Nathaniel Barr Presents at the Collision Conference

AI and Creativity: What’s Left for Humans to do?

Professor Barr at Collision

How does the ascent of AI relate to creativity and innovation? How do uniquely human skills fit into the equation as more and more can be offloaded to machines? How can we study and understand such tricky concepts? Nathaniel Barr, Professor of Creativity and Creative Thinking, had a busy summer weighing in on these big questions. He led a chapter published in the Routledge International Handbook of Creative Cognition entitled, Creative Cognition: From Ideation to Innovation, co-authored a paper in the Creativity Research Journal entitled “Back to the basics: Abstract painting as an index of creativity, and co-authored a paper in the journal Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, entitled “Humans versus AI: whether and why we prefer human-created compared to AI-created artwork“. He also represented Sheridan and the creativity faculty at Collision Conference, one of the world’s biggest tech conference, in a session called:  AI and creativity: What’s left for humans? The session featured experts from Sheridan alongside industry leaders and offered insight on how the intersection of the human mind and technology is shaping the future of both education and the world of work. 

Works Cited

Barr, N., Klein, L., McNamara, M. J., & Peters, K. (2023). Creative Cognition: From Ideation to Innovation. In The Routledge International Handbook of Creative Cognition (pp. 109-126). Routledge.

Bellaiche, Lucas, Anna P. Smith, Nathaniel Barr, Alexander Christensen, Chloe Williams, Anya Ragnhildstveit, Jonathan Schooler, Roger Beaty, Anjan Chatterjee, and Paul Seli. “Back to the basics: Abstract painting as an index of creativity.” Creativity Research Journal (2023): 1-16.

Bellaiche, Lucas, Rohin Shahi, Martin Harry Turpin, Anya Ragnhildstveit, Shawn Sprockett, Nathaniel Barr, Alexander Christensen, and Paul Seli. “Humans versus AI: whether and why we prefer human-created compared to AI-created artwork.” Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 8, no. 1 (2023): 1-22.