From semantic distance to creative text: Rare word pairings shape creativity judgments

Illia Kuznietsov; Tetiana Masytska; Larysa Kuznietsova; Oleksandr Zhuravlov; Stanislav Revko; Oleksandr Kazmirchuk; Nataliia Kozachuk

doi:10.29038/eejpl.2026.13.1.kuz

Authors

Illia Kuznetsov * Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6113-0322
Tetiana Masytska Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University, Ukraine
Larysa Kuznietsova Independent Researcher, USA
Oleksandr Zhuravlov Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University, Ukraine
Stanislav Revko Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University, Ukraine
Oleksandr Kazmirchuk Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University, Ukraine
Nataliia Kozachuk Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University, Ukraine

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29038/eejpl.2026.13.1.kuz

Keywords:

text creativity, semantic maps, semantic distance, cognitive inhibition, brain, age-related changes, event-related potentials

Abstract

While individual semantic map structure has been proposed as a foundation for creative text generation, conventional group-aggregated network metrics obscure the idiosyncratic features that may drive creative output. The main objective of current study was to test whether the specific features of individual semantic structure may impact the subjective perception of text creativity level. To test our hypotheses, we used the following methods: text generation (essays), natural language processing, behavioral experiment. During the first stage of the study, we collected essays on a free topic from 41 participants (35 females, M age = 18.2 years, SD = 0.19, range = 18-20). All texts were processed, and the 15 most frequent and 15 most rare noun pairs used within the same sentence were selected, along with the corresponding sentences. During the second stage, the selected word pairs and sentences were presented to another 71 participants (60 females, M age =18.93 years, SD = 0.36, range = 18-38). Participants rated the semantic distance between the words in each word pair and the level of creativity of the presented sentences. Our results showed that rare word pairs were perceived as being significantly more semantically distant, while sentences containing rare word pairs were perceived as significantly more creative. We conclude that nodes of semantic map, which show person-specific features significantly impact creative text generation.We further discuss how these individual differences can be used in the design of behavioral and neuroimaging experiments on creativity.

Acknowledgements

Illia Kuznietsov was supported by Purdue Ukrainian Scholars Initiative during this work. The authors thank Dr. Sébastien Hélie and the members of the Purdue Laboratory for Computational Cognitive Neuroscience for their assistance with design of the experiment and valuable feedback.

CRediT Author Statement

Illia Kuznetsov: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Data Curation, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project Administration; Tetiana Masytska: Methodology, Validation, Data Curation; Writing – Reviewing & Editing; Oleksandr Zhuravlov: Validation, Formal Analysis Data Curation, Writing – Reviewing & Editing; Oleksandr Kazmirchuk: Methodology, Software, Data Curation, Visualization; Stanislav Revko: Software, Validation, Formal Analysis, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing, Visualization; Nataliia Kozachuk: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Resources, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing, Supervision, Project Administration.

Disclosure Statement

The authors reported no potential conflicts of interest.

Generative AI Statement

During the preparation of this work the authors (Illia Kuznietsov, Stanislav Revko, Nataliia Kozachuk) used Claude Opus 4.8 in order to correct spelling and grammar errors in the manuscript text and remove tautologies, Julius 1.2 for initial prototyping of Python code for data and statistical processing, Undermind for literature search. All Python code was tested on sample datasets and was corrected, if necessary. After using these tools and services, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and takes full responsibility for the content of the publication.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Illia Kuznetsov *, Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University, Ukraine

* Corresponding author, Email: [email protected]

References

Badre, D., & Wagner, A. D. (2002). Semantic Retrieval, Mnemonic Control, and Prefrontal Cortex. Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 1(3), 206–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534582302001003002

Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Silvia, P. J., & Schacter, D. L. (2016). Creative Cognition and Brain Network Dynamics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(2), 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.004

Bellemare-Pepin, A., Lespinasse, F., Thölke, P., Harel, Y., Mathewson, K., Olson, J. A., Bengio, Y., & Jerbi, K. (2026). Divergent creativity in humans and large language models. Scientific Reports 2026 16:1, 16(1), 1279-. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-25157-3

Benedek, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2013). Revisiting Mednick’s Model on Creativity-Related Differences in Associative Hierarchies. Evidence for a Common Path to Uncommon Thought. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(4), 273–289. https://doi.org/10.1002/JOCB.35

Bos, L. T., de Koning, B. B., van Wesel, F., Boonstra, A. M., & van der Schoot, M. (2015). What can measures of text comprehension tell us about creative text production? Reading and Writing, 28(6), 829–849. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11145-015-9551-6/FIGURES/3

