Аннотация:One of the main research questions related to creativity is the dilemma of specificity vs. non-specificity of themechanisms underlying insight solutions as compared to analytical solutions of a problem. The first goal of our study wasto verify insight solution specificity on solving anagram tasks. The second goal was to test a hypothesis about the existenceof unconscious processing prior to insight solutions. We presented two types of stimuli to participants: anagrams andpseudowords. During the experiment, participants had to perform two successive tasks. First they had to judge whether theywere being shown an anagram or a pseudoword, and then they had to solve the anagram. Anagrams and pseudowords differedin some visual features, of which the participants were not aware. It was expected that unconscious processing (if it exists)would be influenced by the implicit difference between the appearance of stimulus categories. During the solving process,participants had to rate how close they were to a solution. After a successful solution, they also had to indicate which waythey found it: analytically or with insight. Our results showed that prior to an insight solution, participants felt that they werefarther from the final solution than in the case of an analytical solution. These results confirm Metcalfe and Wiebe’s (1987)conclusions on the difference between insight and analytical solutions. According to these data, we can propose differentspecific mechanisms for insight solutions and analytical solutions in anagram tasks. At the same time, the presence of visualdifferences between stimulus categories did not influence the anagram solving process. The current results did not showevidence for an important role of unconscious processing before insight solutions of anagrams.