Creative Thinking Isn’t Just Born, It’s Bred

Creativity is something we’d all like to have. The ability to see not just “what is”, but “what could be”. Enviable is the ability of finding innovative solutions to both personal and global problems, and all the successes that may accompany such breakthroughs. While it’s true that some aspect of creativity is genetic (in the sense that genes are a program for neurological development) and I don’t want to diminish that, breaking the typical patterns of thinking in order to cultivate creativity is also something that can be developed by use of lateral thinking exercises. Yet as commercial, scientific, educational and artistic organizations often talk about how they want to foster creativity, groups are less likely to spawn true innovation.

Typically, when groups are able to cultivate creativity it’s because the people within the group are already creative on an individual level and the interactive dynamics can harness a variety of unique perspectives, which can then enhance creativity. However, groups only rarely foment great ideas because people in them are powerfully shaped by group norms: the unwritten rules which describe how individuals in a group ‘are’ and how they ‘ought’ to behave. Norms influence what people believe is right and wrong just and flow almost imperceptibly from one person to the next so that changes are difficult to spot.

One classic study that highlights this was done on randomly allocated new university students to either conservative sororities or more liberal dormitories. Over time, students assigned to the liberal dormitories became less conservative as the group’s norms seeped into their consciousness (Siegel & Siegel, 1957). In fact, B.F. Skinner used to have a whale of a time messing with his student’s heads. He’d sit two students at the front of a classroom and have everyone agree with one student, who’s in on the experiment, and disagree with the other, right or wrong. Within a short time the student (victim) would find themselves abandoning what they knew the right answers were in an attempt to gain the approval of the class.

In very short amounts of time people will conform to others with only the slightest encouragement, even if a person is not very well established within the group itself. Most often norms are beneficial as their purpose is to provide a stable and predictable social world, to regulate our behavior with each other.

Such predictability is the enemy of the creative process. According to a 2006 study done by Adarves-Yorno, groups frequently fail with thinking outside the box because implicit norms constrain them in the most explicit ways. They asked two groups of participants to create posters and subtly gave each group a norm about either using more words on the poster or more images. When they judged each others’ work, participants equated creativity with following the group norm; the ‘words’ group rated posters with more words as more creative and the ‘images’ group rated posters with more images as more creative. In effect groups had redefined creativity as conformity. When the researchers emphasized the value of individuals as distinct from the group, actual creativity took hold.

Where you live and the environment which surrounds you also matters. When you present yourself with new surroundings your brain automatically rewires as it tries to absorb all the new information confronting it. This can be things as simple as trying a new cuisine at an ethnic restaurant, trying to appreciate the value of jazz instead of Lady Gaga (or appreciate Lady Gaga if you’re into jazz… maybe), or something as large as taking a backpacking trip through Central America. As a result, your brains neurons fire in patterns that are different from the norm, thus creating a new way of seeing the world (and as an added bonus, improving intelligence by establishing new neuronal connections).

Construal Level Theory (CLT) suggests that psychological distance may be a way to induce creativity. In a nutshell, CLT posits that the greater the perceived distance between you and the object of your thoughts, the wider the channels of creativity are opened. From a soon-to-be-published story, take the example of grease and vegetable oil. To most, these are things that are simply waste by-products from food (that’s the perspective with little psychological distance). To others these are not waste by-products but are part of a whole chain of energy transfers. Just as surely as photosynthesis produces vegetation to feed livestock and oxygen to breath, which we then use for energy; so too is vegetable oil leftover from a McDonald’s french fry machine an extension of that process of energy moving from one place to another (that’s the perspective with psychological distance – it’s no longer seen from just its immediate use but as part of a larger picture).

Putting distance between yourself and a problem gives a greater room for that “AHA” moment. This can also work if you picture your problems as being someone else’s problems, or even picturing some set of problems as actually existing in some other country. Instead of asking yourself “what should I do here”, imagine someone else has your task and you’re giving advice on how they should handle it.

Is there a take home lesson regarding creative thinking? I would suggest that if one does want to nurture creativity (and by default, nurture higher intelligence) that you constantly look to challenge yourself with something different. Too often we read, hear or see something and because it doesn’t agree with our preconceived notions or values, we dismiss it. Try reading a book that’s outside your norm, and understanding the author’s point of view or philosophy on life on their own merits. Take a vacation that’s not too carefully planned. Go to a ballet instead of watching television. Step outside of yourself and appreciate how the bigger picture plays itself out. Be observant of others and their needs and don’t be self-absorbed. Get off the computer and go meet new people. Simply put, get out of your rut.