Personality and intelligence as predictors of creativity

Participants completed the Big Five NEO-FFI (Costa & McCrae, 1992) as a personality measure, the Wonderlic Personnel Test (Wonderlic, 1992) as an intelligence measure, and four measures of creativity: Guilford’s (1967) unusual uses divergent thinking test; the Biographical Inventory of Creative Behaviours; a self-rated measure of creativity; and the Barron–Welsh Art Scale to measure creative judgement. Extraversion was significantly related to all four measures of creativity. Intelligence failed to add any incremental variance in predicting the creativity scores. Multiple regression indicated that up to 47% of the variance in divergent thinking scores can be accounted for by the Big Five personality traits. Personality correlates to creativity vary as a function of the creativity measure.     

The Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test (STAT) as a measure of academic achievement and general intelligence

The degree to which practical, creative, and analytical abilities, measured by the Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test (STAT) (Sternberg, 1993), significantly contribute to the prediction of academic achievement, independent of general intelligence, was investigated. Although Sternberg et al. (2000) claim that the STAT is not related to, nor a measure of, general intelligence, data obtained by Sternberg, Ferrari, Clinkenbeard, and Grigorenko (1996), found that STAT scores were significantly correlated with measures of general intelligence. In the present study, introductory psychology midterm examination grades, STAT scores, and Wonderlic Personnel Test scores (as a measure of general intelligence), were obtained from undergraduate students at the University of Western Ontario (N=150). Total STAT scores and each of the STAT subsection scores were significantly related to Wonderlic test scores, P<0.01, and the STAT subsections were significantly related to each other, P<0.01. The partial correlations between midterm grades and creative, practical, analytical, and total STAT scores, with the variance due to the Wonderlic test removed, were also found to be significant for practical and for total STAT scores, P<0.05, but nonsignificant for creative and analytical STAT scores. A factor analysis including midterm examination grades, the Wonderlic test, and each of the STAT subsections revealed a single general factor. Thus, some results supported Sternberg but others were contrary to his claims.     

Intelligence,divergent thinking,and creativity

Guilford's Alternate Uses, Plot Titles, and Consequences tests were given to 94 university students along with the Concept Mastery Test, a traditional measure of verbal intelligence. These measures were correlated with an inventory of creative activities and accomplishments. A composite index of ideational fluency correlated with four creativity indices: Crafts, Performing Arts, Math-Science, and Total Creativity, while the Concept Mastery Test correlated with three indices: Art, Literature, and Total Creativity. With the exception that verbal intelligence was a better predictor of creativity in literature, no statistical difference between the predictive accuracies of ideational fluency and verbal intelligence were found. The need to re-examine the widely accepted association of divergent thinking with creativity was discussed.     

Schizotypy and creativity in visual artists

‘Every work of art is an uncommitted crime ’ Adorno (1951) . Cited in Julius (2002) . Given the putative relationship between creativity and schizotypy/psychoticism, the current study set out to investigate differences in scores on a range of personality and creativity measures between visual artists and non‐artists. Results found that the visual artists group scored higher on measures of positive‐schizotypy, disorganized‐schizotypy, asocial‐schizotypy, neuroticism, openness and divergent thinking (uniqueness) than did the non‐artist group and lower on agreeableness. These findings lend support to other studies reporting higher schizotypy scores in artistic and creative cohorts, although provide some of the first evidence of higher unusual experiences and impulsive nonconformity scores on the Oxford‐Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences (O‐LIFE) in visual artists. The relationship between creativity and schizotypy is discussed in terms of unusual ideas and a propensity to endorse socially undesirable responses.     

