A shift of mind – Introducing a concept creation model

Information Sciences 179 (2009) 1639–1646

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Information Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate / ins

A shift of mind – Introducing a concept creation model

Jun Nakamura a,b,*, Yukio Ohsawa a

a Department of Technology Management for Innovation, Graduate School of Engineering, University of Tokyo, Hongo 7-3-1, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japanb Bearing Point, Chiyoda-ku 100-6223, Japan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords:
CreativityConceptAmbiguity and constraint
0020-0255/$ - see front matter � 2008 Elsevier Incdoi:10.1016/j.ins.2008.11.036

* Corresponding author. Address: Department of7-3-1, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan. Tel.: +81

E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Nakamura).

The ability to construct concepts is indispensable to both individual and evolutionarydevelopment. Our model involves the use of ambiguous stimuli to facilitate decision-mak-ing by promoting analogical reasoning. Toward this end, we have developed Web-basedexercises in word categorization for the purpose of engaging participants in analogical rea-soning that contributes to the integration of words and leads to the construction of newconcepts. 12 graduate students and 20 junior high school students were presented withambiguous information for the purpose of comparison between the senior and the juniorstudents. We hypothesized that the senior students tend to behave with more insightrather than junior students with less activation of thought process. Our results suggestedthat the presentation of the ambiguous stimuli were associated with unique thought pro-cesses, which are consistent with approaches to word categorization that reflect either theexperience of insight or the operation of a trial and error strategy, depending on the junioror the senior students. We showed that the senior students tend to be more like insight intocategorization design, while the junior as rather try and error behavior, in consideration ofneeded time and actions in analogical thinking.

� 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

When revenues are decreasing, business executives must consider alternative ways to improve sales, including offeringdiscounts and implementing changes in the sales force. In this situation, a visit to the factory may prove to be fortuitous if apreviously ignored product attribute were noticed. For example, the attention of a liquor company executive might be drawnto the potential marketing value of the bottle cap, resulting in an advertising campaign that equates an opening of the bottlewith the start of a relaxing evening. This strategy is resting on a new conceptualization of the same business situation, whereyou might obviate the need to discount prices. It represents the use of abstract thinking in the form of translating physicalattributes (e.g., the bottle cap) into metaphors for an experience (e.g., a relaxing evening).

There are two types of studies that have addressed this issue. The first focuses on the relationship between the analogicalreasoning and creativity, while the second focuses on using the analytical references to evaluate human behavior.

The first type of research, where exploring connections between analogical reasoning and creativity, has relied ondescriptive evidence from the cognitive psychology literature showing that the same individual can ascribe differentmeanings to a given word in the different contexts, thereby producing new interpretations [8]. Emerging meaning fromgiven words are analyzed by semiotic approach [19]. The ambiguities of the words also involve shifting experiences of

. All rights reserved.

Technology Management for Innovation, Graduate School of Engineering, University of Tokyo, Hongo90 2557 9800; fax: +81 3 5232 9788.

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00200255

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ins

Two groups with two uncategorized words left

Three groups without uncategorized words.

Two groups with two uncategorized words left

Three groups without uncategorized words.

Fig. 1. Concept creation model. The progress is from two clusters with two items left uncategorized (ambiguous) in the left image to three clusters with noambiguous items in the right image.

1640 J. Nakamura, Y. Ohsawa / Information Sciences 179 (2009) 1639–1646

self, often classified as subjective or objective transfer [24,25]. This study focused on an analogical reasoning, which isessential in the creation of concepts [11,12] and elucidated by structure mapping theory [8,9], that allows the transferof knowledge between different domains. This cross-domain transfer from the base (i.e., the given words) to the target(i.e., the concepts emerging from the base) represents a process in which new designs may be discovered and/or created.In this study, we have attempted to increase analogical thinking by providing explicit hints suggesting the creation ofconcepts [10]. It is observed that, the previous research within this first category has not focused on words that cannotbe easily assimilated into newer categorizations. We therefore have examined such words referred to as ‘‘ambiguousitems”.

