Search

An influential model of the neural mechanisms of creative thought suggests that creativity is manifested in the joint contributions of the Default Mode Network (DMN; a set of regions in the medial PFC, lateral and medial parietal cortex, and the medial temporal lobes) and the executive networks within the dorsolateral PFC. Several empirical reports have offered support for this model by showing that complex interactions between these brain systems account for individual differences in creative performance. The present study examined whether the engagement of these regions in idea generation is modulated by one’s eminence in a creativity-related field. Twenty (n ​= ​20) healthy eminent creators from diverse fields of expertise and a ‘smart’ comparison group of sixteen (n ​= ​16) age- and education-matched non-eminent thinkers were administered a creative generation task (an adaptation of the Alternative Uses Task) and a control perceptual task, while undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The participants’ verbal responses were recorded through a noise-canceling microphone and were later coded for fluency and accuracy. Behavioral and fMRI analyses revealed commonalities between groups, but also distinct patterns of activation in default mode and executive brain regions between the eminent and the non-eminent participants during creative thinking. We interpret these findings in the context of the well-documented contributions of these regions in the generation of creative ideas as modulated, in this study, by participants’ creative eminence.

Nearly everyone has the ability for creative thought. Yet, certain individuals create works that propel their fields, challenge paradigms, and advance the world. What are the neurobiological factors that might underlie such prominent creative achievement? In this study, we focus on morphometric differences in brain structure between high creative achievers from diverse fields of expertise and a ‘smart’ comparison group of age-, intelligence-, and education-matched average creative achievers. Participants underwent a high-resolution structural brain imaging scan and completed a series of intelligence, creative thinking, personality, and creative achievement measures. We examined whether high and average creative achievers could be distinguished based on the relationship between morphometric brain measures (cortical area and thickness) and behavioral measures. Although participants’ performance on the behavioral measures did not differ between the two groups aside from creative achievement, the relationship between posterior parietal cortex morphometry and creativity, intelligence, and personality measures depended on group membership. These results suggest that extraordinary creativity may be associated with measurable structural brain differences, especially within parietal cortex.

Creativity is sexy, but are all creative behaviors equally sexy? We attempted to clarify the role of creativity in mate selection among an ethnically diverse sample of 815 undergraduates. First we assessed the sexual attractiveness of different forms of creativity: ornamental/aesthetic, applied/technological, and everyday/domestic creativity. Both males and females preferred ornamental/aesthetic forms of creativity in a prospective sexual partner than applied/technological and everyday/domestic forms of creativity. Secondly, we assessed the simultaneous prediction of general cognitive ability, personality, divergent thinking, self-perceptions of creativity, and creative achievement on preferences for different forms of creativity in a prospective sexual partner. The results were generally consistent with assortative mating. The most robust predictors of a preference for applied/technological forms of creativity in a potential sexual partner were intellectual interests and creative achievement in applied/technological domains. In contrast, the most robust predictor of a preference for ornamental/aesthetic forms of creativity was openness to experience. The results suggest that openness to experience and its associated aesthetic, perceptual, and affective aspects are the primary characteristics influencing the sexual attractiveness of a creative display. Further, the results demonstrate the importance of also taking into account individual differences in personality, interests, and creative achievement when considering the sexual attractiveness of different manifestations of creativity.

Selfishness is often regarded as an undesirable or even immoral characteristic, whereas altruism is typically considered universally desirable and virtuous. However, human history as well as the works of humanistic and psychodynamic psychologists point to a more complex picture: not all selfishness is necessarily bad, and not all altruism is necessarily good. Based on these writings, we introduce new scales for the assessment of individual differences in two paradoxical forms of selfishness that have lacked measurement in the field – healthy selfishness (HS) and pathological altruism (PA). In two studies (N1 = 370, N2 = 891), we constructed and validated the HS and PA scales. The scales showed good internal consistency and a clear two-dimensional structure across both studies. HS was related to higher levels of psychological well-being and adaptive psychological functioning as well as a genuine prosocial orientation. PA was associated with maladaptive psychological outcomes, vulnerable narcissism, and selfish motivations for helping others. These results underpin the paradoxical nature of both constructs. We discuss the implications for future research, including clinical implications.

