See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/341609594

Inspiration in the creative process

Chapter · April 2020

CITATIONS READS
9 8,049

4 authors, including:

Todd M Thrash Peter J Varga

William & Mary University of Oxford
56 PUBLICATIONS 8,216 CITATIONS 5 PUBLICATIONS 19 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Todd M Thrash on 24 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 1

Inspiration in the Creative Process

Yi Cui

ycui04@email.wm.edu

William & Mary

Todd M. Thrash

tmthra@wm.edu

William & Mary

Rebecca Shkeyrov

rashkeyrov@email.wm.edu

William & Mary

Peter J. Varga

pvarga@email.wm.edu

William & Mary

This copy is not the copy of record. For the final published version, see:

Cui, Y., Thrash, T. M., Shkeyrov, R., Varga, P. J. (2020). Inspiration in the creative process. In
M. Runco & S. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity, 3rd edition, Vol. 1 (pp. 660-666).
Elsevier, Academic Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-809324-5.23840-6
 2

Abstract

Inspiration plays a central role in the creative process. The research literature on inspiration

developed only recently due to inconsistency in definition and due to the presumption that

inspiration is unimportant relative to effort. The authors introduce a validated conceptualization

of inspiration and review empirical evidence that inspiration predicts creativity, serves a

transmission function, promotes productivity, and complements exertion of effort. Inspiration is

then distinguished from insight and other constructs. Finally, the authors consider the broader

cultural phenomenon of inspiration contagion. Inspiration is infectious, such that inspired writers

inspire their readers, particularly readers high in openness to experience.

Keywords: contagion, creativity, effort, insight, inspiration, motivation, openness to experience,

personality, productivity, transcendence, transmission

 3

Introduction
In his novel Doctor Zhivago, Boris Pasternak described an episode of inspiration as

follows (Pasternak 1961, p. 427):

After two or three stanzas and several images by which he was himself astonished, his

work took possession of him and he experienced the approach of what is usually called

inspiration. At such moments the correlation of forces controlling the artist is, as it were

stood on its head. The ascendency is no longer with the artist or the state of mind which

he is trying to express, but with language, his instrument of expression.

This passage captures the hallmark features of inspiration: passive evocation (“his work

took possession of him”), transcendence (“the ascendency”), and an impulse toward expression

(“language, his instrument of expression”). Echoing other creators before him (Clark 1997;

Harding 1948), Pasternak’s account poses a perennial but controversial thesis: inspiration is a

central force in the creative process.

Traditionally, scholars portrayed inspiration as a mystical phenomenon outside the scope

of science. In ancient Greece, Plato described poetic inspiration as divine madness, a possession

by the Muse that imbues the poet with a vision of beauty and truth (Bremer 2005). By the 17th

century, inspiration was predominantly discussed in the context of religion, where the Bible was

professed to be the gateway to divine revelation (Lowth 1971). In the 18th century, the focus

shifted to unconscious sources of inspiration that are within the person but external to the

conscious self. Scholars no longer defined inspiration as an external source of power, but rather a

natural energy of the mind (e.g., enthusiasm and passion) that exists in a person’s own being

(Ponsford 1986).
 4

Contemporary psychologists often invoke the inspiration concept, yet tend to do so

informally without defining the term. Therefore, usages vary considerably. Some creativity

researchers equate inspiration with creativity. Others use inspiration as a synonym of insight or

illumination. Some psychologists continue to portray inspiration as a supernatural phenomenon

and hence describe it as unscientific and irrelevant to the science of creativity.

Further complicating matters, some scientists have challenged the importance of

inspiration without defining the term clearly. For example, Martindale (2001) endorsed Thomas

Edison's claim that genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration and suggested that no scientist

disputes Edison’s claim. What exactly is it that all scientists are purported to believe? That

perspiration is important, or that inspiration is unimportant, or both? And what do these terms

mean exactly?

It would be imprudent to dismiss the inspiration concept given longstanding interest in

the humanities and the nascent state of the scientific literature on the subject. In an effort to

investigate inspiration in earnest, Thrash and Elliot (2003) proposed a general conceptualization

of inspiration by integrating usages from diverse disciplines. The next section discusses this

domain-general conceptualization and subsequent conceptual developments.

Inspiration as a General Construct

Conceptualization

Core Characteristics

The tripartite conceptualization identifies three core characteristics that define the state

of inspiration: evocation, transcendence, and approach motivation (Thrash & Elliot 2003).

Evocation refers to the passive or receptive manner by which inspiration is elicited; one does not

feel volitionally responsible for becoming inspired, at least not directly, because inspiration is a
 5

response to a stimulating influence. Transcendence refers to an epistemic change in which one

gains awareness of new and better possibilities. This change often, but not always, occurs during

a sudden moment of illumination or insight. Approach motivation refers to the motivational

impetus to bring one’s new vision into fruition. These three core characteristics are necessary

and collectively sufficient to distinguish inspiration from other constructs (Thrash, Moldovan,

Fuller, & Dombrowski 2014). For instance, awe shares with inspiration the qualities of evocation

and transcendence but does not involve arousal of approach motivation.

Component Processes

Whereas the tripartite conceptualization identifies the characteristics of inspiration, the

more recent component process conceptualization identifies its parts: being inspired by and being

inspired to (Thrash & Elliot 2004). Being inspired by occurs when one is moved by the perceived

intrinsic value in an evocative object (e.g., a piece of art, a role model, or a creative idea). Being

inspired to occurs when one becomes motivated to extend, transmit, or actualize the perceived

intrinsic value found in the evocative object. This component process conceptualization is

consistent with and complements the tripartite conceptualization. Being inspired by gives rise to

the characteristics of evocation and transcendence; being inspired to corresponds to approach

motivation.

Consider some implications of the component process conceptualization. First, evocation

and transcendence characterize the same component process and may be viewed as two sides of

the same coin. Transcendence requires evocation. Generally, one cannot transcend one’s

epistemic limits through an act of will; one must be awoken. Second, gaining awareness of better

possibilities and ensuing motivation are distinct processes and therefore do not always co-occur.

For example, a painter enamored of the grace of mother nature (inspired by) may or may not feel
 6

compelled to capture the scene on canvas (inspired to). Similarly, a spontaneous insight may or

may not lead to inspired action. By definition, inspiration is considered present when both the by

and to component processes are activated.

Transmission Model

Most recently, scientists have rounded out the conceptualization of inspiration by

theorizing about the function it serves. Inspiration is theorized to motivate the transmission of

perceived intrinsic value, such that intrinsic value is transmitted from an elicitor object to an

outcome object (Thrash, Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, & Ryan 2010). From a statistical modeling

standpoint, inspiration may be viewed as a mediating (intervening) process. Encounter with a

source of intrinsic value evokes inspiration, which in turn energizes transmission of the intrinsic

value.

Transmission may take any of three forms: replication, actualization, or expression

(Thrash, Moldovan, Fuller, & Dombrowski 2014). Replication occurs when one reproduces the

intrinsically valuable features of an existing elicitor object in a new object. Actualization occurs

when one brings newly imagined possibilities into fruition. Expression occurs when ideas flow

out swiftly, having arrived well-formed in the same sensorimotor modality in which they are to

be expressed. Regardless of which form it takes, inspiration is qualitatively different from most

other human motivations. Most are telic, or goal focused, whereas inspired transmission is

mimetic—i.e., imitative, preservative, or expressive (Thrash in press).

Contrary to the conventional wisdom that inspiration is a purported source or cause of

creative ideas, the transmission model clarifies that inspiration is a response to creative ideas;

inspiration motivates the process of bringing ideas into fruition. Thrash, Maruskin, Cassidy,

Fryer, and Ryan (2010) have confirmed this empirically. There are two benefits of the proposed
 7

model. First, the specified sequence is consistent with scholarship in the humanities, where the

concept of inspiration originated. For instance, theologians distinguish inspiration (the human act

of articulating divine wisdom) from revelation (God’s act of revealing divine wisdom to the

human mind). Second, suggesting that inspiration explains the origins of creative ideas would

not aid scientific understanding. We are better off ascribing the origins of creativity to the kinds

of cognitive, biological, social, and cultural processes that creativity researchers already study.

The motivation triggered by creative insight is a topic that creativity researchers have neglected,

and inspiration fills this gap perfectly.

Operationalization and Validation

Formally, inspiration is an episode that unfolds across time (Thrash, Moldovan, Fuller, &

Dombrowski 2014). Such episodes give rise to state and trait variance. At the state level, one

may think of inspiration as being more or less present for a particular person at a particular

moment. At the trait level, one may think of some people as more prone than others to

experiencing episodes and states of inspiration.

General Trait Inspiration

Thrash and Elliot (2003) developed the Inspiration Scale (IS) to assess inspiration at the

trait level. The eight-item questionnaire consists of two four-item subscales that assess the

frequency and intensity of inspiration. Inspiration frequency and intensity are strongly correlated

(r = .60 to .80), and therefore a combined score is useful as an overall index of trait inspiration.

The IS has excellent psychometric properties. It has the expected two-factor (frequency,

intensity) structure, is internally consistent (Cronbach’s α ≥ .90), has strong test-retest reliability

(r = .77), and has invariant measurement properties across time and across populations.
 8

Thrash and Elliot (2003) found that trait inspiration relates meaningfully to variables

from major theories of personality and motivation. Of the Big 5 personality traits (extraversion,

neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness to experience), inspiration correlates

positively with openness and extraversion. These traits correspond theoretically with the

component processes of being inspired by and being inspired to, respectively. Regarding

motivation correlates, inspiration converges with indicators of approach motivation, intrinsic

motivation, and work-mastery motivation. The relation with approach motivation is consistent

with the tripartite conceptualization; inspired individuals are motivated to bring new and better

ideas into fruition. The relation with intrinsic motivation suggests that inspired activity is

inherently enjoyable and fulfilling. Finally, the relation with work-mastery motivation implies

compatibility between inspiration and “perspiration.” Inspired individuals are more likely, not

less likely, to work hard to achieve task mastery and develop their skills. Other correlates of

inspiration include perceived competence, optimism, self-esteem, nostalgia proneness, positive

affect, and progress toward personal goals (Milyavskaya, Ianakieva, Foxen-Craft, Colantuoni, &

Koestner 2012; Thrash & Elliot 2003; Stephan, Sedikides, Wildschut, Cheung, Routledge &

Arndt 2015).

General State Inspiration

To validate inspiration at the state level, Thrash and Elliot (2004) compared self-narrated

inspiration experiences to narratives of ordinary daily experiences (as a control condition).

Inspiration narratives showed evidence of evocation (e.g., passive self, low volitional control),

transcendence (e.g., meaning, spirituality), and approach motivation (e.g., activated positive

affect [PA]). Thus, the inspiration narratives provided evidence of all three core characteristics of

inspiration, supporting the tripartite conceptualization at the state level of analysis. In addition,
 9

supporting the component process conceptualization, a confirmatory analysis demonstrated that

being inspired by and being inspired to are distinct and converge meaningfully with indicators of

transcendence, evocation, and approach motivation (Thrash & Elliot 2004).

Inspiration was also found to differ meaningfully from its strongest known correlate, PA,

a basic dimension of mood that involves feeling excited and alert (Thrash & Elliot 2004). The

two states involve similar levels of approach motivation, but inspiration involves higher levels of

transcendence and evocation. Additionally, inspiration and PA were found to have different

antecedents. Inspiration was predicted proximally by illumination and distally by openness-

related traits. In contrast, PA was predicted proximally by reward salience (i.e., the opportunity

to get something desired) and distally by approach temperament. These findings suggest that

inspiration and PA serve different functions—transmission and acquisition, respectively.

Inspiration and PA have also been found to occur on different days of the week. Whereas

PA is roughly equally distributed across days of the week, inspiration is more likely to occur on

weekdays than weekends (Thrash 2007). It appears that the TGIF (“thank goodness it’s Friday”)

attitude is not conducive to visitation by the muse.

Inspiration in the Creativity Domain

Conceptualization of Inspiration within the Domain of Creative Activity

Traditionally, as noted, the creativity research literature has not provided a clear

definition of inspiration. The solution proposed by Thrash, Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, and Ryan

(2010) was to apply the general inspiration construct, based on the interdisciplinary literature

review and construct validation research discussed above, to the specific domain of creative

activity. From the perspective of the tripartite conceptualization, the general quality of

transcendence may be replaced by illumination or insight into a creative solution. From the
 10

perspective of the component process conceptualization, inspiration involves being inspired by a

creative possibility specifically rather than intrinsic value generally. From the perspective of the

transmission model, the function of inspiration may be understood as transmission of a creative

idea. That is, inspiration is a response to a creative idea, and it motivates the translation of the

creative idea into a creative product.

In light of this model, perhaps it is not surprising that there has been so much confusion

about how inspiration relates to creativity. Inspiration is an effect of creativity in an idea and a

cause of creativity in a product. This conceptualization removes any hint of unscientific

supernatural influence, while preserving the mimetic spirit of inspired transmission as it has been

described for millennia (Clark 1997).

Because the concept of transmission may seem a bit abstract, the remainder of this

section provides examples of the three forms of transmission as they occur in the context of

creative activity. The replication form of transmission occurs when one perceives intrinsic value

in a preexisting object that calls for re-expression in the form of a creative product. The English

writer Virginia Woolf described an experience in which an encounter with the world awakened a

creative impulse that can be categorized as replication (Haule & Smith 1993, p. 51):

Boats float past, through the red, through the green…Oh I am in love with life…Now

begins to rise in me the familiar rhythm; words that have lain dormant now lift, now toss

their crests, and fall and rise and fall and rise again. I am a poet yes. Surely I am a great

poet.

Actualization involves bringing a creative insight or feeling into fruition. An example of

actualization comes from Romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley (1840):

 11

The mind in creation is as a fading coal, which some invisible influence, like an

inconstant wind, awakens to transitory brightness; this power arises from within...could

this influence be durable in its original purity and force, it is impossible to predict the

greatness of the result; but when composition begins, inspiration is already on the

decline; and the most glorious poetry that has been communicated to the world is

probably a feeble shadow of the original conceptions of the poet.

Expression involves channeling content that flows out spontaneously in the same sensorimotor

modality in which it arises. An example of expression comes from the English poet, Stephen

Spender (Ghiselin 1975, p. 118): “My own experience of inspiration is certainly that of a line or

a phrase or a word or sometimes something still vague, a dim cloud of an idea which I feel must

be condensed into a shower of words.”

Further Validation Specific to the Domain of Creative Activity

Having introduced the general inspiration construct to the creativity literature, Thrash,

Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, and Ryan (2010) supplemented the original construct validation

research with a test of the tripartite conceptualization within the context of creative writing. A

questionnaire about the writing process included two items related to evocation (e.g., “these

ideas came to me unexpectedly or spontaneously”), transcendence (e.g., “I saw some deep truth

when I wrote this”), approach motivation (e.g., “these ideas energized and motivated me”), and

overall inspiration (e.g., “I felt inspired while writing this”). Two additional items assessed effort

(e.g., “I worked hard in writing this”). A principal components analysis yielded two factors,

inspiration and effort. All eight inspiration items converged as indicators of the inspiration

factor, and the two effort items converged as indicators of the effort factor. These findings
 12

support the tripartite conceptualization and establish discriminant validity (Thrash & Elliot

2003).

Empirical Evidence of a Relation between Inspiration and Creativity

A series of studies documented a positive relation between inspiration and creativity

(Thrash & Elliot 2003). In one study, individuals who were more prone to inspiration were found

to describe themselves as more creative. In another study, individuals were found to feel more

creative on days when they are more inspired. In a third study, U.S. patent holders who

experience inspiration more frequently were found to hold more patents. Receipt of patents is an

objective and culturally significant indicator of creativity.

Another set of studies focused on inspiration in the writing process. Across three types of

writing (scientific writing, poetry, fiction), inspiration while writing was found to predict the

creativity of the product, as evaluated by expert coders (Thrash, Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, &

Ryan 2010). These findings were robust when a variety of covariates (e.g., effort) were

controlled.

An and Youn (2018) recently reported that inspiration predicted a variety of indicators of

creativity, including performance on a test of remote associates, as well as originality and

fluency on alternate uses tasks. Ngara (2010) documented the importance of inspiration to Shona

stone sculptors in Zimbabwe.

Evidence of Transmission

Thrash, Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, and Ryan (2010) conducted a longitudinal study and

found that creative ideation tends to precede feelings of inspiration, consistent with the

transmission model. In the poetry and fiction writing studies, they also conducted direct tests of

the transmission model. In both studies, the creativity of a writer’s initial idea (as appraised by
 13

the writer) predicted the creativity of the resulting text (as evaluated by expert judges). This

effect was mediated by inspiration (as reported by the writer). Other positive affective-

motivational states, such as effort, awe, and positive affect, were found not to function as

mediators of transmission, suggesting that the transmission function is unique to inspiration.

In the fiction writing study, the researchers also examined how personality influences the

transmission process. The trait of openness to aesthetics was found to predict the creativity of the

initial idea; approach temperament, in contrast, amplified the effect of idea creativity on

inspiration. Consistent with the component process conceptualization, which posits separate by

and to components, inspiration requires an openness to ideas, as well as a motivational sensitivity

to creative ideas as positive incentives. An and Youn (2018) recently reported that inspiration

mediates between openness to aesthetics and creativity, as well as between art exposure and

creativity.

Other Correlates of Inspiration in the Writing Process

In the poetry writing study, participants who were more inspired reported that their ideas

came to them more fully formed. Their ideas were experienced as arising from unconscious or

spiritual sources rather than from the conscious mind, and their ideas were experienced as

emerging more suddenly and automatically. These quantitative findings are consistent with

qualitative autobiographical accounts throughout history (Harding, 1948).

In their study of fiction writing, Thrash, Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, and Ryan (2010) used

screen capture methods to assess objective writing behaviors and related them to the subjective

experience of inspiration. Individuals who were more inspired wrote longer texts. This effect was

attributable to the fact that inspired writers generated more words, as opposed to deleting fewer

words. Inspiration was related to writing efficiency, such that inspired writers retained a greater
 14

proportion of the words that they typed. Inspired writers were also more productive in that they

generated more retained words relative to how long they worked. Finally, inspired writers spent

more of their time inscribing (adding or deleting words) and less of their time pausing. Another

noteworthy finding was that writers who were more inspired tended to use shorter words.

Together, these findings indicate that inspired writing is highly economical, consistent with the

expressive function of inspiration.

Differentiation from Related Constructs

Inspiration is often confused with insight and is often treated as incompatible with

“perspiration” or effort. The following sections clarify the relation of inspiration to insight and

effort.

Insight vs. Inspiration

Inspiration is sometimes used synonymously with insight to refer to the emergence of

creative ideas in consciousness (Mayer 1992). Insight is a cognitive event, in which an idea

enters awareness. Inspiration, in contrast, is a motivational state that is often triggered by insight.

If insight always resulted in inspiration (i.e., motivation to actualize the insight), or if inspiration

were always preceded by insight, perhaps there would be little reason to distinguish them.

However, insights do not always lead to inspiration. Insight is more likely to lead to inspiration

in individuals who have a stronger approach temperament (Thrash & Elliot 2004; Thrash,

Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, & Ryan 2010). Moreover, inspiration can occur without insight, as

when one is inspired by a relatively stable feature of the external environment (e.g., scenery near

one’s home, or the life of one’s mother). Therefore, insight and inspiration are distinct concepts,

and these terms should not be used interchangeably.

Inspiration vs. Perspiration

 15

It is time to retire the practice of pitting inspiration and effort against one another and

advocating one over the other. Consider the following arguments.

First, inspiration and effort are positively related and compatible with one another rather

than negatively related or mutually exclusive. For instance, individuals more prone to inspiration

tend to be higher in work-mastery motivation, and inspiration and work-mastery motivation tend

to peak on the same days (Thrash & Elliot 2003). Moreover, both lead to higher levels of the

other over time (Thrash & Elliot 2003). Individuals more inspired to write tend to exert more

effort; and, when particular individuals are more inspired, they also tend to exert more effort

(Thrash, Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, & Ryan 2010). Given that inspiration and effort tend to co-

occur and reinforce each other, it does not make sense to claim that genius is 99% the latter and

1% the former.

Second, although inspiration and effort are compatible and co-occur to a degree, they are

distinguishable constructs that uniquely predict different outcomes. Regarding writing quality,

Thrash, Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, and Ryan (2010) found that inspiration predicts qualities that

call for transmission or expression (e.g., creativity), whereas effort predicts qualities that call for

volitional regulation (e.g., technical merit, use of rhyme). Inspiration and effort also relate to

different objective aspects of the writing process. Whereas inspiration is related to the number of

words generated, effort is related to the number of words deleted. Similarly, whereas writers who

are inspired spend more time inscribing and less time pausing, writers who exert effort spend

more time pausing (presumably to think or plan) and less time off task (Thrash, Moldovan,

Fuller, & Dombrowski 2014). In short, inspiration and effort play different and complementary

roles in the creative process.

 16

Third, inspiration, like effort, is a motivational construct. Therefore, the fact that

creativity requires motivation is not a reason to advocate effort over inspiration. In fact, Thrash,

Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, and Ryan (2010) found that inspired individuals spent more time

writing, whereas individuals who exerted more effort did not spend more time writing.

Inspiration and effort both contribute in important ways to making the creative process happen.

Writer-Reader Inspiration Contagion

Plato argued that inspiration is infectious—the muse inspires the poet, the poet inspires

the performer, and the performer inspires the audience. Researchers recently conducted the first

scientific study of inspiration contagion from writers to readers (Thrash, Maruskin, Moldovan,

Oleynick, & Belzak 2017). The core hypothesis was that inspiration may be self-propagating,

because the output of inspired transmission in a writer (e.g., an insightful text) may also function

as input for inspired transmission in a reader. To test this hypothesis, the poems written in a prior

study of inspiration in the writing process were given to a new sample of readers, who were

asked to report on their inspiration in response to each poem. Readers also reported their

personality traits. A panel of expert judges evaluated poem qualities.

Contagion and Mediation

Analyses indicated that writers who were more inspired wrote texts that were more

inspiring to the average reader. This finding provides the first evidence of inspiration contagion.

A mediation analysis documented two qualities of the text through which inspiration is passed

from writer to reader: insightfulness and pleasantness. Writers who were more inspired generated

texts that were more insightful and more pleasant; and insightful and pleasant texts were, in turn,

more inspiring. Analyses also revealed one quality of inspired texts that undermined contagion to
 17

a degree: originality. Inspired writing was more original, and originality (as distinguished from

insightfulness, etc.) tended to undermine reader inspiration.

Moderation by Reader Personality

In this same study, contagion of inspiration was found to be moderated by reader

openness to experience. The effect of writer inspiration on reader inspiration was stronger among

readers higher in openness. As in prior research, this finding highlights the fact that one needs to

be sufficiently receptive to new and better ideas in order to become inspired.

Moderated Mediation

Why are readers higher in openness to experience more prone to inspiration contagion?

Perhaps they are more responsive to the insightfulness of inspired writing, or more responsive to

its pleasantness, or less uninspired by its originality? Moderated mediation analyses supported

this last possibility. Readers high in openness were immune to the undermining of inspiration by

originality, whereas readers low in openness were particularly prone to this undermining.

This finding seems to have external validity. Imagine the lineages of creators, innovators,

and entrepreneurs who shape our culture. They must be comfortable contemplating new ideas in

order to draw inspiration from one another. This finding is also consistent with Plato’s

suggestion that inspiration contagion occurs among poets, performers, and their audiences, who

presumably are high in the trait of openness.

Related Findings

To provide additional evidence of the discriminant validity of inspiration and its

covariates, researchers have also examined mechanisms underlying contagion of positive affect

and awe (Thrash, Maruskin, Moldovan, Oleynick, & Belzak 2017). Like inspiration, positive

affect and awe were found to be infectious, but contagion occurred through somewhat different
 18

sets of mediators. Contagion of positive affect was mediated largely by the pleasantness of the

text, and contagion of awe was mediated largely by sublimity. Together, these findings provide

additional support for the discriminant validity of inspiration and its covariates. Writer effort was

a relatively weak predictor of reader states.

