Edited by:
Reviewed by:
*Correspondence:
This article was submitted to Cognition, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
The goal of the present study was to take a new look at the relationship between creativity and cognitive functioning. Based on models that have postulated domain- and sub-domain-structures for different forms of creativity, like scientific, technical or artistic creativity with cognitive functions as important basis, we developed a new questionnaire. The Artistic Creativity Domains Compendium (ACDC) assesses interest, ability and performance in a distinct way for different domains of artistic creativity. We present the data of 270 adults tested with the ACDC, standard tests of divergent and convergent thinking, and tests of cognitive functions. We present fine-grained analyses on the internal and external validity of the ACDC and on the relationships between creativity, working memory, attention, and intelligence. Our results indicate domain-specific associations between creativity and attention as well as working memory. We conclude that the ACDC is a valid instrument to assess artistic creativity and that a fine-grained analysis reveals distinct patterns of relationships between separate domains of creativity and cognition.
“Creativity is intelligence having fun” says a quote alleged to Albert Einstein, suggesting that creativity and cognition are closely linked together. Often in contemporary research, however, the relationship between creativity and intelligence has been discussed controversially. While some researchers have distinguished the constructs from each other, others have described them as complements (
Creativity can be defined as the ability to generate new and adaptive ideas or novel solutions to problems and it is thus considered as fundamental for human civilization (
Beyond the general definition, creativity is a versatile construct that can be expressed in many forms, domains and facets. Artistic, scientific, and technical creativity have been proposed as specific forms in previous research (
First, as the process of artistic creativity is likely to be more time-consuming than stimulus triggered divergent or convergent thinking due to domain specific stages, self-report questionnaires provide the opportunity to report past achievements specific for artistic creativity, instead of pressing the participants to produce creative solutions under non-ecological time pressure. Thus, we decided to develop a questionnaire that protocols artistic creativity completely independent of time pressure.
Second, artistic creative thinking is not limited to figural and verbal modes of expression. While painting, sculpting and designing can be easily described as figural expressions, and writing certainly is a verbal form of expression, singing, dancing, and acting cannot be sufficiently characterized by only these two modes. Thus, it is important to cover a wide range of different domains and sub-domains as proposed by
To take this into account, the ACDC addresses the four main artistic domains of
Third, one can be interested in different domains, in each domain the level of ability can vary, and making the creative achievement available for others reflects creative performance. That is, the quality of artistic creative products is influenced by knowledge and technical expertise. Beyond coming up with creative ideas, creativity also involves the creation of an artistic output expressed in a specific domain. The individual either has the aim and ability to do so or not. If the ability is present, the production on a subsequent level can be more or less skilled. Ideally, it will then be judged in an appropriate frame of reference (
In differentiating several forms and levels of involvement of artistic creativity, it is an interesting question how they further relate to cognitive functions. For divergent and convergent creativity, contradictory results between creativity and cognitive functioning have been found which have been explained as a function of overlaps in the assessment of the different constructs (
Several studies support this position. For example,
The first goal of this study was to validate a new self-report-questionnaire that assesses artistic creativity. The ACDC covers
In line with the suggestion that creativity is domain-specific (e.g.,
The ACDC includes
For each scale mean scores were computed to provide a profile of the four domain-scales visual arts, literature, music and performing arts, the three levels of involvement and further the 12 scales of domain differentiated by level of involvement
A total of 320 German speaking, healthy participants, 160 women and 160 men, aged 18–53 years (
The ACDC consists of 72 questions about interest, ability and performance in four artistic domains (visual arts, literature, music and performing arts) and 18 corresponding sub-domains (painting, sculpting, photography, graphic design, fictional-writing, poetry, play-writing, journalism, classical music, jazz music, rock music, folk music, movie-acting, theater-acting, dancing, ballet-dancing, musical performance). The full questionnaire is presented in
The
In order to assess divergent thinking, the
The ATTA consists of one verbal and two figural tasks. In the verbal task, a fictional scenario is presented. Participants are instructed to imagine as many problems as possible that might occur in this situation. In the two figural tasks, the participants are presented with incomplete figures provided on a test sheet. They are instructed to complete them and to give a title for each picture. Two independent raters scored the tasks according to the manual (i.e., Fluency, Originality, Richness and Colourfulness of Imagery, Emotion/Feelings, Future Orientation, Humor and Provocativeness for the verbal task and Elaboration, Flexibility, Openness, Unusual Visualization, Movement/Sound, Richness and Colorfulness of Imagery, Abstractness of Titles, Articulateness, Combination of Figures, Internal Visual Perspective, Emotion and Fantasy for the figural task). Interrater-reliability for the present sample was
The ASK, consists of the presentation of four capital letters. Participants are instructed to construct four-word sentences with these letters as the initial letters. A sum score of all countable sentences in both trials was calculated and ranked according to the manual.