Schizotypy and mental health amongst poets, visual artists, and mathematicians

Many researchers have found evidence of an association between creativity and the predisposition to mental illness. However, a number of questions remain unanswered. First, it is not clear whether healthy creatives have a milder loading on schizotypal traits than people who suffer serious psychopathology, or whether they have an equal loading, but other mediating characteristics. Second, most of the existing research has concentrated on artistic creativity, and the position of other creative domains is not yet clear. The present study compares schizotypy profiles using the O-LIFE inventory in a large sample of poets, artists, mathematicians, the general population, and psychiatric patients. Poets and artists have levels of unusual experiences that are higher than controls, and as high as schizophrenia patients. However, they are relatively low on the dimension of introvertive anhedonia. Mathematicians are lower than controls on unusual experiences. The results suggest that artistic creatives and psychiatric patients share a tendency to unusual ideas and experiences, but creative groups are distinguished by the absence of anhedonia and avolition. Moreover, different domains of creativity require different cognitive profiles, with poetry and art associated with divergent thinking, schizophrenia and affective disorder, and mathematics associated with convergent thinking and autism.     

Shining Lights or Lone Wolves? Creativity and Self‐image in Primary School Children

The relationship between self‐image and creativity was studied in primary school children. Earlier research points in two directions. Some researchers describe the creative child as well adjusted. Others provide a more nuanced picture in which less well‐behaved children can also be creative. Three different measures of creativity were used in this study: the Unusual Uses Test, an activity questionnaire and a perceptual test (the Creative Functioning Test). A self‐image inventory was used to measure participants' perceptions of their own skills, physical self, psychological health and relationships to others. The results showed no self‐image differences between children with high and low creativity. The creativity measures were significantly related, with the exception of the flexibility dimension of CFT. One possible explanation is that CFT measured another aspect of creativity. This was illustrated in a cluster analysis in relation to self‐image.     

Creative Activity,Personality, Mental Illness,and Short‐Term Mating Success

It has been argued that creativity evolved, at least in part, through sexual selection to attract mates. Recent research lends support to this view and has also demonstrated a link between certain dimensions of schizotypy, creativity, and short‐term mating. The current study delves deeper into these relationships by focusing on engagement in creative activity and employing an expansive set of personality and mental health measures (Five Factor Model, schizotypy, anxiety, and depression). A general tendency to engage in everyday forms of creative activity was related to number of sexual partners within the past year in males only. Furthermore, schizotypy, anxiety, and Neuroticism were all indirectly related to short‐term mating success, again for males only. The study provides additional support for predictions made by sexual selection theory that men have a higher drive for creative display, and that creativity is linked with higher short‐term mating success. The study also provides support for the contention that certain forms of mental illness may still exist in the gene pool because particular personality traits associated with milder forms of mental illness (i.e., Neuroticism & schizotypy) are also associated directly with creativity and indirectly with short‐term mating success.     

An investigation of schizotypy in injecting amphetamine users

A fully dimensional view of psychiatric disorder conceptualises schizotypy as both a continuous personality trait and an underlying vulnerability to the development of psychotic illness. Such a model would predict that the structure of schizotypal traits would closely parallel the structure of schizophrenia or psychosis. This was investigated in injecting amphetamine users (N = 322), a clinical population who have high rates of acute psychotic episodes and subclinical schizotypal experiences. Schizotypy was assessed using the Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences (O-LIFE), and psychotic symptoms were assessed using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Using confirmatory factor analysis, O-LIFE subscale scores were mapped onto latent variables with their more clinical counterparts from the BPRS. A four-factor model comprising positive schizotypy, disorganisation, negative schizotypy, and disinhibition provided the best model fit, consistent with prior research into the structure of schizotypy. The model provided a good fit to the data, lending support to the theory that schizotypy and psychotic symptoms map onto common underlying dimensions.     

The cognitive underpinnings of creative thought: A latent variable analysis exploring the roles of intelligence and working memory in three creative thinking processes

The field of creativity has largely focused on individual differences in divergent thinking abilities. Recently, contemporary creativity researchers have shown that intelligence and executive functions play an important role in divergent thought, opening new lines of research to examine how higher-order cognitive mechanisms may uniquely contribute to creative thinking. The present study extends previous research on the intelligence and divergent thinking link by systematically examining the relationships among intelligence, working memory, and three fundamental creative processes: associative fluency, divergent thinking, and convergent thinking. Two hundred and sixty five participants were recruited to complete a battery of tasks that assessed a range of elementary to higher-order cognitive processes related to intelligence and creativity. Results provide evidence for an associative basis in two distinct creative processes: divergent thinking and convergent thinking. Findings also supported recent work suggesting that intelligence significantly influences creative thinking. Finally, working memory played a significant role in creative thinking processes. Recasting creativity as a construct consisting of distinct higher-order cognitive processes has important implications for future approaches to studying creativity within an individual differences framework.     

