The Susceptibility of Compound Remote Associate Problems to Disruption by Irrelevant Sound: A Window onto the Component Processes Underpinning Creative Cognition?

276 18 496 3 2603 document 496 JCP Materials and results.xlsx application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet 3bc36d4f6c0b14ea9dfc88356474a9e1 MD5 240522 2020-11-23 13:59:38 https://data.lancashire.ac.uk/id/eprint/276/1/JCP%20Materials%20and%20results.xlsx 276 1 1 application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet application/vnd.ms-excel en public cc_by_nd

JCP Materials and results.xlsx

data 498 3 2609 document 498 Graphs JCP SI Strategy Report.xlsx application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet 8a73aeadf89875f84aa10c2b2c208107 MD5 22278 2020-11-23 14:00:46 https://data.lancashire.ac.uk/id/eprint/276/2/Graphs%20JCP%20SI%20Strategy%20Report.xlsx 276 2 2 application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet application/vnd.ms-excel en public cc_by_nd

Graphs JCP SI Strategy Report.xlsx

data 499 2 2612 document 499 Graphs JCP SI Accuracy Data.xlsx application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet a09dea34066b933555c7827294fd671c MD5 29560 2020-11-23 14:01:20 https://data.lancashire.ac.uk/id/eprint/276/3/Graphs%20JCP%20SI%20Accuracy%20Data.xlsx 276 3 3 application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet application/vnd.ms-excel en public cc_by_nd

Graphs JCP SI Accuracy Data.xlsx

data 500 2 2615 document 500 results.zip application/zip 2b274663725f795ee73714a313846fb3 MD5 179463 2020-11-23 14:02:19 https://data.lancashire.ac.uk/id/eprint/276/4/results.zip 276 4 4 application/zip application/zip en public cc_by_nd

results.zip

data archive 8023 disk0/00/00/02/76 2020-11-27 15:14:34 2025-10-31 23:30:03 2020-11-27 15:14:34 data_collection 273 no_search 3 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 Litchfield Damien Litchfd@edgehill.ac.uk https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7760-293X Degno Federica FDegno@uclan.ac.uk https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9621-9968 Ball Linden LBall@uclan.ac.uk https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5099-0124 The Susceptibility of Compound Remote Associate Problems to Disruption by Irrelevant Sound: A Window onto the Component Processes Underpinning Creative Cognition? submitted C856 sc_P_CS_20 This document contains the material and raw results data for Experiments 1 to 3, excel documents of the figures, and the r scripts. submitted 10.17030/uclan.data.00000228 dataset Creators SG162930 BA/Leverhulme rdmsupport@lancashire.ac.uk Reader in Cognitive Psychology Marsh John Everett JEMarsh@uclan.ac.uk 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. 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. 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. 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. 2013-01-01 2015-12-31