INS at CH6–CH14 correlated with creativity enhancement, and INS was amplified when feedback was applied rather than ignored¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i2–i3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 INS at CH6–CH14 correlated positively with changes in uniqueness acquisition (r = 0.257), uniqueness transfer (r = 0.293), and flexibility transfer (r = 0.352). → Junting Yin 2025 q3 i3 A Group × uptake ANOVA showed "apply" elicited stronger INS than "copy" and "ignore", with a significant interaction (η2P = 0.080). → Junting Yin 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Junting Yin 2025¶

Junting Yin, Zheyu Jin, Yuxuan Zhang, Xuening Li, Yangzhuo Li, Guoping Zhang & Junlong Luo. (2025). Applying, not ignoring: how feedback uptake and neural synchrony drive creativity. npj Science of Learning 10:61. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00351-0

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

FDR-corrected Pearson correlations between INS values and creativity changes, with printed coefficients r = 0.257, r = 0.293, and r = 0.352. INS at CH6–CH14 was uniquely associated with acquisition and transfer; no significant correlations were found for CH12–CH14 or ROI 2.

"positive correlations betweenchanges in uniqueness (acquisition: r = 0.257; pcorr = 0.020; transfer: r = 0.293; pcorr =0 . 0 0 9 ) a n dflexibility (transfer: r = 0.352; pcorr = 0.002) with the INS at CH6–CH14"

Junting Yin 2025 (2)¶

Junting Yin, Zheyu Jin, Yuxuan Zhang, Xuening Li, Yangzhuo Li, Guoping Zhang & Junlong Luo. (2025). Applying, not ignoring: how feedback uptake and neural synchrony drive creativity. npj Science of Learning 10:61. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00351-0

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

2 (IF, OF) × 3 (ignore, copy, apply) ANOVA on INS extracted per uptake level, with printed effect size η2P = 0.234 for the uptake main effect. Apply elicited stronger INS than copy and ignore; in the IF group, apply and ignore INS both exceeded the OF group's corresponding values.

"The main effect of feedback uptake was also significant ( F(2, 112) = 17.100, p < 0.001,η2 P = 0.234). Specifically, the"apply"(0.39 ± 0.01) elicited stronger INS than "copy" (0.35 ± 0.01, p = 0.010) and "ignore" (0.30 ± 0.01, p < 0.001)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Feedback containing comments or scaffolding is more likely applied; affective or assessing feedback is more likely ignored — related
• Applying feedback correlates positively and ignoring feedback negatively with creativity acquisition — related
• Interpersonal feedback uniquely enhanced bidirectional neural information flow between provider and receiver — related
• Interpersonal feedback improved creativity acquisition more than one-way feedback, irrelevant communication, or no feedback — related
• Interpersonal feedback improved creativity transfer to novel tasks more than all control conditions — related
• Interpersonal feedback induced higher interpersonal neural synchronization in superior frontal gyrus and inferior parietal cortex channels than control conditions — related