More solutions are generated in the OC condition than the AU condition, and adults generate more answers than adolescents in general, with no condition-specific age difference¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 A mixed-model ANOVA revealed an interaction of condition × number with more solutions in OC than AU (η2 = 0.56), and an interaction of number × age group with more answers by adults (η2 = 0.12). → Kleibeuker 2013 q3 i? No significant condition × number × age group interaction, indicating adults were not specifically more creative but generated more answers in general. → Kleibeuker 2013 (2)

Evidence¶

Kleibeuker 2013¶

Kleibeuker, S. W., Koolschijn, P. C. M. P., Jolles, D. D., De Dreu, C. K. W., and Crone, E. A. (2013). The neural coding of creative idea generation across adolescence and early adulthood. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7:905. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00905

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Mixed-model ANOVA on scanner task performance with age group as between-subjects factor. The study reports "more solutions generated in the OC condition compared to the AU condition" (η2 = 0.56) and "more answers generated by adults than by adolescents" (η2 = 0.12).

"an interaction effect of condition × number with more solutions generated in the OC condition compared to the AU condition [F(3, 123) = 58.81, p < 0.001; η2 = 0.56], and an interaction effect of number × age group [F(3, 123) = 5.44, p = 0.009; η2 = 0.12] with more answers generated by adults than by adolescents"

Kleibeuker 2013 (2)¶

Kleibeuker, S. W., Koolschijn, P. C. M. P., Jolles, D. D., De Dreu, C. K. W., and Crone, E. A. (2013). The neural coding of creative idea generation across adolescence and early adulthood. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7:905. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00905

q3 · i? · causal · r1

The three-way interaction of condition × number × age group was not significant (F(3, 123) = 0.64, p = 0.56, η2 = 0.02), which the authors interpret as adults generating more answers in general rather than being specifically more creative.

"There was no significant condition x number x age group interaction effect [F(3, 123) = 0.64, p = 0.56, η2 = 0.02], indicat- ing that adults were not specifically more creative, but generated more answers in general."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Adults show larger left IFG/MFG condition effects (AU relative to baseline) than adolescents, indicating adolescents do not yet recruit left lateral PFC at an adult level for creative thinking — related
• Adults outperform adolescents on fluency measures of divergent thinking (scanner AU-score, verbal fluency, and AUT-brick fluency), but not on originality or flexibility — related
• AU and OC conditions show distinct correlation patterns with external creativity and fluency measures, supporting their differentiation as divergent thinking versus verbal ability conditions — related
• Divergent thinking performance (AU-score) positively correlates with left IFG/MFG activation for AU relative to OC trials — related