Exploring the Myth of Scientific and Artistic Thinking
This is a stereotype, but many of us have made the assumption that scientists are somewhat tough and less artistic than others. On the other hand, artists are often viewed as less rational than the rest of us. Sometimes described as left versus right – or simply logical thinking versus artistic creativity – the two hemispheres are often seen as polar opposites.
This post was originally published in The Conversation .
Neuroscience has already shown that everyone uses both hemispheres of the brain to perform any task. And although certain patterns of brain activity are sometimes associated with artistic or logical thinking, in fact this does not explain who is good at what and why. This is because the exact interplay of nature and nurture is notoriously difficult to pinpoint. But if we put our brains aside for a while and focus only on documented abilities, is there any evidence to support that logic opposes artistic stereotype?
Psychological research has approached this question by distinguishing between two styles of thinking: convergent and divergent . The emphasis in convergent thinking is on analytical and deductive thinking, for example as measured by IQ tests. However, divergent thinking is more spontaneous and free. It is focused on novelty and is measured by tasks that require us to create multiple solutions to a problem. An example is thinking about new, innovative ways to use familiar objects .
Research from the 1960s showed that convergent thinkers are more likely to be good at science in school. Divergent thinking has been shown to be more common in the arts and humanities .
However, we are increasingly learning that convergent and divergent thinking styles are not necessarily mutually exclusive. In 2011, researchers evaluated 116 undergraduate students in the UK in Arts and Sciences on convergent and divergent thinking and creative problem solving. The study found no difference in ability between art and science groups on any of these criteria. Another study found no significant difference in the rates of discrepancy in thinking of undergraduate students in the arts, natural sciences, and social sciences. However, students in both the humanities and natural sciences considered themselves to be more creative than students in social studies.
Go with the flow
Research has actually revealed significant overlap in cognitive processes that support both scientific and artistic creativity. The psychological concept of “flow”, first introduced by Mihai Csikszentmihali in the 1990s, describes a state of consciousness in which a person is completely absorbed and energized while performing an activity. Flow’s expertise is closely tied to maximum performance in many artistic and creative fields.
There is also significant overlap in the use of visualization and mental imagery in scientific and artistic thinking . All great scientists such as Albert Einstein , Michael Faraday and Nikola Tesla reported that they used mental images to describe their thought processes. Research has also shown that mental imagery plays a central role in the construction and evaluation of many scientific “thought experiments” in which the scientist mentally evaluates the meaning of a hypothesis.
It is perhaps more obvious that such mental imagery also appears strongly in musical composition , painting, and architectural design .
The power of stereotypes
Convergent and divergent thinking abilities are not necessarily innate. Recent research on creative stereotypes has asked people to complete the task of divergent thinking by adopting the point of view of either an “eccentric poet” or a “strict librarian.”
Those who fancied themselves as “eccentric poet” performed significantly better at the creative task than those who presented themselves as “strict librarian,” suggesting that activating stereotypical views of creative thinking could improve or slow down people’s work.
Despite such biases about how logical and unstructured thinking styles are associated with creativity, it is not hard to find examples of people who do not fit the stereotype. Albert Einstein was an avid musician who enjoyed playing the piano and violin, while Nobel Prize winner Richard Feynman worked as an artist under the pseudonym “Ofey”. Musicians Brian May , Brian Cox and Greg Graffin received PhDs .
Artistic case studies, and vice versa, are often touted as unusual. However, psychologists recently conducted a comprehensive review of the extent to which Nobel Prize winners in science, members of the Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences, and members of the US public have reported being involved in arts and crafts . They found that members of the Royal Society and the National Academy of Sciences were almost twice as likely to report involvement in arts and crafts as the general public. Prominent Nobel Prize-winning scientists are almost three times more likely to report such activities.
These results clearly show that the stereotypical view that scientists and other logical thinkers are less artistic or creative is not true. As Einstein himself remarked : “The greatest scientists are also artists.”
Destroying the myth of the scientific and artistic minds | Talk