143; see also, Eysenck, 1995). This notion may stem from the general observation that creative people are usually characterized by high ideational fluency, high associative fluency (Benedek et al., in press and Mednick et al., 1964), and are associated with increased impulsivity (Burch et al., 2006 and Schuldenberg, 2000). Empirical evidence for this notion comes from a study showing that high creative achievers were found to show decreased latent inhibition as compared to low creative achievers

(Carson, Peterson, & Higgins, BIBW2992 chemical structure 2003). As a third perspective, creativity has been related to differential or flexible engagement of inhibition. It was shown that creative people show slower responses in tasks requiring inhibition of interfering information, but faster responses in tasks without interference (Dorfman et al., 2008, Kwiatkowski et al., 1999 and Vartanian et al., 2007). These findings have been interpreted in terms of a differential focusing of attention; that is, creative people may be able to focus or defocus attention depending on task demands. In a similar vein, Zabelina and Robinson (2010) found that divergent thinking and creative achievement were not generally related to inhibition as measured by the common Stroop effect, but rather to a more flexible trial-to-trial modulation of cognitive control. Hence,

although there is increasing evidence that creativity is related to AZD2281 ic50 cognitive inhibition, this evidence appears to be conflicting, either associating creativity with high cognitive inhibition, with cognitive disinhibition, or an adaptive cognitive control. It should also be noted that most studies on creativity and inhibition so far have not considered the role of intelligence. Executive functions such as cognitive inhibition are commonly conceived to reflect essential cognitive processes underlying

general intelligence (e.g., Arffa, 2007). Moreover, intelligence shows a moderate but consistent relationship with creativity (e.g., Kim, 2005), and there is an increasing understanding on how intelligence may facilitate creative thought (Nusbaum and Silvia, 2011 and Silvia, in press). Taken together, intelligence may qualify as a mediator of the inhibition-creativity Carnitine palmitoyltransferase II relationship. The first main aim of this study is to examine the correlation of cognitive inhibition and creativity and see whether it is consistent for different indicators of creativity. Since inhibition as defined above is related to cognitive flexibility and non-perseverative behavior, we hypothesize that there generally should be a positive correlation. The second main aim of this study is to examine whether the relation of creativity and inhibition is mediated by intelligence. Analyses shall be performed at latent level in order to estimate the correlations devoid of the influence of measurement error.