A
The
To measure attention, the D2-R was used (
Working memory was tested with a German version of the
After signing written informed consent, participants were tested individually. The study consisted of the ACDC, tests of divergent and convergent thinking, intelligence, working memory, and attention. The ordering of the tests is displayed in
Procedure: ordering of tasks.
Construct | Test | Time (minutes) |
---|---|---|
Attention | D2-R | 8 |
Convergent thinking | RAT | 6 |
Working memory | RST | 25 |
Divergent figural thinking | ATTA | 10 |
Divergent verbal thinking | ASK | 7 |
Verbal intelligence | WST | 13 |
Artistic creativity | ACDC | 10 |
For the D2-R (
Next, the divergent thinking tests were administered. In the verbal task of the ATTA (
To analyze the scale-structure of the ACDC we used a
Correlations were analyzed in SPSS with z-transformed data. Significance level was set to α = 0.05.
Mean and standard deviation for all variables are displayed in
Mean values and standard deviations for Artistic Creativity Domains Compendium scores, creativity tests, and cognitive tests.
Test-score | ||
---|---|---|
ACDC total | 1.71 | 0.30 |
Visual arts | 1.90 | 0.47 |
Literature | 1.51 | 0.32 |
Music | 1.70 | 0.38 |
Performing arts | 1.73 | 0.41 |
ACDC interest | 2.14 | 0.44 |
ACDC ability | 1.57 | 0.34 |
ACDC performance | 1.16 | 0.18 |
Interest in visual arts | 2.20 | 0.61 |
Ability in visual arts | 2.03 | 0.62 |
Performance in visual arts | 1.18 | 0.34 |
Interest in literature | 1.98 | 0.55 |
Ability in literature | 1.21 | 0.31 |
Performance in literature | 1.08 | 0.16 |
Interest in music | 2.17 | 0.49 |
Ability in music | 1.47 | 0.54 |
Performance in music | 1.15 | 0.26 |
Interest in performing arts | 2.18 | 0.58 |
Ability in performing arts | 1.62 | 0.52 |
Performance in performing arts | 1.22 | 0.30 |
ASK | 100.99 | 9.93 |
ATTA mean verbal score 1 | 1.58 | 1.32 |
ATTA mean figural score 1 | 6.29 | 2.73 |
ATTA mean verbal score 2 | 11.07 | 5.07 |
ATTA mean figural score 2 | 23.24 | 6.88 |
RAT | 5.01 | 2.34 |
Verbal intelligence | 31.16 | 3.69 |
Attention | 105.69 | 9.57 |
Working memory | 2.79 | 1.13 |
We generated an MTMM-model with 200 bootstraps according to the structure of the ACDC, that is, 72 items in four domains separated by level of involvement (interest, ability and performance in visual arts, literature, music and performing arts). The fit was good with χ2(39) = 55.75,
Internal consistency was high, with Cronbach’s alpha of α = 0.93 for the 72 items as a whole. For the four domains, internal reliability was α = 0.88 for
For the levels of involvement resulted α = 0.91 for
In order to test the external validity of the ACDC, we assessed its relation to divergent and convergent thinking. The
On the level of
Correlations between the overall ACDC-Score, ACDC-levels, ACDC-domains and divergent and convergent thinking scores.
