observations on the article: study defines art as drawing; first paragraph claims study can spot innate creativity, but the scientists admit they cannot because they studied art students and non-art-students; study makes cheeky reference to “drawing on the right side of the brain” mythos while an outside observer interviewed for the article claims the structural difference is distributed throughout both hemisperes of the brains studied.

questions that aries for me: 

1. is drawing different enough from penmanship that the structural differences seen in this study would also be markedly different?

2. are the structural differences comparable across a wider set of activities that we recognize as art (e.g. poetry and literature, musical composition and musicianship, choreography and dance, etc..)?

3. does the small sample size allow us to trust these results?

4. is it possible to create a twenty+ year longitudinal study that follows a statistically significant population from pre-k through adulthood that would track these structures and map them against educational opportunities and career outcomes?

5. is there a mapping of the existence and density of these brain structurings correlated against the Torrance Test of Creativity?