Creators' Sensitivity

Creators’ sensitivity

1.   Why is being creative a mystery? Does it need to be?

Do you find yourself being creative frequently, occasionally, rarely, or simply never?

Maybe not explicitly, you may see yourself coming up with new ideas different from others, or you found a new way to make use of an old shoe box. Creativity comes in different shapes, forms and sizes.  For example, name the most creative people, famous or not. On your list did you name Albert Einstein, next to Picasso, or did you name your best chemistry instructor, next to your best friend who performs poetry?

Better yet, are you often under the impression that being creative is attain by a certain type of person and it is something that cannot be changed?

Well you’re not wrong, but you’re not right either. The ability to be creative differs immensely amongst creators, as mentioned above, from an artist to a scientist. Creativity in itself is dynamic, complex and multilayered. So, why should a person whom is creative be any more distinct of how creativity is defined? The problem is pinpointing what factors encompass the entirety of what it means to be creative: the person, the process the product and the place – these are the four P’s of creativity.

Psychologists whom create methods and procedures to better understand what identifies and defines an individual whom is creative, are currently standing at a roadblock. Why? The three major indicators that may facilitate further investigation in the individual differences of creators are cognition, affect, and personality.   

Turns out that a creative personality exists, and here’s how: personality trait ‘openness’ is the strongest predictor for creativity; biologically-based temperament of sensitivity is likely to interact with creativity; and cognitive processes reflect sensitive neural processing of which should be studied in conjunction with creativity to understand its relationship (Bridges & Schendan, 2019).

2.   So, how can the realtionship between creativity, personality and sensitiivty be established?

This is what we know…

               i.         Temperament and Personality

It is likely that you’ve heard of the major “Big Five” personalities, which are Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism. The idea is that data (i.e., self-report is collected cross-culturally to assess traits that are shared and considered stable throughout a person’s lifetime.

Thereby, personality encompasses individual differences that consistently interact with socio-cultural factors such as our beliefs, values and perceptions. The concern about this approach is that is based on self-report questionnaires, critics point out that the personality questionnaire may consist of biased language that influences individuals to response in a socially desirable manner.

Additionally, the consensus of accepting the Big Five questionnaire as static and determined results have led to neglecting that personality in fact evolves throughout an individual’s development. For example, as adolescents we may have made decisions that were driven by impulsivity, rather than using conscious effort to determine whether skipping class was a good idea or not. It is safe to say, that as adults, we have become more cautious if showing up to work with a hangover is a great idea.

On the other hand, research describes early dispositions in activity, affectivity, attention and self-regulation that are predicted by the interaction of genetic, epigenetic, biological and environmental factors, of which form the framework of global personality traits.

Moreover, the research describing traits developing on a biological basis and cognitive processes are called temperaments, of which individuals react and regulate to the interaction of socio-cultural factors and influence thought processes.

In other words, temperaments are how our bodies and our cognition (i.e., thinking processes) response instinctively to sensory input from the environment and social interactions.

On the contrary, rather than analyzing personality and temperaments as distinct, it is suggested that they describe the same trait in their own way. In literature, what sets personality and temperaments apart is the age these characteristics are displayed and manifested. As children, we are described by our temperaments and as adults, we are identified by our personality.

However, the investigation of the relationship between temperaments and personality may be the bridge to better understanding what entails the creative personality.

              ii.         Personality and Creativity

From what was mentioned above, personality studies have indicated that the strongest predictor of creativity is openness. In fact, openness is traced and linked to cognitive exploration. An individual that reports higher scores on traits of openness reflect tendencies to be more imaginative, curious, perceptive, creative, artistic, thoughtful and intellectual, which is also defined by cognitive exploration.

The existing relationship between openness and cognitive exploration supports the proposition of disinhibition and hemispheric asymmetry.

By now, you’re probably asking yourself: What does that mean?

 

What it means is that in studies to better understand what factors are driven by creative individuals, the research indicates that brain findings tells us that creativity processes takes part in a process of disinhibition – i.e., the active role of allowing irrelevant information into consciousness – and it occurs mostly in the right hemisphere of the brain where exogenous attention and global processing is thought to be dictated – i.e., the brain is processing stimuli as a whole from external events  in its environment.  

In other words, the creative process is likely to facilitate a creative individual to mind wander or daydream. 

 

Moreover, the differences in individuals’ temperaments that indicate the degree of disinhibited and diffused attentional states need to be communicated in how it impacts or influences the highly creative individual.

             iii.         Creativity and Sensitivity

When creative cognition is examined as an indicator for physiological sensitivity, measures of brain stimulation reactivity play a role for individuals reporting high scores of sensory-sensitivity processing.

Participants whom report to be oversensitive and display elevated physiological reactions from electric shock intensity and skin conductance responses, tend to orientate their attention to become more aware and conscious. In other words, a highly creative individual is more likely to be more attentive to stimuli in their environment.