ACDC T | ACDC I | ACDC A | ACDC S | ACDC VA | ACDC L | ACDC M | ACDC PA | DF | DV | CV | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACDC total | 1 | ||||||||||
ACDC interest | 0.95** | 1 | |||||||||
ACDC ability | 0.86** | 0.69** | 1 | ||||||||
ACDC performance | 0.70** | 0.49** | 0.70** | 1 | |||||||
Visual arts | 0.74** | 0.71** | 0.63** | 0.48** | 1 | ||||||
Literature | 0.76** | 0.76** | 0.62** | 0.46** | 0.43** | 1 | |||||
Music | 0.74** | 0.68** | 0.72** | 0.51** | 0.37** | 0.48** | 1 | ||||
Performing arts | 0.79** | 0.74** | 0.65** | 0.64** | 0.41** | 0.53** | 0.38** | 1 | |||
Divergent (Figural) | 0.17** | 0.16** | 0.15* | 0.12* | 0.15* | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.22** | 1 | ||
Divergent (Verbal) | 0.33** | 0.27** | 0.38** | 0.25** | 0.25** | 0.30** | 0.19** | 0.28** | 0.26** | 1 | |
Convergent | -0.04 | -0.05 | -0.01 | 0.00 | -0.02 | -0.02 | -0.02 | -0.04 | -0.01 | 0.06 | 1 |
On the level of
The correlations between artistic domains divided further by levels of involvement are presented in
Correlations between ACDC domains divided by levels of involvement, divergent, and convergent thinking scores.
I VA | A VA | P VA | I L | A L | P L | I M | A M | P M | I PA | A PA | P PA | DF | DV | CV | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Interest in visual arts | 1 | ||||||||||||||
Ability in visual arts | 0.64∗∗ | 1 | |||||||||||||
Performance in visual arts | 0.40∗∗ | 0.54∗∗ | 1 | ||||||||||||
Interest in literature | 0.50∗∗ | 0.30∗∗ | 0.11 | 1 | |||||||||||
Ability in literature | 0.27∗∗ | 0.29∗∗ | 0.13∗ | 0.63∗∗ | 1 | ||||||||||
Performance in literature | 0.17∗∗ | 0.22∗∗ | 0.16∗∗ | 0.40∗∗ | 0.67∗∗ | 1 | |||||||||
Interest in music | 0.45∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.10 | 0.50∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.20∗∗ | 1 | ||||||||
Ability in music | 0.21∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.19∗∗ | 0.39∗∗ | 0.31∗∗ | 0.26∗∗ | 0.56∗∗ | 1 | |||||||
Performance in music | 0.14∗ | 0.18∗ | 0.24∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.20∗∗ | 0.19∗∗ | 0.41∗∗ | 0.72∗∗ | 1 | ||||||
Interest in performing arts | 0.47∗∗ | 0.32∗∗ | 0.10 | 0.59∗∗ | 0.33∗∗ | 0.30∗∗ | 0.42∗∗ | 0.27∗∗ | 0.23∗∗ | 1 | |||||
Ability in performing arts | 0.26∗∗ | 0.28∗∗ | 0.07 | 0.32∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.28∗∗ | 0.21∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.18∗∗ | 0.69∗∗ | 1 | ||||
Performance in performing arts | 0.24∗∗ | 0.23∗∗ | 0.21∗∗ | 0.29∗∗ | 0.29∗∗ | 0.37∗∗ | 0.18∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.31∗∗ | 0.52∗∗ | 0.67∗∗ | 1 | |||
Divergent (Figural) | 0.15∗ | 0.14∗∗ | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.21∗∗ | 0.21∗∗ | 0.15∗∗ | 1 | ||
Divergent (Verbal) | 0.21∗ | 0.27∗∗ | 0.11 | 0.28∗∗ | 0.23∗∗ | 0.20∗∗ | 0.12 | 0.25∗∗ | 0.11 | 0.24∗∗ | 0.27∗∗ | 0.23∗∗ | 0.26∗∗ | 1 | |
Convergent | -0.04 | 0.09 | 0.02 | -0.01 | -0.05 | 0.00 | -0.06 | 0.02 | 0.02 | -0.04 | -0.04 | -0.02 | -0.01 | 0.06 | 1 |
The total score of the ACDC correlated with
Correlations between the overall ACDC-Score, ACDC-levels, ACDC-domains and cognitive functions.
