Richards R L
Genet Psychol Monogr. 1981 May;103(Second half):261-324.
An age-old belief links creativity with psychopathology. The present paper examines the degree of scientific support for this belief and proposes a scheme for interpretation of the evidence within a framework of multiple causation. First, three major theories are considered; these differ fundamentally regarding whether creative ability and/or motivation may be associated with psychopathology. Next, creativity research involving cognitive, personality, motivational, and environmental variables is examined in this theoretical context. Results do not emerge as definitive for any one type of position. It is suggested instead that the origins of creativity may be heterogeneous; separate explanations may be required for distinct S subgroups, to potentially include subgroups within traditional psychiatric diagnostic categories. Epidemiological research is then considered. Despite methodological shortcomings, this work as a whole appears to support elevated levels of psychopathology among recognized creators compared to the general population, and familial (and perhaps even genetic) patterns of creativity-psychopathology association. Affective psychosis is particularly prominent across studies although design features limit full consideration of other pathologies. Some etiological hypotheses are then indicated within the framework of a proposed, inclusive classification scheme. Finally, considerations for further research are discussed, and the potential importance of continued inquiry in this area is emphasized.
一种由来已久的观点将创造力与精神病理学联系在一起。本文探讨了这一观点的科学依据，并提出了一个在多重因果关系框架内解释证据的方案。首先，考虑了三种主要理论；这些理论在创造力与精神病理学之间是否存在关联的问题上存在根本分歧。接下来，在这一理论背景下审视了涉及认知、人格、动机和环境变量的创造力研究。对于任何一种立场来说，结果都并非确凿无疑。相反，创造力的起源可能是多种多样的；对于不同的亚组可能需要不同的解释，这可能包括传统精神科诊断类别中的亚组。然后考虑了流行病学研究。尽管存在方法学上的缺陷，但总体而言，这项研究似乎支持了与普通人群相比，公认的创造者中精神病理学水平较高，以及创造力与精神病理学之间的家族（甚至可能是遗传）关联模式。尽管研究设计的特点限制了对其他病理学的全面考虑，但情感性精神病在各项研究中尤为突出。然后在一个提议的综合分类方案框架内指出了一些病因假设。最后，讨论了进一步研究的考虑因素，并强调了在这一领域持续探究的潜在重要性。
