Individual differences in trait creativity moderate the state-level mood-creativity relationship

PLoS One. 2020 Aug 3;15(8):e0236987. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236987. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

The relationship between mood states and state creativity has long been investigated. Exploring individual differences may provide additional important information to further our understanding of the complex mood-creativity relationship. The present study explored the state-level mood-creativity relationship from the perspective of trait creativity. We employed the experience sampling method (ESM) in a cohort of 56 college students over five consecutive days. The participants reported their state creativity on originality and usefulness dimensions at six random points between 9:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m., along with a 10-item concurrent mood state report. Their trait creativity was measured by the Guildford Alternative Uses Test (AUT) and the Remote Associates Test (RAT). We found moderating effects of the participants' trait creativity on their state-level mood-creativity relationship. Specifically, whereas the positive correlation between positive mood state and originality of state creativity was stronger for the participants with higher AUT flexibility scores, stronger positive correlations between negative mood state and originality of state creativity were observed for individuals with higher AUT originality scores. Our findings provide evidence in support of introducing individual differences to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the mood-creativity link. The results could be of practical value, in developing individualized mood state regulation strategies for promoting state creativity.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Affect / physiology*
  • China
  • Creativity*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Individuality*
  • Male
  • Students / psychology
  • Young Adult

Grants and funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number: 61977041 to DZ and U1736220 to DZ and FW), the National Key Research and Development Plan (grant number: 2016YFB1001200 to DZ), and the National Social Science Foundation of China (grant number: 17ZDA323 to DZ). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.