Joydeep Bhattacharya

Prof. Joydeep Bhattacharya


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
23 January 2008 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SSSimone Sandkühler
Simone Sandkühler
JBJoydeep Bhattacharya
Joydeep Bhattacharya
Cognitive insight phenomenon lies at the core of numerous discoveries. Behavioral research indicates four salient features of insightful problem solving: (i) mental impasse, followed by (ii) restructuring of the problem representation, which leads to (iii) a deeper understanding of the problem, and finally culminates in (iv) an “Aha!” feeling of suddenness and obviousness of the solution. However, until now no efforts have been made to investigate the neural mechanisms of these constituent features of insight in a unified framework. In an electroencephalographic study using verbal remote associate problems, we identified neural correlates of these four features of insightful problem solving. Hints were provided for unsolved problems or after mental impasse. Subjective ratings of the restructuring process and the feeling of suddenness were obtained on trial-by-trial basis. A negative correlation was found between these two ratings indicating that sudden insightful solutions, where restructuring is a key feature, involve automatic, subconscious recombination of information. Electroencephalogram signals were analyzed in the space×time×frequency domain with a nonparametric cluster randomization test. First, we found strong gamma band responses at parieto-occipital regions which we interpreted as (i) an adjustment of selective attention (leading to a mental impasse or to a correct solution depending on the gamma band power level) and (ii) encoding and retrieval processes for the emergence of spontaneous new solutions. Secondly, we observed an increased upper alpha band response in right temporal regions (suggesting active suppression of weakly activated solution relevant information) for initially unsuccessful trials that after hint presentation led to a correct solution. Finally, for trials with high restructuring, decreased alpha power (suggesting greater cortical excitation) was observed in right prefrontal area. Our results provide a first account of cognitive insight by dissociating its constituent components and potential neural correlates.

27 October 2015 in Scientific Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CLCaroline Di Bernardi Luft
Caroline Di Bernardi Luft
JBJoydeep Bhattacharya
Joydeep Bhattacharya
Recent studies showed that the visceral information is constantly processed by the brain, thereby potentially influencing cognition. One index of such process is the heartbeat evoked potential (HEP), an ERP component related to the cortical processing of the heartbeat. The HEP is sensitive to a number of factors such as motivation, attention, pain, which are associated with higher levels of arousal. However, the role of arousal and its associated brain oscillations on the HEP has not been characterized, yet it could underlie the previous findings. Here we analysed the effects of high- (HA) and low-arousal (LA) induction on the HEP. Further, we investigated the brain oscillations and their role in the HEP in response to HA and LA inductions. As compared to LA, HA was associated with a higher HEP and lower alpha oscillations. Interestingly, individual differences in the HEP modulation by arousal induction were correlated with alpha oscillations. In particular, participants with higher alpha power during the arousal inductions showed a larger HEP in response to HA compared to LA. In summary, we demonstrated that arousal induction affects the cortical processing of heartbeats; and that the alpha oscillations may modulate this effect.

17 April 2018 in Human Brain Mapping
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MTMartin Tik
Martin Tik
RSRonald Sladky
Ronald Sladky
CLCaroline Di Bernardi Luft
Caroline Di Bernardi Luft
DWDavid Willinger
David Willinger
AHAndré Hoffmann
André Hoffmann
Christian WindischbergerChristian Windischberger
Christian Windischberger
Finding creative solutions to difficult problems is a fundamental aspect of human culture and a skill highly needed. However, the exact neural processes underlying creative problem solving remain unclear. Insightful problem solving tasks were shown to be a valid method for investigating one subcomponent of creativity: the Aha!‐moment. Finding insightful solutions during a remote associates task (RAT) was found to elicit specific cortical activity changes. Considering the strong affective components of Aha!‐moments, as manifested in the subjectively experienced feeling of relief following the sudden emergence of the solution of the problem without any conscious forewarning, we hypothesized the subcortical dopaminergic reward network to be critically engaged during Aha. To investigate those subcortical contributions to insight, we employed ultra‐high‐field 7 T fMRI during a German Version of the RAT. During this task, subjects were exposed to word triplets and instructed to find a solution word being associated with all the three given words. They were supposed to press a button as soon as they felt confident about their solution without further revision, allowing us to capture the exact event of Aha!‐moment. Besides the finding on cortical involvement of the left anterior middle temporal gyrus (aMTG), here we showed for the first time robust subcortical activity changes related to insightful problem solving in the bilateral thalamus, hippocampus, and the dopaminergic midbrain comprising ventral tegmental area (VTA), nucleus accumbens (NAcc), and caudate nucleus. These results shed new light on the affective neural mechanisms underlying insightful problem solving.

