"New ideas about new ideas".

• Position: Conferences

Considerable work has been done on creativity across a wide-range of disciplines, including business, cognitive neuroscience, economics, history, psychology, and sociology, but until recently there had been little interaction among these researchers. But on March 10 and 11, fifteen experts on innovation and creativity from these disciplines--both established senior scholars and emerging younger researchers--met at the NBER in Cambridge for a "New Ideas About New Ideas Conference" designed to foster cross-disciplinary dialogue on creativity and innovation. The conference, supported by the Sloan Foundation, was organized by NBER Research Associate Richard Freeman of Harvard University and Faculty Research Fellow Bruce Weinberg of Ohio State University. Weinberg also prepared this summary article for the NBER Reporter.

Given the varied group and the nature of scientific papers presented, one might have been concerned about the ability to communicate across disciplinary lines, let alone to find common interest, but soon cognitive neuroscientists were discussing history, psychologists were talking about economics, and everyone was poring over images of the brain. And, after close to 20 hours of discussions, some during an informal stroll along the Charles River, a set of themes emerged quite clearly along with policy implications and directions for future research.

Indeed, the timing was also fortuitous from a policy perspective. As the most recent State of the Union Address indicated, the United States increasingly sees its economic position challenged, and creativity and innovation are viewed as the most promising directions for us to take in maintaining our position. On the other hand, this increased interest in creativity and innovation may conflict with demographics--the workforce has been aging, and creativity and innovation traditionally have been regarded as linked to youth.

1. The Idiosyncrasy of Innovation

   With innovation viewed as a way for the United States to maintain its economic position, it is natural to ask what can be done to foster it. As Daniel Goroff--a mathematician and the Dean of Faculty at Harvey Mudd College--discussed, colleges and universities increasingly are prioritizing creativity, and the Mills Commission is recommending systematic testing of higher education outcomes.

   Our working definition of creativity was "the production of novel and useful ideas or artifacts." The discussion touched on the arts, industry, and sciences. Perhaps the single point on which there was the widest agreement was that, while there are recognizable patterns in creativity, the motivations of creators and the processes by which creative ideas arise are frequently specific to the individual, or idiosyncratic. The idiosyncratic nature of innovation showed up in brain images, in problem-solving experiments, and in analyses of historical and contemporary innovations and innovators. Participants were optimistic about our ability to foster creativity; however, we agreed that, to be successful, we must attempt to confront the idiosyncratic nature of creativity.

   The Idiosyncratic Nature of the Creative Brain

   At the finest level, the cognitive neuroscientists at the conference showed the idiosyncratic nature of creativity in brain functioning. Mark Jung-Beeman, a cognitive neuroscientist at Northwestern University, showed that distinct brain areas contribute when people solve problems with insight, that is, when solutions are accompanied by "Aha" moments. The patterns of brain activity suggest an increase in "top-down" processing, and increased contributions from the brain's right hemisphere. Beeman attributed the latter effect to the more diffuse links in the right brain, which allow for novel or idiosyncratic connections across distantly related concepts.

   John Kounious, a cognitive neuroscientist at Drexel University, showed that, although the final moment of insight is sudden, there are substantial changes in brain activity leading up to insight solutions to problems, such as a quieting of the sensory areas of the brain in the seconds before the solution reaches consciousness. He interpreted these results as the unconscious brain searching for solutions, but having to quiet down external inputs to bring a candidate solution...