6 ms·

Creativity Predicts a Longer Life

37 points by technology 14y ago

tokenadult 14y ago
It's important to note that this is a preliminary finding, based on weak evidence, and that "creativity" is not necessarily the core concept of "openness" in the OCEAN five-factor model of human personality. The "big five" personality model is still developing, http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~johnlab/2008chapter.pdf http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~johnlab/2008chapter.pdf and "openness" is the most poorly defined of the five personality factors in the model. It is plain, on stronger and better replicated evidence, that the factor "neuroticism" is a risk factor for many bad outcomes, including shorter lifespan. Some investigators have proposed specific interventions to reduce neuroticism in the general population. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2792076/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2792076/ The relationship of "openness" to creativity is still debatable, and still more debatable is the relationship of openness (or creativity) to mortality. I should also note that the study described in the article kindly submitted here doesn't allow for the causal inference, or verify the proposed mechanism, made in the quoted statements in the article.
tlb 14y ago
That word "Predicts" is dangerous. It strongly suggests causation, though it only reflects a statistical correlation. Many external causes are known to negatively effect both creativity and life-span. Most chronic illnesses reduce both. Alcoholism reduces both. Genetic disorders such as Down's syndrome or Huntington's reduce both. Given many known mechanisms for external factors causing both factors in a correlation study, and only speculative mechanisms for how one factor causes the other, even hinting at causation is bad journalism.
- dllthomas 14y ago
  > That word "Predicts" is dangerous. It strongly suggests causation, though it only reflects a statistical correlation. REALLY? What do you WANT them to say? Accuracy of a prediction implies some sort of causal relationship, but not a direct one by any means. All of the thing you suggest are causal links. A genetic disorder causing a decrease in both lifespan and creativity is causation. "A predicts B" does NOT AT ALL imply "A causes B" - tinsel, wreaths, and increased toy buying predict Christmas.
  - tlb 14y ago
    "is correlated with". If you're not convinced that the reporters are trying to suggest causation with the word "predicts", try swapping the two terms. Would they write a headline, "Longer life predicts creativity"?
    - meric 14y ago
      If the statistics show that creative people are correlated with longer life, but that longer life is only correlated with creativity if factors X, Y, Z are also present (but not necessarily just X, Y, Z without creativity), then it would be correct to say "creativity predicts longer life" but not "longer life predicts creativity"; while not implying any causation. Also it could be that some long living people are creative and all creative people are long living; while creative still not being a cause of the longer life. (let's say all creative people eat peanut butter sandwiches, and it was infact the peanut butter that caused a longer life.) "The weatherman predicts the weather". Are you saying in this sentence, causation is implicitly referenced? ...
    - dllthomas 14y ago
      It doesn't work the other way because of temporal constraints, not causality. A person's creativity happens before their longevity is determined. Similarly, you wouldn't write "election predicts poll results." That said, if I was looking at records of the deceased and first discovered a person's age at time of death, then I could use the correlation to predict that I am likely to further find that they were creative.
  - lutusp 14y ago
    >> That word "Predicts" is dangerous. It strongly suggests causation, though it only reflects a statistical correlation. > REALLY? Yes -- really. It is very misleading. > What do you WANT them to say? Replace "predicts" with "is correlated with." That's the meaning of the work being described -- a correlation between A and B has been observed. But this doesn't mean that A predicts B, or A causes B, or even that B causes A. Both may result from some unevaluated cause C. Science is not description, it is explanation. The linked article describes, and then draws a conclusion that goes far beyond the description. But it never presumes to explain why the author's conclusion might be so. > "A predicts B" does NOT AT ALL imply "A causes B" It certainly does. Rain predicts puddles. Puddles do not predict rain, they follow from it.
- paganel 14y ago
  > Most chronic illnesses reduce both. Alcoholism reduces both Guys like Hafiz and Hemingway were both alcoholics by today's standards, and thank God for that and for their creativity
- meric 14y ago
  In statistics, which this is, a "prediction" is an outcome that the statistics suggests would happen. The "cause" isn't involved. A predicts B, means that having factor A means factor B is likely present also. And that is that. There is no suggestion of causation. This is a science magazine, the reporter would have read a lot of papers over his career, and because "A predicts B" is such a common use to denote correlation in statistics, I wouldn't blame him/her.
paganel 14y ago
Maybe we shouldn't be so scared about dying and instead try to make the most out of our (supposedely short) lives. After all, a guy like Alexander the Great was only in his early 30s when he had already conquered half of the known-world (yes, this is a Euro-centrist view)
- j_baker 14y ago
  It seems fairly simple to me: I like being alive. Therefore, I want to live longer. What reason do I have to stop?
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
lutusp 14y ago
> Creativity Predicts a Longer Life False! Creativity is correlated with a longer life. > A large body of research links neuroticism with poorer health and conscientiousness with superior health. [Emphasis added.] There's that word again -- "links". Neuroticism is not linked with poorer health, it is correlated with poorer health. And so forth -- frankly, the linked article is a piece of pseudoscientific trash. Psychologists would be so much happier if there simply wasn't any science at all, rather than the kind they practice -- the kind that avoids control groups, experimental discipline, can't seem to express correlations accurately, and draw nonsense conclusions like this: "...the results suggest that practicing creative-thinking techniques could improve anyone's health by lowering stress and exercising the brain." Without a control group, without a disciplined, prospective, double-blind, replicated study, the "results" suggest no such thing. Isn't obvious that creative thinking may be an effect, not a cause, of good physical and mental health? Reading articles like this, I begin to suspect that in school, psychologists are told, "say the word 'science' a lot -- that's how you do science."
- meric 14y ago
  Predict is something you can do if something is "correlated"! Having creativity is highly correlated with a longer life, therefore, creativity can be used as a factor to predict whether a person has longer life. It doesn't mean that if you get more creative you live longer, just that if you look at the existing population, the more creative people are likely to live longer also. See? Search for this phrase in this paper "We show how simple image statistics can be used to predict the presence and absence of objects in the scene before exploring the image." http://cvcl.mit.edu/papers/TorralbaOliva03.pdf http://cvcl.mit.edu/papers/TorralbaOliva03.pdf You can see how "predict" is a word for an action you can take if something is correlated.
  - lutusp 14y ago
    > Predict is something you can do if something is "correlated"! This is false. I saw a puddle, so I predict that the puddle will cause rain. See the problem? You can't "predict" until you have a cause-effect relationship. A correlation is not a cause-effect relationship: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_caus... A quote: "The opposite belief, correlation proves causation, is a logical fallacy by which two events that occur together are claimed to have a cause-and-effect relationship. The fallacy is also known as cum hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin for "with this, therefore because of this") and false cause. It is a common fallacy in which it is assumed that, because two things or events occur together, one must be the cause of the other." > You can see how "predict" is a word for an action you can take if something is correlated. You may be able to do that. Scientists require evidence.