Conclusion
In conclusion, inspiration plays an important role in the creative process, as supported by

the following arguments. First, inspiration is a motivational state that directly fuels the creative

act. Second, inspiration makes creators more efficient and productive. Third, individuals who are

more inspired produce works that are more creative, and a given individual is more creative

when inspired. Finally, inspiration has far-reaching consequences. Inspiration is infectious

because inspired works embody the spirit with which they were created. It is worth considering

whether similar processes occur in other domains, including the contagion of inspiration through

scripture and through online media.

Inspiration and effort are compatible and complementary. The opposite of effort is not

inspiration; it is laziness. The opposite of inspiration is not effort; it is a lack of inspiration. The

ideal is to have a capacity for both inspiration and effort. The former is the fuel that enlivens us

as we translate creative ideas into creative solutions. The latter is a volitional resource that helps

us power through the less appealing aspects of the creative process.

 19

References

An, D., & Youn, N. (2018). The inspirational power of arts on creativity. Journal of Business

Research 85, 467-475. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.10.025

Bremer, J. (2005). Plato's Ion: Philosophy as performance. North Richland Hills, TX: BIBAL

Press.

Clark, T. (1997). The theory of inspiration: Composition as a crisis of subjectivity in romantic

and post-romantic writing. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Ghiselin, B. (ed.) (1975). The creative process. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.

Harding, R. E. M. (1948). An anatomy of inspiration. Cambridge: W. Heffer & Sons.

Haule, M. J. and Smith, H. P. (1993). The waves. Oxford: Blackwell.

Lowth, R. (1971). Lectures on the sacred poetry of the Hebrews. New York: Garland.

Martindale, C. (2001). Oscillations and analogies. American Psychologist 56, 342-345.

Mayer, R. E. (1992). Thinking, problem solving, cognition. New York, NY: WH Freeman/Times

Books/Henry Holtand Co.

Milyavskaya, M., Ianakieva, I., Foxen-Craft, E., Colantuoni, A., & Koestner, R. (2012). Inspired

to get there: The effects of trait and goal inspiration on goal progress. Personality and

Individual Differences 52, 56-60. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.08.031

Ngara, C. (2010). Creative vision and inspiration of Shona stone sculptors. Psychology of

Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 4, 181-192. doi: 10.1037/a0017475

Pasternak, B. (1961). Doctor Zhivago. Translated by M. Hayward and M. Harari. New York,

NY: Fontana Books.

Ponsford, M. (1986). Poetical fury: the religious enthusiasts of the late seventeenth century.

Christian Scholar’s Review 16, 24-39.

 20

Shelley, P. (ed.) (1840). Essays, letters from abroad, translations and fragments by Percy Bysshe

Shelley. London, UK: Edward Moxon.

Stephan, E., Sedikides, C., Wildschut, T., Cheung, W.-Y., Routledge, C., & Arndt, J. (2015).

Nostalgia-evoked inspiration: Mediating mechanisms and motivational

implications. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 41(10), 1395-

1410. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215596985

Thrash, T. M. (2007). Differentiation of the distributions of inspiration and positive affect across

days of the week: an application of logistic multilevel modeling. Oxford Handbook of

Methods in Positive Psychology 8, 515-529.

Thrash, T. M. (in press). The creation and curation of all things worthy: Inspiration as vital force

in persons and cultures. Advances in Motivation Science.

Thrash, T. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2003). Inspiration as a psychological construct. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology 84, 871-889. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.87

Thrash, T. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2004). Inspiration: Core characteristics, component processes,

antecedents and function. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 87, 957-973. doi:

10. 1037/0022-3514.87.6.957

Thrash, T. M., Maruskin, L. A., Cassidy, S. E., Fryer, J. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). Mediating

between the muse and the masses: inspiration and the actualization of creative ideas.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98(3), 469-487.

Thrash, T. M., Maruskin, L. A., Moldovan, E. G., Oleynick, V. C., & Belzak, W. C. (2017).

Writer–reader contagion of inspiration and related states: conditional process analyses

within a cross-classified writer × reader framework. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology 113(3), 466-491. doi:10.1037/pspp0000094

View publication stats

21

Thrash, T. M., Moldovan, E. G., Fuller, A. K., & Dombrowski, J. T. (2014). Inspiration and the

creative process. In Kaufman, J. C. (ed.) Creativity and Mental Illness, pp 343-362.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.