Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 6(4), pp. 8-14 www.ejop.org
The intrinsic div ersity of creativ ity research: Interv iew with Prof. Todd Lubart
By Vlad Glăveanu EJOP Editor Professor Todd Lubart’s past and present w ork on creativ ity is a perfect example of how dynamic and multi-faceted this area of psychology really is. Creativ e phenomena draw on cognitiv e, personality, emotional, motiv ational and social processes at once and creativ ity studies can be found at the intersection betw een different psychological fields: cognitiv e, social and personality, organisational, dev elopmental, educational, indiv idual differences and so on. I n this interv iew Professor Lubart discusses his creativ ity research projects and how they ev olv ed in a constant dialogue betw een personal interests and opportunities for research and collaboration. Creativ ity is portrayed as a heterogeneous domain w here the most interesting breakthroughs happen ‘at the borders’. Here, those w ho make an i mpact are the ones ready to take risks and exploit the domain’s intrinsic div ersity and the possibilities for creativ e thinking associated w ith it. Todd Lubart is Professor at the University Paris Descartes where he directs the activity of the Laboratoire Adaptations Travail Individu (LATI). He earned his PhD from Yale University in 1994 under the supervision of Robert Sternberg and soon after that moved to the University of Paris Descartes where he became an Assistant Professor in 1995 and then Professor of Psychology in 2002. He was a member of the Institut Universitaire de France (2005-2010). His work on creativity is extensive and includes approximately 75 publications, articles, books and book chapters covering various aspects of the phenomenon: creative process, individual differences, role of cognition and emotion, environmental and cultural factors, etc. Among his coauthored books, “Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity” (1995, with R. Sternberg), “Psychologie de la créativité” (2003) and the co-edited volume “Models of intelligence: International perspectives” (2003, with R. Sternberg and J. Lautrey). Professor Lubart was responsible for several research grants on creativity and co-organised several conferences or symposiums dedicated to this topic. His current work develops a multivariate approach to creativity.
The intrinsic diversity of creativity research Address for correspondence: Prof. Todd Lubart, Institut de Psychologie - Université René Descartes (Paris 5), 71 avenue Edouard Vaillant 92774 Boulogne-Billancourt E-mail: todd.l
[email protected] EJOP: Thank you for accepting our inv itation for an interv iew . Your w ork for many years had focused on the topic of creativ ity and indiv idual differences, could you tell me how did you come to w ork in this particular area? Todd Lubart: I started by studying v arious topics in psychology actually, first psycholinguistics and then deductiv e logical reasoning and inductiv e reasoning, and then I started to look for a kind of problem solv ing topic to study more in-depth for my Masters degree or PhD, and had the opportunity to find creativ ity among the subjects offered. And this particular topic w as kind of on my line of ev olv ing interests, but I w as also fascinated by it because I initially studied v isual art as my first discipline before I got inv olv ed in psychology. And so during about sev en years I had done studies in v isual arts and considered going to an art school before I decided differently. But then creativ ity made me go back to some of my prev ious interests since some of the things I w as studying inv olv ed people making draw ings and other similar products. And in fact, w hen I actually started psychology, I w as more oriented tow ards a generalist approach, not an indiv idual differences one in particular. But w hen I got inv olved in that reasoning study, on inductiv e and deductiv e reasoning, I w as in fact looking at people w ho dev iated from the general logical reasoning model. And I got interested in w hat they w ere thinking and in the indiv idual differences associated w ith this. How ev er in the end, w hen the moment came for me to choose a Masters and PhD topic my decision also had to do w ith the chance of hav ing creativ ity research proposed by the univ ersity. EJOP: So this kind of conv erged w ith your many interests, including your w ork in v isual arts and then reasoning. But did you know from before about creativ ity or the idea just came then and there? Todd Lubart: Well I can say that I w asn’t specifically thinking about creativ ity until I looked at the list of topics proposed that included many choices, different professors to w ork w ith. And at that moment I thought that creativ ity seemed to me to be the most interesting. There w ere other choices that w ere not of zero interest but this w as the most appealing. And then, w hen I came to w ork on it I saw it is ev en more fascinating because I am not a purely cognitiv e-oriented person, so I w as interested in some social aspects, etc., and in creativ ity in fact you kind of hav e a mix of cognitiv e and other types of factors, like emotional, social, motiv ational and so on.
9
Europe’s Journal of Psychology So that w as a good choice for me because it gav e me the chance to mov e around w ithin the same topic. EJOP: You said you also hav e a background in v isual arts. Do you think this influences the w ay you came to think about creativ ity? I s it important for you and your w ork that you know both ‘sides’ of creativ ity, as practice and as a research topic? Todd Lubart: I don’t know , it’s hard to say, I don’t know w hat could hav e been, w hat w ould hav e been if things w ere different. I also don’t think that I am consciously considering my v isual arts training w hen I am studying creativ ity but I w ould say that the basic point of departure for my w ork on creativ ity w as the artistic process. So it w as probably not a random choice. And I w as mostly into activ ities such as draw ing and painting and that w as w here I ’ve put more effort. And I w as in touch w ith some students in art and art graduates or professors w ho w ere judging the products, I w as also in some art w orkshops at the univ ersity w here the participants w ere these more adv anced art students and just after that I extended my interests to literature, to writing as forms of creativ ity, and then to other things. Notably now I am quite interested in design, w hich is a bit connected to the artistic stuff. So art definitiv ely is a connecting point but I do not sit and think about my prev ious personal experience. EJOP: I understand. You approached a lot of aspects of creativ ity in your w ork, as you mentioned already: from the cognitiv e to the social, from organisational to dev elopmental and educational, the study of giftedness and so on. And now you w ere talking a bit about a kind of ‘art nucleus’. What w ould you say are the red threads going through your w ork? Do you think in terms of an ov erarching project or do you hav e all these different projects and are keeping them a bit separated? Todd Lubart: I had shifting interests: so at one point I w as interested more in cognitiv e factors and studying them, at another I w as in a more detailed personality traits phase, one moment I w as in a more social env ironment phase; but ultimately now I had an opportunity to think about this because here in France w e do a thing called ‘habilitation’ so it’s a moment w hen people are encouraged to put all their w ork together and make a master plan. So I w as able to kind of put it together around the multiv ariate, multi-faceted approach to creativ ity in the sense that I w as all this time exploring the different facets of the phenomenon. And I kind of had for each facet a timeline, a kind of curv e of my activ ity on each of them. And there w ere opportunities that presented themselv es that made me be more interested in one facet compared to another, w hen some collaborators w ere av ailable. And so the w hole picture is div erse, leading me to mov e in and out of interest for particular facets, each w ith its timeline of activ ity. And currently I am preoccupied a little bit 10
The intrinsic diversity of creativity research more w ith trying to connect the factors or facets w ith the creativ e process, in adults in different domains. And this w ork has an aspect of identifying dimensions and w ays of training w hat can be trained to enhance creativ ity in different domains. I t is based on identifying the profile of factors at play for one type of creativ ity or another. And w ith children w e hav e a project of assessing creativ e potential again in different domains. We hav e dev eloped a new battery of creativ ity measures for children, called EPoC (Ev aluation of Potential for Creativ ity). So I am kind of in a phase that is very much assessment related. EJOP: And w ith educational applicability. Todd Lubart: Yes, educational applicability or educational implications. For children and adults depending on the profile of the person and comparing it w ith the kind of profile that is ideal for creativ e expression in their domain. So this is the stage I am at. EJOP: Well it has been a kind of organic grow th of your interests I see. But at the same time you now hav e this particular focus. You also rev iewed sev eral creativ ity models in your w ork and you are obv iously preoccupied w ith ‘modelling’ creativ ity, taking into account domain specificity. I t is interesting that you mentioned the children and adults focus. Talking about continuities in creativ e expression, do you see creativ ity in childhood and adulthood as tw o completely different things or are you concerned w ith the links betw een them? Todd Lubart: Oh they are not tw o different things. They are linked, connected, an d the basic model is the same, but the manifestation is a little different because in adults it gets more domain and expertise-linked. And in children there is a domain specificity that can be detected from quite early on but the domains are broader, and so not as detailed and specific as in the case of adults. But ultimately I hav e the same ideas about the factors inv olv ed, the process, etc. EJOP: So the ‘content’ elements are different, the ‘input’ and ‘output’ as it w ere. Todd Lubart: Yes, that’s it. The nature of w hat is ‘entering’ for example from the env ironment and so on, and w hat is ‘coming out’, the kind of production they make, and also the w ay that others are reacting to the w ork is different for children and adults, but it is globally the same basic idea. EJOP: And in terms of research, w hat are the methods you usually employ to study creativ ity? Especially now that you said you are in an assessment phase.
