If Experts Converge on the Same Answer are they Less Creative than Beginners? Redefining Creativity in Terms of Adaptive Landscapes

TL;DR

This paper redefines creativity based on adaptive landscapes, showing that experts' convergence on solutions affects perceived creativity differently depending on the landscape's ruggedness, challenging traditional views.

Contribution

It introduces a landscape-based framework for understanding creativity, emphasizing task-specific constraints and the ruggedness of adaptive landscapes.

Findings

Creativity involves originality and appropriateness, but their importance varies with landscape topology.

Experts' convergence on solutions does not necessarily imply lower creativity in rugged landscapes.

Artistic and scientific pursuits share rugged landscapes, but their topologies differ due to emotional and experiential factors.

Abstract

The standard view that creativity entails both originality and appropriateness leads to the paradox that experts who converge on one optimal solution are rated as no more creative than beginners who give many original solutions. This paper asserts that there is no one-size-fits-all definition of creativity; creativity must be assessed relative to the constraints and affordances of the task. The flatter the adaptive landscape associated with the task, the greater the extent to which creativity is a function of originality only. For tasks with a single-peaked adaptive landscape, there is a tradeoff between originality and appropriateness. Only for tasks with rugged adaptive landscapes is creativity positively correlated with both originality and appropriateness. It is suggested that the adaptive landscapes associated with artistic and scientific pursuits are equally rugged, but for artistic pursuits their topologies reflect idiosyncratic experiences and emotions (the peaks and valleys are not aligned).