Reading ability conflates SES creativity gaps

Who is more creative: high- or low-socioeconomic status (SES) individuals? This question is the focus of intense debates within both the scientific community and society at large, since creativity has been linked to innovation, productivity, and wealth generation. This question is, however, hard to answer; in particular, because creativity is typically assessed through standardized tests that build on reading and writing proficiency, which might conflate the relationship between SES and creativity. To overcome this challenge, we combine high-quality data on reading ability and experimental variation in reading requirements embedded in creativity assessments in a series of studies with 6-12th graders in Brazilian schools. We first document that established creativity measures exhibit sizable SES gaps, but that these gaps become much smaller and no longer significant once we parse out students' reading ability (Study 1). Next, in two randomized control trials, we have students complete divergent thinking tasks while experimentally varying reading requirements: in the control group, students had to read question prompts, just like in standard assessments (e.g., PISA); in the treatment group, enumerators read the prompts on their behalf. In both conditions, enumerators wrote down students' answers. We find that high-SES students outperform low-SES ones only when they read the prompt, but not when performance does not depend on reading ability (Studies 2 and 3).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
npj Science of Learning
Published
2026-02-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-026-00404-y
Primary Topic
Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reading ability conflates SES creativity gaps

Guilherme Lichand, Sachin Allums, Lêticia Lopes
npj Science of Learning
Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
article

Reading ability conflates SES creativity gaps

Guilherme Lichand, Sachin Allums, Lêticia Lopes
article en

Abstract

Who is more creative: high- or low-socioeconomic status (SES) individuals? This question is the focus of intense debates within both the scientific community and society at large, since creativity has been linked to innovation, productivity, and wealth generation. This question is, however, hard to answer; in particular, because creativity is typically assessed through standardized tests that build on reading and writing proficiency, which might conflate the relationship between SES and creativity. To overcome this challenge, we combine high-quality data on reading ability and experimental variation in reading requirements embedded in creativity assessments in a series of studies with 6-12th graders in Brazilian schools. We first document that established creativity measures exhibit sizable SES gaps, but that these gaps become much smaller and no longer significant once we parse out students' reading ability (Study 1). Next, in two randomized control trials, we have students complete divergent thinking tasks while experimentally varying reading requirements: in the control group, students had to read question prompts, just like in standard assessments (e.g., PISA); in the treatment group, enumerators read the prompts on their behalf. In both conditions, enumerators wrote down students' answers. We find that high-SES students outperform low-SES ones only when they read the prompt, but not when performance does not depend on reading ability (Studies 2 and 3).

npj Science of Learning
Stanford Medicine (US), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (BR), Stanford University (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.