Learn more how to embed presentation in WordPress
Copy and paste the code below into your blog post or website
Copy URL
Embed into WordPress (learn more)
Comments
comments powered by DisqusPresentation Slides & Transcript
Presentation Slides & Transcript
Aging and Creative ProductivityIs There an Age Decrement or Not?
Brief history: Antiquity of topicQuételet (1835)Beard (1874)Lehman (1953)Dennis (1966)Simonton (1975, 1988, 1997, 2000, 2004)
Central findings: The typical age curveDescribed by fitting an equation derived from a combinatorial model of the creative process
p (t) = c (e – at – e – bt)where p (t) is productivity at career age t (in years), e is the exponential constant (~ 2.718), a the typical ideation rate for the domain (0 < a < 1), b the typical elaboration rate for the domain (0 < b < 1), c = abm/(b – a), where m is the individual’s creative potential (i.e. maximum number of publications in indefinite lifetime).[N.B.: If a = b, then p (t) = a2mte – at]
Central findings: The typical age curveRapid ascent (decelerating)
Central findings: The typical age curveRapid ascent (decelerating)Single peak
Central findings: The typical age curveRapid ascent (decelerating)Single peakGradual decline (asymptotic)
With correlations with published data between .95 and .99.
Criticisms of findings:Is the age decrement real?
Criticisms of findings:Is the age decrement real?Quality but not quantity?
Criticisms of findings:Is the age decrement real?Quality but not quantity?But high correlation between two
Criticisms of findings:Is the age decrement real?Quality but not quantity?Differential competition?
Criticisms of findings:Is the age decrement real?Quality but not quantity?Differential competition? But survives statistical controls
Criticisms of findings:Is the age decrement real?Quality but not quantity?Differential competition? Aggregation error?
Criticisms of findings:Is the age decrement real?Quality but not quantity?Differential competition? Aggregation error?But persists at individual level
e.g., the career of Thomas EdisonCEdison (t) = 2595(e - .044t - e - .058t)r = .74
However ...
Complicating considerations
Complicating considerationsIndividual differences
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesCreative potential (m in model)
In fact, 1) cross-sectional variation always appreciably greater than longitudinal variation2) the lower an individual’s productivity the more random the longitudinal distribution becomes
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesCreative potentialAge at career onset (i.e., chronological age at t = 0 in model)
Hence, arises a two-dimensional typology of career trajectories
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relation
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationThe equal-odds rule
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationThe equal-odds ruleCareer landmarks
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationThe equal-odds ruleCareer landmarks: First major contribution (f)
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationThe equal-odds ruleCareer landmarks: First major contribution (f)Single best contribution (b)
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationThe equal-odds ruleCareer landmarks: First major contribution (f)Single best contribution (b)Last major contribution(l)
Journalist Alexander Woolcott reporting on G. B. Shaw:“At 83 Shaw’s mind was perhaps not quite as good as it used to be. It was still better than anyone else’s.”
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationInter-domain contrasts (a and b in model)
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationInter-domain contrasts Differential decrements (0-100%)
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationInter-domain contrasts Differential peaks and decrements Differential landmark placements
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationInter-domain contrasts Impact of extraneous factors
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationInter-domain contrasts Impact of extraneous factorsNegative influences
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationInter-domain contrasts Impact of extraneous factorsNegative influences: e.g., war
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationInter-domain contrasts Impact of extraneous factorsNegative influencesPositive influences
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationInter-domain contrasts Impact of extraneous factorsNegative influences Positive influences: e.g., disciplinary networks
Complicating considerationsIndividual differencesQuantity-quality relationInter-domain contrasts Impact of extraneous factorsNegative influences Positive influences: e.g., disciplinary networkscross-fertilization
Hence, the creative productivity within any given career will show major departures from expectation, some positive and some negative
Three Main ConclusionsAge decrement a highly predictable phenomenon at the aggregate levelAge decrement far more unpredictable at the individual levelAge decrement probably less due to aging per se than to other factors both intrinsic and extrinsic to the creative process
Hence, the possibility of late-life creative productivity increments;e.g., Michel-Eugène Chevreul (1786-1889)
ReferencesSimonton, D. K. (1984). Creative productivity and age: A mathematical model based on a two-step cognitive process. Developmental Review, 4, 77-111. Simonton, D. K. (1989). Age and creative productivity: Nonlinear estimation of an information-processing model. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 29, 23-37.
ReferencesSimonton, D. K. (1991). Career landmarks in science: Individual differences and interdisciplinary contrasts. Developmental Psychology, 27, 119-130.Simonton, D. K. (1997). Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks. Psychological Review, 104, 66-89.Simonton, D. K. (2004). Creativity in science: Chance, logic, genius, and zeitgeist. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
More Presentations
By seirenewable
Published Oct 15, 2013