion.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020; 117: 19830-19836Crossref PubMed Google Scholar] was by people’s about the of ideas over time. research to this and other initial evidence that people’s beliefs about creativity undervalue persistence and overvalue insight. We a of for research research to evidence for the insight bias. This studies that persistence and insight beliefs or to one also consequences of an insight bias such as how these beliefs or of other idea Finally, also the insight bias other of the creativity–innovation process such as how ideas are or for when people’s creativity beliefs from the of how creativity actually works of the creative process and promote creative for are beliefs related to the of more beliefs by cognitive or working beliefs an idea an idea via insight persistence people’s about their or beliefs of other an idea generated via insight persistence of the idea creativity or beliefs the of the creativity–innovation an idea was generated via insight persistence how the idea is or the that the idea is or ‘Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something.’ – Steve is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration.’ – Thomas Creative idea generationCreativity is the generation of ideas that are both novel and appropriate [1.Amabile T.M. Pratt M.G. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: making progress, making meaning.Res. Organ. Behav. 2016; 36: 157-183Crossref Scopus (502) Google Scholar,2.Kaufman J.C. Sternberg R.J. The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press, 2010Crossref Google Scholar] and it is the crucial first step of the broader creativity–innovation process, which also includes idea evaluation, selection, and the implementation of ideas into final products, solutions, or outcomes [1.Amabile T.M. Pratt M.G. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: making progress, making meaning.Res. Organ. Behav. 2016; 36: 157-183Crossref Scopus (502) Google Scholar]. For the past century, researchers have studied creativity with the goal of answering the question: how are creative ideas generated? More recently, researchers have begun to turn their attention to people’s beliefs about creativity. In other words, how do people think creative ideas are generated? Do people think, like Steve Jobs, that creativity is simply noticing things? Or, like Thomas Edison, do they think creativity requires effort and hard work? In this forum we describe recent research on people’s beliefs about how creativity works and examine why these beliefs matter.Research finds that creative ideas are often generated via two cognitive pathways: persistence and insight. Persistence refers to the effortful, deliberate, and sustained search for creative solutions [1.Amabile T.M. Pratt M.G. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: making progress, making meaning.Res. Organ. Behav. 2016; 36: 157-183Crossref Scopus (502) Google Scholar,3.Nijstad B.A. et al.The dual pathway to creativity model: creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence.Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 2010; 21: 34-77Crossref Google Scholar]. In contrast, insight refers to the effortless and unexpected comprehension of new ideas or solutions, colloquially called the ‘A-ha!’ moment [4.Kounios J. Beeman M. The aha! moment: the cognitive neuroscience of insight.Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2009; 18: 210-216Crossref Scopus (280) Google Scholar,5.Schooler J.W. Melcher J. The ineffability of insight.in: Smith S.M. The Creative Cognition Approach. MIT Press, 1995: 97-133Google Scholar]. People report both pathways in their subjective experiences of creativity and both pathways promote creative performance [3.Nijstad B.A. et al.The dual pathway to creativity model: creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence.Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 2010; 21: 34-77Crossref Google Scholar,4.Kounios J. Beeman M. The aha! moment: the cognitive neuroscience of insight.Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2009; 18: 210-216Crossref Scopus (280) Google Scholar]. Yet, emerging research suggests that people’s beliefs about the creative process do not reflect these dual pathways. It appears that people associate creativity with effortless insight and undervalue persistence; a phenomenon we refer to as an insight bias. We next present evidence for an insight bias, consider the mechanisms behind it, and discuss the implications of these (faulty) is the generation of ideas that are both novel and appropriate [1.Amabile T.M. Pratt M.G. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: making progress, making meaning.Res. Organ. Behav. 2016; 36: 157-183Crossref Scopus (502) Google Scholar,2.Kaufman J.C. Sternberg R.J. The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press, 2010Crossref Google Scholar] and it is the crucial first step of the broader creativity–innovation process, which also includes idea evaluation, selection, and the implementation of ideas into final products, solutions, or outcomes [1.Amabile T.M. Pratt M.G. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: making progress, making meaning.Res. Organ. Behav. 