While there is a growing literature on “dark traits” (i.e., socially aversive traits), there has been a lack of integration with the burgeoning research literature on positive traits and fulfilling and growth-oriented outcomes in life. To help move the field toward greater integration, we contrasted the nomological network of the Dark Triad (a well-studied cluster of socially aversive traits) with the nomological network of the Light Triad, measured by the 12-item Light Triad Scale (LTS). The LTS is a first draft measure of a loving and beneficent orientation toward others (“everyday saints”) that consists of three facets: Kantianism (treating people as ends unto themselves), Humanism (valuing the dignity and worth of each individual), and Faith in Humanity (believing in the fundamental goodness of humans). Across four demographically diverse samples (N = 1,518), the LTS demonstrated excellent reliability and validity, predicting life satisfaction and a wide range of growth-oriented and self-transcendent outcomes above and beyond existing measures of personality. In contrast, the Dark Triad was negatively associated with life satisfaction and growth-oriented outcomes, and showed stronger linkages to selfish, exploitative, aggressive, and socially aversive outcomes. This exploratory study of the contrasting nomological networks of the Light vs. Dark Triad provides several ways forward for more principled and data driven approaches to explore both the malevolent and beneficent sides of human nature.

Narcissism is a truly Janusian phenomenon, consisting of both narcissistic grandiosity, exhibitionism, admiration-seeking, boldness, and dominance on the one hand, and narcissistic vulnerability, introversion, withdrawal, hypersensitivity, and anxiety on the other hand. While there is broad consensus that these two seemingly contradictory faces of narcissism can be empirically discerned and have different implications for psychological functioning and mental health, there is not yet agreement on whether grandiose and vulnerable narcissism should be regarded as independent traits or as two manifestations of one personality trait. Previous research indicates that both views hold true when the level of grandiosity is considered a moderating factor: while grandiose and vulnerable narcissism are largely unrelated in the range of normal personality variation, they are correlated in the range of high grandiosity (Jauk et al., 2017b). Here, we replicate and extend this work in an independent sample (N = 891) using a more comprehensive narcissism inventory grounded in a new trifurcated model of narcissism. The trifurcated model partitions narcissism into three main personality dimensions: agentic extraversion, antagonism, and neuroticism. We found a significant breakpoint in the association between narcissistic grandiosity and vulnerability at 75% cumulative frequency of grandiosity. While grandiosity and vulnerability are unrelated below this breakpoint (r = 0.02), they are strongly correlated above (r = 0.45). In the lower range of grandiose narcissism, grandiosity draws more upon agentic extraversion and is largely associated with mental health. In the upper range, however, grandiosity is more strongly linked to antagonism and is substantially associated with fear, negative affect, and depression. These findings provide evidence for the view that grandiose and vulnerable narcissism are distinct traits at lower levels of grandiosity, but blend into an antagonistic core with signs of psychological maladjustment at higher levels. Implications for research on narcissism as a personality trait, as well as clinical practice, are discussed.

Openness to experience is the broadest personality domain of the Big Five, including a mix of traits relating to intellectual curiosity, intellectual interests, perceived intelligence, imagination, creativity, artistic and aesthetic interests, emotional and fantasy richness, and unconventionality. Likewise, creative achievement is a broad construct, comprising creativity across the arts and sciences. The aim of this study was to clarify the relationship between openness to experience and creative achievement. Toward this aim, I factor analyzed a battery of tests of cognitive ability, working memory, Intellect, Openness, affect, and intuition among a sample of English Sixth Form students (N = 146). Four factors were revealed: explicit cognitive ability, intellectual engagement, affective engagement, and aesthetic engagement. In line with dual-process theory, each of these four factors showed differential relations with personality, impulsivity, and creative achievement. Affective engagement and aesthetic engagement were associated with creative achievement in the arts, whereas explicit cognitive ability and intellectual engagement were associated with creative achievement in the sciences. The results suggest that the Intellectual and Openness aspects of the broader openness to experience personality domain are related to different modes of information processing and predict different forms of creative achievement.

