St Edward's Academic Review 2025

ST EDWARD’S, OXFORD

In summary, the biological mechanisms of dyslexia, from the neurons and brain architecture of dyslexics, to the physical and mechanical properties of their visual systems, do seem to support a potential for increased creative and artistic abilities.

imaging to demonstrate that the dyslexic brain constantly uses more right brain structures when processing imagery (Shaywitz, Mody, & Shaywitz, 2006). This could demonstrate that dyslexics see a more detailed and holistic image in comparison to non-dyslexics. Interestingly, data shows that the brains of dyslexic children are symmetrical between the dominant left side and the non-dominant right side, the right side being more pivotal in artistic creativity (Chakravarty, 2009). This is further supported by the fact that when brain injury occurs in the left brain parietal lobe, an increase in overall creativity can frequently be seen, and there are even reports of individuals acquiring musical talents that they have not previously possessed (Mernin, 2020). In this situation, it is hypothesised that the dominant left brain has an inhibitory effect on the more creative right brain. When the damage occurs, that inhibition is removed and creativity is allowed to flow. This understanding of neurobiology potentially helps explain why dyslexic individuals may be more artistically creative – it is linked to the biology of their symmetrical brain. Building on this observation, Matthew Schneps (2014), an astrophysicist with dyslexia, has shown that when illiterate adults learn to read, the process of learning to read may in fact override certain visual and creative abilities that dyslexic individuals have due to their lexical challenges. He argues that dyslexics show trends related to ‘out of the box’ thinking which can be advantageous in many fields including art, maths and science. He also suggests that learning to read, which is a comparatively modern development in human evolution, actually shuts off certain cognitive processes and standardises an individual’s cognitive processes. The lack of lexical abilities therefore could be an advantage in preserving artistic creativity. Finally, in assessing the biology of dyslexia, it is important to explore any potential genetic link with the condition. It has been demonstrated that there is no simple genetic causative factor for dyslexia as it is polygenic in nature, despite the fact that it does run in families – a fact which has been clearly shown across studies of dyslexic twins, showing an inheritability of at least 60% (Paracchini, Diaz, & Stein, 2016). Therefore, along with creativity, intelligence and other cognitive skills, dyslexia has genetic linkages, but is also highly dependent upon the environment.

Assessing creativity benefits in studies

To investigate whether there is an increase in artistic creativity in the dyslexic population, the scientific community first had to consider what the definition of artistic creativity might be, and how to measure it. Creativity has been defined as, ‘The ability to produce work that is both original (new, unusual, novel, unexpected) and valuable (useful, good, adaptive, appropriate)’ (Ward & Kapoula, 2022). When considering creativity, it is generally believed that there is no such thing as a completely new idea and, in fact, creativity comes from combining pre existing ideas (also known as convergent thinking), or by breaking apart previously held ideas into new concepts (known as divergent thinking). Creativity has been measured in prospective trials using various tools. The most common tool is the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT), first developed in 1974. In this test, simple testing methods are used to assess divergent thinking. Specifically, the test uses verbal and non-verbal stimuli to assess ‘fluency’ (the total number of understandable, meaningful and relevant ideas generated as a response to the stimulus), ‘flexibility’ (the number of different categories of relevant ideas generated), ‘originality’ (the uniqueness and rarity of the ideas), and ‘elaboration’ (the amount of detail contained in the response – iteration on the theme). This test has been validated over many thousands of subjects and has had follow-up of groups of individuals lasting up to 50 years, demonstrating the robustness of the test. Cancer et al used this tool in their 2016 research article where they assessed the link between creativity and dyslexia – this will be covered in the next section (Cancer, Monzoli, & Aontonetti, 2016). Assessing the evidence of a dyslexia creativity link This section will assess the evidence for and against there being a relationship between dyslexia and the trait of artistic creativity. It will commence with a review of the best pieces of original research in the field, followed by a review of the large-scale

4