Abstract
In this brief commentary to Kaufman’s call for a “new agenda for positive outcomes” of creativity research, I emphasize how the broad construct of “identity” qualifies as such an outcome. While doing so, I challenge the issue of directionality (predictor vs. outcome) of creativity in relation to relevant correlates by outlining the influence of epistemological position and publication bias in directional interpretations of correlational findings. Through illustrations of various levels of relationships between creativity and identity, I also urge creativity researchers to be more explicit regarding how “generic” creativity is being operationalized in their study, so that more targeted hypotheses regarding the relationship between distinct aspects of creativity and such positive out-come variables may be formulated.