ArticleFrontiers in cognition2026
Creativity beyond the isolated mind: toward a biopsychosocial and sociotechnical perspective.
Article in Frontiers in cognition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Creativity has traditionally been studied at different levels of analysis, focusing on neural mechanisms, cognitive abilities, individual characteristics, or environmental influences. Although each approach has provided important insights, none alone fully explains why the same factors may support creativity under some conditions but constrain it under others, or why creative potential is expressed differently across individuals, domains, developmental stages, and sociocultural contexts. Building on biopsychosocial, systemic, sociocultural, and interactionist approaches, this Perspective conceptualizes creativity as a multilevel, developmentally situated, and sociotechnically mediated phenomenon emerging from interactions among biological, psychological, sociocultural, and technological processes. The central proposition is that no single factor is inherently creative or uncreative; its contribution depends on how it interacts with other factors under particular conditions. The framework therefore shifts the unit of explanation from isolated determinants to changing configurations of relationships across levels. Four mechanisms, i.e., constraint, affordance, regulation, and feedback/selection, describe how these relationships may develop over time and generate testable predictions concerning differences across individuals, stages of the creative process, developmental periods, and levels of analysis. Evidence from neuroscience, psychology, sociocultural research, education, organizational studies, and generative artificial intelligence illustrates how apparently contradictory findings may partly reflect these differences. Methodologically, the framework calls for greater conceptual and measurement specificity and for ecological, longitudinal, multilevel, and interdisciplinary research. Rather than asking which factors universally increase creativity, it asks for whom, under which conditions, at which stage and level, and over what timescale particular factors support or constrain creative activity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.