1 January 2013 in Frontiers in Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MMManuela M. Marin
Manuela M. Marin
JBJoydeep Bhattacharya
Joydeep Bhattacharya
Being ‘in flow’ or ‘in the zone’ is defined as an extremely focused state of consciousness which occurs during intense engagement in an activity. In general, flow has been linked to peak performances (high achievement) and feelings of intense pleasure and happiness. However, empirical research on flow in music performance is scarce, although it may offer novel insights into the question of why musicians engage in musical activities for extensive periods of time. Here, we focused on individual differences in a group of 76 piano performance students and assessed their flow experience in piano performance as well as their trait emotional intelligence. Multiple regression analysis revealed that flow was predicted by the amount of daily practice and trait emotional intelligence. Other background variables (gender, age, duration of piano training and age of first piano training) were not predictive. To predict high achievement in piano performance (i.e., winning a prize in a piano competition), a seven-predictor logistic regression model was fitted to the data, and we found that the odds of winning a prize in a piano competition were predicted by the amount of daily practice and the age at which piano training began. Interestingly, a positive relationship between flow and high achievement was not supported. Further, we explored the role of musical emotions and musical styles in the induction of flow by a self-developed questionnaire. Results suggest that besides individual differences among pianists, specific structural and compositional features of musical pieces and related emotional expressions may facilitate flow experiences. Altogether, these findings highlight the role of emotion in the experience of flow during music performance, and call for further experiments addressing emotion in relation to the performer and the music alike.

30 January 2013 in Journal of Neuroscience
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CLCaroline Di Bernardi Luft
Caroline Di Bernardi Luft
GNGuido Nolte
Guido Nolte
JBJoydeep Bhattacharya
Joydeep Bhattacharya
A crucial aspect of cognitive control and learning is the ability to integrate feedback, that is, to evaluate action outcomes and their deviations from the intended goals and to adjust behavior accordingly. However, how high-learners differ from low-learners in relation to feedback processing has not been characterized. Further, little is known about the underlying brain connectivity patterns during feedback processing. This study aimed to fill these gaps by analyzing electrical brain responses from healthy adult human participants while they performed a time estimation task with correct and incorrect feedback. As compared with low-learners, high-learners presented larger mid-frontal theta (4–8 Hz) oscillations and lower sensorimotor beta (17–24 Hz) oscillations in response to incorrect feedback. Further, high-learners showed larger theta connectivity from left central, associated with motor activity, to mid-frontal, associated with performance monitoring, immediately after feedback (0–0.3 s), followed by (from 0.3 to 0.6 s after feedback) a flux from mid-frontal to prefrontal, associated with executive functioning. We suggest that these results reflect two cognitive processes related to successful feedback processing: first, the obtained feedback is compared with the expected one, and second, the feedback history is updated based on this information. Our results also indicate that high- and low-learners differ not only on how they react to incorrect feedback, but also in relation to how their distant brain areas interact while processing both correct and incorrect feedback. This study demonstrates the neural underpinnings of individual differences in goal-directed adaptive behavior.

30 September 2022 in Creativity Research Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JLJames Lloyd-Cox
James Lloyd-Cox
APAlan Pickering
Alan Pickering
JBJoydeep Bhattacharya
Joydeep Bhattacharya
According to the standard definition, creative ideas must be both novel and useful. While a handful of recent studies suggest that novelty is more important than usefulness to evaluations of creativity, little is known about the contextual and interpersonal factors that affect how people weigh these two components when making an overall creativity judgment. We used individual participant regressions and mixed-effects modeling to examine how the contributions of novelty and usefulness to ratings of creativity vary according to the context of the idea (i.e., how relevant it is to the real world) and the personality of the rater. Participants (N = 121) rated the novelty, usefulness, and creativity of ideas from two contexts: responses to the alternative uses task (AUT) and genuine suggestions for urban planning projects. We also assessed three personality traits of participants: openness, intellect, and risk-taking. We found that novelty contributed more to evaluations of creativity among AUT ideas than projects, while usefulness contributed more among projects than AUT ideas. Further, participants with higher openness and higher intellect placed a greater emphasis on novelty when evaluating AUT ideas, but a greater emphasis on usefulness when evaluating projects. No significant effects were found for the risk-taking trait. Understanding how creativity is perceived and defined in different contexts and across different individuals is highly important, not just to our understanding of how to assess creativity, but to our understanding of creativity itself. However, relatively few existing studies have examined differences in how individuals evaluate creativity, and the factors they consider during their evaluations. We investigated how personality and problem context affect how individuals consider novelty and usefulness when making an overall creativity judgment. Participants rated ideas from two contexts: responses to a common lab-based measure of creative ability and genuine suggestions for urban planning projects (ideas with more real-world relevance). We also assessed three personality traits of participants: openness, intellect, and risk-taking. Data was analyzed using both individual participant regressions and linear mixed-effects models. We found that participants considered novelty more when evaluating the creativity of AUT ideas (relative to projects), and usefulness more when evaluating the creativity of projects (relative to AUT ideas). Furthermore, when evaluating the creativity of AUT ideas, participants with higher openness and higher intellect placed a greater emphasis on novelty, but when evaluating projects, these same participants placed a greater emphasis on usefulness. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of considering contextual and interpersonal factors when researchers examine how creativity is evaluated, defined, and perceived, strengthening recent calls for creativity assessments that can account for variation across raters.