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. (Contains 4 figures and 4 tables.)

We examined the degree to which the conventional notion of g associated with IQ tests and general cognitive ability tests ("COG-g") relate to the general ability that underlies tests of reading, math, and writing achievement ("ACH-g"). Two large, nationally representative data sets and two independent individually-administered set of test batteries were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis procedures: (a) the Kaufman-II sample (N=2520), organized into six age groups between 4-5 and 16-19 years, tested on both the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children-2nd ed. (KABC-II) and the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-2nd ed. (KTEA-II) Comprehensive Form; and (b) the WJ III sample (N=4969), organized into four age groups between 5-6 and 14-19 years, tested on both the Cognitive and Achievement batteries of the Woodcock-Johnson-3rd ed. (WJ III). Second-order latent factor models were used to model the test scores. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis was used to investigate factor loading invariance across the age groups. In general, invariance was tenable, which allowed for valid comparisons of second-order "COG-g" and "ACH-g" factor variance/covariances and correlations across age. Although "COG-g" and "ACH-g" were not isomorphic, they correlated substantially, with an overall mean correlation coefficient of 0.83, and with the correlations generally increasing with age (ranging from 0.77 to 0.94). The nature of the relation between "COG-g" and "ACH-g" was explored and the best measures of "COG-g" were examined. (Contains 9 tables and 2 figures.)

Assessing creative potential using a comprehensive battery of standardized tests requires a focus on "how" and "why" an individual responds in addition to "how well" they respond. Using the "intelligent testing" philosophy of focusing on the person being tested rather than the measure itself helps psychologists form a more complete picture of an examinee, which may include information about his or her creative potential. Although most aspects of creativity are not present in current individually based IQ and achievement tests, one exception is divergent production. Although still poorly represented, some subtests show great potential for tapping into divergent production, and hence provide some insight into creativity. The research on the relationship between measures of intelligence and creativity is discussed in this article. The authors also propose a way to use individually administered cognitive and achievement batteries to extract information about an individual's divergent production and general creative potential. (Contains 2 tables and 2 notes.)

The existence of general-purpose cognitive mechanisms related to intelligence, which appear to facilitate all forms of problem solving, conflicts with the strong modularity view of the mind espoused by some evolutionary psychologists. The current study assessed the contribution of general intelligence ("g") to explaining variation in contextualized deductive reasoning. One hundred and twelve participants solved 70 contextualized reasoning problems in a computerized version of the Wason Card Selection Task that recorded both accuracy and reaction time. Consistent with prior research, in the sample as a whole, precautionary and social exchange reasoning problems were solved more frequently and more quickly than reasoning problems about arbitrary rules. At the individual-differences level of analysis, however, performance on all reasoning tests was significantly correlated and loaded on a single deductive-reasoning accuracy factor. Further, this factor was significantly correlated with "g". There was no relation, however, between "g" and the speed of arriving at the correct answer for any form of deductive reasoning. We discuss the implications of these findings for evolutionary psychology, intelligence, and reasoning. (Contains 4 tables and 1 figure.)

The ability to automatically and implicitly detect complex and noisy regularities in the environment is a fundamental aspect of human cognition. Despite considerable interest in implicit processes, few researchers have conceptualized implicit learning as an ability with meaningful individual differences. Instead, various researchers (e.g., Reber, 1993; Stanovich, 2009) have suggested that individual differences in implicit learning are minimal relative to individual differences in explicit learning. In the current study of English 16-17 year old students, we investigated the association of individual differences in implicit learning with a variety of cognitive and personality variables. Consistent with prior research and theorizing, implicit learning, as measured by a probabilistic sequence learning task, was more weakly related to psychometric intelligence than was explicit associative learning, and was unrelated to working memory. Structural equation modeling revealed that implicit learning was independently related to two components of psychometric intelligence: verbal analogical reasoning and processing speed. Implicit learning was also independently related to academic performance on two foreign language exams (French, German). Further, implicit learning was significantly associated with aspects of self-reported personality, including intuition, Openness to Experience, and impulsivity. We discuss the implications of implicit learning as an ability for dual-process theories of cognition, intelligence, personality, skill learning, complex cognition, and language acquisition. (Contains 4 tables and 4 figures.)