 

For example, a creative individual in a new painting workshop (regardless of level artistry – for simplicity purposes), is more likely to pay attention to the technique being taught and/or more likely to experiment with colours and materials. They are using their senses to project what their interpretation is of their environment, they are actively present and engaged.

 

However, neural processing of creative cognition needs to tie how the interaction of social and environmental factors develop and evolve in relation to the personality of a highly creative individual.

             iv.         Sensitivity and Temperament

The way sensitivity and temperaments are assessed (e.g., HSPS – Highly Sensitive Person Scale and ATQ – Adult Temperament Questionnaire, respectively) already exist, yet not in conjunction. In other words, the theoretical frameworks of individual’s sensitivity are defined as how an individual reacts external events.

 

The level of reactivity for an individual tends to hold a threshold, where the interaction between the characteristics of neurosensitivity and the impact of external events occur. When a threshold is reached – based on the chemical signals of emotional response, these reactions trigger systems of emotions and motivations that lead to behaviours that facilitate an individual to adapt in an approachable or avoidant manner (i.e., vantage sensitivity or disproportionate reactivity).

 

Moreover, the reactivity that occurs within an individual becomes part of their genes, generating chemical reactions that pursue their personality overtime.  For example, this could explain how some individuals tend to better engage in a new context, where sometimes the same individuals may shy away at unfamiliar faces.

 

The research contributes to what traits need to be included for a sensitive individual and its implications are of value based on great (moderate) statistical significance. However, sensitivity frameworks indirectly suggest and include how these traits also pertain to the development and evolvement of traits in an individual’s temperament.

3.   What would it mean to focus on the role of sensitivity for creators??

Based on the extensive review that Bridges and Schendan (2019) propose, further understanding what the differences are amongst creative individuals also pertains to looking at the big picture, rather than seeking findings with a microscope. When the role of sensitivity is the focus in creativity, we are more likely to gain a clearer image of how personality traits evolve physiologically in cognitive processes. The interaction of sensitivity thresholds, creative cognition and the stability of behavioral characteristics support and predict creative potential and achievement (refer to figure at the top for a general breakdown).

Creativity at face value continues to be a mystery, especially the creative process and the creative person themselves. We often are taught or form beliefs that a person ‘either is or is not’ creative. We are driven to behave to mirror what we have learned, and how we have learned it. When in reality, even having the ‘genes’ that increase your likelihood of being more creative, what will determine an individual’s creative potential and achievement is how you react to social and environmental interactions, it is how you choose to perceive sensory stimuli. In other words, it is becoming more aware and more conscious of your surroundings that will determine how your creative potential will produce novel and effective products.

Nevertheless, an individual can be identified to have a creative personality, in which traits will differ amongst creators, such as from Picasso to Einstein.

4.   The real question: how do we come up with a practical solution?

In order to understand what composes the sensitive creator, a method needs to be created with the state-of-the-art measures. In other words, it is the combination of all the things discussed in this blog. The authors outline details on which assessments fit best for each concept. The following is only a hypothetical outline of what the creative personality assessment would include:

Independent Variables	Dependent Variables	Outcomes
Highly Sensitive Person Scale (HSPS) + Adult Temperament Questionnaire (ATQ)	Abbreviated Torrance Tests for Adults (ATTA) + electric shock intensity and skin conductance responses	Neurosensitivity
Creativity Four-Stage Model + ATTA with a focus on nonverbal tests	Default Mode Networks + EEG responses	Neural processing of creative attention
Big Five Personalities	Structure Temperament Questionnaire (STQ) and Functional Ensemble Temperament	Development and evolvement of personality-temperament traits throughout experience
	In combination:	SENSITIVE CREATOR ASSESSMENT

5.   Who will benefit from the creative personality assessment?

The direction towards understanding the mechanisms of a biologically based measure for the creative personality, taps into the relationship between environment advantage and adversity, and the impact it has overtime (i.e., the development of the individual). 

For example, a parent whom may see such characteristics in themselves and their children may consider adopting practices that flourishes and shapes their creative sensitivity. Parents may benefit from learning to transition from a ‘disproportionate reactivity’ to ‘vantage sensitivity.’

Another example, in classrooms, there could be a shift of promoting adaptive practices that encourage visual literacy – using doodling effectively and productively (for further reading: The Doodle Revolution by Sunni Brown). 

In summary, there are implications of cognitive-behavioural therapy tactics for educators, parents, and in the workplace. That is, creating the opportunity to physically use the surrounding environment to facilitate ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking, exploration, curiosity and openness to novelty may lead to more successful outcomes of objectives.

References

Bridges, D., & Schendan, H. E. (2019). Sensitive individuals are more creative. Personality and Individual Differences, 142, 186–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.09.015