MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206019672 · doi:10.1002/jocb.526

Integrating B.F. Skinner’s Writings with Some Current Research in Human Creativity

2021· article· en· W3206019672 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Creative Behavior · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCreativity in Education and Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityUnconscious mindAnalogyPsychologyEpistemologySelection (genetic algorithm)Creativity techniqueCognitive scienceSociologyPsychoanalysisSocial psychologyPhilosophyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Despite widespread misunderstandings, B.F. Skinner did not ignore creativity. The present article first integrates Skinner’s writings with some current research in creativity that focuses on the role of near associations in creative innovations. Next, Skinner’s writings are integrated with the role of the unconscious in creativity, including some practical advice that may be helpful in capturing unconscious insights. Finally, Skinner’s writings are integrated with techniques that may stimulate creativity, using the analogy that variation may be critical in both creativity and natural selection. Although Skinner’s work is often considered outdated, the present article shows that Skinner’s writings share similarities with some current research in human creativity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.202
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it