In the last installment of this column we considered how group creativity can go very wrong even when all the neurobiological pieces are working properly. In this installment we will discuss how aging, a normal and inevitable consequence of living, affects these neurobiological pieces and in turn might affect creativity. The effect of age on creativity is particularly salient at this time when the most rapidly growing age demographic of our society is the oldest old. We see this in and around us: Baby boomers are reaching retirement, medical advances are reducing the rate of disease-related deaths, physicians are aging, we neurologists are aging.
There are many cognitive manifestations of aging. In a cognitive aging study of the Arizona APOE Cohort that I led (Neurology 2011;76:1383-8), neuropsychological measures reflecting different components of creativity tended to decline with age (as seen in the accompanying table). These are the same components of the model of creativity that I introduced in a previous column. The cohort included 351 healthy individuals aged 21-81 years (two-thirds were women), with a mean educational level of nearly 16 years, who completed the Iowa Gambling Task and a battery of other tests.
The data in the table are presented for illustration purposes only, and do not constitute a thorough analysis of all aspects of creativity, but our findings do reflect those that others have reported as well in studies focused on creativity. With increasing age comes greater wisdom (as reflected by higher scores on tests of general knowledge and vocabulary not shown above), greater accumulated assets both materially and in terms of social standing (reflected in the Community ladder above). On the other hand, there appears to be a decline in motivational intensity and reward-based learning caused by age-related alterations in reward systems (Brain Res. Bull. 2005;67:382-90). Senescent changes in the neural machinery of perception, executive function, and dexterity cause these skills to decline even more (Am. J. Psychiatry 1998;155:344-9), and if our data is at all representative, it is in the area of action – including both strategic formulation and dexterous execution – that the biggest declines occur. Temperament, on the other hand, seems to be relatively stable, showing little change with age.
What is the net effect of increasing knowledge, assets, and social standing coupled with declining motivation, perception, and execution on individual creativity? Studies of creative productivity over a lifetime have revealed that noteworthy achievements tend to remain in constant proportion to one’s total creative output (Psychol. Bull. 1988;104:251-67). That is, the more one creates, the more noteworthy creations are produced. Even in old age, this ratio generally remains constant. What changes is the total output. Over the course of a lifetime, there is a ramp-up period leading eventually to a maximally productive phase, typically from one’s late 30s to their late 40s or early 50s (depending in part on the field of creative endeavor), and then a declining phase (not as steep as the initial ramp-up phase). The later years are also vulnerable to external circumstances such as illness and family problems. So the good news is that one’s ability to generate good work does not decline with age. The bad news is that total productivity does decline, and so too therefore does the total number of noteworthy contributions. This has been demonstrated in a variety of creative arenas including the arts and sciences.