This fact alone demonstrates intelligence's relation to creativity, one that is vital for not only understanding creative thinking, but for improving it. Consideration of the relationship between creativity and intelligence during Creative Process Creative Thinking Intelligence Test Divergent Thinking is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves. PDF | The relationship between intelligence and creativity is often discussed and debated, and it has significant ment, Training and Youth Affairs ; Qualiﬁcations and . who is independent, original and productive in his thinking,. but we.
He further states that the interpretation of the design problem and the creation and selection of possible suitable solutions can only be decided during the design process on the basis of proposals made by the designer. In design problems the generation stage may be considered a divergent thinking process. However, not in the sense that it moves in multiple directions or generates multiple possibilities as in a divergent thinking tests, but in the sense that it unrolls by considering an initially vague idea from different perspectives until it comes into focus and requires further processing to become viable.
These processes can be characterized by a set of invariant features Goel and Pirolli,e.
Structuring of the initial situation is required in design processes before solving can commence. The problem contains little structured and clear information about its initial state and about the requirements of its solution.
Therefore, design problems allow or even require re-interpretation of transformation rules; for instance, rearranging the location of furniture in a room according to a set of desirable outcomes. A second aspect of design processes is their iterative character. After structuring and planning a vague idea emerges, which is the result of the merging of memory items.
A vague idea is a cognitive structure that, halfway the creative process is still ill defined and, therefore, can be said to exist in a state of potentiality Gabora and Saab, Design processes unroll in an iterative way by the inspection and adjustment of the generated ideas Goldschmidt, A third aspect of design processes is coherence.
Coherence theories characterize coherence in, for instance, philosophical problems and psychological processes, in terms of maximal satisfaction of multiple constraints and compute coherence by using, a. Another measure of coherence is characterized as continuity in design processes. This measure was developed for a design task Jaarsveld and van Leeuwen, and calculated by the occurrence of a given pair of objects in a sketch, expressed as a percentage of all the sketches of a series.
In a series of sketches participants designed a logo for a new soft drink. Design series strong in coherence also received a high score for their final design, as assessed by professionals in various domains.
Indicating that participants with a high score for the creative quality of their final sketch seemed better in assessing their design activity in relation to the continuity in the process and, thereby, seemed better in navigating the ill-defined space of a design problem Jaarsveld and van Leeuwen, Hence, design problems are especially suited to study more complex problem solving processes.
Knowledge Domain Knowledge domain represents disciplines or fields of study organized by general principles, e. It contains accumulated knowledge that can be divided in diverse content domains, and the relevant algorithms and heuristics. We also speak of knowledge domains when referring to, e. This latter differentiation may refer to the method by which performance in a certain knowledge domain is assessed, e. In comparing tests results, we should keep in mind that apart from reflecting cognitive processes evolving in different problem spaces, the results also arise from cognition operating on different knowledge domains.
We argue that, the still contradictory and inconclusive discussion about the relationship between intelligence and creativity Silvia,should involve the issue of knowledge domain. Intelligence tests contain items that pertain to, e. Items of creativity tests, by contrast, pertain to more idiosyncratic knowledge domains, their contents relating to associations between stored personal experiences Karmiloff-Smith, The influence of knowledge domain on the relationships between different test scores was already mentioned by Guilfordp.
This author expected a higher correlation between scores from a typical intelligence test and a divergent thinking test than between scores from two divergent thinking tests because the former pair operated on identical information and the latter pair on different information. Studies with the CRT showed that when knowledge domain is controlled for, the development of intelligence operating in ill-defined problem space does not compare to that of traditional intelligence but develops more similarly to the development of creativity Welter et al.
Relationship Intelligence and Creativity The Threshold theory Guilford, predicts a relationship between intelligence and creativity up to approximately an intelligence quotient IQ level of but not beyond Lubart, ; Runco, Threshold theory was corroborated when creative potential was found to be related to intelligence up to certain IQ levels; however, the theory was refuted, when focusing on achievement in creative domains; it showed that creative achievement benefited from higher intelligence even at fairly high levels of intellectual ability Jauk et al.