2016; 36: 157-183Crossref Scopus (502) Google Scholar]. For the past century, researchers have studied creativity with the goal of answering the question: how are creative ideas generated? More recently, researchers have begun to turn their attention to people’s beliefs about creativity. In other words, how do people think creative ideas are generated? Do people think, like Steve Jobs, that creativity is simply noticing things? Or, like Thomas Edison, do they think creativity requires effort and hard work? In this forum we describe recent research on people’s beliefs about how creativity works and examine why these beliefs Research finds that creative ideas are often generated via two cognitive pathways: persistence and insight. Persistence refers to the effortful, deliberate, and sustained search for creative solutions [1.Amabile T.M. Pratt M.G. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: making progress, making meaning.Res. Organ. Behav. 2016; 36: 157-183Crossref Scopus (502) Google Scholar,3.Nijstad B.A. et al.The dual pathway to creativity model: creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence.Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 2010; 21: 34-77Crossref Google Scholar]. In contrast, insight refers to the effortless and unexpected comprehension of new ideas or solutions, colloquially called the ‘A-ha!’ moment [4.Kounios J. Beeman M. The aha! moment: the cognitive neuroscience of insight.Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2009; 18: 210-216Crossref Scopus (280) Google Scholar,5.Schooler J.W. Melcher J. The ineffability of insight.in: Smith S.M. The Creative Cognition Approach. MIT Press, 1995: 97-133Google Scholar]. People report both pathways in their subjective experiences of creativity and both pathways promote creative performance [3.Nijstad B.A. et al.The dual pathway to creativity model: creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence.Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 2010; 21: 34-77Crossref Google Scholar,4.Kounios J. Beeman M. The aha! moment: the cognitive neuroscience of insight.Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2009; 18: 210-216Crossref Scopus (280) Google Scholar]. Yet, emerging research suggests that people’s beliefs about the creative process do not reflect these dual pathways. It appears that people associate creativity with effortless insight and undervalue persistence; a phenomenon we refer to as an insight bias. We next present evidence for an insight bias, consider the mechanisms behind it, and discuss the implications of these (faulty) performance to perceptionWhat might an insight bias look like? We propose that an insight bias would be supported by evidence that people’s beliefs about creativity systematically mispredict creative performance such that people undervalue persistence and overvalue insight.Initial evidence of an insight bias comes from research that compared people’s beliefs about the value of persistence for creativity against actual performance. After an initial period of idea generation, people predicted how many more ideas they would generate during a second round of idea generation and then they actually generated ideas a second time. This research found that people consistently underestimated how many ideas they would generate during the second round [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google Scholar]. That is, they underestimated the value of persisting. Building on this finding, other research investigated people’s beliefs about how creativity changes over time. People were asked to predict the trajectory of their creativity across an ideation session and then to actually complete the session. These studies found that whereas creativity actually increased or stayed the same across the session, people consistently predicted their creativity would decline [7.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. The creative cliff illusion.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020; 117: 19830-19836Crossref PubMed Google Scholar]. Finally, problem solving research has found that people overestimate how quickly they exhaust a problem’s solution space (i.e., the set of reasonable solutions to a problem). In one study, people estimated that they generated 75% of the solution space when in fact their ideas covered only 20–30% [8.Gettys C.F. et al.An evaluation of human act generation performance.Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1987; 39: 23-51Crossref Scopus (98) Google Scholar].Other research more directly compares beliefs about insight and persistence. For instance, people believe creative ideas are more likely to be produced by cognitive processes related to insight (e.g., cognitive flexibility) than processes related to persistence (e.g., deliberate, persistent thinking) [9.Baas M. et al.Conceiving creativity: the nature and consequences of lay people’s beliefs about the realization of creativity.Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 2015; 9: 340-354Crossref Scopus (27) Google Scholar]. One study found that people believe creativity is stimulated more by defocusing (i.e., not working on the problem) than by focusing (i.e., deliberately working) on the task. However, when asked to recall and describe a recent idea generation experience, they reported the opposite: their idea was more often preceded by focusing than defocusing [9.Baas M. et al.Conceiving creativity: the nature and consequences of lay people’s beliefs about the realization of creativity.Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 2015; 9: 340-354Crossref Scopus (27) Google Scholar]. The preference for insight resonates with research on beliefs about the origins of talent. This research finds that people favor entrepreneurs whose ideas stem from innate talents (e.g., from traits related to genius and insight) over entrepreneurs whose ideas result from effort and hard work. In one study, people even preferred an innately talented entrepreneur with fewer achievements over a hard-working entrepreneur with more achievements [10.Tsay C.J. Privileging naturals over strivers: the costs of the naturalness bias.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2016; 42: 40-53Crossref PubMed Scopus (15) Google Scholar].The studies summarized above provide evidence that people undervalue persistence and overvalue insight. Understanding these (faulty) beliefs is important because they how people to in creative work. For instance, persistence and ideas people to from creative more which creativity [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google B.J. Nordgren L.F. The creative cliff illusion.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020; 117: 19830-19836Crossref PubMed Google Scholar]. insight people to more creativity when in the than [9.Baas M. et al.Conceiving creativity: the nature and consequences of lay people’s beliefs about the realization of creativity.Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 2015; 9: 340-354Crossref Scopus (27) Google Scholar] and to the value of whose on persistence than innate genius [10.Tsay C.J. Privileging naturals over strivers: the costs of the naturalness bias.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2016; 42: 40-53Crossref PubMed Scopus (15) Google the insight One to the subjective of idea generation the of ideas called S. insight into the Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2010; Scopus Google Scholar]. ideas via insight and than ideas via persistence. This more of people to think and feel more about insight [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google S. insight into the Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2010; Scopus Google Scholar]. For the research people underestimated how many ideas they would generate [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google Scholar] found that the of during initial idea generation for the and performance. people’s that creativity across an ideation session [7.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. The creative cliff illusion.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020; 117: 19830-19836Crossref PubMed Google Scholar] was by people’s about the of ideas over time. research to this and other might an insight bias look like? We propose that an insight bias would be supported by evidence that people’s beliefs about creativity systematically mispredict creative performance such that people undervalue persistence and overvalue insight. evidence of an insight bias comes from research that compared people’s beliefs about the value of persistence for creativity against actual performance. After an initial period of idea generation, people predicted how many more ideas they would generate during a second round of idea generation and then they actually generated ideas a second time. This research found that people consistently underestimated how many ideas they would generate during the second round [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google Scholar]. That is, they underestimated the value of persisting. Building on this finding, other research investigated people’s beliefs about how creativity changes over time. People were asked to predict the trajectory of their creativity across an ideation session and then to actually complete the session. These studies found that whereas creativity actually increased or stayed the same across the session, people consistently predicted their creativity would decline [7.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. The creative cliff illusion.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020; 117: 19830-19836Crossref PubMed Google Scholar]. Finally, problem solving research has found that people overestimate how quickly they exhaust a problem’s solution space (i.e., the set of reasonable solutions to a problem). In one study, people estimated that they generated 75% of the solution space when in fact their ideas covered only 20–30% [8.Gettys C.F. et al.An evaluation of human act generation performance.Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1987; 39: 23-51Crossref Scopus (98) Google Scholar]. research more directly compares beliefs about insight and persistence. For instance, people believe creative ideas are more likely to be produced by cognitive processes related to insight (e.g., cognitive flexibility) than processes related to persistence (e.g., deliberate, persistent thinking) [9.Baas M. et al.Conceiving creativity: the nature and consequences of lay people’s beliefs about the realization of creativity.Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 2015; 9: 340-354Crossref Scopus (27) Google Scholar]. One study found that people believe creativity is stimulated more by defocusing (i.e., not working on the problem) than by focusing (i.e., deliberately working) on the task. However, when asked to recall and describe a recent idea generation experience, they reported the opposite: their idea was more often preceded by focusing than defocusing [9.Baas M. et al.Conceiving creativity: the nature and consequences of lay people’s beliefs about the realization of creativity.Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 2015; 9: 340-354Crossref Scopus (27) Google Scholar]. The preference for insight resonates with research on beliefs about the origins of talent. This research finds that people favor entrepreneurs whose ideas stem from innate talents (e.g., from traits related to genius and insight) over entrepreneurs whose ideas result from effort and hard work. In one study, people even preferred an innately talented entrepreneur with fewer achievements over a hard-working entrepreneur with more achievements [10.Tsay C.J. Privileging naturals over strivers: the costs of the naturalness bias.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2016; 42: 40-53Crossref PubMed Scopus (15) Google Scholar]. The studies summarized above provide evidence that people undervalue persistence and overvalue insight. Understanding these (faulty) beliefs is important because they how people to in creative work. For instance, persistence and ideas people to from creative more which creativity [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google B.J. Nordgren L.F. The creative cliff illusion.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020; 117: 19830-19836Crossref PubMed Google Scholar]. insight people to more creativity when in the than [9.Baas M. et al.Conceiving creativity: the nature and consequences of lay people’s beliefs about the realization of creativity.Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 2015; 9: 340-354Crossref Scopus (27) Google Scholar] and to the value of whose on persistence than innate genius [10.Tsay C.J. Privileging naturals over strivers: the costs of the naturalness bias.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2016; 42: 40-53Crossref PubMed Scopus (15) Google Scholar]. the insight One to the subjective of idea generation the of ideas called S. insight into the Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2010; Scopus Google Scholar]. ideas via insight and than ideas via persistence. This more of people to think and feel more about insight [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google S. insight into the Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2010; Scopus Google Scholar]. For the research people underestimated how many ideas they would generate [6.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109: 232-243Crossref PubMed Scopus (43) Google Scholar] found that the of during initial idea generation for the and performance. people’s that creativity across an ideation session [7.Lucas B.J. Nordgren L.F. The creative cliff illusion.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020; 117: 19830-19836Crossref PubMed Google Scholar] was by people’s about the of ideas over time. research to this and other initial evidence that people’s beliefs about creativity undervalue persistence and overvalue insight. We a of for research research to evidence for the insight bias. This studies that persistence and insight beliefs or to one also consequences of an insight bias such as how these beliefs or of other idea Finally, also the insight bias other of the creativity–innovation process such as how ideas are or for when people’s creativity beliefs from the of how creativity actually works of the creative process and promote creative for are beliefs related to the of more beliefs by cognitive or working beliefs an idea an idea via insight persistence people’s about their or beliefs of other an idea generated via insight persistence of the idea creativity or beliefs the of the creativity–innovation an idea was generated via insight persistence how the idea is or the that the idea is or We initial evidence that people’s beliefs about creativity undervalue persistence and overvalue insight. We a of for research research to evidence for the insight bias. This studies that persistence and insight beliefs or to one also consequences of an insight bias such as how these beliefs or of other idea Finally, also the insight bias other of the creativity–innovation process such as how ideas are or for when people’s creativity beliefs from the of how creativity actually works of the creative process and promote creative performance. are beliefs related to the of more beliefs by cognitive or working beliefs an idea an idea via insight persistence people’s about their or beliefs of other an idea generated via insight persistence of the idea creativity or beliefs the of the creativity–innovation an idea was generated via insight persistence how the idea is or the that the idea is or are beliefs related to the of more beliefs by cognitive or working Do beliefs an idea an idea via insight persistence people’s about their or Do beliefs of other an idea generated via insight persistence of the idea creativity or Do beliefs the of the creativity–innovation an idea was generated via insight persistence how the idea is or the that the idea is or