Chaudhuri, S., & Bhattacharya, J. (2025). The Power of Brevity: Creativity Judgments in English Language Haiku and Senryu Poetry. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 59(2), e70018. https://doi.org/10.1002/JOCB.70018

Cosgrove, A. L., Beaty, R. E., Diaz, M. T., & Kenett, Y. N. (2023). Age Differences in Semantic Network Structure: Acquiring Knowledge Shapes Semantic Memory. Psychology and Aging, 38(2), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1037/PAG0000721

Crone, E. A., & Steinbeis, N. (2017). Neural Perspectives on Cognitive Control Development during Childhood and Adolescence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(3), 205–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TICS.2017.01.003/ASSET/B6C6B7DC-1264-4EFD-8AF0-29401C3F4E76/MAIN.ASSETS/GR1B1.JPG

Davelaar, E. J. (2015). Semantic Search in the Remote Associates Test. Topics in Cognitive Science, 7(3), 494–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/TOPS.12146

Denervaud, S., Christensen, A. P., Kenett, Y. N., & Beaty, R. E. (2021). Education shapes the structure of semantic memory and impacts creative thinking. Npj Science of Learning 2021 6:1, 6(1), 35-. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00113-8

Fan, L., Zhuang, K., Wang, X., Zhang, J., Liu, C., Gu, J., & Qiu, J. (2023). Exploring the behavioral and neural correlates of semantic distance in creative writing. Psychophysiology, 60(5), e14239. https://doi.org/10.1111/PSYP.14239

Gerver, C. R., Griffin, J. W., Dennis, N. A., & Beaty, R. E. (2023). Memory and creativity: A meta-analytic examination of the relationship between memory systems and creative cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 30(6), 2116–2154. https://doi.org/10.3758/S13423-023-02303-4/FIGURES/4

Green, A. E., Beaty, R. E., Kenett, Y. N., & Kaufman, J. C. (2024). The Process Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 36(3), 544–572. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2023.2254573

Green, A. E., Kraemer, D. J. M., Fugelsang, J. A., Gray, J. R., & Dunbar, K. N. (2010). Connecting Long Distance: Semantic Distance in Analogical Reasoning Modulates Frontopolar Cortex Activity. Cerebral Cortex, 20(1), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/CERCOR/BHP081

Gu, J., Wang, X., Liu, C., Zhuang, K., Fan, L., Zhang, J., Sun, J., & Qiu, J. (2025). Semantic memory structure mediates the role of brain functional connectivity in creative writing. Brain and Language, 264, 105551. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BANDL.2025.105551

Gutbezahl, J., & Averill, J. R. (1996). Individual Differences in Emotional Creativity as Manifested in Words and Pictures. Creativity Research Journal, 9(4), 327–337. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ0904_4

He, L., Kenett, Y. N., Zhuang, K., Liu, C., Zeng, R., Yan, T., Huo, T., & Qiu, J. (2020). The relation between semantic memory structure, associative abilities, and verbal and figural creativity. Thinking & Reasoning, 27(2), 268–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2020.1819415

Kenett, Y. N. (2025). The Role of Knowledge in Creative Thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 37(2), 242–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2024.2322858

Kenett, Y. N., Anaki, D., & Faust, M. (2014). Investigating the structure of semantic networks in low and high creative persons. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8(JUNE), 89404. https://doi.org/10.3389/FNHUM.2014.00407/EPUB

Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62(Volume 62, 2011), 621–647. https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV.PSYCH.093008.131123/CITE/REFWORKS

Lewis, M., Cahill, A., Madnani, N., & Evans, J. (2023). Local similarity and global variability characterize the semantic space of human languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 120(51), e2300986120. https://doi.org/10.1073/PNAS.2300986120/SUPPL_FILE/PNAS.2300986120.SAPP.PDF

Li, Y., Kenett, Y. N., Hu, W., & Beaty, R. E. (2021). Flexible Semantic Network Structure Supports the Production of Creative Metaphor. Creativity Research Journal, 33(3), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2021.1879508

Liu, S., Erkkinen, M. G., Healey, M. L., Xu, Y., Swett, K. E., Chow, H. M., & Braun, A. R. (2015). Brain activity and connectivity during poetry composition: Toward a multidimensional model of the creative process. Human Brain Mapping, 36(9), 3351–3372. https://doi.org/10.1002/HBM.22849

