constraints

  • During the ideation phase, Genji paid attention to the number of components and other constraints.
  • In a previous study by Finke et al. “imposing constraints on the parts, categories, and functions of the output increases the rate at which creative works are produced.
  • Gen. had put this to good use.

Change of plan

  • There was no significant difference in the number of plan changes based on failure, but the number of plan changes not based on failure was significantly higher for Gen.
  • When there was a failure in a part, mechanism, or algorithm factor, there was no significant difference in the number of times the same factor was corrected, but significantly more Gen Xers corrected the different factors.

Personal Opinion: I think that Genin has an execution model in his brain, which allows him to conduct “experiments in the brain” that cannot be observed from the outside. I would like to know what exactly was the “non-failure based plan change.” What appears to the observer in this experiment as “working well, i.e., the plan was changed even though it was not a failure” is actually a phenomenon of “a difference between the execution results in the brain model and the reality,” and the plan is modified based on the difference between the execution results in the brain.

paper

orthographical variants - LEGO Creativity Experiment

relevance


This page is auto-translated from /nishio/素人のアイデアは口頭発表では独創性高く見えるが実現可能でない using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.