The relationship between intelligence and creativity is a topic of debate, with significant implications for education, student development, and the development of innovative solutions to problems. Creative intelligence involves inventing or imagining solutions to problems, while creativity involves finding novel solutions. Sternberg’s model suggests five possible relationships: creativity as a subset of intelligence; intelligence as a subset of creativity; and creativity and intelligence.
Creativity is not just about being “creative” in the traditional sense but a blend of cognitive processes that include fluency, which is the ability to produce new products or ideas, and divergent thinking, which finds multiple ways to solve problems. The relationship between intelligence and creativity is more of an overlap than one being dependent on the other.
IQ is a measure of cognitive ability and problem-solving skills, while creativity is more about coming up with new ideas and solutions. While creativity requires a baseline degree of intelligence, it isn’t entirely dependent on it. Creativity involves a unique blend of cognitive processes.
The threshold hypothesis suggests that high creativity requires high or at least above-average intelligence. Lower intelligence predicts lower levels of creativity, and higher intelligence is associated with higher creativity. Intelligence is the ability to acquire and utilize knowledge, while creativity is the act of having original and valuable thoughts. Intelligence is an NBNS condition for creativity, meaning low-intelligence individuals can only have low creative ability.
In conclusion, the relationship between intelligence and creativity is complex and multifaceted. Both are functions of the brain that process information to determine solutions or answers to problems.
📹 The Relationship Between Intelligence, Conscientiousness, and Success
This video describes the relationship between intelligence, conscientious, and success. IQ is positively associated with many …
Can you be creative but not intelligent?
Creativity is a mindset rather than an intelligence, with personality factors playing a more significant role than test scores. Studies have shown that an IQ score of around 100 is a necessary threshold for creative potential, and personality factors become more predictive once the threshold is met. Robert Sternberg, a prominent researcher on the intersection of creativity and intelligence, postulates the Triarchic Theory of Intelligence, which suggests that creative intelligence helps us generalize from old to new situations and navigate novel environments. However, a high level of intelligence may interfere with the development of creativity.
An alternate interpretation of the creativity-intelligence relationship suggests two distinct levels: “Little C” creativity, which refers to everyday creativity used to solve problems and adapt to work, and “Big C” creativity, which refers to groundbreaking creativity that produces significant events like a cure for polio, a Mars rover, or the Mona Lisa. Despite these theories, it is unclear where one ends and the other begins, creating an element of “weaving” that makes it difficult to separate intelligence and creativity.
What is the relationship between creativity and multiple intelligence theory?
The research indicates that there is a significant correlation between creativity and Gardner’s eight intelligence types. It is proposed that students may be regarded as creative in a particular domain or discipline, rather than exhibiting a general proclivity towards creativity.
Are high IQ people more creative?
Individuals with high IQs exhibit a range of abilities in utilizing their talents. Some demonstrate creativity, while others opt for more conventional lifestyles. Some also gravitate towards intellectual pursuits. Creativity is not an inherent component of intelligence.
Are creative people emotionally intelligent?
Creativity, often associated with natural skills or inspiration, is a multidimensional phenomenon that drives invention, problem-solving, and creative expression. A recent study reveals a strong correlation between emotional intelligence and creative talents. Emotional intelligence involves detecting, analyzing, and controlling one’s own emotions and others’ emotions, including self-awareness, self-regulation, social awareness, and relationship management.
It was popularized by psychologists Peter Salovey, John D. Mayer, and novelist Daniel Goleman. On the other hand, creativity involves producing unique and beneficial ideas or solutions through divergent thinking, breaking established patterns, and integrating seemingly unrelated thoughts. Understanding this link can help nurture and maximize creative potential.
What is the relationship between creativity and intelligence?
The threshold hypothesis suggests that high creativity requires high or above-average intelligence, which is considered a necessary but not sufficient condition for creativity. This hypothesis has been widely supported in empirical research, but it has faced criticism in recent investigations. The threshold hypothesis is commonly investigated by splitting a sample at a given threshold, such as 120 IQ points, and estimating separate correlations for lower and upper IQ ranges.