The second type of research involves using the empirical methods to analyze human cognitive behavior. Studies havefound that subjects who have participated in an initial task to combine keywords in various ways subsequently demon-strated a greater creativity [20]. Our approach followed in this research, use an algorithm, as well as an experimental pro-cedure involving rewards and words presented on cards, to observe human cognitive behavior. An empirically basedcomputational model using neural network was introduced to focus on the semantic characteristics of the words [23]. Inthe real-world situation, semantic interpretation by phenomena can be described by AFS (axiomatic fuzzy set) formal con-cept [26]. Several methodological approaches use cards in this regard. The CRC [1,3], which facilitates the discovery of thereal-world objects, is designed to achieve object-oriented models according to a predefined scenario. Our target, however,relates to the creation of a scenario itself by combining word cards. The Q-methodology [4] employs cards to reveal subjec-tive structures, attitudes and perspectives. This objective is based on factor analysis involving the rank-ordering of a set ofstatements to agree or disagree. Despite similarities with our approach, the method does not explore the thought processesunderpinning creativity.

The construction of over-arching categories for ambiguous items are associated with the creation of a new concepts andan enhanced interpretation, where existence of an ambiguous items corresponds to a diversification of a thought processeither as insight or trial and error [18]. It is, however, not focused on an effect of seniority with ambiguous stimuli in thethought process for concept creation. Therefore, we have defined the same experimental conditions (environment with anal-ogy board, experimental rule with constraint, a set of word cards, etc.) in accordance with the previous research [18] with theparticipation of additional segment of examinees, to explore the shift of the diversification in the thought process, dependingon either senior or junior students.

2. Our model of concept creation

Our concept creation model, shown in Fig. 1, is based on the effect of externally derived information on creativity [13].Questions such as, what types of object can be ambiguous; how ambiguity arises; and how we can decide between rival def-initions are argued [21]. We hypothesized that environmental constraints would motivate creativity [2], and therefore in-structed the subjects to categorize all word cards.

We further hypothesized that the subjects would initially address to those items that seemed easy to categorize, whilewould subsequently address to those that were difficult to categorize. Given the constraint that all items are to be catego-rized, we hypothesized that the subjects would construct new concepts by recombining clusters into novel groups, as de-picted in Fig. 1. In other words, we sought to create an impasse in which the subjects were forced to move beyond theprefabricated ideas and construct new concepts to comply with the instruction of placing each item into a category [22].

Furthermore, we hypothesized that insight [15] would facilitate the categorization of all words included in the experi-ment. In the absence of such insight, we hypothesized that the subjects would use trial and error to fit any remaining itemsinto a cluster. In this regard, the seniority is presumed with more like insight, while the junior tends to be more like try anderror, in consideration of individual cumulative ability in analogical thinking.

J. Nakamura, Y. Ohsawa / Information Sciences 179 (2009) 1639–1646 1641

3. Experiment

3.1. Method

3.1.1. DesignThe participants were presented with ‘‘word cards” on a screen as described in Section 3.1.3 below and were instructed to

rearrange them into groups corresponding to appropriate higher-order concepts. The subjects then color-coded, named andprovided written descriptions of the concepts underlying each cluster. The participants continued to restructure the clusters,while constructing new concepts when necessary, until all the items were placed into a higher-order conceptual category.

All words were simple nouns with ambiguous meanings [25] (e.g., ‘‘Lincoln” could be construed as referring to a US Pres-ident, the name of a place or the name of a motor car). We hypothesized that this ambiguity would evoke analogical thinking[6] in the service of combining words into concepts.

3.1.2. ParticipantsTwelve graduate school students including business people (here, we call senior students) and 20 junior high school stu-

dents (junior students) participated in this ‘‘analogy board game” (see Fig. 2).

3.1.3. MaterialsThe interface shown in Fig. 3 was constructed on the basis of our concept creation model. Each ‘‘player” was presented

with 20 words (items), and each word appeared within a small square node. Initially, the words were randomly placed(Fig. 3A). Most words were already categorized, as indicated by the meanings included on their cards. The meanings ofambiguous items (Fig. 3B) were initially omitted, but during the second trial, the experimental group was presented withthe ambiguous items and the clusters were restructured to include them (Fig. 3C).

