Toward a General Factor of Disruptiveness: The Most Novel Creative Objects Tend to Be the Least Valuable and Feasible Ones
Talking about creative productions seems to be a common activity in both everyday language and the language used by researchers. The use of the term creative implies the existence of a creativity variable that allows for comparisons between different productions. According to the standard definition of creativity (Runco & Jaeger, 2012), to be creative, a production must have both value and novelty. So far, empirical psychometric studies looking for a creativity variable with these two dimensions have shown that value and novelty are not only independent, but are also only weakly correlated. This empirical evidence, which has been widely replicated in the literature, indicates that, according to psychometric rules, it is impossible and indeed paradoxical to talk about the creativity of a production. In the present study, we sought to replicate these results by including a new dimension that has mostly been omitted in psychometric studies of creativity dimensions, namely feasibility. Results (N = 662 ideas) tended to show that this new dimension, negatively correlated with novelty and positively correlated with value, led to a second-order general factor of creativity. We named the axis formed by these three dimensions disruptiveness in order to underline the subtle difference from what would be an axis of creativity. The theoretical and applied implications of these results are discussed.