Marek, S., Hwang, K., Foran, W., Hallquist, M. N., & Luna, B. (2015). The Contribution of Network Organization and Integration to the Development of Cognitive Control. PLOS Biology, 13(12), e1002328. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PBIO.1002328

Markovits, H., Fleury, M. L., Qninn, S., & Venet, M. (1998). The Development of Conditional Reasoning and the Structure of Semantic Memory. Child Development, 69(3), 742–755. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1467-8624.1998.TB06240.X

Moore, C. C., Romney, A. K., Hsia, T.-L., & Rusch, C. D. (1999). The Universality of the Semantic Structure of Emotion Terms: Methods for the Study of Inter- and Intra-Cultural Variability. American Anthropologist, 101(3), 529–546. https://doi.org/10.1525/AA.1999.101.3.529

Moreno-Rodriguez, S., Béranger, B., Volle, E., & Lopez-Persem, A. (2025). The human reward system encodes the subjective value of ideas during creative thinking. Communications Biology 2025 8:1, 8(1), 37-. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-024-07427-4

Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2011). Are intelligence and creativity really so different?: Fluid intelligence, executive processes, and strategy use in divergent thinking. Intelligence, 39(1), 36–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INTELL.2010.11.002

Olson, J. A., Nahas, J., Chmoulevitch, D., Cropper, S. J., & Webb, M. E. (2021). Naming unrelated words predicts creativity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(25), e2022340118. https://doi.org/10.1073/PNAS.2022340118/SUPPL_FILE/PNAS.2022340118.SAPP.PDF

Ovando-Tellez, M., Kenett, Y. N., Benedek, M., Bernard, M., Belo, J., Beranger, B., Bieth, T., & Volle, E. (2022). Brain connectivity-based prediction of real-life creativity is mediated by semantic memory structure. Science Advances, 8(5). https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIADV.ABL4294/SUPPL_FILE/SCIADV.ABL4294_SM.PDF

Patel, T., Macpherson, S. E., & Hoffman, P. (2024). Balancing Act: A Neural Trade-off Between Coherence and Creativity in Spontaneous Speech. BioRxiv, 2024.12.23.630053. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.12.23.630053

Riesen, K., & Bunke, H. (2011). CLASSIFICATION AND CLUSTERING OF VECTOR SPACE EMBEDDED GRAPHS. 49–70. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814343008_0003

Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The Standard Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092

Schatz, J., Jones, S. J., & Laird, J. E. (2022). Modeling the Remote Associates Test as Retrievals from Semantic Memory. Cognitive Science, 46(6), e13145. https://doi.org/10.1111/COGS.13145

Shah, C., Erhard, K., Ortheil, H. J., Kaza, E., Kessler, C., & Lotze, M. (2011). Neural correlates of creative writing: An fMRI Study. Human Brain Mapping, 34(5), 1088. https://doi.org/10.1002/HBM.21493

Sun, L., Xiang, W., Chai, C., Wang, C., & Liu, Z. (2013). Impact of text on idea generation: An electroencephalography study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(4), 1047–1062. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10798-013-9237-9/TABLES/5

Thompson, B., Roberts, S. G., & Lupyan, G. (2020). Cultural influences on word meanings revealed through large-scale semantic alignment. Nature Human Behaviour 2020 4:10, 4(10), 1029–1038. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0924-8

van Genugten, R. D. I., Beaty, R. E., Madore, K. P., & Schacter, D. L. (2022). Does Episodic Retrieval Contribute to Creative Writing? An Exploratory Study. Creativity Research Journal, 34(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2021.1976451

Wang, X., Liu, W., Zhuang, K., Liu, C., Zhang, J., Fan, L., Chen, Q., & Qiu, J. (2025). Neural representations of noncentral events during narrative encoding predict subsequent story ending originality. Science Advances , 11(17), 5251. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIADV.ADU5251/SUPPL_FILE/SCIADV.ADU5251_SM.PDF

Wulff, D. U., De Deyne, S., Aeschbach, S., & Mata, R. (2022). Using Network Science to Understand the Aging Lexicon: Linking Individuals’ Experience, Semantic Networks, and Cognitive Performance. Topics in Cognitive Science, 14(1), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/TOPS.12586

Yadan, L., Ying, D., Cong, X., Chunyu, L., Yilong, Y., Yangping, L., & Jiang, Q. (2023). A meta-analysis of the relationship between semantic distance and creative thinking. Advances in Psychological Science, 31(4), 519. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2023.00519