Curiosity Causes Creativity? Revealing the Reinforcement Circle between State Curiosity and Creativity

Abstract

Curiosity has long been extolled as a seed for employee creativity. This causality is plausible when considering curiosity as a stable trait. However, curiosity can also oscillate as a transitory state, thus complicating the causal sequence between such state curiosity and creativity. To clarify the causal ordering and achieve a refined understanding of what role state curiosity plays in the creative process, we utilize a random‐intercept cross‐lagged panel model (RI‐CLPM) to estimate the reciprocal effects between state curiosity and creativity at the within‐person level. With a full longitudinal panel data across three‐time points (N = 400), we find that at the within‐person level, state curiosity has a positive lagged effect on creativity and creativity also shows a positive lagged effect on state curiosity. This research highlights that curiosity and creativity, in fact, mutually reinforce each other.

Inconclusive effects between executive functions and symptoms of psychiatric disorders in random-intercept cross-lagged panel models: A simulated reanalysis and comment on Halse et al. (2022)

“…Without this combination of expected effects, observed effects would appear to be spurious and conclusions of causality premature. We Sorjonen, Nilsonne, et al, 2024; have previously used this type of triangulation and challenged conclusions in studies using RI-CLPM and claiming effects of need of cognition on anxiety and depression symptoms (Zainal & Newman, 2022), of income on self-esteem (Bleidorn et al, 2023), of curiosity on creativity and vice versa (Ma & Wei, 2023), and of self-esteem on eating pathology and vice versa (Beckers et al, 2023). We recommend researchers to use similar triangulations to scrutinize findings from analyses of observational data.…”

Experimentally established expected effects in random-intercept cross-lagged panel models when causality holds

“…The present findings might appear self-evident. However, at the time of writing, we [8,[14][15][16] are trying to publish reanalyses that challenge studies using RI-CLPM and suggesting within-individual effects between self-esteem and eating disorders [17], of emotion dysregulation and post-migration stressors on hyperarousal [18], between curiosity and creativity [19], and of income on self-esteem [20]. Some editors and reviewers have questioned our hypotheses and predictions, similar to the hypotheses and predictions in the present study, claiming, for example, that there are no reasons to expect similar effects in MLM-analyses of personmean centered scores as in RI-CLPM.…”

Using triangulation to evaluate findings from random-intercept cross-lagged panel models: An application with data on curiosity and creativity

“…a positive crude effect of the amount of poured water on the subsequent-initial weight difference. Similarly, if, as concluded by Ma and Wei (2023), initial curiosity has an increasing effect on creativity, initial curiosity should have a positive effect on subsequent creativity when adjusting for initial creativity, a negative effect on initial creativity when adjusting for subsequent creativity, and a positive effect on the subsequent-initial creativity difference.…”

“…nonexperimental) data could be evaluated through triangulation. For example, Ma and Wei (2023) analyzed data on curiosity and creativity with a random-intercept cross-lagged panel model (RI-CLPM) and concluded, based on statistically significant cross-lagged effects, that curiosity and creativity mutually reinforce (i.e. cause) each other.…”