Difference is relative: How neurodiversity contributes to creativity

Research into the brain through neuroscience is showing us that past characterisations of intelligence and creativity have been oversimplified and exclusionary. Human difference, especially around cognitive and creative abilities has too often been described using a binary framework: ‘creative’ vs. ‘non-creative’ people.

Multiple intelligences

Nearly four decades ago, researchers into creativity and learning noted that generalising labels are insufficient to describe learning abilities. Our understanding of creative diversity needed to shift-- big time. One characterisation of these differences was through the concept of multiple intelligences, which asserted that individuals have differing levels of ability depending on the task. Some of us are better at using language(s) or working with mathematical principles, while others are more attuned to social-emotional interactions or have greater visual-spatial ability. Each ‘intelligence’ has distinct configurations of knowledge and behaviours that most of us can develop, but our starting points depend on our intuitive ability in specific domains.

Creativity: a sum of parts

Neuroscientific research has since been able to affirm and challenge theories about differences in human aptitudes, arriving at the concept of neurodiversity: an understanding that our neural behaviours encompass a broader range of performance. Examples of neurodivergent individuals include those with autism, dyslexia, brain trauma or some forms of mental illness. Neurodivergent brains perceive and operate differently, sometimes revolutionising prevailing norms. One need only consider game-changing scientists, artists and inventors the likes of Galileo, Mozart and Tesla, each of whom demonstrated neurodivergent traits. It is notable that Steve Jobs was dyslexic, and that Greta Thunberg has Asperger’s syndrome. Neurodiversity as a concept reframes our perceptions of those whose brain function operates differently by including them within the spectrum of creative cognition rather than treating them as having a form of disability.

Neuroplasticity

Historically, creativity in neurodivergent individuals was thought to be a form of aberrant genius, connecting inspiration to melancholia or eccentricity. While creative types were described as suffering from ‘divine madness’ in Plato’s time, the 19^th century Romantics celebrated the artist as a rebellious ‘savant’. Then, the perception of creative innovation was radically different and speculative. Recent neuroscientific research, however, has been better able to identify differences in neural patterning when performing both cognitive and creative tasks. We are long past defining creative cognition through right brain/left brain dominance. Multiple regions of the brain are activated or limited in concert with each other to make creative flow possible. Some areas of the brain, such as pattern recognition in the left hemisphere and novelty in the right hemisphere can now be seen as lateralized, with connectivity between the distinct parts.

Interestingly, many individuals on the autism spectrum and those who have suffered certain types of brain trauma have developed enhanced creative capacity. Similarly, many learners with dyslexia excel in the visual domain, to the same degree of cognitive complexity as others do with language  (Carson, 2019). Although the research into neuroplasticity is ongoing, the ability of the brain to develop or ‘rewire’ itself in nearly infinite configurations of networks introduces new possibilities for understanding and appreciating the diversity of human brain function. Over time, we will be able to mobilise more research about this adaptive capacity in the brain, forming measurable learning strategies.

What do these new understandings of neurodiversity mean for creativity?

Regardless of training, creativity in one domain does not guarantee creative ability across the board. Stand-up comedians aren’t necessarily effective dramatic actors, sculptors may not excel at digital art. There are exceptions: just as it’s true that some ‘natural’ athletes can transition seamlessly from one sport to another, some individuals are comparably proficient in both visual and performing arts. In the main, however, we recognise that individual creative ability varies greatly depending on individual pursuit. The good news is neuroscience is collaborating with creativity research to develop training exercises that will develop both generic and domain-specific creative capacity. By expanding understanding and celebrating neurodivergent aptitudes within individuals, creativity transcends a fixed creative/non-creative binary and becomes accessible to everybody, regardless of inherent ability.

Thinking ahead: a more inclusive mindset

Organisational culture is transforming too, implementing practices which benefit from neurodivergent approaches. By intentionally configuring neurodiverse teams, creative and innovative solutions become more probable than with a team of like-minded individuals. Neurodiverse individuals offer unique insights that can complement existing organisational structures and procedures.

Whether in learning institutions or business organisations, neurodiversity offers a more inclusive mindset for considering the scope of human ability. Neurodivergent thinkers drive a need for new approaches to creativity. From recruiting strategies to shifts in workplace culture, removing barriers to neurodiversity achieves a moral purpose and mobilises untapped potential. Creativity happens differently for everyone. Welcoming and supporting neurodiverse individuals offers benefits that will only enhance an organisation’s vision, mission and values.

About the author