IS THERE A LINK BETWEEN CREATIVITY AND MENTAL ILLNESS 3

 

A Cow Ruminating

"What if Schopenhauer was wrong and cows don't have rights?"

Supports: The Case for the Link

A famous study on Abstract Expressionist artists by Schildkraut et al. (1994) refutes other researchers’ findings that there is a lack of evidence to support the link between creativity and mental illness. Schildkraut et al. made an empirical study on case studies of 15 contemporary artists of the New York School of Abstractionism. While the article admits that criteria for including subjects into a study are usually somewhat arbitrary, it maintains that the amazingly high coincidence of psychopathology in these creative artists show a link between mental disorders and creative individuals.

Despite possible questions that can be raised regarding the time perspective in the experimental design of their study, these researchers found impressive ratios that showed most artists suffered from depressive disorders compounded by alcoholism. Noteworthy is that seven of the 15 artists were dead before the age of 60 and most suffered dysfunctions in relationships, specifically shown by the high rate of divorce among these artists.

Some researchers agree that they find a common thread in the ability and/or willingness of creative people to regress into primitive thought and cross the line between rationality and irrationality. Artists, themselves, claim that they need to keep in touch with their primitive selves because it is a well-spring of inspiration.

Based on several case studies, the process of "dedifferentiation" in manic states is explained—that it is a process of regression involving the denial of loss. In the regression process, for example, the individual with bipolar illness does not lose sense of self, but refuses to choose between various aspects of the self. The regression process appears to be similar to primitive thinking and, therefore, may support the hypothesis that creativity requires the ability to cross back and forth between rational and irrational states. It seems the importance of abstractionist artists being in touch with their primitive sides to create their unique modern art may be paramount. The manic regressive state found in bipolar subjects is also similar to the Janusian thought process. It is noteworthy that most research on creativity makes a link between mental illness and the requisite cognitive processes involved in the creative process.

Janusian thinking, therefore, is required to form creative ideas. Many researchers maintain that bipolar patients, having a high tendency for Janusian thinking, are inclined to be more creative than the general population. Other research uncovered higher correlations between bipolar illness and creativity in studies that were more solidly designed. Therefore, the more rigorous and in-depth investigations support the link between the cognitive processes of bipolar patients and creativity, thereby supporting a general link between mental illness and creativity.

As remarkable the link between creativity and mental illness seems, some researchers doubt that the link is direct. When considering the importance of creative cognitive processes in creative people compared to the high incidence of depressive disorders found in them as well, these findings are puzzling. These researchers claim that because depression is debilitating, causing the sufferer to lose interest, focus, decisiveness, and energy, it seems unlikely that creativity is associated with these symptoms. Their conclusion:  depression decreases creative activity.

Due to the apparent lack of a direct causal link, the researchers hypothesize that there may be an underlying factor linking creativity and mental illness, particularly depression. They assert that that rumination is the causal link between depression and creativity. This appears to be another possible key to discovering the mental illness/creativity link.

One definition of rumination is, conscious thoughts that revolve around a common theme, with the caveat that the thoughts recur without the presence of immediate environmental demands requiring the thought. However, rumination is a process that most people use and is not necessarily negative. Rumination implies a focus on self that can be both helpful in the creative process and hurtful when rumination becomes negative. However, because creative thought requires intrinsic thought, and self-reflective rumination, being intrinsic, is often motivated by negative events, much of self-reflective rumination involves negative thought. Therefore, it appears that rumination and negativity have a reciprocal relationship, implying an indirect effect on mental health and creativity.

The Creating Cow Ruminating

(To those "not in the know", ruminating is a double-entendre for the process in which cows digest their food!)

MORE TO COME...

IS THERE A LINK BETWEEN CREATIVITY AND MENTAL ILLNESS?

Many people automatically assume there is a thin line between creativity and mental illness, citing anecdotal evidence and pointing to famous "crazy" artists from the past and present. However, this conclusion is quite difficult to prove, as reflected by many attempts to find solid evidence through research studies.

A connection between madness and creative genius has been made throughout history. Shakespeare wrote that, “The lunatic, the lover and the poet are of imagination all compact.” Proust said, “Everything great in the world is created by neurotics.”  Even in ancient times Plato and Aristotle spoke of creativity as “divine madness” as being “a gift from the Gods” and that genius was infused with a mixture of insanity.  Yet, until about 25 years ago, research on this topic was limited.  Determining the validity of a link between mental illness and creative people is still hotly debated, despite the over 9000 studies conducted on creativity and mental illness between 1960 and 1991.