37 points by technology 14y ago

It's important to note that this is a preliminary finding, based on weak evidence, and that "creativity" is not necessarily the core concept of "openness" in the OCEAN five-factor model of human personality. The "big five" personality model is still developing, http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~johnlab/2008chapter.pdf http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~johnlab/2008chapter.pdf and "openness" is the most poorly defined of the five personality factors in the model. It is plain, on stronger and better replicated evidence, that the factor "neuroticism" is a risk factor for many bad outcomes, including shorter lifespan. Some investigators have proposed specific interventions to reduce neuroticism in the general population. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2792076/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2792076/ The relationship of "openness" to creativity is still debatable, and still more debatable is the relationship of openness (or creativity) to mortality. I should also note that the study described in the article kindly submitted here doesn't allow for the causal inference, or verify the proposed mechanism, made in the quoted statements in the article.

tlb 14y ago

That word "Predicts" is dangerous. It strongly suggests causation, though it only reflects a statistical correlation. Many external causes are known to negatively effect both creativity and life-span. Most chronic illnesses reduce both. Alcoholism reduces both. Genetic disorders such as Down's syndrome or Huntington's reduce both. Given many known mechanisms for external factors causing both factors in a correlation study, and only speculative mechanisms for how one factor causes the other, even hinting at causation is bad journalism.

