Maybe this is why we come up with our best ideas when we sleep? It seems that we are more creative when the lights are turned down low- very low.

Drs. Anna Steidle (University of Stuttgart) and Lioba Werth (University of Hohenheim) just published their treatise in the Journal of Environmenal Psychology. Steidle and Werth had already been working together for some time.   Along with Dr. Hanke, they had reported that bright light conditions amplify executive thinking, which enhances performance on logical (analytical) cognitive tasks, while dim light conditions enhanced legislative style thinking, which amplified creative efforts.

These new series of experiement describe the way we are more creative when the ambient light conditions are low. They devised and performed a series of six experiments to determine these facts.  Their key issues were to determine if darkness would offer individuals freedom from constraints, enabling a global and explorative processing style, which in turn would facilitate creativity

114 undergraduate subjects were grouped in units of 2 or 3, and then placed in a small room (simulating a corporate office). The light was provided from a fixture directly above the desk, with light intensities ranging from 150 lux (dim light) to 500 lux to 1500 lux (very bright conditions). The subjects became acclimated (a 15 minute period) and then were provided standard insight problems (ones employed in creativity research). To obtain the optimal solution, the subjects are required to change their perception of the problem.

After two minutes, the participants then evaluated how “free from constraints” they felt during the experiment (whether they felt externally controlled, and their degree of self-assurance). First, we should note that those in the 150 lux conditions solved more problems correctly than those in the brighter rooms. On top of that, the subjects reported they felt more creative (less externally controlled, more self-assured). Drs. Steidle and Werth attributed the sensation of ‘no external constraints’ made it more possible for the subjects to become creative.

However, this “light” induced creativity (maybe I should call it “dark” induced creativity) required the use of direct illumination. When indirect illumination (luminaire in the ceiling and surrounding walls), as opposed to a “top-down” light over the desk was employed, the subjects did not report a heightened sense of constraint removal. And, did not yield more creative results.

Another experiment involved “priming” the idea of darkness. This experiment required the subjects to describe the experiences of being in the dark- and how they felt under those conditions. After five minutes describing such experience, the subjects were more creative (yes, they drew space aliens!) than those whose initial discussions revolved about being in bright light conditions.

The researchers determined that there were two distinct phases to creativity. The first phase involved idea generation. The second phase required the analysis of those ideas and their implementation. Obviously, the second phase requires analytical thinking. And, that phase was more advantageous when performed under bright light conditions over the dimmer ones.

So, if we are trying to develop a slew of new ideas, that’s when we need to adjust the light downward. (Maybe even turn them off and rely on the dimmer ambient conditions- letting us feel “safer” to expand our horizons, explore various scenarios, and let our imaginations wander.)

Note that these results do NOT contradict those earlier series of experiments I described with a bare light bulb in the room. Because those results relied upon our perception of the symbolic power of the bulb (you know, the “great ideas” cartoons), not the actual illumination afforded by the bulb. So, we should pick one bare bulb over our desk (minimal wattage) to derive our best ideas. And, then work in a different, more widely lit room to discern the best of the ideas and how to implement them.

Share this: