In what ways do you think sociohistorical context may have influenced the investigation of creativity?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

There's a lot of room for speculation in answering this question and not much guidance from the text. Answers should demonstrate students' understanding of what sociohistorical influence means, i.e., that the zeitgeist, including widespread social, political, and economic assumptions, influences the questions that are asked and interpretations of findings. Some examples of ideas that students might try to develop include the following.

A common assumption has been that creativity is usually manifested in sudden bursts of insight. An implication of these assumptions is that creativity is largely beyond the control of individuals and that one cannot therefore be held responsible for not being creative. These beliefs have inspired studies demonstrating that, in fact, creative achievements generally are extensions of existing ideas and they come from a person's deep well of experience in a particular area. This view may not sit well with today's impatient generation.

There has long been a common belief that high levels of creativity are usually accompanied by psychological disorders. Some research supports this belief, in that truly exceptional creativity may be correlated with depression. Could it be that, because of long-held stereotypes about creative people, individuals who show creativity are treated by others in our society in ways that contribute to those disorders?