People high in openness and high in creative potential engage more frequently in creative activities (and perform minor/personal creative accomplishments), but intelligence may determine whether these remain at the level of personal accomplishments or may become publically acknowledged achievements.
This area of translational research is rich in creative opportunities to improve the unmet medical needs of patients with either chronic or acute renal failure.
Everyday creative activities can help to bridge a gap from creative potential, in terms of tested ability, to actual creative achievement: We found that openness and creative potential exert their influence on creative achievement via the path of creative activities.
Diversity can be a key element in ensuring that a culture remains fertile with creative potential.
Specifically, our recent results suggest that the intelligence threshold depends on the employed criterion: Although we observed threshold effects for indicators of creative potential, we found no evidence for an intelligence threshold in creative achievement.
Further studies dealing with Torrance's data reported that creative potential and intelligence were significant predictors of creative achievement in a 40-year follow-up (Cramond et al., 2005).
Similar to the measurement model of creative potential, error correlations between the corresponding parcels were allowed in order to account for unique (domain-specific) variance.
In a 50-year follow-up, Runco et al. (2010) found that creative potential was associated with personal achievements (which can be considered everyday creative activities), whereas publicly acknowledged creative achievement was related to an interaction between intelligence and creative potential.
The aim of this study was to disentangle several aspects of the multifaceted construct of creativity: We tested to which extent real-life creativity, in terms of everyday creative activities and actual creative achievement, is determined by creative potential, openness to experiences, and intelligence.
Creative potential was the strongest predictor of creative achievement, but intelligence explained incremental variance over and above creative potential.
Specifically, we tested the effects of creative potential, intelligence, and openness to experiences on everyday creative activities and actual creative achievement.
