Dynamic switching between brain networks predicts creative ability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creativity is hypothesized to arise from a mental state which balances spontaneous thought and cognitive control, corresponding to functional connectivity between the brain's Default Mode (DMN) and Executive Control (ECN) Networks. Here, we conduct a large-scale, multi-center examination of this hypothesis. Employing a meta-analytic network neuroscience approach, we analyze resting-state fMRI and creative task performance across 10 independent samples from Austria, Canada, China, Japan, and the United States (N = 2433)-constituting the largest and most ethnically diverse creativity neuroscience study to date. Using time-resolved network analysis, we investigate the relationship between creativity (i.e., divergent thinking ability) and dynamic switching between DMN and ECN. We find that creativity, but not general intelligence, can be reliably predicted by the number of DMN-ECN switches. Importantly, we identify an inverted-U relationship between creativity and the degree of balance between DMN-ECN switching, suggesting that optimal creative performance requires balanced brain network dynamics. Furthermore, an independent task-fMRI validation study (N = 31) demonstrates higher DMN-ECN switching during creative idea generation (compared to a control condition) and replicates the inverted-U relationship. Therefore, we provide robust evidence across multi-center datasets that creativity is tied to the capacity to dynamically switch between brain networks supporting spontaneous and controlled cognition.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".