ACDC T | ACDC I | ACDC A | ACDC S | ACDC VA | ACDC L | ACDC M | ACDC PA | VI | A | WM | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACDC total | 1 | ||||||||||
ACDC interest | 0.95∗∗ | 1 | |||||||||
ACDC ability | 0.86∗∗ | 0.69∗∗ | 1 | ||||||||
ACDC performance | 0.70∗∗ | 0.49∗∗ | 0.70∗∗ | 1 | |||||||
Visual arts | 0.74∗∗ | 0.71∗∗ | 0.63∗∗ | 0.48∗∗ | 1 | ||||||
Literature | 0.76∗∗ | 0.76∗∗ | 0.62∗∗ | 0.46∗∗ | 0.43∗∗ | 1 | |||||
Music | 0.74∗∗ | 0.68∗∗ | 0.72∗∗ | 0.51∗∗ | 0.37∗∗ | 0.48∗∗ | 1 | ||||
Performing arts | 0.79∗∗ | 0.74∗∗ | 0.65∗∗ | 0.64∗∗ | 0.41∗∗ | 0.53∗∗ | 0.38∗∗ | 1 | |||
Verbal intelligence | 0.25∗∗ | 0.27∗∗ | 0.19∗∗ | 0.09 | 0.15∗ | 0.27∗∗ | 0.23∗∗ | 0.13∗ | 1 | ||
Attention | -0.00 | -0.03 | 0.04 | 0.01 | -0.11 | -0.06 | -0.04 | 0.16∗∗ | 0.15∗ | 1 | |
Working memory | 0.03 | -0.02 | 0.11 | 0.08 | -0.04 | 0.14∗∗ | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.22∗∗ | 0.10 | 1 |
We also explored the relation between specific artistic domains and intelligence, attention, and working memory. On level of domains,
Further, for the artistic domains of the ACDC divided by levels of involvement
Correlations between ACDC domains divided by levels of involvement, divergent, and convergent thinking scores.
I VA | A VA | P VA | I L | A L | P L | I M | A M | P M | I PA | A PA | P PA | VI | A | WM | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Interest in visual arts | 1 | ||||||||||||||
Ability in visual arts | 0.64∗∗ | 1 | |||||||||||||
Performance in visual arts | 0.40∗∗ | 0.54∗∗ | 1 | ||||||||||||
Interest in literature | 0.50∗∗ | 0.30∗∗ | 0.11 | 1 | |||||||||||
Ability in literature | 0.27∗∗ | 0.29∗∗ | 0.13∗ | 0.63∗∗ | 1 | ||||||||||
Performance in literature | 0.17∗∗ | 0.22∗∗ | 0.16∗∗ | 0.40∗∗ | 0.67∗∗ | 1 | |||||||||
Interest in music | 0.45∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.10 | 0.50∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.20∗∗ | 1 | ||||||||
Ability in music | 0.21∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.19∗∗ | 0.39∗∗ | 0.31∗∗ | 0.26∗∗ | 0.56∗∗ | 1 | |||||||
Performance in music | 0.14∗ | 0.18∗ | 0.24∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.20∗∗ | 0.19∗∗ | 0.41∗∗ | 0.72∗∗ | 1 | ||||||
Interest in performing arts | 0.47∗∗ | 0.32∗∗ | 0.10 | 0.59∗∗ | 0.33∗∗ | 0.30∗∗ | 0.42∗∗ | 0.27∗∗ | 0.23∗∗ | 1 | |||||
Ability in performing arts | 0.26∗∗ | 0.28∗∗ | 0.07 | 0.32∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.28∗∗ | 0.21∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.18∗∗ | 0.69∗∗ | 1 | ||||
Performance in performing arts | 0.24∗∗ | 0.23∗∗ | 0.21∗∗ | 0.29∗∗ | 0.29∗∗ | 0.37∗∗ | 0.18∗∗ | 0.25∗∗ | 0.31∗∗ | 0.52∗∗ | 0.67∗∗ | 1 | |||
Verbal intelligence | 0.21∗∗ | 0.05 | -0.01 | 0.30∗∗ | 0.14∗ | 0.08 | 0.19∗∗ | 0.22∗∗ | 0.15∗ | 0.15∗ | 0.09 | 0.05 | 1 | ||
Attention | -0.12 | -0.06 | -0.07 | -0.05 | -0.10 | -0.01 | -0.06 | 0.01 | -0.06 | 0.12 | 0.22∗∗ | 0.11 | 0.15∗ | 1 | |
Working memory | -0.08 | 0.04 | -0.01 | 0.12∗ | 0.17∗∗ | 0.04 | -0.08 | 0.11 | 0.15∗ | -0.00 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.22∗∗ | 0.10 | 1 |
Finally, we also analyzed the relationship between
Correlations between divergent and convergent thinking, intelligence, attention, and working memory.