Distinguishing between subtypes of general intelligence known as fluent and crystallized intelligence Cattell,Sligh et al. Also creative achievement showed to be affected by fluid intelligence Beaty et al. Intelligence, defined as fluid IQ, verbal fluency, and strategic abilities, showed a higher correlation with creativity scores Silvia, than when defined as crystallized intelligence. Creativity tests, which involved convergent thinking e.
That the Remote Association test also involves convergent thinking follows from the instructions; one is asked, when presented with a stimulus word e.
The word pair table—chair is a common association, more remote is the pair table—plate, and quite remote is table—shark. To circumvent the problem of tests differing in knowledge domain, one can develop out of one task a more divergent and a more convergent thinking task by asking, on the one hand, for the generation of original responses, and by asking, on the other hand, for more common responses Jauk et al.
By changing the instruction of a task, from convergent to divergent, one changes the constraints the solution has to answer and, thereby, one changes for cognition its freedom of operation Razumnikova et al.
However, asking for more common responses is still a divergent thinking task because it instigates a generative and ideational process. Indeed, studying the relationship between intelligence and creativity with knowledge domain controlled for yielded different results as defined in the Threshold theory.
A study in which knowledge domain was controlled for showed, firstly, that intelligence is no predictor for the development of creativity Welter et al. Secondly, that the relationship between scores of intelligence and creativity tests as defined under the Threshold theory was only observed in a small subset of primary school children, namely, female children in Grade 4 Welter et al.
We state that relating results of operations yielded by cognitive abilities performing in defined and in ill-defined problem spaces can only be informative when it is ensured that cognitive processes also operate on an identical knowledge domain.
Intertwining of Cognitive Abilities Eysenck observed that there is little justification for considering the constructs of divergent and convergent thinking in categorical terms in which one construct excludes the other. In processes that yield original and appropriate solutions convergent and divergent thinking both operate on the same large knowledge base and the underlying cognitive processes are not entirely dissimilar Eysenck,p.
Divergent thinking is especially effective when it is coupled with convergent thinking Runco, ; Gabora and Ranjan, A design problem study Jaarsveld and van Leeuwen, showed that divergent production was active throughout the design, as new meanings are continuously added to the evolving structure Akin,and that convergent production was increasingly important toward the end of the process, as earlier productions are wrapped up and integrated in the final design.
Parallel to the discussion about the intertwining of convergent and divergent thinking abilities in processes that evolve in ill-defined problem space we find the discussion about how intelligence may facilitate creative thought. This showed when top-down cognitive control advanced divergent processing in the generation of original ideas and a certain measure of cognitive inhibition advanced the fluency of idea generation Nusbaum and Silvia, Fluid intelligence and broad retrieval considered as intelligence factors in a structural equation study contributed both to the production of creative ideas in a metaphor generation task Beaty and Silvia, The notion that creative thought involves top-down, executive processes showed in a latent variable analysis where inhibition primarily promoted the fluency of ideas, and intelligence promoted their originality Benedek et al.
Definitions of the Constructs Intelligence and Creativity The various definitions of the constructs of intelligence and creativity show a problematic overlap. This overlap stems from the enormous endeavor to unanimously agree on valid descriptions for each construct.
The development of the IQ measure is discussed by Carroll Not much later, Stern around noticed that, as chronological age increased, variation in mental age changes proportionally. He developed the IQ ratio, whose standard deviation would be approximately constant over chronological age if mental age was divided by chronological age. With the development of multiple-factor-analyses Thurstone, around it could be shown that intelligence is not a simple unitary trait because at least seven somewhat independent factors of mental ability were identified.
Although it is identified with divergent thinking, and performance on divergent thinking tasks predicts, e. Divergent thinking often leads to highly original ideas that are honed to appropriate ideas by evaluative processes of critical thinking, and valuative and appreciative considerations Runco, Divergent thinking tests should be more considered as estimates of creative problem solving potential rather than of actual creativity Runco, Divergent thinking is not specific enough to help us understand what, exactly, are the mental processes—or the cognitive abilities—that yield creative thoughts Dietrich, Although current definitions of intelligence and creativity try to determine for each separate construct a unique set of cognitive abilities, analyses show that definitions vary in the degree to which each includes abilities that are generally considered to belong to the other construct Runco, ; Jaarsveld et al.