dllthomas 14y ago
> That word "Predicts" is dangerous. It strongly suggests causation, though it only reflects a statistical correlation. REALLY? What do you WANT them to say? Accuracy of a prediction implies some sort of causal relationship, but not a direct one by any means. All of the thing you suggest are causal links. A genetic disorder causing a decrease in both lifespan and creativity is causation. "A predicts B" does NOT AT ALL imply "A causes B" - tinsel, wreaths, and increased toy buying predict Christmas.
- tlb 14y ago
  "is correlated with". If you're not convinced that the reporters are trying to suggest causation with the word "predicts", try swapping the two terms. Would they write a headline, "Longer life predicts creativity"?
  - meric 14y ago
    If the statistics show that creative people are correlated with longer life, but that longer life is only correlated with creativity if factors X, Y, Z are also present (but not necessarily just X, Y, Z without creativity), then it would be correct to say "creativity predicts longer life" but not "longer life predicts creativity"; while not implying any causation. Also it could be that some long living people are creative and all creative people are long living; while creative still not being a cause of the longer life. (let's say all creative people eat peanut butter sandwiches, and it was infact the peanut butter that caused a longer life.) "The weatherman predicts the weather". Are you saying in this sentence, causation is implicitly referenced? ...
  - dllthomas 14y ago
    It doesn't work the other way because of temporal constraints, not causality. A person's creativity happens before their longevity is determined. Similarly, you wouldn't write "election predicts poll results." That said, if I was looking at records of the deceased and first discovered a person's age at time of death, then I could use the correlation to predict that I am likely to further find that they were creative.
- lutusp 14y ago
  >> That word "Predicts" is dangerous. It strongly suggests causation, though it only reflects a statistical correlation. > REALLY? Yes -- really. It is very misleading. > What do you WANT them to say? Replace "predicts" with "is correlated with." That's the meaning of the work being described -- a correlation between A and B has been observed. But this doesn't mean that A predicts B, or A causes B, or even that B causes A. Both may result from some unevaluated cause C. Science is not description, it is explanation. The linked article describes, and then draws a conclusion that goes far beyond the description. But it never presumes to explain why the author's conclusion might be so. > "A predicts B" does NOT AT ALL imply "A causes B" It certainly does. Rain predicts puddles. Puddles do not predict rain, they follow from it.
paganel 14y ago
> Most chronic illnesses reduce both. Alcoholism reduces both Guys like Hafiz and Hemingway were both alcoholics by today's standards, and thank God for that and for their creativity
meric 14y ago
In statistics, which this is, a "prediction" is an outcome that the statistics suggests would happen. The "cause" isn't involved. A predicts B, means that having factor A means factor B is likely present also. And that is that. There is no suggestion of causation. This is a science magazine, the reporter would have read a lot of papers over his career, and because "A predicts B" is such a common use to denote correlation in statistics, I wouldn't blame him/her.

paganel 14y ago

Maybe we shouldn't be so scared about dying and instead try to make the most out of our (supposedely short) lives. After all, a guy like Alexander the Great was only in his early 30s when he had already conquered half of the known-world (yes, this is a Euro-centrist view)

j_baker 14y ago
It seems fairly simple to me: I like being alive. Therefore, I want to live longer. What reason do I have to stop?

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

lutusp 14y ago

> Creativity Predicts a Longer Life False! Creativity is correlated with a longer life. > A large body of research links neuroticism with poorer health and conscientiousness with superior health. [Emphasis added.] There's that word again -- "links". Neuroticism is not linked with poorer health, it is correlated with poorer health. And so forth -- frankly, the linked article is a piece of pseudoscientific trash. Psychologists would be so much happier if there simply wasn't any science at all, rather than the kind they practice -- the kind that avoids control groups, experimental discipline, can't seem to express correlations accurately, and draw nonsense conclusions like this: "...the results suggest that practicing creative-thinking techniques could improve anyone's health by lowering stress and exercising the brain." Without a control group, without a disciplined, prospective, double-blind, replicated study, the "results" suggest no such thing. Isn't obvious that creative thinking may be an effect, not a cause, of good physical and mental health? Reading articles like this, I begin to suspect that in school, psychologists are told, "say the word 'science' a lot -- that's how you do science."

meric 14y ago
Predict is something you can do if something is "correlated"! Having creativity is highly correlated with a longer life, therefore, creativity can be used as a factor to predict whether a person has longer life. It doesn't mean that if you get more creative you live longer, just that if you look at the existing population, the more creative people are likely to live longer also. See? Search for this phrase in this paper "We show how simple image statistics can be used to predict the presence and absence of objects in the scene before exploring the image." http://cvcl.mit.edu/papers/TorralbaOliva03.pdf http://cvcl.mit.edu/papers/TorralbaOliva03.pdf You can see how "predict" is a word for an action you can take if something is correlated.
- lutusp 14y ago
  > Predict is something you can do if something is "correlated"! This is false. I saw a puddle, so I predict that the puddle will cause rain. See the problem? You can't "predict" until you have a cause-effect relationship. A correlation is not a cause-effect relationship: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_caus... A quote: "The opposite belief, correlation proves causation, is a logical fallacy by which two events that occur together are claimed to have a cause-and-effect relationship. The fallacy is also known as cum hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin for "with this, therefore because of this") and false cause. It is a common fallacy in which it is assumed that, because two things or events occur together, one must be the cause of the other." > You can see how "predict" is a word for an action you can take if something is correlated. You may be able to do that. Scientists require evidence.