For decades, intelligence and creativity were seen and believed as abilities that did not correlate with each other. It is still unclear how they both correlate with each other(Kaufman & Plucker, 2011). Intelligence is the ability to judge and reason carefully, think logically, use comparison, process information more firmly and accurately, and be able to apply it into new areas (Neubauer & Martskvishvili, 2018, p.2.) Whereas creativity is one’s ability to resolve problems or to bring new ideas into an area, in a way that is originally different but eventually satisfactory in culture (Howard Gardner, 1989).
Sternberg and O’Hara (1999) provided a framework of five possible relationships between intelligence and creativity: Intelligence and creativity can be a subdivision of each other, or they can be coinciding with each other, or they can be seen as independent yet overlapping each other, or as entirely different from each other. There is substantial evidence provided for the above perspectives, and many influential ideals of intelligence treat creativity as one of the central factors for intelligence. Furthermore, after a lot of new research studies, statistics and creative thinking approach, it has finally been revealed that intelligence and creativity are overlapping constructs, and they influence each other.
Intelligence is essential for creativity but is only partially correlated to creativity as developed by Guilford(1967) with the threshold hypothesis. A lot of studies and researches conducted have paved the way for a bright and conscience understanding of intelligence which has led to the developments of many tests to confirm one’s intelligence capacity.
127 our experts are availableright now
The first modern test is the Intelligence Quotient Test (IQ) which was developed by Alfred Binet(1857-1911) and Theodore Simon (1873-1961) in 1904 to distinguish between developmentally disabled children from healthy children. However, merely talking about measuring IQ does not mean that one can get an explicit knowledge about the existence of intelligence. For that reason, there are many forms of intelligence which cannot be measured by IQ tests alone.
Besides, creativity is a theory of personal diversity which explain why some people have a higher order of thinking new solutions to the same problem compared to others. It leads to thinking in new perspectives, thus making it a driving force towards changing civilized advancement (Hennessey & Amabile, 2010). Creativity can be observed at different individual differences level, but one of the most prominent is the creative potential.
It refers to the ability of a person to build something beneficial and unique (Sternberg & Lubart, 1999). It evaluates through the various measure of divergent thinking ability like the Tolerance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT; Torrance, 1966), the Guilford tests (Wilson, Guilford, & Christensen, 1953), or the Wallach and Kogan tests (Wallach & Kogan, 1965). One of the critical and leading research conducted providing evidence for the correlation between intelligence and creativity is the Threshold Hypothesis developed by Guilford(1967).
For a start, the threshold hypothesis states that an exceptional level of creativity requires high or at least over average intelligence (Guilford, 1967). More accurately, an assumed average threshold exists in intelligence which is an IQ of 120. While creativity should be limited by intelligence beneath this threshold, variations in intelligence should no longer be associated with the creativity above it. Researches and investigation initially done prove that individuals having a high level of creativity also has a high level of intelligence (Barron, 1963, 1969; Getzels & Jackson, 1962).
However, (Fuchs-Beauchamp, Karnes and Johnson 1993) investigated the threshold hypothesis in preschool individuals and concluded that the result indeed followed the threshold hypothesis. He found out that there was a correlation between intelligence and creativity. As a result, the threshold hypothesis theory proved to be precise.
On the contrary, some of the other studies did not support the threshold hypothesis. (Kim,2005; Preckel, Holling, & Wiese, 2006; Runco & Albert, 1986; Wallach & Kogan, 1965). Preckel et al. (2006) investigated the threshold hypothesis for about 1328 German Students, including the gifted students. The test was done using an intelligence fluid test and Berlin structure of intelligence test, which tested the threshold hypothesis for linguistic, figures and numeric areas.
Since Wallach and Kogan (1965) documented a steady impact of speed of task on the correlation between intelligence and creativity, the investigation completed without any controlling for processing speed. However, after controlling for the processing speed the correlation between intelligence and ideational fluency was reduced greatly, but no other differences still got discovered.
As a result, the outcome achieved did not verify the threshold hypothesis. Furthermore, Meta-analysis research conducted by (Kim, 2005) also rejected the threshold hypothesis as the correlation between intelligence and creativity obtained from her research was contradicting the threshold hypothesis. Besides, since (Kim, 2005) meta-analysis research, many started to view creativity and intelligence as associated in the following years.
Recently the correlation between intelligence and creativity is becoming more and more known after the increase in the statistical pieces of evidence provided from many types of research including researches from cognitive abilities. Most studies have examined the relationship between observed fluctuating variables, and underlying shifting model has only become relatively known more recently. These latent variable models allow the researches to develop a construct’s accurate record and error independently (Skrondal and Rabe-Hesketh 2004).
As a result, this allows the researchers to separate their differences in opinion and give more precise and firm estimates of the outcome. One such example comes from the study conducted by Wallach and Kogan (1965), where when the data when reanalyzed proved that the correlation between both intelligence and creativity could deflate. However, they remain correspondent to each other.
In any case, successful cognitive neuroscience of creativity has supported that the correlation between intelligence and creativity is robust and they are very associated with each other. The research about the relationship between intelligence and creativity cannot compile easily. However, a lot of pieces of evidence like the Electroencephalogram ( EEG) and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) have strong support for the correlation between creativity and intelligence. Similarly, in these studies, the individual is given a creativity task, for example, divergent thinking, or musical improvisation and at the same time their neurological markers responsible for controlled, and executive thoughts are activated.
Similarly, their activation of specific brain functions responsible for supervisory control and controlled cognitive also stimulates (Beaty 2015; Beaty et al. 2014; Benedek and Beaty et al. 2014; Benedek et al. 2014a, b, c; Vartanian et al. 2014). Because the neuroscience of control is well recognised, the cognitive neuroscience of creativity has been able to establish an essential role in the neurological system when an individual completes a creativity task. All of these pieces of evidence and the researches provided confirm the conclusion that there is a definite relationship between intelligence and creativity.