Abilities considered belonging to the construct of intelligence such as hypothesis testing, inhibition of alternative responses, and creating mental images of new actions or plans are also considered to be involved in creative thinking Fuster,as cited in Colom et al. The ability, for instance, to evaluate, which is considered to belong to the construct of intelligence and assesses the match between a proposed solution and task constraints, has long been considered to play a role in creative processes that goes beyond the mere generation of a series of ideas as in creativity tasks Wallas,as cited in Gabora,p.
The Geneplore model Finke et al. The generation phase brings forth pre inventive objects, imaginary objects that are generated without any constraints in mind.
In exploration, these objects are evaluated for their possible functionalities. In anticipating the functional characteristics of generated ideas, convergent thinking is needed to apprehend the situation, make evaluations Kozbelt,and consider the consequences of a chosen solution Goel and Pirolli, Convergent reasoning in creativity tasks invokes criteria of functionality and appropriateness Halpern, ; Kaufmann,goal directedness and adaptive behavior Sternberg,as well as the abilities of planning and attention.
Convergent thinking stages may even require divergent thinking sub processes to identify restrictions on proposed new ideas and suggest requisite revision strategies Mumford et al. Hence, evaluation, which is considered to belong to the construct of intelligence, is also functional in creative processes.
In contrast, the ability of flexibility, which is considered to belong to the construct of creativity and denotes an openness of mind that ensures the generation of ideas from different domains, showed, as a factor component for latent divergent thinking, a relationship with intelligence Silvia, Flexibility was also found to play an important role in intelligent behavior where it enables us to do novel things smartly in new situations Colunga and Smith, They propose to include the construct of flexibility within that of intelligence.
Therefore, definitions of the constructs we are to measure affect test construction and the resulting data. However, an overlap between definitions, as discussed, yields a test diversity that makes it impossible to interpret the different findings across studies with any confidence Arden et al. Also Kim concluded that because of differences in tests and administration methods, the observed correlation between intelligence and creativity was negligible.
As the various definitions of the constructs of intelligence and creativity show problematic overlap, we propose to circumvent the discussion about which cognitive abilities are assessed by which construct, and to consider both constructs as being involved in one design process. This approach allows us to study the contribution to this process of the various defined abilities, without one construct excluding the other.
Reasoning Abilities The CRT is a psychometrical tool constructed on the basis of an alternative construct of human cognitive functioning that considers creative reasoning as a thinking process understood as the cooperation between cognitive abilities related to intelligent and creative thinking. In generating relationships for a matrix, reasoning and more specifically the ability of rule invention is applied.
The ability of rule invention could be considered as an extension of the sequence of abilities of rule learning, rule inference, and rule application, implying that creativity is an extension of intelligence Shye and Goldzweig, According to this model, we could expect different results between a task assessing abilities of rule learning and rule inference, and a task assessing abilities of rule application.
In two studies rule learning and rule inference was assessed with the RPM and rule application was assessed with the CRT. Results showed that from Grades 1 to 4, the frequencies of relationships applied did not correlate with those solved Jaarsveld et al.
Results showed that performance in the CRT allows an insight of cognitive abilities operating on relationships among components that differs from the insight based on performance within the same knowledge domain in a matrix solving task. Hence, reasoning abilities lead to different performances when applied in solving closed as to open problems. In doing so one explains to oneself the relationship s realized so far and what one would like to attain.
Explanatory activity enhances learning through increased depth of processing Siegler, Constraint of the CRT is that the matrix, in principle, can be solved by another person. Therefore, in a kind of inner explanatory discussion, the designer makes observations of progress, and uses evaluations and decisions to answer this constraint.
Because of this, open problems where certain constraints have to be met, constitute a powerful mechanism for promoting understanding and conceptual advancement Chi and VanLehn, ; Mestre, ; Siegler, Conclusion Convergent and divergent thinking processes have been studied with a variety of intelligence and creativity tests, respectively.
