title: Bilingualism and creativity: benefits in convergent thinking come with losses in divergent thinking.
abstract: Bilingualism is commonly assumed to improve creativity but the mechanisms underlying creative acts, and the way these mechanisms are affected by bilingualism, are not very well understood. We hypothesize that learning to master multiple languages drives individuals toward a relatively focused cognitive-control state that exerts strong top-down impact on information processing and creates strong local competition for selection between cognitive codes. Considering the control requirements posed by creativity tasks tapping into convergent and divergent thinking, this predicts that high-proficient bilinguals should outperform low-proficient bilinguals in convergent thinking, while low-proficient bilinguals might be better in divergent thinking. Comparing low- and high-proficient bilinguals on convergent-thinking and divergent-thinking tasks indeed showed a high-proficient bilingual advantage for convergent thinking but a low-proficient bilingual advantage for fluency in divergent thinking. These findings suggest that bilingualism should not be related to "creativity" as a unitary concept but, rather, to the specific processes and mechanisms that underlie creativity.
authors.affiliation: Institute for Psychological Research and Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition, Leiden University Leiden, Netherlands.
authors.forename: Bernhard
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Hommel
authors.forename: Lorenza S
authors.initials: LS
authors.lastname: Colzato
authors.forename: Rico
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Fischer
authors.forename: Ingrid K
authors.initials: IK
authors.lastname: Christoffels
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 1996 Jun;30(3):257-303
references.pmid: 8660786
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1999 Jul;106(3):529-50
references.pmid: 10467897
references.citation: Neuropsychology. 2002 Oct;16(4):562-76
references.pmid: 12382994
references.citation: Brain Res. 2006 Jan 19;1069(1):190-7
references.pmid: 16403463
references.citation: Psychol Aging. 2004 Jun;19(2):290-303
references.pmid: 15222822
references.citation: Neuroscientist. 2008 Aug;14(4):381-95
references.pmid: 18660464
references.citation: Cognition. 2010 Jun;115(3):458-65
references.pmid: 20334856
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Mar;34(2):302-12
references.pmid: 18315407
references.citation: PLoS One. 2010 May 17;5(5):e10670
references.pmid: 20498850
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 May 25;101(21):8174-9
references.pmid: 15148381
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1962 May;69:220-32
references.pmid: 14472013
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2006 Nov;32(6):1341-54
references.pmid: 17087588
references.citation: Appl Neuropsychol. 2000;7(1):17-24
references.pmid: 10800624
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Mar;11(3):118-25
references.pmid: 17276130