However, there is no compelling reason why the threshold should be fixed at 120 IQ points, and no attempts have been made to detect the threshold empirically. This study examined the relationship between intelligence and different indicators of creative potential and achievement using segmented regression analysis in a sample of 297 participants. The results confirmed the threshold hypothesis for qualitative indicators of creative potential and may explain some observed discrepancies in previous research.
Additionally, the study found evidence that personality factors become more predictive for creativity once the intelligence threshold is met, but no threshold was found for creative achievement, suggesting that creative achievement benefits from higher intelligence even at fairly high levels of intellectual ability.
Why is creativity more important than intelligence?
Creative thinking is becoming increasingly appreciated outside the creative industries, with leaders and managers recognizing its value. As AI advances, it is crucial to make the brain more creative to future-proof it. The ability to generate and develop inventive, ingenious, and original ideas is the most valuable cognitive skill as a professional, as it is the one that computers may not be able to do.
In the future, CVs and resumes may look different, with experience and competence being less important. Instead, it is essential to stress creativity, including where creativity training was received, the level of creativity reached, and the creative ideas generated. Evidence of creativity, such as a creative IQ score, is essential.
With a creative thinking faculty becoming increasingly valuable in the coming months and years, it is essential to get serious about working on it or risk becoming the human equivalent of Blockbuster Video.
Are intelligence and creativity really so different?
Modern creativity research emphasizes the distinction between intelligence and creativity, with recent textbooks arguing that they are essentially unrelated abilities. This distinction dates back to Guilford’s work. Recent creativity textbooks argue that creativity and intelligence are distinct abilities. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies. Open access content is subject to Creative Commons licensing terms.
Which correlation best explains the relationship between creativity and intelligence?
The expert-verified answer is that the correlation coefficient provides the most accurate explanation of the relationship between creativity and intelligence at 1. 00.
Are creativity and intelligence closely linked?
The threshold hypothesis is a classical theory that suggests that the relationship between creativity and intelligence may vary at different levels of intelligence. Guilford and Christensen assumed a break in the correlation data between intelligence quotient (IQ) and creativity at an IQ level of approximately 120. This hypothesis suggests that high creativity requires high intelligence or above-average intelligence, which is considered a necessary but insufficient condition for high creativity.
People with intelligence below average intelligence have little chance of being very creative, while those with intelligence above the threshold may have the potential of high creativity but it is not related to their IQ level.
Many theoretical treatments of the creativity-intelligence link exist compared to few empirical studies, with only a few systematically examined the threshold hypothesis and conclusions are inconsistent. Some studies provide evidence that does not support the threshold hypothesis, such as Runco and Albert using California Achievement Test (CAT) scores as the estimate of intelligence and Preckel et al.
Investigating the relationship between DT and fluid intelligence with a sample of 1328 German 12-16 year old students and discovering that correlations between both variables are almost equal at different IQ levels.
Recent research has also raised concerns about the threshold hypothesis, as previous studies tested the hypothesis by dividing a sample at a given level and separately estimated the correlations for lower and higher IQ groups. However, empirical studies cannot prove that the threshold should be defined as 120 IQ points. Recent studies have examined the threshold using different data analysis techniques, such as Karwowski and Gralewski, Jauk et al., and Mourgues et al., finding no threshold effect for advanced indicators such as creative achievement across the entire IQ range.
Which of the following best describes the relationship between creativity and intelligence?
The relationship between creativity and intelligence is such that while a certain level of intelligence is necessary, it is not sufficient for creativity.
