Abstract

To what extent are creative processes in one domain (e.g., technology) affected by information from other domains (e.g., music)? While some studies of professional creators suggest that creative abilities are domain-specific, other studies suggest that creative avocations stimulate creativity. The latter is consistent with the predictions of the honing theory of creativity, according to which the iterative process culminating in a creative work is made possible by the self-organizing nature of a conceptual network, or worldview, and its innate holistic tendency to minimize inconsistency. As such, the creative process is not restricted to the creative domain; influences from domains other than that of the final product are predicted to impact the creative process and its outcome. To assess the prevalence of cross-domain influences on creativity we conducted two studies: one with creative experts, and one with undergraduate students from diverse academic backgrounds. Participants listed both their creative outputs, and the influences (sources of inspiration) associated with each of these outputs. In both studies, cross-domain influences on creativity were found to be widespread, and indeed more frequent than within-domain sources of inspiration. Thus, examination of the inputs to, rather than the outputs of, creative tasks supported the prediction of honing theory that cross-domain influences are a ubiquitous component of the creative process.

Highlights

  • Creative thought is central to human life

  • Within-domain narrow (WN): Within-domain broad (WB): Cross-domain (C): Unclear (U): When the domain of the creative inspiration and the creative output are from the same subcategory, mark the inspiration as within-domain narrow (WN)

  • When the domain of the creative inspiration is in the same category as the creative output, but not the same subcategory, mark the inspiration as within-domain broad (WB) [e.g., when a painting is inspired by a photograph, or when a song is inspired by a musician]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Creative thought is central to human life It shapes everyday activities such as putting together an outfit or holding a conversation. It fuels cultural evolution, giving us technology, music, media, and art. Domain-specific theories of creativity emphasize the non-transferability of expertise from one creative domain to another (Baer, 2015). These theories appear to be supported by findings that creative individuals are rarely creative in more than a few domains (i.e., someone known for their creativity in physics is rarely known for their creativity as a dancer; Kaufman and Baer, 2004a; Baer, 2012), Cross-Domain Thinking and by low correlations between an individuals’ creative products in different domains (Baer, 1991). Latent class analysis has demonstrated categorically distinct groups of creative achievement, furthering the argument for domain-specific creativity, especially in regard to creative products (Silvia et al, 2009)

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call