Agreed with the first-posted comment that the online formatting of this article into multiple pages is very annoying. That said, the article is written by one of the best researchers on the subject, and is chock full of thoughtful discussion of the primary research conducted by others over the last century. It's well worth the annoying read.
"Although intelligence is not correlated with creativity in the upper levels of the intelligence distribution, a certain minimal level of intelligence is required for exceptional creativity (Simonton, 2000). That threshold level is in the gifted range, roughly equivalent to an IQ 120. Creators do not necessarily have genius-grade IQs, but they do have sufficient information processing power to select, develop, elaborate and refine original ideas into creative contributions."
So why am I being downvoted? For complaining that there isn't a way to view a full-length version of the article (which is important for slow mobile devices) and about the entirely useless "print this page" functinality on the site? Fine, I'll keep my thoughts to myself. I'll also come to your house and skin your puppy, because, you know, I'm a genius.
> "Print This Page". Cute. I am so not clicking through half a dozen pages on this slow-loading iPhone.
Clicking six times on an iPhone is way easier than typing that long-winded sentence with full punctuation and capitalization on an iPhone, wouldn't you say?
"Although intelligence is not correlated with creativity in the upper levels of the intelligence distribution, a certain minimal level of intelligence is required for exceptional creativity (Simonton, 2000). That threshold level is in the gifted range, roughly equivalent to an IQ 120. Creators do not necessarily have genius-grade IQs, but they do have sufficient information processing power to select, develop, elaborate and refine original ideas into creative contributions."