📹 Creativity Hack: Intelligence Versus Creativity
Besides being an artist, I do a lot of reading about neuroscience. In this episode of “Chats With Josie” (deeply flawed working title …
I found this to be true for myself growing up where I relied a lot on my intelligence and didn’t develop any degree of conscientiousness. I found that however to be a handicap later in life when self disciplined could have given me long term success. Conscientiousness is something I have to actively try to develop now and it’s been difficult.
just a theory: I would consider myself medium-high intelligence and medium-low in conscientiousness. the main thing I notice when I’m trying to focus is that there are so many ideas I can dive into and so many potential subjects of interest that I constantly have to combat the seductive pull of just living in my imagination, reading books on history or economics, or perusal articles like this one. people with medium to low intelligence don’t see to have this tendency, which may mean there are a lot less potential distractions.
I have an IQ from 127 to 131 and conscienciousness from 96 to 100, both measured several times. I got that conscienciousness in the last 10/15 years. As I entered the labour market, I realised I could not deliver quality work reliably without creating bullit proof work methods. In fact, I learn a new profession very quickly and then procede to dissect it of it’s work methods flaws. The improvement makes me stand out from other people. It has got me fired and gaining enemies to being promoted. I also apply this to myself in learning new skills, like woodworking, mechanics, bodywork, etc.
I think a big factor of what makes someone intelligent is to have an open mind, which allows the person the ability to see more things at a deeper level and to be open to more possibilities rather than to create rigid structures that stifle this mentality. I am pretty sure IQ has some correlation with Openness to Experience trait, which should explain it. Of course even conscientious people vastly differ and it’s possible to be high on both openness and conscientiousness (I definitely am and I’ve met some other people who are). I think it’s quite interesting how highly open conscientious people differ from non-open conscientious people. The non-open conscientious people seem to like existing structures a lot and they are good at adapting to them and following orders, whereas highly open conscientious people often despise existing structures and prefer to create their own instead which they deem to be more efficient (I am so guilty of that). I noticed that INTJ personality people like myself (from MBTI 16 personalities) tend to often fall in the latter. What I’m really confused about is that despite having a high IQ, high openness, and high conscientiousness, I really struggle to find career success and a place in the world (although I used to get very good grades at school). I’ve been analyzing this to death and so far my suspicions is that my overly high openness (~90th percentile) makes it almost impossible for me to tolerate monotonous jobs where I can’t have some sort of autonomy and creativity, and majority of jobs don’t exactly offer that at all, so I’m just stuck being self-employed, but the income from that fluctuates like crazy from one month to the next.
My cousin has both high conscientiousness and a high IQ. She was always the top of her class, except in her last year of medical school when she dropped to third in her class. It probably had something to do with raising three kids at the time. My two brothers are both incredibly smart. One was held back in elementary school because he was bullied by his classmates and his teacher. The other always got straight As in school, despite only reading his books one time. I used to read my books three times before classes started and still struggled for my Cs. I learned more in the classes where I got Cs than in my classes where I got my As. I have an incredible visual memory, though. The really quick learners I have known in my life had good garbage collection. They could dispose of unnecessary information very quickly. As a rule, their memories were not as good as mine. My good memory is probably due to my fondness for reading from a young age. I used to daydream a lot as a kid. Daydreaming is good for building an imagination. I am glad that they did not have Ritalin when I was a kid. I am pretty sure they would have insisted I take it. Just say “No” to drugs.
Even a smart child would be forced to develop conscientiousness if the environment—especially the school environment—were challenging enough. Our education system ends up enabling high-IQ students to slack off, which compromises their development of conscientiousness, which in turn hobbles their potential. If the bit about compensatory effects is true, it’s an argument for identifying high-IQ children early on and making sure they are just as challenged as their lower-IQ peers.
I am in my late 20s and work in some sh1tty average paying technical job which is completely meaningless to me, I did well throughout my studies from primary sch to college,and according to professional tests I found out I have rather high IQ, high openess, high artistic talent, high neuro, and average conscience, what I’ve observed is that those boys that I knew who were average IQ who did badly in studies, low neuro,zero artistic talents, low conscience and high openess are the the ones who earn big bucks now because they have very little sense of shame they can communicate really well in front of large crowds and worry nothing about how others judging them, so most of them ended up becoming military officers, celebrities/comedians, sales leaders.
