创造性过程中的语义距离的定量测量
Quantitative Measurement of Semantic Distance in Creative Processes
摘要: 在创造性思维过程中，概念间的语义距离起着重要作用，也就是说，当一个人越能联想到与给定概念看似不相关或相关很遥远的概念，结合产生的想法就越具有创造性。两个概念间的语义距离看似直观，但由于在创造性思维过程中测量的挑战性，大多数都是主观评测。近年来，在创造性思维的研究中越来越多的运用到了语义距离的定量测量方法，为创造性思维的研究提供了一个更加客观的指标，也为研究语义记忆结构和语义距离在创造性过程中的作用提供了更直接的方法。本文将对现有关于创造性思维研究中语义距离定量测量的方法及其应用进行介绍。
Abstract: In the creative thinking process, the semantic distance between concepts plays an important role. In other words, the more one can associate with concepts that seem unrelated or far away from the given concept, the more creative the combined idea will be. The semantic distance between the two concepts may seem intuitive, but due to the challenge of measuring creative thinking processes, most are subjective measures. In recent years, the quantitative measurement method of semantic distance has been used more and more in the research of creative thinking, which provides a more objective index for the research of creative thinking. This paper will give an overview of the existing methods for quantitative measurement of semantic distance in creative thinking research.
文章引用：曾荣灿, 曹贵康 (2021). 创造性过程中的语义距离的定量测量. 心理学进展, 11(1), 55-60. https://doi.org/10.12677/AP.2021.111007

参考文献

[1] 孙江洲(2015). 远距离语义联结与创造性思维的关系. 硕士学位论文, 重庆: 西南大学.
[2] Acar, S., & Runco, M. A. (2014). Assessing Associative Distance among Ideas Elicited by Tests of Divergent Thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 26, 229-238.[CrossRef] 
[3] Baronchelli, A., Ferrer-i-Cancho, R., Pastor-Satorras, R., Chater, N., & Christiansen, M. H. (2013). Networks in Cognitive Science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 348-360.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Beaty, R. E., Silvia, P. J., Nusbaum, E. C., Jauk, E., & Benedek, M. (2014). The Roles of Associative and Executive Processes in Creative Cognition. Memory & Cognition, 42, 1186-1197.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Benedek, M., Kenett, Y. N., Umdasch, K., Anaki, D., Faust, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2017). How Semantic Memory Structure and Intelligence Contribute to Creative Thought: A Network Science Approach. Thinking & Reasoning, 23, 1-26.[CrossRef] 
[6] Boden, M. (2003). The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. New York: Basic Books.[CrossRef] 
[7] Borge-Holthoefer, J., & Arenas, A. (2010). Semantic Networks: Structure and Dynamics. Entropy, 12, 1264-1302.[CrossRef] 
[8] Chan, K. Y., & Vitevitch, M. S. (2010). Network Structure Influences Speech Production. Cognitive Science, 34, 685-697.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[9] Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1988). A Spread-ing-Activation Theory of Semantic Processing. Readings in Cognitive Science, 82, 126-136.[CrossRef] 
[10] Costello, F. J., & Keane, M. T. (2000). Efficient Creativity: Constraint-Guided Conceptual Combination. Cognitive Science, 24, 299-349.[CrossRef] 
[11] Dahl, D. W., & Moreau, P. (2002). The Influence and Value of Analogical Thinking during New Product Ideation. Journal of Marketing Research, 39, 47-60.[CrossRef] 
[12] Gray, K., Anderson, S., Chen, E. E., Kelly, J. M., & Lewis, K. (2019). “Forward Flow”: A New Measure to Quantify Free Thought and Predict Creativity. American Psychologist, 74, 539-554.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Green, A. E., Fugelsang, J. A., & Dunbar, K. N. (2006). Automatic Activation of Categorical and Abstract Analogical Relations in Analogical Reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 34, 1414-1421.[CrossRef] 
[14] Green, A. E., Fugelsang, J. A., Kraemer, D. J., & Dunbar, K. N. (2008). The Micro-Category Account of Analogy. Cognition, 106, 1004-1016.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[15] Green, A. E., Fugelsang, J. A., Kraemer, D. J., Shamosh, N. A., & Dunbar, K. N. (2006). Frontopolar Cortex Mediates Abstract Integration in Analogy. Brain Research, 1096, 125-137.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Green, A. E., Kraemer, D. J., Fugelsang, J. A., Gray, J. R., & Dunbar, K. N. (2010). Connecting Long Distance: Semantic Distance in Analogical Reasoning Modulates Frontopolar Cortex Activity. Cerebral Cortex, 20, 70.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] Green, A. E., Spiegel, K. A., Giangrande, E. J., Weinberger, A. B., Gallagher, N. M., & Turkeltaub, P. E. (2016). Thinking Cap plus Thinking Zap: TDCS of Frontopolar Cortex Improves Creative Analogical Reasoning and Facilitates Conscious Augmentation of State Creativity in Verb Generation. Cerebral Cortex, 27, 2628-2639.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Gruszka, A., & Necka, E. (2002). Priming and Acceptance of Close and Remote Associations by Creative and Less Creative People. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 193-205.[CrossRef] 