We prepared a 20-word card set (e.g., strawberry, baseball and Internet), which could be changed according to the goalsof the experiment. The system architecture consisted of a network environment with a browser for the player to engage withthe system, which provided logs to record any actions performed using the application. This system may relate to cognitivesimulator for the users to realize causal relation between the mental operation and the behavior [17] in future. However, theaim of this system is rather an empirical development to visualize human cognitive processes.

3.1.4. ProcedureTwo trials of the experiment were conducted without any break. The first trial included no special instructions, while the

second included the instruction to focus on a social issue (e.g., ‘‘consider environmental issues”) to prevent impasses [22].The reason to give the instruction is that the effect of analogical thinking tends to decrease without explicit hint towardthe target [10]. The reason why a social issue was conducted is that mental process reflects social process [16], and theinsight heavily depends on social interactions [5].

Fig. 2. Students enjoy playing an analogy board at a junior high school.

Fig. 3. Screen image of the developed environment in which (A) 20 word cards are randomly located the beginning, (B) four clusters with one item leftaside. The player clicks on the orphan card to view a balloon in which the player writes his/her interpreted meaning of the word and (C) all items are thencategorized into three clusters by reconstructing the combinations.


3.2. Results

3.2.1. Method of analysisWe analyzed the data obtained from the logs as follows.First, of the three types of action involved in the procedure (i.e., dragging items, coloring items and providing written

descriptions of the meanings of items), two formed the core of our analysis owing to their direct relation to conceptualization(i.e., coloring and providing meanings). Second, we defined the ambiguous items to be extracted from the 20 word cards.Third, we arranged the actions on a timeline to compare the group of players who had been presented with the ambiguouswords with those who had not. We then used the following definitions for our analysis.

3.2.1.1. Clusters and meaning. Color-coding was construed as representing the cognitive process underlying the constructionof a higher-order conceptual cluster. Awareness of a cluster was defined by Eq. (1), where the experimental time is normal-ized by 50 as t = {1, 2, . . . ,50}, and the number of actions required to color the card Ci is defined as gi(t)

G ¼X20

i¼1

X50

t¼1

giðtÞ: ð1Þ

The cognition reflecting awareness of meaning was captured in the same manner as the cognition reflecting awareness ofclusters; and is defined by Eq. (2), where the number of actions required to give meaning to an interpretation is expressed ashi(t):

H ¼X20

i¼1

X50

t¼1

hiðtÞ: ð2Þ

3.2.1.2. Definition of ambiguous items. In the absence of an impasse, no items remained uncategorized. Items that remaineduncategorized as a result of an impasse were deemed ‘‘ambiguous”, and were extracted in the following manner.

We defined a set of word cards as {C1, C2, . . . ,C20}. The timing required for G0 to attain 10% in Eq. (3) is shown as td. In thisregard, we can consider Ci (possibly a plural number) as an ambiguous item(s), where gi(t) > 0

G0 ¼X20

i¼1

X50

t¼d

giðtÞ=G: ð3Þ

We expected the tasks involving ambiguous items to require more time than those involving more concrete items, owingto the amount of time needed to manage such ambiguity. The above calculation identified those word cards that were leftuntil the end of the experiment (i.e., the last 10% of all actions) or were colored repeatedly.

The mode, representing the time period during which the greatest number of coloring actions occurred, showed thatstrategies entailed a progression toward the formation of concepts in so far as concept recognition involved several wordcards. We defined the timing of this mode as tm. The time gap between the mode (tm) and the final coloring action (td), wheretd � tm > 0, must be considered. The duration of this gap can be logically calculated as 49 at maximum (tm = 1, td = 50) and 1 atminimum (tm = 49, td = 50). Two types of ambiguity emerged as a function of the size of this duration. Longer durations were


associated with more realistic strategies for dealing with ambiguity, while shorter durations were associated with less real-istic strategies for dealing with the ambiguity. In other words, a trial and error strategy, in which an uncategorized card is leftaside as the player struggles with the ambiguity, is more time-consuming than an approach that involve temporarily placingan ambiguous word aside as the player seems to consider all the words simultaneously before finally arriving at an insight tosettle the ambiguity. Thus, the word card initially left aside might not seem ambiguous to the player by the end of the trial.