Relationships between performances on these tests have been demonstrated and a large number of research questions have been addressed. However, the fact that intelligence and creativity tests vary in the definition of their construct, in their problem space, and in their knowledge domain, poses methodological problems regarding the validity of comparisons of test results. When we want to focus on one cognitive process, e. The CRT was developed on the basis of creative reasoning, a construct that assumes the intertwining of intelligent and creativity related abilities when looking for original and applicable solutions.
Matched with the Matrices test, results indicated that, besides similarities, intelligent thinking also yielded considerable differences for both problem spaces. Data gathered from intelligence and creativity tests, whether they are performance scores or physiological measurements on the basis of, e. Data are also reflections of the processes evolving within a certain problem space and of cognitive abilities operating on a certain knowledge domain.
Data can unhide brain networks that are involved in the performance of certain tasks, e. The characteristics of the task, such as problem space and knowledge domain originated at the construction of the task, and the construction, on its turn, is affected by the definition of the construct the task is meant to measure.
Here we present the CRT as one possible solution for the described problems in cognition research.
However, for research on relationships among test scores other pairs of tests are imaginable, e. It is conceivable that pairs of test could operate, besides on the domain of mathematics, on content of e. Pairs of test have been constructed by changing the instruction of a task; instructions instigated a more convergent or a more a divergent mode of response Razumnikova et al. Hence, matrices created in the CRT are original in the sense that they all bear individual markers and they are applicable in the sense, that they can, in principle, be solved by another person.
For research on the relationship among convergent and divergent thinking, we need pairs of test that differ in the problem spaces related to each test but are identical in the knowledge domain on which cognition operates. For research on the intertwining of convergent and divergent thinking, we need tasks that measure more than tests assessing each construct alone.
We need tasks that are developed on the definition of intertwining cognitive abilities; the CRT is one such test. Hence, we hope to have sufficiently discussed and demonstrated the importance of the three test features, construct definition, problem space, and knowledge domain, for research questions in creative cognition research. Author Contributions All authors listed, have made substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.
Conflict of Interest Statement The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Supplementary Material Click here for additional data file. Semantic memory as the root of imagination.Creative thinking - how to get out of the box and generate ideas: Giovanni Corazza at TEDxRoma
Psychology of Architectural Design London: University of California Press. Creative cognition and brain network dynamics. Personality and complex brain networks: Does insight problem solving predict real-world creativity? A first look at the role of domain-general cognitive and creative abilities in jazz improvisation. EEG alpha synchronization is related to top-down processing in convergent and divergent thinking.
Differential effects of cognitive inhibition and intelligence on creativity. Intelligence, creativity, and cognitive control: Myths and Mechanisms London: Top-down versus bottom-up control of attention in the prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices. Cambridge University Press;29— The theory of fluid and crystallized general intelligence checked at the year-old level.
American Psychological Association;— The content of physics self-explanations. The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and preinventive structure: When investigating a liberal criterion of ideational originality i.
In contrast, a threshold of IQ points emerged when the criterion was more demanding i. Moreover, an IQ of around 85 IQ points was found to form the threshold for a purely quantitative measure of creative potential i. These results confirm the threshold hypothesis for qualitative indicators of creative potential and may explain some of the observed discrepancies in previous research. In addition, we obtained evidence that once the intelligence threshold is met, personality factors become more predictive for creativity.
On the contrary, no threshold was found for creative achievement, i. Threshold hypothesis, Intelligence, Creativity, Segmented regression, Breakpoint detection 1. Sternberg and O'Hara provide a general framework for researchers encompassing five possible relationships: Intelligence and creativity can either be seen as a subset of each other, they may be viewed as coincident sets, they can be seen as independent but overlapping sets, and lastly as completely disjoint sets. These models thus assume a substantial correlation between creativity and intelligence.