[19] Hahn, L. W. (2008). Overcoming the Limitations of Sin-gle-Response Free Associations. Electronic Journal of Integrative Biosciences, 5, 25-36.
[20] Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1995). Mental Leaps. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.[CrossRef] 
[21] Karuza, E. A., Thompson-Schill, S. L., & Bassett, D. S. (2016). Local Patterns to Global Architectures: Influences of Network Topology on Human Learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 629-640.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[22] Kenett, Y. N., & Austerweil, J. (2016). Examining Search Processes in Low and High Creative Individuals with Random Walks. 38th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Philadelphia, 10-13 August 2016.
[23] Kenett, Y. N., David, A., & Miriam, F. (2014). Investigating the Structure of Semantic Networks in Low and High Creative Persons. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 407.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[24] Mayer, R. E. (1999). Fifty Years of Creativity Research. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 449-460). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.[CrossRef] 
[25] Mednick, S. (1962). The Associative Basis of the Creative Process. Psychological Review, 69, 220-232.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Dennis, S. (2000). What Is Free Association and What Does It Measure? Memory & Cognition, 28, 887-899.[CrossRef] 
[27] Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (2004). The University of South Florida Free Association, Rhyme, and Word Fragment Norms. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 402-407.[CrossRef] 
[28] Prabhakaran, R., Green, A. E., & Gray, J. R. (2014). Thin Slices of Creativity: Using Single-Word Utterances to Assess Creative Cognition. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 641-659.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[29] Recchia, G., & Jones, M. (2009). More Data Trumps Smarter Algorithms: Comparing Pointwise Mutual Information with Latent Semantic Analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 647-656.[CrossRef] 
[30] Rossman, E., & Fink, A. (2010). Do Creative People Use Shorter Association Pathways? Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 891-895.[CrossRef] 
[31] Runco, M. A., & Acar, S. (2012). Divergent Thinking as an Indicator of Creative Potential. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 66-75.[CrossRef] 
[32] Schunn, C. D., Paulus, P. B., Cagan, J., & Wood, K. (2006). Final Report from the NSF Innovation and Discovery Workshop: The Scientific Basis of Individual and Team Innovation and Discovery. Washington DC: National Science Foundation.
[33] Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Successful Intelligence. New York: Plume.
[34] Van Petten, C. (2014). Examining the N400 Semantic Context Effect Item-by-Item: Relationship to Corpus-Based Measures of Word Co-Occurrence. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 94, 407 -419.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[35] Vitevitch, M. S. (2008). What Can Graph Theory Tell Us about Word Learning and Lexical Retrieval? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51, 408-422.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[36] Vitevitch, M. S., Chan, K. Y., & Goldstein, R. (2014). Insights into Failed Lexical Retrieval from Network Science. Cognitive Psychology, 68, 1-32.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[37] Vitevitch, M. S., Chan, K. Y., & Roodenrys, S. (2012). Complex Network Structure Influences Processing in Long-Term and Short-Term Memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 67, 30-44.[CrossRef] [PubMed]