3.2.2. Summary of the results: data and graphsWe have tried to extract the ambiguous items from the first trial experimented by both junior students and senior stu-

dents respectively, in accordance with the method outlined in the Section 3.2.1.First, with regard to junior students, the relevant procedure revealed 11 players with the ambiguous items and eight play-

ers without the ambiguous items (i.e., using the length between td and tm of 10 to define the presence of the ambiguousitems).

We compare the processes underlying clustering and meaning-making, in accordance with Eqs. (1) and (2). Figs. 4 and 5are displayed by way of the degreed polynomial approximation technique.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3PETS2PETS1PETS

Cognition of cluster

Cognition of Meanings

“Longer Valley”

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

Normalized Time

Sum

of

actio

n (i

n av

erag

e)

3PETS2PETS1PETS



“Longer Valley”

Fig. 4. Junior high school students with action related to the cognition of clusters and meanings (for the players with ambiguous items), where the lengthbetween td and tm is more than 10.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3PETS2PETS1PETS



“SmallValley”

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

Normalized time

Sum

of

actio

n (i

n av

erag

e)

3PETS2PETS1PETS



“SmallValley”

Fig. 5. Junior high school students with action related to the cognition of clusters and meanings (for the players without ambiguous items) where the lengthbetween td and tm is less than 10.


Recognition of the clusters and color-coding items involve awareness of an over-arching concept. The result of a t-test forthe difference in population means, between actions with the ambiguous items and without ambiguous items in terms ofcognition of the cluster is significant as in Table 1 (t = 2.110, df = 17, p < 0.05).

Fig. 4 shows that the color-coding of the items to form the clusters increased prior to the task of providing writtendescriptions of the meaning. After this, the meaning assignment remained at a high level, whereas the clustering activityfaded. Thus, in the mid of playing time (step 2), the players tend to color some items, but left others uncolored. Followingthis, they began to write word meanings. During this time, players considered where to integrate the uncolored cards (i.e.,ambiguous items), or created a new concept by rearranging a set of cards and redefining their meaning, so as to accommo-date the previously uncolored cards. The ‘‘valley” in step 2, representing the players considering individual contexts in themidst of the mid of thought processes (see Fig. 4) confirms, that ambiguity led to new concept creation.

Players without the ambiguous items, however, demonstrated two additional processes: the coloring that alternated withmeaning description during most of the procedure, and the coloring that increased greatly during the final stage of the pro-cedure. This implies that the preparation for the final coloring action occurs from the beginning and proceeds carefully, asevidenced by a ‘‘smaller valley”.

In either case for the junior students, the form of graphs show that the valleys representing the actions performed in step2 vary in size (see the ‘‘valleys” in Figs. 4 and 5) representing an important finding for the case with junior students. Theresults of the t-test displayed in Table 1 show that no apparent difference was observed between the experimental and con-trol groups with regard to their performance in step 2.

Now we analyze the thought process for senior students. As a result of the procedure explained in the Section 3.2.1, wefound 4 players with the ambiguous items and 8 players without the ambiguous items. Figs. 6 and 7 show the process under-lying clustering and the meaning-making in accordance with Eqs. (1) and (2) being displayed by way of the polynomialapproximation technique. It is vital that the form of graph can be seen as a significant difference between the ‘with ambig-uous items’ and the ‘without ambiguous items’, which supports the ambiguous stimuli affect on thought process in conceptcreation [13] for not only junior students as in the previous paragraph but also senior students as well. We therefore focus onthe analysis on how different thought process between the junior and the senior students either the ‘with ambiguous items’or the ‘without ambiguous items’.

Fig. 6 shows that senior students with the ambiguous items tend to have similar ‘‘valley” with a little bit small size incomparison with the junior students (Fig. 4). The result of t-test for the difference in population means of coefficient ofthe cubic polynomial equation between the senior students and the junior students, result in the similarity (i.e., there isno significant difference), as shown in Table 2 (t = 2.160, df = 13, p < 0.05).

Table 1Result of a t-test for the differences in population means.