There are many flaws in studies researching creativity and its relationship to mental disorders, casting doubt on the reliability of the creativity/mental illness connection.  Even though it is extremely difficult to prove a link between creativity and mental illness, the consistency with which humanity has made this connection through the ages indicates that a link does exist!

Because creativity has been valued throughout history, determining a link is important.  Why?  If we can determine a link, we may be able to determine a cause and, in doing so, help creative persons avoid suffering and maximize their potential good for themselves and society.  Furthermore, because creativity is thought to be an ability that most of us use or can learn to use in everyday life, identifying the aspects and possible links between creativity and mental illness can have universal benefit and appeal.

But exactly what are we measuring?  Interestingly, there is no difference in the definition of madness and inspiration in Latin.  One essential difficulty in establishing a link between mental illness and creativity is in defining the terms creativity and mental illness. How can researchers measure something if they are not exact about the meanings of what they are measuring? In the field of psychology, and especially for the purposes of measurement, the definition of creativity is varied. Many authors have attempted to describe creativity.  But researchers have yet not arrived at a consensus regarding the process, the product and the person of creativity.

The definition of mental illness is also problematic.  Although the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) comes to a consensus with the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Classification of Disease (ICD) systems on the reliability of various mental illness categories, these instruments have not improved on the validity of how to categorize mental illness.

Some descriptors of creativity in the research include:  introspective, intelligent, less compliant to social norms, enthusiastic, energetic, sensitive, adventurous, radical, and persistent.  Obviously, creativity involves many other abilities and qualities and the interplay of these qualities complicates the search for a universal definition of creativity. Descriptions of creativity appear to vary and sometimes are contradictory, which leaves us with the question, “Do creative people fit into society or don’t they?”

We agree that creative people have original ideas, however, just because people have original ideas, they are not necessarily creative.  Another apparent contradiction in the definition of creativity is that creative people are intrinsically motivated (from within themselves) (according to personality measures of creative people) but they also have been found to be extrinsically motivated (from outside factors).  Further confusing the issue, some researchers warn that when both extrinsic and intrinsic factors do not coincide these factors create psychological stress and can cause madness.

Most definitions of mental illness are based on symptoms, signs, and some perceived disability.  Even though a convergence of signs, symptoms and disabilities point to a particular mental illness, mental health professionals continue to have difficulty diagnosing illnesses such as personality disorders, schizophrenia, much less more mild or atypical disorders. How then can we establish a link between creativity and mental illness if diagnoses of mental illness vary and are especially difficult to establish in creative people (by virtue of their creativity!)?

The question of finding universal definitions is further complicated when considering the framework of studies on creativity and mental illness. If studies are produced within various disciplines (e.g., behavioral, biological, clinical, cognitive, etc.), the definitions are tweaked accordingly.

There are also different types of creativity to consider used in different domains. Researchers need to recognize these domains and consider them when trying to measure creativity. Some people are creative musically, some mathematically, some verbally, some bodily, and so on.  Within each of these domains, there are differences between creative people.  For example, poets differ from playwrights, who differ from comic writers and artists, designers, and performing artists.  In addition, they all differ in their cognitive patterns.  Considering the above complications and contradictions, it seems that a link between creativity and mental illness is extremely difficult to prove.

Recently, however, encouraging news regarding a universal aspect and definition for creativity can be found in numerous articles on the link between mental illness and creativity.  Many professionals say that the cognitive processes of creative people are unique and follow Janusian processes: that is, “…the ability to resolve antinomies or to accommodate apparently opposite or conflicting traits in one’s self-concept.”  This concept at least partly explains a connection between the Janusian thought process and creative individuals. Janusian thought enables creative people to think and conceive of antithetical and contradictory ideas at the same time.  The literature review on links between mental illness and creativity do not appear to dispute this aspect of creativity.  That is an exciting prospect!  Perhaps, in applying Janusian thought to a literature review on creativity and mental illness, it can bridge the apparent contradictions found in the mass of definitions on creativity and mental illness used by researchers and facilitate a more "creative" approach to and understanding of the subject.

(More to come on this subject.  Feel free to ask me for references!)