I’m doomed. I have a high IQ, super low conscientiousness, high neuroticism. Most likely ADHD as well. My biggest problem is the fact that I’m musically talented but never seem to be able to complete any projects. I just keep starting new ones since I easily get bored and want to create something new all the time. However, 3 years ago I was diagnosed with burn out syndrome but since I haven’t recovered I’m up for a ME/CFS evaluation which seems more likely, so it seems I’m doomed anyways. Doooomed I tell’ya! Great website btw! 🙂
I measured 120 IQ and had a high GPA without even working hard most of the time, had an easy time grasping concepts etc., but my conscientiousness has always fallen way short. Its my biggest downfall. I’m definitely trying to work on it. I think my biggest problem in learning new tasks is that I overthink them and am too hard on myself, thinking I should get it right away, and since im not conscientious, I give up too soon.
I have a high IQ across many areas and moderate IQ in spelling. I have high openness and conscientiousness. I am happy and surviving but I am only moderately successful. Other factors might be EQ and Social IQ. I think these are more important. I am probably moderate in EQ and crushingly low in Social IQ which is necessary for notable levels of success beyond anonymous mediocrity.
Conscientiousness doesn’t have to be developed at an early age. I have an IQ of 129 and I never really tried in school too much so I got okay grades but not great. However, after I was hit in a moped accident, and suffered a traumatic brain injury, I went back to college and have gained a 3.89 GPA due to working harder than ever before because the brain injury makes school harder. In this way, I developed conscientiousness at a later age.
Dr. Grande. I suffer from grandiosity which technically means I am a REASONABLY intelligent working class fool..It also means that discussions about intelligence within a highly distressed social system are going to increasingly seem like gratuitous fodder. People at top positions continue to use unpredictable mixtures of simple reward and punishment just in case you are wondering.
In reference to the different scales of intelligence: It is my opinion that only a few matter, and Weschler has nothing to do with it. The first measure of intelligence is the ability to adapt to and thrive in a given milieu. Philisophically, this may be expressed as a form of flexibility or adaptability coupled with strength of will. My justification in coupling the two concepts is that an intelligence that does not will to impose itself upon its world will not test itself and gradually loses experience as a source of input. This lack of use translates to lesser degrees of milieu-specific capability when compared to the intelligence that actively seeks to apply itself in every situation — and my scale of measurement rests on demonstrated ability. Social position therefore rests as my everyday determinant regarding individual intelligence. This definition, however, seems something of a Darwinian corollary to me, when I look upwards in the food chain of society… Intelligent input on this is welcome.
I would think emotional intelligence has more of an affect on earnings than IQ. Over three decades in the workforce it was very rare someone would be passed over, fired over quit over their intelligence or quality of their work, rather it was almost always about their ability to work well with others or to follow guidelines they didn’t agree with. Maybe there is ‘good smart’ but also ‘too smart for one’s own good’ because many youtubers are obviously very intelligent while also being single, childless and completely broke. Are they successful due to their fame and potential future earnings, or are they failures due to being reduced to begging for Patreon donations?
I’ve was told, how can you be so intellegent and not have any common sense. And I can’t remember how many times I’ve done term papers, lost them and had to do them over, had to iron out the wrinkles, and using white out to cover coffee stains and put them on a copy machine to hide the white out, them turning them and getting an A. Conscientiousnes. Doing everything like that works against completing on schedule and thus can impede success.
I have really small female friends who believe they are taking up huge space. I am Scandinavian on one side of my family so I’m a bit larger and taller than the average American woman. I don’t consciously think of myself physically in general. If I do I think I’m average. If other people force me to admit it I know I’m above. Is the difference in our physical beliefs about ourselves based on IQ or is it environmental. I know I shouldn’t laugh at an 83 pound 5 ft tall woman who thinks she’s taking up space like a Space Sputnik. So I wait til I get home. I’m really good about controlling my expressions in front of ppl.
