{"title":"Connecting the Dots of Creativity and Curiosity: A Weekly Diary Examination Using Dynamic Structural Equation Modeling","authors":"Leonidas A. Zampetakis","doi":"10.1002/jocb.1500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the last decade, research on the connection between curiosity and creativity has surged revealing a positive correlation. However, these findings are primarily based on cross‐sectional studies, which do not establish the direction of the relationship between creativity and curiosity. Is curiosity the driving force behind creativity, or does creativity spark curiosity? The present study addresses this question by examining the potential reciprocal associations between creativity and curiosity within‐persons using state‐of‐the‐art methodology and statistics. Self‐reported data were collected on a weekly basis from a sample of Greek entrepreneurs (N = 195, 49% female) over a 10‐week period. We used the dynamic structural equation modeling (DSEM) framework for data analyses. Results supported the positive relationship between creativity and curiosity within and between individuals. At the within‐person level, creativity and curiosity exhibited significant carry‐over effects from 1 week to the next. However, we did not find consistent evidence for cross‐lagged effects, meaning that curiosity and creativity did not directly cause changes in each other within a 1‐week period. We also found significant random effects underscoring the role of curiosity as a catalyst for creativity, particularly when individuals do not have a strong tendency for their creative levels to persist but do have a strong tendency for their curiosity levels to persist. In such cases, curiosity seems to have a more pronounced impact on shaping creative endeavors. We discuss the implications of our findings for theory and practice and suggest directions for future research.","PeriodicalId":516032,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Creative Behavior","volume":"5 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Creative Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.1500","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In the last decade, research on the connection between curiosity and creativity has surged revealing a positive correlation. However, these findings are primarily based on cross‐sectional studies, which do not establish the direction of the relationship between creativity and curiosity. Is curiosity the driving force behind creativity, or does creativity spark curiosity? The present study addresses this question by examining the potential reciprocal associations between creativity and curiosity within‐persons using state‐of‐the‐art methodology and statistics. Self‐reported data were collected on a weekly basis from a sample of Greek entrepreneurs (N = 195, 49% female) over a 10‐week period. We used the dynamic structural equation modeling (DSEM) framework for data analyses. Results supported the positive relationship between creativity and curiosity within and between individuals. At the within‐person level, creativity and curiosity exhibited significant carry‐over effects from 1 week to the next. However, we did not find consistent evidence for cross‐lagged effects, meaning that curiosity and creativity did not directly cause changes in each other within a 1‐week period. We also found significant random effects underscoring the role of curiosity as a catalyst for creativity, particularly when individuals do not have a strong tendency for their creative levels to persist but do have a strong tendency for their curiosity levels to persist. In such cases, curiosity seems to have a more pronounced impact on shaping creative endeavors. We discuss the implications of our findings for theory and practice and suggest directions for future research.