11
Europe’s Journal of Psychology Todd Lubart: Well mostly w e ask people, children and adults, to produce w orks and w hen they produce the w orks w e try to measure or observ e certain things in the process. And then w e get a final production, w hich w e submit to a panel of judges, using consensual assessment, and w e relate the outcome of their ev aluation to other indiv idual differences v ariables that w e measure off-line, w hich concern personality or cognition. This is the basic technique. But I should say that my indiv idual differences approach became ev en more focused w hen I came ov er to Paris, because at that moment I joined a research group w hich w as 100% w orking on indiv idual differences, w ith more elaborate models of how these differences are constructed and ev olv e and so on. So through these contacts w ith people around me I ’v e got more and more focused on this aspect. EJOP: At the same time you hav e edited many book chapters on creativ ity and culture along the years. And it is interesting to notice how they sit together: on the one hand indiv idual differences and on the other cultural differences, the micro and the macro lev el. Todd Lubart: Well indiv iduals obv iously reflect a lot from their cultural env ironment. I t’s true that the culture w ork is more at a macro lev el and I don’t exclusiv ely w ork at an indiv idual lev el. I n fact I initially started w orking on the topic of creativ ity and culture w hen I w as interested in the social env ironment, I w as in a ‘less indiv idual’ phase, and at that time it w as v ery little written on that topic. I t became quite popular afterw ards and so I w ould hav e probably left it at some point, after an initial entry, but then I had continuous solicitation for this, it w as a like a snow ball effect. So I kept coming back to it, trying to get a little further on it. And then obv iously w hen I came ov er here in France I w as myself experiencing a new culture and w as also getting more in contact w ith v arious people in Europe and other places too that put me into the kind of situation that brings this cultural aspect back in, back to my mind. EJOP: I t is interesting how you said you picked some ideas up a nd then left them at some point, at least for a w hile; it reminds me of the inv estment theory of creativ ity you proposed w ith Robert Sternberg. Actually I w as curious to know if you still w ork on that idea or hav e integrated it somehow in your current research. I know that the seeds of the multiv ariate approach w ere present in there. Todd Lubart: Yes in that model there is the multiv ariate approach w hich I obv iously continue to use for structuring my thinking about creativ ity. Then there w as also the more specific inv estment concept and that is something in fact I am reflecting on at the moment: the connection betw een inv estment, economic thinking and the creativ e person as a decision-maker, choosing w here to go next. There w ere a few 12
The intrinsic diversity of creativity research times w hen I w orked on this occasionally, so I did keep it aliv e and sporadically there w ere requests to giv e an update on it. And chance has it that I might go back to that idea since I am currently inv olv ed in a teaching situation w here economics and psychology are brought to gether, in a Masters programme. So it just so happens that in creativ ity there is alw ays this possibility of w orking on different areas at the same time. And so it w orks out... EJOP: To continue ‘inv esting’ in the inv estment model. Todd Lubart: Yes, yes, right, because now I am suddenly in contact w ith a lot of economists and so there might be some new things to w ork on there. EJOP: So I understand that your professional trajectory had to do w ith an interaction betw een your interests and the opportunities you encountered: of teaching, of writing, of researching and so on. After w orking so much on creativ ity, w hat do you find to be the most interesting parts of this w ork, and also the most challenging parts? What do you like best? Todd Lubart: Oh, w ell, I like best w orking on dev eloping some theoretical ideas and trying to think of how w e can design an empirical study that could test these ideas. And I also like the data analysis phase because it is actually a rather inv entiv e or exploratory phase, usually. So I like these phases of research. And then creativ ity is a topic that, compared to other topics of psychology, is not that much studied. But there is a grow ing number of studies, kind of an exponential grow th of creativ ity studies. And in any case, w ithin the field of creativ ity I w as alw ays interested in those topics that w ere the most ambiguous. I don’t know for w hat reason but perhaps because they giv e the most leew ay, the most room for mov ing around, trying w hatev er you like to try, compared to those topics w here, after a certain time and number of studies, you get into a mode of detailed testing and finding that last brick that is missing from the nice w all that w as built. But that is not my cup of tea. EJOP: I n creativ ity studies there are bricks ev eryw here, but no final w all. Todd Lubart: Yes, right. I w ould say that in the scientific method there is an aspect that is quite technical and rational and detail-oriented but there are also phases and topics w here things are a little more ‘artistic’. And ev en in analysis, people say for example that exploratory factor analysis is a little bit of an artistic tool, compared to other techniques w ere everyone w ill get to the exact same result. I n factor analysis it is not completely sure that w ith the same dataset ev eryone gets the same result. I t’s a more exploratory, a little bit ‘artistic’, treatment of the data. And those 13
Europe’s Journal of Psychology w ere alw ays the kind of topics that I w as attracted to. Luckily I also hav e a lot of interesting collaborators and so w hen something gets to ‘sticky’ or difficult than I call up on somebody w ho I might hav e met, w ho might hav e ideas. I am not really much of a lone w orker. EJOP: I n the end, do you hav e any w ords of adv ice for young scholars or students w orking on creativ ity? Any concluding thoughts? Todd Lubart: Well I think that for any topic, but I suppose you can apply this to creativ ity, that you obv iously w ant to know w hat has been done but you don’t w ant to get too stuck in the current thinking. And that is true for any search f or a creativ e idea; one could apply it or should apply it ev en more to thinking about creativ ity. So the idea w ould be to take the risk to go in a new direction, counter the current thinking, and try out new things. Because in the w orst case you w asted your time or finally don’t get a result that w as w orthy to see the light of day but... EJOP: The v oyage w as w orth making. Todd Lubart: Yes. Exactly. EJOP: Thank you v ery much for sharing your thoughts w ith us.
14
