Divergent and Convergent Group Creativity in an Asynchronous Online Environment

This study examined the influence of various group diversity dimensions on collaborative creativity related to the healthcare system. Research findings on the association between diversity and brainstorming performance has been mixed. Diversity that increases cognitive stimulation or promotes elaboration has been shown to increase group performance. Participants exchanged ideas, replied, and elaborated using an electronic discussion board in an asynchronous fashion in groups of five over a period of 4 weeks. The groups varied in diversity of ethnicity, gender, age, and political orientation, but participants were not made aware of this diversity. Age and gender diversity were related to lower levels of replying to ideas and lower idea novelty but political diversity was related to increased replies and novelty. If a topic engages people with different perspectives to actively respond to others’ ideas, this can increase the creative potential of idea sharing in groups. Political or value-based diversity has the potential for creative solutions if the other participants’ political or value-based identities are not made salient.     

Is I Guaranteed to Refer?

Abstract: One claim about I , regularly made and almost universally endorsed, is that uses of the term are logically guaranteed to refer successfully (if they refer at all). The claim is only rarely formulated perspicuously or argued for. Such obscurity helps disguise the fact that those who profess to advance the claim actually turn out to support not a logical guarantee at all but merely high security through fortunate coincidence. This is not surprising. For we have no good reason to accept the claim – granted, any use of I is apt to refer successfully; but that can be explained by pragmatic features of its use. And we have some reason to reject the claim – it is notoriously difficult to see how genuine reference and guaranteed success do not exclude each other when considered as properties of the logic of any term.     

Are rats short-sighted? Effects of stimulus distance and size on visual detection

Behavioural evidence concerning short-sightedness in rats is apparently conflicting: in some experiments rats have performed poorly with visual stimuli further than about 60 cm distant, while in others they have made efficient use of more distant cues, for example to find their way through mazes. However, in the experiments suggesting short-sightedness, the physical size of the stimuli was not varied, so that stimulus distance and visual angle were confounded. In the present experiment, therefore, the size and distance of the stimuli to be detected were varied independently. Over the range tested (30-160 cm), distance was found to produce relatively slight effects on the smallest detectable visual angle, and these tended to diminish with practice. Thus, no good evidence was found for short-sightedness in rats up to 160 cm, a finding consistent with current views of the structure and image-forming capacities of the rat's eye. The smallest detectable targets were, however, surprisingly large in view of the rat's visual acuity (which is about 1c/deg): at the distances tested, animals required considerable training to run reliably to targets subtending less than 5-10° of visual angle. Difficulties in responding to stationary stimuli of this size are likely to restrict severely the use that rats make of vision both in the laboratory and in their natural surroundings.