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 All

Mean 2.40751 �0.38570 �2.19515 0.07036Variance 2.05935 �0.24960 �1.89685 �1.28884Maximum 1.86639 �0.37690 �2.60046 �1.40441Sum of actions 2.40751 �0.38570 �2.19515 0.07036

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3PETS2PETS1PETS

“Small Valley”



0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

Normalized time

Sum

of

actio

n (i

n av

erag

e)

3PETS2PETS1PETS

“Small Valley”



Fig. 6. Graduate school students with action related to the cognition of clusters and meanings (for the players with ambiguous items), where the lengthbetween td and tm is more than 10.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

Normalized time

3PETS2PETS1PETS



0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Sum

of

actio

n (i

n av

erag

e)

3PETS2PETS1PETS



Fig. 7. Graduate school students with action related to the cognition of clusters and meanings (for the players without ambiguous items) where the lengthbetween td and tm is less than 10.

Table 2Result of a t-test for the differences in population means.

x3 x2 x d

Cognition of cluster 1.41833 �1.22931 1.36763 �2.11595Cognition of meanings �0.18218 �0.46000 0.16275 �0.67597


In Fig. 6, the graph has smaller sized valley with shorter (normalized) time in comparison with Fig. 4, which means thatthe junior students needs more time and actions (as try and error) to activate analogical thinking for the concept creationwith ambiguity in comparison with the senior students.

In spite of the existence of several valleys in case of the junior students without the ambiguous items (Fig. 5), we couldnot find any ‘‘valley” from the senior students without the ambiguous items as shown in Fig. 7, which could be observed thatthe color-coding of items is concurrently synchronized with the meaning assignment. This non-existence of valley impliesthat the senior students without the ambiguous items consider simultaneously both clustering with word meaning in fullprocess of the procedure, to have an insight into a view of whole categorization design to avoid a possible impasse [22].

4. Discussion

Whether the ambiguous items were presented, the study participants were given a task that required the creation of con-cepts. Nonetheless, our concept creation model envisaged a cognitive process in which those words that were difficult togroup (i.e., words left uncategorized at presentation) would be interpreted as the most ambiguous. Furthermore, the recon-struction of groups to incorporate the uncategorized words within some group enhanced interpretations owing to the neces-sity of redefining the originally ascribed meanings. We observed that players considering individual contexts in the midst ofthe mid of thought processes, what we call the ‘‘valley” in this paper. We also observed that players concentrating on assign-ing consistent meanings to words within a given cluster prior to finalizing their responses. In this regard, a ‘‘valley” can beconsidered reflective of an exploratory cognitive process [7].

The thought processes involved in constructing new concepts varies, especially during the beginning and the end of theprocedure, depending on whether the ambiguous items were presented. We suggest that the presence of the ambiguousitems was associated with the use of a trial and error cognitive approach, whereas the absence of ambiguous items was asso-ciated with the use of an approach involving perceptive insight [15] in the service of grasping a wider and a longer-termperspective.

We found a vital difference of the thought process between the junior and the senior students, in view of the existence ofthe feature size of the valley. Although both the junior and the senior students are sensitive with ambiguous stimuli, ouranalogy board shows visualization, that ambiguous stimuli affect the junior students be more like as try and error thanthe senior students, while the senior students (without ambiguous stimuli) are significantly associated with the perceptiveinsight. This implies that the effect of seniority might obviously exist as well as the effect of the ambiguous items on conceptcreation process.


5. Conclusions

We have presented evidence demonstrating that the analogy board can facilitate creativity when a constraining conditionentails concentration on an ambiguous item. Whilst previous research has been limited by exclusively focusing on outers(the ambiguous items) in terms of creativity, our findings imply that presenting the ambiguous items within the aforemen-tioned constraint evokes emotions and thoughts, thereby yielding a wider perspective characterized by increased awarenessof commonalities among stimuli; likewise, analogical reasoning supports the abstraction of similarities among the bases. Inthis context, our concept creation model allows for repetitive trial and error strategies that shift interpretations, or for theemergence of insight that entails a broader perspective on meaning and possible relationships. The approach adopted de-pends on the respective presence or absence of ambiguous items, as well as depends on whether junior or seniorsegmentations.

Further research is required to apply semantic analysis in attempts to validate possible patterns between created con-cepts in a way to measure representability, diversity, full coverage and multiplicity [14], as well as to identify words thatare sufficiently ambiguous to generate new concepts.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by a Nissan Science Foundation Grant, Japan and foundation for the fusion of science and tech-nology. We thank all the members of the baseball team at Kami-isshiki junior high school in Tokyo, Japan, for their partic-ipation in playing our analogy board.