I think it’s cool how music is the mimic of the mix of both. A mimic of how we would want to live our lives with order and spontaneity using an idea of moving sounds as to abstract our emotions. I’m talking about how rhythm is a mimic of routine (Consciousness) and how chords and harmonies is a mimic of peace (Agreeableness) or diminished chords for (disagreeablility) and how melody and tone is a mimic of expressionism (extroversion/introversion) and… and..wait.. I don’t know how it has anything to do with intelligence. 😅
It is a little obvious that intelligence would predict success because intelligent people are more likely to make better choices in life. The biggest surprise was learning that intelligence and conscientiousness have negative correlation which I would have thought the two would have positive correlation
Have you studied Jung’s cognitive functions? I have a hypothesis that IQ (and the Intellect domain of Openness) correlates with Extraverted Intuition, and Conscientious (specifically the Order domain) correlates with Introverted Sensing. Jung posited that these cognitive functions exist on an axis. Someone with higher Extraverted Intuition would necessarily have lower Introverted Sensing. It would be cool to see if there are any other correlations, as there’s currently no empirical data to support Jung’s personality theory; nonetheless, there is something uncanny about it (it makes sense). I’m not talking about MBTI by the way; just sticking to Jung here.
“I can be a little woo-woo” OMG that cracked me up. But I know what you mean about ideas just being out there. I’ve often thought that is why we get three movies by different groups about the same thing at the same time. Or I’ll have an idea for a technique one day and see someone else talk about their exact same “new idea” the next day.
I soooo agree with what you’ve said. Although I am really into science, I also happen to know there are many things beyond which science has a handle. This world isn’t just solid earth, it’s a very metaphysical place. I know I probably sound like a weirdo of some sort and I don’t mean to, I just know that there are things beyond common knowledge. Having said that, I think that the “universe”, so to speak, is always sending out sparks to those who c as n receive them. Some are creative, some are scientific. Some are ideas to help humanity. There are all sorts. So for creative folks who are willing to open their mind and receive, the universe is willing to give.
I feel ya Sister! Thanks for bringing up this topic and for making so many great articles. My best ideas and inspiration definitely comes from the Devine. All I have to do is release resistance and it flows in like water. I’m a bit woo woo too but I can feel when I’ve tapped into the stream of collective human though and I can feel when I’ve tapped into something more evolved, more pure and loving, Infinite Intelligence. It’s like when you hear a sad sorrowful “I’ve lost my lover” type of song and you almost immediately get swept way into the accumulated stream of human emotion that surrounds that topic and before you know it you’ve got tears in your eyes. It’s not the song that has effected you so deeply. The song was a vehicle that took you into the space where all that accumulated human heart ache lives. Similarly when I’m creating I feel so joyful and at peace and I loose all track of time and I forget that I have to pee or eat ha ha. My art is a vehicle that uplifts me above the stream of collected human thoughts to a Devine place of Infinite Intelligence, the loving place where all the solutions and creative inventions and new beautiful everything exists. I know my best ideas come from this place and it is not my subconscious because what I feel when I’m there is new, I have never experienced it before, so it’s not a memory from the subconscious, it’s brand new, new heights I haven’t been too before, new feelings I haven’t felt before. I think this space is where all creativity, inspiration, and invention comes from.
This is some pseudo-scientific nonsense, Josie, and it’s borderline Eugenics and Phrenology thinking to say that you can visibly see people’s mental abilities (with or without a brain scan). What a slippery slope of conjecture. You don’t even cite your sources! The only source for this theory I can find is … * googles for 10 seconds * … YOUR own book. WTF! I have such respect for you as an artist, but please have some respect for your audience too.