Another interesting set of findings to lop on top of this is that dissatisfaction (diminishing probability x magnitude of reward) can be an antecedent to task creativity, as can mild depression, while mania can be an antecedent for behavioral stereotypy (antithesis of creativity), and manic-depressive types swing in behavioral variability on tasks depending on their state.
One interpretation is that dissatisfaction is a problem or environment exploration mechanism, and that behavioral stereotypy is the proper response for optimizing on a stable reward.
This has also been found in rats. As you lower tweak the probability x magnitude of reward, rat behaviors become more variable.
Different kinds of reward scheduling has also been tested with children suffering from disorders where behavioral variability or stereotypy is a feature, such as autism, with similar findings but no obvious application for treatment.
> Another interesting set of findings to lop on top of this is that dissatisfaction (diminishing probability x magnitude of reward) can be an antecedent to task creativity, as can mild depression, while mania can be an antecedent for behavioral stereotypy (antithesis of creativity)
That's interesting. I agree about the link between depression and creativity, but in my experience manic people are also quite creative, in a different way. Or have I confused creativity with mere productivity?
The world has varied people, so I wouldn't discount the possibility that you've met people who are more creative and productive during their manic episodes.
Measure five different things. Use underpowered design. Compare everything to everything using many fancy-sounding statisticsl tests. Fish for p<0.05 (and the occasional "marginally significant" p=0.07).
We have simply got to remind our friends here on Hacker News that university press releases are almost never a good guide to what research shows, but rather are part of the science hype cycle that confuses the public about what research shows.[1]
This is interesting from a number of perspectives. Knowing many top-notch programmers, they manifest the ability to see the big picture and the detailed view at the same time. Quite a feat because ordinarily one view distracts from the other. Being able to take in the noise without being overwhelmed by it goes to their creative talent.
OTOH, decreased "filtering" of extraneous stimuli is common in attentional disorders where the diminished gating becomes a liability. Indeed, people will complain that it's overwhelming their ability to "focus" and task performance suffers. So the distinction between "creativity" and "distracted" may be determined by particular circumstance, differences fuzzy at best.
I haven't yet taken the time to look it up, would have been ideal if the article had mentioned where the research was published, at least I didn't see that information in the article.
Edit: I should have also said something about synesthesia, another form of sensory "crosstalk", also associated with creativity, e.g., artists like Kandinsky. Not the same of course as the semi-random phenomena alluded to in the article, but an interesting variation on the theme.
Fits the archetype of the "prodigious procrastinator" programmer type - I find the most easily distractable and inconsistent (on an hour-by-hour basis) coders can also frequently come up with the most clever and elegant solutions.
This is exactly why modern corporations love open spaces so much - so that people would get flooded with irrelevant sensory distractions and be more creative!
I was thinking along those lines too (with contempt), and realized its the NpBFY factor is the sort of sensory distraction that I think doesn't help with creativity.
I have been tortured by this all my life. To the point where, now, after decades of trying to "adapt" per the wishes of my family, school, medical professionals, and workplace... and landing, ironically or whatever, in a series of apparently quiet when selecting but actually abnormally loud living circumstance -- well, to the point where my physical health is significantly and irreversibly destroyed.
A few things:
+ I am -- or was; the health issues now dominate -- able to concentrate, quite intensely and effectively. But I needed a QUIET and distraction free environment in which to do so.
+ Academically, I was, despite these problems, quite successful. Grade-curve-distorting successful.
+ I was flagged from an early age as "gifted". I still remember one of the initial tests and being told the results -- in fourth grade. Despite this, the school system never seemed to have an understanding, sympathy, nor accommodation for my environmental needs. This left me feeling "broken" and very frustrated and anxious.
+ Pernicious bullying, whether related or not, led to something for which I only decades later received a term and gradual, reluctant acceptance of its validity with respect to me: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
+ I am actually quite GOOD at collaboration. I just can't do it in a noisy, distracting environment -- except during bursts of stress and adrenalin (e.g. imminent deadlines) and when the work is actually suited to the environment -- e.g. more of a physical component, working together to complete a physical task that can also have a significant mental component.
In corporate workplaces that increasingly tortured me with cubes turning into low-walled corners with someone sitting 3 feet off my shoulder in my peripheral vision. Etc. Nonetheless, I got to know people across these very substantial organizations. And we'd simply "get stuff done", short-circuiting some of the bureaucracy while actually improving safety and results by keeping and eye open and reaching out when things didn't seem right.
----
So, understand that such people can be very productive and collaborative and, often in their own, quiet, non-aggressive way, social.
Early on, they/we need to learn this about ourselves and that we, of necessity, must advocate for and, OR, more simply achieve, the kind of workspace and living environment we need.
In times past, that might have meant a bit more remote home and a job or workspace off by itself. These days, in the modern Western world (my experience), these things can be very hard to achieve -- our personal landscapes so packed and full of ever noisier devices: Televisions; stereos; car stereos with those ridiculous, block-shaking subwoofers.
And especially early on, a mainstream that practically compels us to struggle with these environments by dint of an exhausting, chronic stress. Perhaps the home environment. Certainly school. Junior workspaces packed together like veal. Economic circumstances that only allow apartment living where those devices I mentioned seem to make the experience louder and louder, year by year, and social mores that ever more seem to populate building with people who think the only consideration they need have is for themself.
So... pardon what has become my ramble/rant, here.
I would like to make the point that, if you are not one of these people, please don't simply discount them. They are often actually very kind and accommodating and helpful people, if they can simply have their peace and quiet. If they are not stressed into that "fight or flight" frame of mind. ALL we want from you is a bit of peace and quiet. Just for ourselves; we don't care what you do nor how you want to fill your day. Just let us have our quiet and concentration. Our own bit of space.
Personally, I feel most of my chances for this life are past. Of the few things left that I might actually accomplish, communicating this in a manner that makes life easier -- in this respect -- for future people like me, is a primary goal.
The perspective I see is that too much of the sensory information is relevant. I find it very difficult to read textbooks because the implications of each small part are interesting enough for me to have ideas and wonder at the implications. To a point of view I am engaging in the irrelevant in that I am not advancing directly towards the goal of whatever reason lead me to pick up the text. In that respect when I was at university, studying for exams was a fairly futile exercise if my goal was simply to increase my grade. Many years later I find out the things I did discover while studying are still with me.
I have not become wealthy, but I have become enriched.
No cited sources. Only link goes to a laughable site of pseudo intellectualism. Pushing the standard narrative of, "Every strength is tied to a weakness, which means things equal out..." Which is of course BS to make people feel special. Gonna go out on a limb and say nope.
These findings fit with my understanding of an ecology of findings, and I think that criticizing the lack of citations as a way of shutting down conversation is counterproductive. Do you have institutional access? Then searching (or citation lookup) is easy, but most people here don't.
As if questioning vague findings with no methodology given were akin to "shutting down discussion." Pop psychology is notoriously garbage. Being skeptical of such a general claim without any way to verify even the actual numbers is the only sane response. People just want to believe this junk because they can suddenly say, "I'm easily distracted... That must mean I'm creative!"
One interpretation is that dissatisfaction is a problem or environment exploration mechanism, and that behavioral stereotypy is the proper response for optimizing on a stable reward.
This has also been found in rats. As you lower tweak the probability x magnitude of reward, rat behaviors become more variable.
Different kinds of reward scheduling has also been tested with children suffering from disorders where behavioral variability or stereotypy is a feature, such as autism, with similar findings but no obvious application for treatment.