I agree. The article has to lack data as that's the reason for why we are so impressed by creativity. 'True creativity' (as opposed to opposed to the shallow "

I agree. The article has to lack data as that's the reason for why we are so impressed by creativity. 'True creativity' (as opposed to opposed to the shallow "We have to think outside the box" type of creativity) can not be measured by definition. That's what makes it so intriguing! As soon as something can be fully measured it becomes debatable whether it is still a creative effort or not. If you accept what I wrote above then the headline of the article appears even more bonkers: How can something that is so complex that we can not fully measure it (yet) be caused (mostly) by a one-dimensional factor? I mean, sure, you could find a single factor if it is very vague one but that's not helpful. I.e. I could say: Being alive is a key factor for creativity. What's more, social rejection is surely also a key factor for becoming a dull person who watches TV all day.