In an experiment with 109 undergraduates, we examined the effect of mood, cognitive style, and cognitive ability on implicit learning in the Artificial Grammar (AG) and Serial Reaction Time (SRT) tasks. Negative mood facilitated AG learning, but had no significant effect on SRT learning. Rational cognitive style predicted greater learning on both tasks, but this effect on SRT was mediated by cognitive ability. SRT, but not AG learning was significantly correlated with Math and English scores on the ACT. These findings confirm and contradict previous research. The association of negative mood and rational cognitive style with AG confirms that AG learning is facilitated by systematic, bottom-up processing. However, the lack of converging evidence for the SRT task suggests that the tasks involve different aspects of implicit processing. Theoretical explanations and suggestions for future research are discussed. (Contains 2 tables and 1 figure.)

Recent evidence suggests the existence of multiple cognitive mechanisms that support the general cognitive ability factor (g). Working memory and processing speed are the two best established candidate mechanisms. Relatively little attention has been given to the possibility that associative learning is an additional mechanism contributing to g. The present study tested the hypothesis that associative learning ability, as assessed by psychometrically sound associative learning tasks, would predict variance in g above and beyond the variance predicted by working memory capacity and processing speed. This hypothesis was confirmed in a sample of 169 adolescents, using structural equation modeling. Associative learning, working memory, and processing speed all contributed significant unique variance to g, indicating not only that multiple elementary cognitive processes underlie intelligence, but also the novel finding that associative learning is one such process. (Contains 3 tables and 1 figure.)

Sex differences in spatial ability are well documented, but poorly understood. In order to see whether working memory is an important factor in these differences, 50 males and 50 females performed tests of three-dimensional mental rotation and spatial visualization, along with tests of spatial and verbal working memory. Substantial differences were found on all spatial ability and spatial working memory tests (that included both a spatial and verbal processing component). No significant differences were found in spatial short-term memory or verbal working memory. In addition, spatial working memory completely mediated the relationship between sex and spatial ability, but there was also a direct effect of sex on the unique variance in three-dimensional rotation ability, and this effect was not mediated by spatial working memory. Results are discussed in the context of research on working memory and intelligence in general, and sex differences in spatial ability more specifically.

The "ten-year rule" suggests that it takes about 10 years of preparation to reach "expert" status. How long does it take, however, for someone to reach a level of creative greatness? Through an analysis of 215 contemporary fiction writers, we found that these writers took an average of 10.6 years between their first publication and their best publication, although there was a high degree of variability. This tentatively suggests that at least for modern fiction writers, a second phase after the first ten years may be crucial for achieving eminence. We discuss these findings in the context of results found in other domains of creativity, along with limitations and future directions. (Contains 1 figure.)

More than 70 years ago, Maslow put forward an integrated theory of human motivation that still captures the public imagination. Still, integration with modern theory and research remains elusive. The current study aims to fill this gap in the psychological literature, linking Maslow's theory to contemporary theory and research on personality and well-being. Toward this aim, the new 30-item "Characteristics of Self-Actualization Scale (CSAS)" was developed. Scale validation showed that 10 characteristics of self-actualizing people as proposed by Maslow load on a general factor of self-actualization and demonstrate external validity. Those reporting more characteristics of self-actualization were more motivated by growth, exploration, and love of humanity than the fulfillment of deficiencies in basic needs. The characteristics of self-actualization were also associated with greater well-being across a number of indicators of well-being, including greater life satisfaction, self-acceptance, positive relations, environmental mastery, personal growth, autonomy, purpose in life, and self-transcendent experiences. Self-actualization scores also predicted work-related outcomes and creativity across multiple domains of achievement. The results provide support for Maslow's proposed characteristics of self-actualization and basic motivational framework, bringing the concept of self-actualization so frequently discussed by the founding humanistic psychologists firmly into the 21st century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]