Need for Uniqueness,Need for Cognition,and Creativity

This study examined two neglected dispositional contributions to creativity, namely needs for uniqueness and cognition. Multiple measures of creativity were used including an inventory of creative accomplishments, preference for complex visual figures (a measure similar to the Barron‐Welsh Art Scale), unconventional rather than popular word associations, and consensually‐assessed creative products. The latter included creative drawing, creative writing (a TAT story), richness of a photo essay about the self and the vividness of a recent dream. The predictors independently made significant contributions to creativity.     

Eysenck Personality Questionnaire scales and paper-and-pencil tests related to creativity

Pearson correlations for scores on scales of the 1975 version of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire with measures of schizotypy, hypomania, and creative traits are reported for 625 undergraduates. The Psychoticism scores are correlated .30 with Hypomanic traits, .25 with Perceptual Aberration, and .20 with the How Do You Think, a test of attitudes and activities related to creativity. Extraversion is also related to creativity-relevant scores. Results support a broad and nonspecific role for the Psychoticism scale in relation to both creativity and subclinical symptomatology.     

The Contributions of Creative Cognition and Schizotypal Symptoms to Creative Achievement

Although previous research has suggested that people with subclinical levels of schizophrenic symptoms achieve a greater number of creative accomplishments, the contention that there is a creative cognitive advantage in schizotypy has received mixed support. It was hypothesized that accounting for complex relationships between (a) creative cognition abilities (moderated relationships), and (b) creative cognition and schizotypy variables (mediated, moderated, and curvilinear relationships) would significantly increase the ability to predict creative performance and provide a more accurate survey of the schizotypic creative cognitive advantage. One hundred and fourteen participants completed a creative problem solving measure, measures of cognitive creative abilities (Remote Associates Test, a divergent thinking task, and a deductive reasoning task) and measures of positive and negative symptoms of schizotypy. Regression analyses supported the conception of a multistage process in which creative cognition variables interact with each other to predict performance on a creative problem solving task. There was no evidence of a creative cognitive advantage in schizotypy: People high in schizotypy performing the same or worse than people reporting few schizotypic symptoms on measures of creative cognition and creative problem solving performance. If people with schizotypy are, indeed, more creative than those without, it is because of factors other than the cognitive processes surveyed in this investigation.     

Probing Linear and Nonlinear Relations Among Schizotypy,Hypomania, Cognitive Inhibition,and Creativity

This study explored the relationship between schizotypy, hypomania, and indicators of creativity in 152 adult undergraduate students. We were interested in exploring a possible inverted U-shaped relationship between mental illness and creativity where moderate (vs. high or low) amounts of pathology are associated with facilitating creative responses. An indicator of cognitive inhibition derived from Stroop mismatch reaction times was also evaluated as a potential moderating factor between symptomatology and levels of creativity. College students (n = 152) were recruited from an introductory psychology class and completed a series of questionnaires (Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire-BR; Hypomania Checklist-32; Creative Achievement Questionnaire) and experimental tasks (color Stroop task; Wallach-Kogan Creativity Test) with a research assistant in a controlled environment. Polynomial regression results suggested that creative accomplishments were predicted by levels of disorganized schizotypy, but negatively associated with levels of interpersonal schizotypy. Scores on two divergent thinking indices were predicted by levels of disorganized schizotypy, yet surprisingly negatively associated with scores of hypomania. Although the relationship between disorganized symptoms and creative processes was not anticipated, these results may reflect certain nonconforming characteristics (e.g., tendency to wander off the topic in conversations) associated with this symptom domain. Although there was no definitive evidence supporting an inverted-U relationship between symptom severity and creativity within our sample, several linear relationships emerged suggesting that cognitive inhibition acted as a moderator variable for originality in those with higher levels of interpersonal schizotypy. Limitations and recommendations for future research are discussed.     