DF | DV | CV | Intelligence | Attention | WM | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Divergent (Figural) | 1 | |||||
Divergent (Verbal) | 0.26∗∗ | 1 | ||||
Convergent | -0.01 | 0.06 | 1 | |||
Verbal intelligence | 0.07 | 0.32∗∗ | 0.20∗∗ | 1 | ||
Attention | 0.13∗ | 0.12 | 0.01 | 0.15∗ | 1 | |
Working memory | 0.05 | 0.19∗∗ | 0.06 | 0.22∗∗ | 0.10 | 1 |
We present the ACDC, a new questionnaire that covers artistic creativity in different domains (
In the external validation of the ACDC the correlations support the hypothesis that it indeed measures forms of divergent creativity. The non-significant correlation between the ACDC and convergent thinking might suggest that artistic creativity is rather related to divergent than to convergent thinking. In future studies, tests of figural convergent creativity should be included to see if the results are similar.
On the level of artistic domains,
The significant correlation between each of the domains
In sum, the external validation of the ACDC with divergent and convergent tests indicates that the questionnaire measures the construct “artistic creativity” that correlates with divergent creativity and does not overlap with convergent creativity. Moreover, the differing results among domains and levels of involvement concerning figural and verbal scores support the expected separation of domains and levels of involvement.
Further, the analysis of the correlations between the ACDC, intelligence, attention and working memory also showed interesting results. Only
Working memory correlated with
To further analyze the correlations between artistic creativity and cognitive functioning we compared them to the correlations obtained between divergent and convergent tests and cognitive functioning. The divergent figural creative test correlated positively with attention whereas the verbal test did not. The fact that both parties also significantly correlate with
The ACDC is a new easy to use questionnaire that enables to assess artistic creativity in several domains and sub-domains. It provides separate scales for interest, ability, and performance, providing for fine-grained results. Moreover, the ACDC offers the possibility to study changes across development, in training studies, or to follow up on pathological changes. It also gives the opportunity to investigate relationships between different aspects of artistic creativity and personality traits, affective, or cognitive style in a straight-forward way. Further, our results show that relationships between creativity and cognitive functioning are most pronounced within domains and at the level of interest and ability. They show that different domains and sub-domains build on different cognitive functions. Interestingly all four domains of artistic creativity, on a level of interest, rather relate to more complex cognitive functions like
All authors listed, have made substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.
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.
We would like to thank Rebecca Ovalle for help in rating the creativity tests and Ulrich Orth and Markus Wirtz for helpful suggestions on the structural equation models. We would also like to thank Benjamin Ambühl, Saskia Cadisch, Jelena Eggenberger, Kristina Ettemeyer, Lilian Flühmann, Lorena Glisenti, Tena Gusic, Sebastian Harnisch, Rahel Heeb, Frédéric Hübsch, Anastasia Lessis, Lia Locher, Anna-Katharina Meier, Isabelle Probst, Ida Schneider, Lydia Siuda, Laura Siragusa, Alexandra Stöckli, Yasmine Ward and Stefanie Zehnder for help with recruitment and testing.
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: