The relationship between age and musical creativity is not well understood, especially within the jazz idiom. In this study, ratings of 17,416 jazz albums recorded by 921 artists, sourced from a popular music review website, were analyzed. Creativity was operationalized in two different ways: 1) as hit ratios (the proportion of albums that received the critics’ highest rating), and 2) as album ratings (based on the unmodified 9-point scale used by the critics). Results from generalized additive mixed models (GAMMs) indicated that hit ratios peaked sharply around the age of 28 before rapidly declining. In contrast, album rating increased with age, with average ratings higher when artists were in their 60s and 70s than during their earlier years. Follow-up analyses indicated that this trend could be attributed to a reduced number of “inferior” albums—those with below-average ratings—among older artists. Implications for lifespan creativity and avenues for future research are discussed.
AbuhamdehS.CsikszentmihalyiM. (2014). The artistic personality: A systems perspective. In The systems model of creativity. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9085-7_14
BenedekM.BorovnjakB.NeubauerA. C.Kruse-WeberS. (2014). Creativity and personality in classical, jazz and folk musicians. Personality and Individual Differences, 63, 117–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.064
4.
BernaysP. (2009). 1959: The year that changed jazz [Film]. Columbia Records Productions.
5.
CampbellD. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review, 67(6), 380–400. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040373
6.
CohenJ.CohenP.WestS. G.AikenL. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed, pp. xxviii, 703). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
7.
CookR.MortonB. (2004). The Penguin Guide to Jazz (6th ed). Penguin.
8.
CsikszentmihalyiM. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–335). Cambridge University Press.
9.
DennisW. (1966). Creative productivity between the ages of 20 and 80 years. Journal of Gerontology, 21(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/21.1.1
EricssonK. A. (1999). Creative expertise as superior reproducible performance: Innovative and flexible aspects of expert performance. Psychological Inquiry, 10(4), 329–333. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1004_5
12.
FergusonH. J.BrunsdonV. E. A.BradfordE. E. F. (2021). The developmental trajectories of executive function from adolescence to old age. Scientific Reports, 11, 1382. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80866-1
13.
ForthmannB.SzardeningsC.DumasD.FeistG. J. (2021). Strict equal odds: A useful reference to study the relationship between quality and quantity. Creativity Research Journal, 33(2), 96–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2020.1827605
14.
GalensonD. W. (2006). Old masters and young geniuses: The two life cycles of artistic creativity. Princeton University Press.
15.
HaslamN.LahamS. M. (2010). Quality, quantity, and impact in academic publication. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(2), 216–220. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.727
16.
HassR. W.WeisbergR. W. (2009). Career development in two seminal American songwriters: A test of the equal odds rule. Creativity Research Journal, 21(2–3), 183–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410902855275
17.
HassR. W.WeisbergR. W. (2015). Revisiting the 10-year rule for composers from the great American songbook: On the validity of two measures of creative production. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(4), 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000021
18.
HassR. W.WeisbergR. W.ChoiJ. (2010). Quantitative case-studies in musical composition: The development of creativity in popular-songwriting teams. Psychology of Music, 38(4), 463–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735609352035
KozbeltA. (2004). Creativity Over the Lifespan in Classical Composers: Reexamining the Equal-Odds Rule. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 26(26). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118367377.ch21
24.
KozbeltA. (2005). Factors affecting aesthetic success and improvement in creativity: A case study of the musical genres of Mozart. Psychology of Music, 33(3), 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735605053732
25.
KozbeltA. (2007). A quantitative analysis of Beethoven as self-critic: Implications for psychological theories of musical creativity. Psychology of Music, 35(1), 144–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735607068892
26.
KozbeltA. (2008). Longitudinal hit ratios of classical composers: Reconciling “Darwinian” and expertise acquisition perspectives on lifespan creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(4), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012860
27.
KozbeltA. (2011). Age and aesthetic significance in classical music: A multi-level reanalysis of Halsey’s (1976) ratings. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 29(2), 129–148. https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.29.2.a
28.
KozbeltA. (2012). Process, self-evaluation, and lifespan creativity trajectories in eminent composers. In CollinsD. (Ed.), The act of musical composition: Studies in the creative process (pp. 27–51). Ashgate Press.
LehmanH. C. (1953). Age and achievement (pp. xi, 359). Princeton University Press.
31.
MacCallumR. C.ZhangS.PreacherK. J.RuckerD. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 19–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.19
32.
ManturzewskaM. (1990). A biographical study of the life-span development of professional musicians. Psychology of Music, 18(2), 112–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735690182002
33.
MillerG. F. (1999). Sexual selection for cultural display. In DunbarR.KnightC.PowerC. (Eds.), The evolution of culture: An interdisciplinary view (pp. 71–91). Rutgers University Press.
34.
QueteletA. (1835/1968). A treatise on man and the development of his faculties. Franklin. (Reprint of 1842 Edinburgh translation of 1835 French original.).
SawyerR. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of innovation (2nd Ed.). Oxford University Press.
38.
SimontonD. K. (1977). Creative productivity, age, and stress: A biographical time-series analysis of 10 classical composers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(11), 791–804. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.11.791
39.
SimontonD. K. (1980). Thematic fame, melodic originality, and musical zeitgeist: A biographical and transhistorical content analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(6), 972–983. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.6.972
40.
SimontonD. K. (1991). Emergence and realization of genius: The lives and works of 120 classical composers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(5), 829–840. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.5.829
41.
SimontonD. K. (1997). Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks. Psychological Review, 104(1), 66–89. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.104.1.66
42.
SimontonD. K. (2022). The blind-variation and selective-retention theory of creativity: Recent developments and current status of bvsr. Creativity Research Journal, No Pagination Specified-No Pagination Specified. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2022.2059919
WebsterG. D.ZanderL. (2024). Burning out, fading away, and the sophomore slump: Critics’ versus fans’ ratings of music artists’ album quality over time. Psychology of Music, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/03057356241289076
45.
WeisbergR. W. (2006). Expertise and reason in creative thinking: Evidence from case studies and the laboratory. In Creativity and reason in cognitive development (pp. 7–42). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606915.003
WoodS. N. (2003). Thin plate regression splines. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 65(1), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9868.00374
48.
WoodS. N. (2017). Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R, Second Edition (2nd ed.). Chapman and Hall/CRC. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315370279