Schizotypy and verbal memory in the adolescent general population

The following study examines the relationship between verbal memory deficits and schizotypal traits measured psychometrically from a non- clinical adolescent population. In this transversal analytical study participated 139 subjects. They were secondary school students, with ages ranging from 13 to 16 years old (mean= 14, 35; Sta.Dev.= 0, 548). After administrating the scales O-LIFE (psychometrical schizotypy), CVLT (verbal memory), and Letters and Numbers subtest of WAIS-III (working memory), data was analyzed utilizing Pearson correlations and mean comparison test. Results showed lack of relations between schizotypy measures and working memory. Nonetheless, some of the O-LIFE dimensions correlated with verbal memory. These findings support partly the literature reviewed. Yet, more work focused on schizotypy and cognitive deficits as risk factors are suggested.     

Convergent,Discriminant, and Incremental Validities of Person–Environment Fit Scale for Creativity in Predicting Innovative Behavior

This study examined the validity of a 14-item two-factor person–environment fit scale for creativity (PEFSC) to measure the personal and environmental components of creativity. A sample of 2,475 participants completed the PEFSC for evaluating the factor structure. For convergent, discriminant, and incremental validities, a subsample (N = 362) completed the creative self-efficacy scale, support for innovation subscale of the team climate inventory, and innovative behavior measure. Results indicated the two-factor correlated model showed a better goodness of fit than the one-factor model. Measurement invariance of PEFSC was observed across different genders and educational groups. Internal consistency reliabilities were satisfactory (α  ≥  .87). The personal dimension indicated stronger associations with creative self-efficacy than with support for innovation, whereas the environmental dimension was related more closely to support for innovation than to creative self-efficacy. Incremental validity was confirmed by significant and additional explanations from PEFSC in predicting innovative behavior. These results consolidated the application of person–environment fit theoretical framework in creativity research.     

Are creativity and schizotypy products of a right hemisphere bias?

Prior research has shown associations between higher creativity (e.g., semantic association, verbal fluency), higher schizotypy (e.g., magical ideation), and relatively stronger right hemisphere laterality measures--when each of the three pairings has been studied individually. Our prior study related creativity and schizotypy to signal detection theory response criterion aspects of laterality. The present study attempted to integrate findings regarding these three constructs and to replicate the signal detection theory laterality results by providing measures of all three constructs in a within subjects design. Participants were 60 undergraduates who completed a test battery including two measures of creativity, three measures of schizotypy, a lateralized lexical decision task, and a dichotic listening task. Results are consistent with individual differences in creativity and schizotypy being partly related to a response criterion favoring right hemisphere, possibly nonconscious, processing. Dichotic listening results revealed a strong association of better right hemisphere (left ear) localization ability and creativity.     

Are Openness and Intellect distinct aspects of Openness to Experience? A test of the O/I model

The Openness/Intellect (O/I) model proposes that Openness to Experience has two major facets—Openness and Intellect—that can be measured with the Big Five Aspect Scales (BFAS). Thus far, however, research has not shown distinct, unique relationships between the Openness and Intellect aspects and other outcomes. The present research evaluated the relationships between Openness and Intellect with two outcomes: creative behavior and achievement (conceptually closer to Openness) and fluid intelligence (conceptually closer to Intellect). Young adults completed the BFAS, several measures of fluid intelligence, and several measures of creative achievement. Latent variable models indicated that the Openness aspect significantly predicted creativity but not fluid intelligence; the Intellect aspect, in contrast, significantly predicted fluid intelligence but not creativity. The findings thus offer support for the validity of the O/I model.     

