Opinion TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol.9 No.7 July 2005 ELSEVIER Full text provided by www.sciencedirect.com SCIENCE DIRECT. New approaches to demystifying insight Edward M. Bowden1, Mark Jung-Beeman1, Jessica Fleck2 and John Kounios2 1Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208, USA 2Department of Psychology, Drexel University, 245 N. 15th Street, MS 626, Philadelphia, PA 19102-1192, USA After a person has become stuck on a problem, they sometimes achieve a clear and sudden solution through insight - the so-called Aha! experience. Because of its distinctive experience, the origins and characteristics of insight have received considerable attention historically in psychological research. However, despite consider- able progress in characterizing insight, the underlying mechanisms remain mysterious. We argue that research on insight could be greatly advanced by supplementing traditional insight research, which depends on a few complex problems, with paradigms common in other domains of cognitive science. We describe a large set of mini-insight problems to which multiple methods can be applied, together with subjective reports to identify insight problem-solving. Behavioral priming and neuro- imaging methods are providing evidence about what, where, and how neural activity occurs during insight. Such evidence constrains theories of component pro- cesses, and will help to demystify insight. Introduction Almost everyone has had the 'Aha!' experience when solving a problem. After working for some time on a vexing problem, the solution comes in a sudden and unexpected flash. Most of these insights are rather minor events, such as a solution to a crossword puzzle. However, there are many anecdotes - indeed, some might say a mythology - about insights involved in the solution of far more complex and important problems, such as Kekule's discovery of the ring structure of benzene [1] and Poincares discoveries in mathematics [2]. The scientific understanding of insight has grown sporadically for almost a century. Supplementing tra- ditional research with newer paradigms from the recent advances in neuroimaging would put the field in position to make another leap forward in our understanding of insight. In this article we discuss several limitations in the way insight research is typically done, which present difficulties for using certain paradigms. These limitations include inconsistent efforts to determine whether insight has occurred, the assumption that 'insight problems' produce insight solutions, and the use of small numbers of problems. We offer a novel approach to illustrate what might be gained by attempts to overcome these limitations. Corresponding author: Bowden, E.M. (e-bowden@northwestern.edu). Available online 13 June 2005 What is insight? The term 'insight' is used to designate the clear and sudden understanding of how to solve a problem. Insight is thought to arise when a solver breaks free of unwar- ranted assumptions, or forms novel, task-related connec- tions between existing concepts or skills. Most researchers accept insight as subjectively differ- ent from trial-and-error or algorithmic problem-solving. Despite these subjective differences, a persistent debate surrounds whether insight represents a distinct type of problem-solving involving at least some distinct cognitive mechanisms, or is merely an epiphenomenon based on the same cognitive