Marsh, John Everett and Threadgold, Emma and Barker, Melissa and Litchfield, Damien and Ball, Linden The Susceptibility of Compound Remote Associate Problems to Disruption by Irrelevant Sound: A Window onto the Component Processes Underpinning Creative Cognition? [DataSet]

There is a more recent version of this item available.

Description

Data set for three experiments
Materials information for three experiments

Research / Data Type:	Dataset
DOI:	10.17030/uclan.data.00000228
Depositing User:	Emma Threadgold
Date Deposited:	27 Mar 2020 14:00
Revision:	24
URI:	https://uclandata.uclan.ac.uk/id/eprint/228
Additional details Additional details Creators: Creators Email ORCID Marsh, John Everett JEMarsh@uclan.ac.uk https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9494-1287 Threadgold, Emma EThreadgold1@uclan.ac.uk https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9073-0669 Barker, Melissa MBarker1@uclan.ac.uk UNSPECIFIED Litchfield, Damien UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Ball, Linden LBall@uclan.ac.uk https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5099-0124 Schools: Collection period: From To 1 January 2013 31 December 2015 Date type: Submission Geographic coverage: The data was collected at University of Central Lancashire (Preston Campus), UK. Data collection took place in designated experimental psychology laboratories in The School of Psychology, Darwin Buliding. Data collection method: The excel data workbook comprises raw data from 3 experimental studies, and details of the associated task materials. Each experiment followed a consistent procedure for collection, with variation of the independent variable of sound (Experiment 1; Quiet vs. Steady-state speech vs. Changing-state speech Experiment 2; Quiet vs. Steady-state tones vs. Changing-state tones, Experiment 3; Quiet vs. Rotated speech vs. Normal speech) and a consistent independent variable of Compound Remote Associate Task (CRAT) difficulty (Easy vs. Hard). Each experiment utilised a fully within-participants design. Experimental Materials The excel workbook contains two sheets providing details of the experimental materials. This consists of the normative data for the CRAT problems. The data sheets entitled Experiment 1 & 2_materials and Experiment 3_Materials provide the following information. Columns A, B & C are the three cue words for each CRAT, column D denotes the difficulty of the CRAT (easy vs. hard) column e the normative solution rate, column f the normative solution time, column g the set allocation. Data Collection Procedure Prior to collection, written informed consent was obtained. Participants completed the task individually on a laptop computer, with headphones attached. The experiment was executed on a PC running an E-Prime 2.0 program (Psychology Software Tools, Sharpsburg, PA, USA) that controlled stimulus presentation and recorded participant responses. Participants were provided with instructions to ignore the background sound played through the headphones, and were assured that they would not be asked anything about it later. An example CRAT item was presented along with its answer. To ensure familiarity with the task and computer programme, participants completed three practice problems, not drawn from the experimental set of CRAT items, before undertaking the experimental problems. Each participant was permitted up to 30 seconds to attempt to solve each CRAT problem. On identifying the answer, they were asked to press the space bar to reveal a text field to insert their response, before continuing onto the next screen. Participants were then presented with a target cue on the screen and the next problem. They could not go back to the same problem, or revise their answer, once they had entered a response. Cue-words were presented in 30-point Times New Roman font. For each CRAT problem all three cue-words were presented simultaneously along the same horizontal plane. In Experiments 1 & 3, a randomly allocated subset of participants provided a self-reported solution strategy indicating the extent to which the problem was solved by analytic or insight means. This was recorded on a four-point scale (1 indicated an analytic response, and 4 an insight response). Participants were fully debriefed on completion of the experiment. Statement on legal, ethical and access issues: Ethical approval was obtained from the PsySoc Ethics Committee at the University of Central Lancashire, UK. There are no legal or access issues pertaining to this data set or materials. Data processing and preparation activities: The following sheets; Experiment 1_Solution Rates, Experiment 2_Solution Rates, and Experiment 3_Solution Rates provide the mean percentage solution rate according to each condition. The following sheets; Experiment 1_Solution Strategy and Experiment 3_Solution Strategy provide the raw self-reported solution strategy score for each participant per condition. The raw scores varied from 1 to 4, where 1 indicated an analytic response, and 4 indicated an insight response. The highlighted yellow cells indicate a blank cell (where no CRAT was solved correctly for that participant in that particular condition) replaced with the condition mean. Projects: Grant Number Funder Name Funder ID SG162930 BA/Leverhulme UNSPECIFIED Status: Published Copyright holders: Creators Contact email address: rdmsupport@uclan.ac.uk Last Modified: 19 Mar 2021 10:06

Available Files

Full Archive

Materials%20and%20results.xlsx Materials%20and%20results.xlsx Materials%20and%20results.xlsx Visible to: Anyone Document Type : Full Archive Metadata Revision: 2 Mime-Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Language: English License: Creative Commons: Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 File size: 31kB