Cognitive Abilities and Creative Behaviors: CAB-5 and Consequences

The validity of six indices of divergent production is examined with reference to creative output in eight content domains: visual arts, music, literature, theater, science and engineering, business ventures, apparel design, and video and photographic work. Undergraduates (n = 144) completed Consequences, four scales from the Comprehensive Ability Battery, and a specially developed self-report inventory that produced eight creative content scores and a total score. Correlational analysis determined that Semantic Fluency, Ideational Fluency, Originality and Remote Consequences were substantially correlated with most creative behaviors and were uncorrelated with grade point average. A factor analysis of criteria revealed two underlying patterns of creativity, suggesting that proficiency in one creative domain is predictive of proficiency in several others. The study of creativity has traditionally been propelled by aesthetic, scientific, and economic concerns. While revolutionary breakthroughs in science, technology, and design often command our attention and respect, it is the small, evolutionary innovations that typically have the greatest immediate economic impact (Haustein, 1981). From any vantage point there has always been an interest in the prediction and measurement of creative behavior and aptitude. The available measurement approaches for creativity include cognitive abilities, personality traits, self-reports of creative behavior and peer and teacher ratings of creative works (Hocevar, 1981). The purpose of this study is to assess the validity of an underresearched set of cognitive measures: four subtests of the Comprehensive Ability Battery (CAB-5; Hakstian & Cattell, 1976) and the Consequences test (Christensen, Merrifield, & Guilford, 1958). Our validity strategy was correlational; criteria were eight self-report indices of creative endeavor. The following paragraphs elaborate the underlying theory from which these measures originated and some unresolved issues. Perhaps the largest single breakthrough in the cognitive approach to understanding creativity came from Guilford's (1967) 120-factor structure of intellect model. While commonly used intelligence tests measure convergent forms of thinking, creativity involves divergent thought processes which, according to Guilford, account for 30 of the 120 factors of intelligence. Working through a factor analytic paradigm, Guilford was able to identify over 100 out of 120 factors. Guilford's structure of intellect may be criticized for having fractured intellectual functioning into too narrowly defined units relative to what human faculties are actually engaged in ordinary intellectual endeavors. Nonetheless, the theory did provide a provocative explanation for the nature of creative thought and some interesting measurements of same. Measurements of creative thought (divergent production) involve word fluency, category formation and reformation, ideational fluency original uses for common objects (opposite of functional fixedness). One test, Consequences (Christensen et al., 1958), is of particular concern to this research project and involves a certain amount of social awareness on the part of the examinee in conjunction with divergent production. In a typical test item, examinees are presented with a hypothetical situation, “What would be the consequences if people no longer needed to sleep?” along with a few common responses. Examinees are then given five minutes to write as many consequences of the hypothetical situation as they can think of. Responses are scored by, first, eliminating responses that are redundant with the samples or other responses or that are completely irrelevant Remaining responses are then categorized as obvious and remote. The numbers of obvious and remote responses are counted to produce two scores. Consequences continues to be listed as a research instrument by its publisher. Norms in the manual (Guilford & Guilford, 1980) are only available for 331 engineers who took two forms of the test, 665 ninth-graders, 80 twelfth graders, and a college sample of 87 cases. According to Guilford & Guilford, the consequences scores are closely related to other divergent production measures, remote more so than obvious. The CAB-5 developed by Hakstian & Cattell (1976, 1978) who also worked in the factor analytic mode, consists of 20 subscales that appear to capture the essentials of convergent and divergent thinking in a timed battery of manageable size. The four divergent thinking scales — semantic fluency, ideational fluency, word fluency, and originality — are of particular interest to this project While the usual types of validity and norm-building research have been done with the convergent scales (Hakstian & Cattell, 1976; Hakstian & Woolsey, 1985) little external validation work is available for the divergent scales. Hakstian & Woolsey (1985) found that semantic fluency and ideational fluency were significantly correlated with grades in an introductory psychology course (r = .33 and .30 respectively). The rationale for why divergent production would be related to grades in that course was vague. Norms for the divergent scales are currently available for 216 college and 1098 high school students. While the validation question is framed around a limited set of scales in this research project, it does represent an issue of more general concern. According to Storfer (1990), several researchers have questioned whether measures of divergent production have any external validity with actual creative works. He cited a study where teachers' ratings of their students' creativity were based on logical or convergent measures but had no relationship to divergent measures. In his review of creativity measures, Hocevar (1978) noted a generally low level of interrelationship among personality, cognitive, self-report, and rating measures of creativity; from this trend he opined that self-report measures of creative behavior were perhaps the most defensible indices of creativity. On the other hand, a study of approximately 500 college students showed that those that had won science prizes, or who published or exhibited their work scored higher than others on ideational fluency (Wallach & Wing, 1969). While the latter finding is reassuring, we are not convinced that prizes, publication, or exhibition represent the full range of creative behavior to be found at the college level. Prizes require a propensity to compete among the participants, and a proclivity toward subjectivity, among the judges. As academic researcher know, earth-shattering ideas are not quickly snapped up by scientific journals, and much of what is published is indicative of the evolutionary progress mentioned at the outset of this article. There is reason to assume that there is much valuable creative effort taking place that does not reach wide audiences or that is otherwise shoved into drawers. From a statistical point of view, it is preferable to conduct a criterion related validity study that encompasses a wide (if not complete) range of criterion values and to avoid an extreme groups methodology, such as a comparison of prizewinners and others. The latter has the impact of exaggerating the predictor-criterion effect size. Altogether, Hocevar (1981) identified 15 studies showing a positive relationship between divergent production and other measures of creativity, and 15 other studies that showed no such relationship. With the foregoing theoretical and methological points in mind, the following hypotheses were examined: 1. Consequences and CAB-5 divergent scale scores would be significantly related to several types of creative behavior. 2. Consequences and CAB-5 divergent scale scores would be significantly related to each other. 3. There would be a substantial interrelationship among the various types of creative behavior. Significant findings would dispel the notion among critics of divergent thinking theory (cf. Stolper, 1990) that the prediction of creativity is situationally specific. 4. Divergent measures and indices of creative behavior would not be related to college students' grade point average (GPA). While we recognize that no point is proven by failing to reject the null hypothesis, a null relationship with GPA is expected from the general theory, on the basis of findings concerning teachers' rates cited in Stolper (1990) and our own assumptions that much creative work goes unnoticed in favor of traditional academic demand. An expected null relationship thus adds an element of convergent-discriminant validity analysis to the research plan.     

