Commentary on The Psychology of Creativity: A Critical Reading by Vlad P. Glăveanu

Abstract

The psychology of creativity is in crisis! This is the assertion of Glăveanu’s thought-provoking and wide-ranging review. The present commentary responds to each of Glăveanu’s six conclusions – supporting some and challenging others – finding much to drive an exciting future of research in creativity. Bold, new and surprising questions do, indeed, need to be asked in this field. Reflection on definitions of creativity is, as Glăveanu asserts, important, but should not divert researchers from moving forward, confident that a consensus does exist. Reductionist approaches in creativity research should not overwhelm attempts to integrate the contributions of the 4Ps as a system. Creativity research should seek out and study inconvenient samples – professional practitioners, for example. Qualitative, theory-building approaches to creativity research need to be encouraged as a counter-balance to quantitative theory-testing. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly for the future health of creativity, researchers need to demonstrate to the wider scientific community the value that creativity brings to other disciplines. If the community of creativity researchers, psychological or otherwise, contributes to Glăveanu’s suggestions for future research, then the fragmentation and dispersion he identifies are, in fact, the seeds of future health.