I am pretty sure the study is not able to distinguish causality from coronation. To me, the reverse implication seems more likely: Downtime makes you creative.
"People who enjoy idle time tend to be more creative" seems like an equivalent statement. It doesn't have to imply causality one way or the other. And I think the word you're looking for is correlation, not coronation.
I feel like their study is pretty flimsy for many reasons - but they had random people sit in a room with not much to do and observed how productive they were.
If you assumed this was measuring something real, then your implied causation doesnt make sense. Everyone was given equal time.
Downtime doesn't make you creative, but downtime gives you space to be creative. Boredom is a critical ingredient in my creativity, because when I'm bored, I find creative ways to fill the boredom.
Boredom is the purest reservoir of intrinsic motivation one can tap.
If you're too busy trying to put food on the table it leaves little time to explorer, be creative, in ways that doesn't move you up the needs pyramid, at least in the short term. Or, just "busy" doing other shit. Indeed, downtime is required for creativity.
At a workplace, if you've got super tight deadlines you don't have much space to explorer ideas. That deadspace is vital to produce better solutions. Assuming it's not wasted reading HN.
Kind of? I do my best work during road trips, because I am forced to be alone with my thoughts for hours on end. Ideas just tend to float the surface if you don't muddle the waters.
I deliberately integrate a bit of boredom into my work. I force myself to let things rest until I figure out a better design. I go on walks or have tea on the balcony to let good ideas form.
