In many countries, the COVID-19 pandemic led to a period of lockdown that impacted individuals’ lifestyles, in both professional and personal spheres. New problems and challenges arose, as well as opportunities. Numerous studies have examined the negative effects of lockdown measures, but few have attempted to shine light on the potential positive effects that may come out of these measures. We focused on one particular positive outcome that might have emerged from lockdown: creativity. To this end, this paper compared self-reported professional creativity (Pro-C) and everyday creativity (little-c) before and during lockdown, using a questionnaire-based study conducted on a French sample (N = 1266). We expected participants to be more creative during than prior to lockdown, in both professional and everyday spheres. Regarding Pro-C, we did not see any significant differences between the two comparison points, before and during lockdown. Regarding everyday creativity, we observed a significant increase during lockdown. Furthermore, our results suggest that participants with a lower baseline creativity (before lockdown) benefited more from the situation than those with a higher initial baseline creativity. Our results provide new insights on the impact of lockdown and its positive outcomes. These measures may have inarguably negative consequences on the physical and mental health of many, but their positive impact exists as well.

In many countries, the COVID-19 pandemic led to a period of lockdown that impacted individual’s lifestyles, in both professional and personal spheres. New problems and challenges arose, as well as opportunities. Numerous studies have examined the negative effects of lockdown measures, but few have attempted to shine light on the potential positive effects that may come out of these measures. We focused on one particular positive outcome that might have emerged from lockdown: creativity. To this end, this paper compared professional creativity (Pro-C) and everyday creativity (little-c) before and during lockdown, using a questionnaire-based study conducted on a French sample (N = 1266). We expected participants to be more creative during than prior to lockdown, in both professional and everyday spheres. Regarding professional creativity, we did not see any significant differences between the two comparison points, before and during lockdown. Regarding everyday creativity, we observed a significant increase during lockdown. Furthermore, our results suggest that participants with a lower baseline creativity (before lockdown) benefited more from the situation than those with a higher initial baseline creativity. Our results provide new insights on the impact of lockdown and its positive outcomes. These measures may have inarguably negative consequences on the physical and mental health of many, but their positive impact exists as well.

This article addresses educational challenges posed by the future of work, examining “21st century skills”, their conception, assessment, and valorization. It focuses in particular on key soft skill competencies known as the “4Cs”: creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication. In a section on each C, we provide an overview of assessment at the level of individual performance, before focusing on the less common assessment of systemic support for the development of the 4Cs that can be measured at the institutional level (i.e., in schools, universities, professional training programs, etc.). We then present the process of official assessment and certification known as “labelization”, suggesting it as a solution both for establishing a publicly trusted assessment of the 4Cs and for promoting their cultural valorization. Next, two variations of the “International Institute for Competency Development’s 21st Century Skills Framework” are presented. The first of these comprehensive systems allows for the assessment and labelization of the extent to which development of the 4Cs is supported by a formal educational program or institution. The second assesses informal educational or training experiences, such as playing a game. We discuss the overlap between the 4Cs and the challenges of teaching and institutionalizing them, both of which may be assisted by adopting a dynamic interactionist model of the 4Cs—playfully entitled “Crea-Critical-Collab-ication”—for pedagogical and policy-promotion purposes. We conclude by briefly discussing opportunities presented by future research and new technologies such as artificial intelligence and virtual reality.

Creativity is a crucial 21 st century skill. Thus, finding ways to improve the creative potential of adults is essential. Games are an effective learning tool, and some studies have investigated the effects of video games and role-playing games on creative potential. However, less is known about the potential benefits of board games. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of creative and non-creative board games. The sample consisted of 55 university students. We used a within-subject repeated-measurement design. We assessed creative potential using a divergent thinking task, using fluency and originality as indicators.We controlled the potential effects of mood states and enjoyment. Results indicate a positive effect, for participants with low creative potential, for both types of games.

Creativity is a crucial 21st century skill. Thus, finding ways to improve the creative potential of adults is essential. Games are an effective learning tool, and some studies have investigated the effects of video games and role-playing games on creative potential. However, less is known about the potential benefits of board games. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of creative and non-creative board games. The sample consisted of 55 university students. We used a within-subject repeated-measurement design. We assessed creative potential using a divergent thinking task, using fluency and originality as indicators. We controlled the potential effects of mood states and enjoyment. Results indicate a positive effect, for participants with low creative potential, for both types of games.

Video games play a big part in many individuals’ lives, children and adults alike. Video games have often been viewed as detrimental to an individual’s development and well-being, while encouraging violent behavior. This framing has often overshadowed another facet to video games use, that is the benefits they can and do bring to individuals. Here we contend that playing more to video games can lead to higher creativity, with a focus in adults’ creativity in the workplace. Furthermore, we attempt to explain this link through the mediating effect Psychological Capital (PsyCap). Using a cross-sectional study (N = 370), we found results consistent with these hypotheses. Namely, we observed a full mediation of the link between video games frequency of play and creativity, through PsyCap: playing video games is positively associated with higher PsyCap, which in turn is associated with more creativity in the workplace.

Creativity is a crucial skill in the 21st century. Finding ways to develop and improve it is therefore a major challenge. Games are powerful educational tools, and several early studies have shown the potential of video games and role-playing games to develop creativity. However, the question of the potential of board games is still open. The aim of this paper was therefore to explore this question, through two studies. Using a cross-sectional study (N = 284), the first study showed that the frequency of playing board games was positively correlated with several components of creative potential: divergent thinking, openness to experiences, creative self-efficacy and creative personal identity. Using the experimental method (N = 239), the second study demonstrated that playing creative games - requiring the generation of creative ideas - had a beneficial effect on participants' originality, compared to playing non-creative games and a control condition. This result was observed independently of the participants' baseline creative potential, derived using latent profile analysis. This beneficial effect, obtained after 30 minutes of play, could be used to temporarily improve creative performance, in education or in business.

Are individual-level factors necessary for creativity to occur in the workplace ? Using a novel statistical approach, Necessary Condition Analysis, we tested empirically the hypothesis that individual factors (conative factors, drivers, and creative process engagement) were critical to creativity in the workplace, using a sample of 1384 workers in France. We examined three known conative factors of creativity: openness to experience, creative personality, and creative personal identity. We examined three types of drivers: intrinsic motivation, job self-efficacy and creative self-efficacy. Additionally, we examined creative process engagement. We observed that all conative factors were necessary for creativity, even though they each showed small effect sizes. We found a similar small effect size for creative process engagement. We found that creative self-efficacy was a critical driver for creativity: an employee will not be able to achieve high creative performance if he or she does not have strong confidence about his or her creative capacities, regardless of other factors. However, neither job self-efficacy nor intrinsic motivation proved to be necessary for creativity: their absence can be compensated by other factors. Our findings highlight the need to distinguish between what makes a variable “important” or “necessary”, in the field of creativity and innovation.