Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40592889›Full record

ArticleNPJ science of learning2025

Creativity supports learning through associative thinking.

Simone A Luchini, James C Kaufman, Benjamin Goecke, Oliver Wilhelm, Yoed N Kenett, Daisy Lei, Mathias Benedek, Janet G van Hell, Roger E Beaty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ science of learning, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Simone A LuchiniDepartment of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, Philadelphia, USA, PA. skl5875@psu.edu.
James C KaufmanNeag School of Education, University of Connecticut, Storrs, USA, CT.
Benjamin GoeckeHector Research Institute of Education Sciences and Psychology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Oliver WilhelmInstitute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Yoed N KenettFaculty of Data and Decision Sciences, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel.
Daisy LeiDepartment of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, Philadelphia, USA, PA.
Mathias BenedekDepartment of Psychology, University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Janet G van HellDepartment of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, Philadelphia, USA, PA.
Roger E BeatyDepartment of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, Philadelphia, USA, PA.

Funding

National Science Foundation DUE-2155070
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Creativity is a key 21st-century skill and a consistent predictor of academic learning outcomes. Despite decades of research on creativity and learning, little is known about the cognitive mechanisms underlying their relationship. In two studies, we examined whether creativity supports associative learning through associative thinking-the ability to generate novel word associations-an ability central to creativity which has not been previously tied to associative learning. In Study 1, we found that students who generated more novel word associations learned more words on a foreign language learning test 24 h later. In Study 2, we replicated and extended the effect to naturalistic creativity tasks (i.e., writing short stories and sketching line drawings), finding associative thinking mediated the relationship between creativity and associative learning. Importantly, both studies controlled for general intelligence. Our findings suggest that creativity's contribution to learning operates partly through a shared cognitive capacity for making new connections.

Identifiers

PMID40592889
PMCPMC12214691

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.