Creativity in the Age of Technology: Measuring the Digital Creativity of Millennials

Digital technology and its many uses form an emerging domain of creative expression for adolescents and young adults. To date, measures of self-reported creative behavior cover more traditional forms of creativity, including visual art, music, or writing, but do not include creativity in the digital domain. This article introduces a new measure, the Creative Behavior Questionnaire: Digital (CBQD), which assesses self-reported creative behavior in the digital domain. High school students (N = 230) completed the CBQD, as well as several other measures of creativity and personality. Factor analysis revealed 3 factors: digital creativity achievement, school-based everyday creativity, and self-expressive digital creativity. Factor-based scales showed expected correlations with other creativity measures, as well as Big-Five personality traits and Unconventionality, supporting construct validity. Results indicate that the CBQD can be used as an independent or a supplemental measure of creative behavior.     

Relating Personality and Creativity: Considering What and How We Measure

Creativity is a complex construct that is conceptualized and measured in multiple ways. This study examined the relationship between creativity and personality taking this into account. It was hypothesized that applying different conceptions and measures would cause variation in the creativity–personality relationship. The participants (N = 224) were undergraduate students and completed six creativity measures, a personality inventory, and a demographic questionnaire. Personality predicted more creative production (R² = .277) than creative potential (R² = .176) and more self‐reported creativity (R² = .348) than that which was externally rated (R² = .149). Openness was most consistently and strongly related to creativity, but other personality factors varied in their influence and some demonstrated suppression effects. Overall, the results suggest that despite relatively small effects of personality on creativity, there appear to be meaningful differences in the relationships depending on conception and measurement. Implications for educational settings and future research are discussed.