P. Silvia, Katherine N. Cotter, Alexander P. Christensen
{"title":"Creative Omnivores: An Experience Sampling Study of the Variety and Diversity of Everyday Creative Activities","authors":"P. Silvia, Katherine N. Cotter, Alexander P. Christensen","doi":"10.1080/10400419.2023.2226453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Studies of everyday creativity suggest that some people are like creative omnivores, dabbling in a broad range of creative pursuits, but others are like picky eaters, focusing on a single creative passion. A week-long experience sampling study examined the breadth vs depth of 125 university students’ everyday creative activities. Several times a day, people were asked if they were doing something creative, and if they were, to describe what they were doing. Diversity statistics quantified the variety (number of distinct domains) and balance (the relative predominance of any domain) of their creative activities. The sample varied widely in both aspects of diversity, reflecting differences in whether people’s creative efforts were relatively broad or focused. Notably, people who were high in openness to experience showed significantly higher variety (they did more kinds of creative activities) yet lower balance (one or two activities predominated), suggesting that they had a broad creative diet but a few favorite foods. Plain Language Summary When people are spending time in their everyday lives working on creative activities, what are they actually doing? A small but growing literature on creativity in everyday life shows that creativity is common – many people spend much of their time on creative hobbies, passions, and pursuits – but not much is known about the kinds of things people are opting to do. In the present research, we explored the diversity and complexity of creative activities across a typical week. Using the metaphor of omnivores vs picky eaters, we suggest that some people are like creative omnivores, dabbling in a broad range of creative pursuits, and that others are like picky eaters, focusing on a single creative passion. In a week-long study of 125 adults, several times a day people were asked if they were doing something creative, and if they were, to describe what they were doing. Using diversity statistics, we found broad differences in the variety (how many different kinds of activities people did) and balance (whether one or two activities predominated) of people’s creative engagement. Overall, there’s no single profile for everyday creativity: some people enjoy spending time on many different kinds of creative tasks, and others focus their creative efforts on one or two areas.","PeriodicalId":48144,"journal":{"name":"Creativity Research Journal","volume":"35 1","pages":"427 - 437"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Creativity Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2023.2226453","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT Studies of everyday creativity suggest that some people are like creative omnivores, dabbling in a broad range of creative pursuits, but others are like picky eaters, focusing on a single creative passion. A week-long experience sampling study examined the breadth vs depth of 125 university students’ everyday creative activities. Several times a day, people were asked if they were doing something creative, and if they were, to describe what they were doing. Diversity statistics quantified the variety (number of distinct domains) and balance (the relative predominance of any domain) of their creative activities. The sample varied widely in both aspects of diversity, reflecting differences in whether people’s creative efforts were relatively broad or focused. Notably, people who were high in openness to experience showed significantly higher variety (they did more kinds of creative activities) yet lower balance (one or two activities predominated), suggesting that they had a broad creative diet but a few favorite foods. Plain Language Summary When people are spending time in their everyday lives working on creative activities, what are they actually doing? A small but growing literature on creativity in everyday life shows that creativity is common – many people spend much of their time on creative hobbies, passions, and pursuits – but not much is known about the kinds of things people are opting to do. In the present research, we explored the diversity and complexity of creative activities across a typical week. Using the metaphor of omnivores vs picky eaters, we suggest that some people are like creative omnivores, dabbling in a broad range of creative pursuits, and that others are like picky eaters, focusing on a single creative passion. In a week-long study of 125 adults, several times a day people were asked if they were doing something creative, and if they were, to describe what they were doing. Using diversity statistics, we found broad differences in the variety (how many different kinds of activities people did) and balance (whether one or two activities predominated) of people’s creative engagement. Overall, there’s no single profile for everyday creativity: some people enjoy spending time on many different kinds of creative tasks, and others focus their creative efforts on one or two areas.
期刊介绍:
Creativity Research Journal publishes high-quality, scholarly research capturing the full range of approaches to the study of creativity--behavioral, clinical, cognitive, crosscultural, developmental, educational, genetic, organizational, psychoanalytic, psychometrics, and social. Interdisciplinary research is also published, as is research within specific domains (e.g., art, science) and research on critical issues (e.g., aesthetics, genius, imagery, imagination, incubation, insight, intuition, metaphor, play, problem finding and solving). Integrative literature reviews and theoretical pieces that appreciate empirical work are extremely welcome, but purely speculative articles are not published. Readers are encouraged to send commentaries, comments, and evaluative book reviews.