References

[1] D. Bellin, S.S. Simone, The CRC Card Book, Addison-Wesley Pub., Reading, MA, 1997.[2] N. Bonnardel, Towards understanding and supporting creativity in design: analogies in a constrained cognitive environment, Knowledge-Based

Systems 13 (2000) 505–513.[3] J. Börstler, C. Schulte, Teaching object oriented modeling with CRC-Cards and role playing games, in: Proceedings of 2005 World Conference on

Computers in Education, 2005. <http://www.cs.umu.se/~jubo/Papers/WCCE05.pdf>.[4] S.R. Brown, Q-methodology and qualitative research, Qualitative Health Research 6 (1996) 561–567.[5] M. Csikszentmihalyi, K. Sawyer, Creative insight: the social dimension of a solitary moment, in: R.J. Sterngerg, J.E. Davidson (Eds.), The Nature of

Insight, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1995, pp. 329–364.[6] G. Fauconnier, Mental Spaces, Cambridge University Press, 1994.[7] R.A. Finke, Creative insight and pre-inventive forms, in: R.J. Sternberg, J.E. Davidson (Eds.), The Nature of Insight, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1995, pp. 255–

280.[8] D. Gentner, A.B. Markman, Structure mapping in analogy and similarity, American Psychologist 42 (1997) 45–56.[9] D. Gentner, M.J. Rattermann, K.D. Forbus, The roles of similarity in transfer: separating retrievability for inferential soundness, Cognitive Psychology 25

(1993) 524–575.[10] M.L. Gick, K.J. Holyoak, Analogical problem solving, Cognitive Psychology 12 (1980) 306–355.[11] P. Gomes, N. Seco, F.C. Pereira, P. Paiva, P. Carreiro, J.L. Ferreira, C. Bento, The importance of retrieval in creative design analogies, Knowledge-Based

Systems 19 (2006) 480–488.[12] K.J. Holyoak, P.R. Thagard, Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.[13] K. Hori, An ontology of strategic knowledge: key concepts and applications, Knowledge-Based Systems 13 (2000) 369–374.[14] H.L. Hu, Y.L. Chen, Mining typical patterns from databases, Information Sciences 178 (2008) 3683–3696.[15] R.E. Mayer, GESTALT: thinking as restructuring problems, in: Thinking, Problem Solving and Cognition, second ed., W.H. Freeman and Company, 1992,

pp. 39–78. Chapter 3.[16] G.H. Mead, Mind, Self, and Society, University of Chicago Press, 1934.[17] K. Miwa, A cognitive simulator for learning the nature of human problem solving, Journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence 23 (6) (2008)

374–383.[18] J. Nakamura, Y. Ohsawa, Insight or try and errors: ambiguous items as clue to discovering new concepts in constrained environments, in: Proceedings

of 2008 Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems (KES2008), LNAI, Springer-Verlag, 2008.[19] Y. Neuman, A theory of meaning, Information Sciences 176 (2006) 1435–1449.[20] Y. Nishihara, W. Sunayama, M. Yachida, Creative activity support by discovering effective combinations, Systems and Computers in Japan 38 (2007)

99–111.[21] A. Pease, S. Colton, A. Smaill, J. Lee, A model of Lakatos’s philosophy of mathematics, Computing, Philosophy, and Cognition (2005) 57–85.[22] R.C. Shank, Dynamic Memory: A Theory of Reminding and Learning in Computers and People, Cambridge University Press, 1982.[23] Y. Silberman, S. Bentin, R. Miikkulainen, Semantic boost on episodic associations: an empirically-based computational model, Cognitive Science 31

(2007) 645–671.[24] G. Stern, Meaning and Change of Meaning, Indiana University Press, 1931.[25] R.A. Waldron, Sense and Sense Development, Andre Deutsch Ltd., London, UK, 1979.[26] L. Wang, X. Liu, Concept analysis via rough set and AFS algebra, Information Sciences 178 (2008) 4125–4137.

http://www.cs.umu.se/~jubo/Papers/WCCE05.pdf

Documents

A shift of mind – Introducing a concept creation model