Guilford was one of the first to discover that this correlation may vary at different levels of cognitive ability: He found a positive linear relationship in the lower to average IQ range while there was no correlation at above-average levels of intelligence. Creativity Creativity is a concept of individual differences which is intended to explain why some people have higher potential to provide new solutions to old problems than others.
Creativity is usually examined at different conceptual levels. One of the most general distinctions to be made is the one between creative potential as opposed to creative achievement Eysenck, In turn, creative achievement refers to the actual realization of this potential in terms of real-life accomplishments such as having made a scientific discovery, written a novel etc.
Although different authors use different terminologies such as Little-C vs. Accordingly, divergent thinking tests involve open problems for which a variety of possible solutions can be found.
A widely used DT task is the alternate uses task in which participants are instructed to find creative uses for everyday objects for example: DT tests can be scored with respect to different criteria usually involving ideational fluency, i. This is especially true when a summative originality scoring is employed where originality may directly increase with the number of ideas i. Creative achievement is commonly assessed by means of self-reports such as biographical questionnaires in which participants indicate their achievements across diverse domains e.
Besides its relationship to intelligence, personality correlates of creative potential have been extensively studied. The most consistent and significant finding is that creative potential is positively related to openness to experiences cf. Open people are imaginative and curious, which forms a good basis for creative endeavors across all domains.
On the contrary, the relationship to other personality traits such as conscientiousness or neuroticism strongly depends on the investigated domain.
The threshold hypothesis The basic idea behind the threshold hypothesis is that high creativity requires high or at least above-average intelligence.
At this, above-average intelligence is thought to form a necessary but not a sufficient condition for high creativity Guilford, More specifically, it is assumed that there exists a threshold in intelligence which is usually set to an IQ of While creativity should be limited by intelligence below this threshold, differences in intelligence should be no longer relevant to creativity above it.
Accordingly, the threshold hypothesis predicts a correlation between measures of creativity and IQ only in low to average IQ samples, whereas there should be no correlation in groups of higher IQ. Sligh, Conners, and Roskos-Ewoldsen reported a slight threshold effect for crystallized intelligence while an inverse threshold effect was found for fluid intelligence.
After controlling for speed of information processing, the correlations of intelligence and ideational fluency were markedly reduced, but still no group differences were found.
Thus, the results did not support the threshold hypothesis. Correlations between the two constructs were markedly lower when the type of creativity test was taken into account as a moderator: Like in an early study of Wallach and Kogannon-speeded tests were practically uncorrelated with intelligence.
Turning from creative potential to creative achievement, no evidence for an intelligence-threshold was found in recent investigations: Thus, individual differences in intelligence are highly relevant to real-life achievement not only the in general population e. Methodological considerations for investigating the threshold hypothesis Recently, Karwowski and Gralewski tested the threshold hypothesis in light of different methodological considerations.
The authors proposed three possible criteria in order to accept or reject the threshold hypothesis by means of the correlational approach: The most liberal criterion would be a significant positive correlation below the threshold and an insignificant correlation above it. As a more conservative criterion, there should be a significant positive correlation below the threshold that is significantly higher than the correlation above the threshold.
The most conservative test would be to claim a significant positive correlation below, an insignificant correlation above the threshold, and a significant difference between both of them. The authors investigated the threshold hypothesis at different levels of intelligence Taken together, investigations of the relationship between intelligence and creative potential provide a scattered view: While some studies support a threshold effect, others report low to moderate positive correlations throughout the whole spectrum of intellectual ability.
One possible reason for the seemingly contradictory empirical findings could be the different conceptions and measures of creative potential employed by these studies. While some used ideational fluency as a single quantitative indicator of creative potential, other studies also included qualitative measures including ideational originality. In fact, it seems that none of the sources that are usually quoted when the threshold hypothesis is concerned e. It hence appears that, even in absence of any empirical evidence for an IQ-threshold atthis very specific assumption of the threshold hypothesis has hardly ever been questioned or examined thoroughly.
The present research This study aims at the identification of a possible threshold in the intelligence—creativity-relationship by means of continuous data analysis methods. We applied segmented linear regression analysis which allows for an empirical test of whether and where there is a significant shift in a correlation pattern.