There is almost agreement among scholars on the importance of temperamental traits in the process of creativity, (but the temperamental traits that are attributed to creators are contradictory, ranging from mental health on the one hand and mental illness on the other, which makes us in any situation supposed to discern the type of relationship between the ability on creativity and different temperamental traits).

And creative processes go beyond all that is familiar to give us the results of many things from outside the realm of consciousness. Even the talented person himself feels amazement and admiration about his work, which makes him believe that this work is a talent that came to him from outside forces, and that it is greater than his normal personal effort, and that this work is an advantage that can be lost, and must be exploited before it is too late. Even some talented people tell us that talent descends on them like a dream or like lightning represented in a poem or a discovery, then it goes away and may not return. For this reason, the creative genius gets up from his bed at night and hastens the steps to record what this talent brought him.

Since ancient times, poets have been inspired by their demons and believe that they are the sources of their creativity outside themselves, but the credit goes to the romantic movement that overturned this concept as it made the inspiration stem from within the artist and not from the outside.

Today, psychologists recognize the existence of a link between creative production and previous mental experiences and processes. They also differentiate between the thinking processes of the gifted on the one hand, and the rest of the people on the other hand.

Unfortunately, the study of creative thinking does not receive much attention. We are waiting for the emergence of an innovator in order to study creativity through it. Perhaps the reason for this neglect is due to the difficulty of establishing a practical test for creativity. Creativity is due to the environment more than it is due to the individual, and if the opportunities of the environment are equal to individuals, then great differences appear in the creative work between these individuals.

Perhaps one of the reasons for neglecting the study of creativity is the dependence of many scholars on the connection between creativity and intelligence, or even confusion between the two concepts. The truth is that the codes of intelligence, which are codified codes, through which the creator cannot show his creativity, because he is free from rationing, and from the templates set in advance, although these codes often reveal some of the characteristics of the creators. (Therman) indicated, in 1954, that “the rules applied to children at the age of six and over can predict the ability of these children to achieve over a period of thirty years, but it cannot predict the direction of this achievement”

The person whose abilities remain disjointed and unconnected does not expect to be creative the secret is not in what you possess, but in how to dispose of what you possess.

The most prominent workers in the field of creative studies seeking to uncover the secret of creativity and creators are (Guilford in California, Calvin Taylor at Butah University, Donald McKinnon, Frank Baron, Buffalo, Paul Torrance at the University of Minnesota and others).

The best way for parents and teachers to do so is not to accustom the child to receiving ready-made solutions to all the problems he faces, but rather to leave him with the task of searching and exploring for these solutions.

Baron believes (that creators are more disturbed from a psychological point of view, but they have more sufficient means and tricks by which they face these disorders.

There is no doubt that creative people have the power of the ego, and they are more capable than others of achieving social status, self-acceptance, independent performance, more initiative, and motivation for mental activity.

Scientists have discovered the correlation between the general state of personality and superiority in the verbal domains. Gilford and his collaborators found that the degree of neuroticism, which is characterized by contraction and pessimism, is negatively related to intellectual fluency, and that both self-confidence and emotional sensitivity or ease of consulting feelings are positively related to intellectual fluency.

It is noted that the creators, during the tests, prefer complex forms, due to their ability to face complexity in different ways, while simple forms do not arouse much interest in them.