The notion of potential is closely associated with what humans can do effectively in an environment and thus it relies heavily on both social and material elements and their relation to each other (Corazza and Glăveanu, 2020). Nevertheless, many creativity theories and frameworks emphasize the creative actor and depict the environment as an external factor that either constrains or facilitates the creative process (Glăveanu, 2010b). As such, the role of the environment is over-simplified as a conditioning factor experienced by the actor. By contrast, the tetradic cultural framework of creativity (Glăveanu, 2010a) moves beyond this unidirectional perspective by suggesting that “creativity is not simply ‘conditioned’ by social factors, its mere nature is relational since it could not exist outside of cultural resources and dialogical relations” (p. 88).

This relational perspective makes the notion of affordances relevant to the design of creativity enhancement interventions. Introduced by Gibson (1979/1986) as what environment “offers the animal, what it provides or furnishes, either for good or for ill” (p.127), affordances dictate how the surroundings guide, facilitate and constrain human activity. They are opportunities for action that emerge at the intersection between an actor’s idiosyncratic perception and the specific environmental ‘features’ (Chemero, 2003). In fact, Gibson (1979/1986) argued that action possibilities are the primary objects of perception and although affordances are not the cause of behavior, they have the potential to invite behaviors.

It is this concept of ‘behavioral invitation’ that matters for creativity intervention. Because affordances can both repel and attract actions, they play an important role in creative achievements (Glăveanu, 2013), even at the little-c level (Glăveanu and Kaufman, 2019). For instance, objects and spaces “channel” our actions by dictating what we can do with available instruments as well as where and how we can move within various spaces. Environmental manipulation thus impacts on what behavior is performed in a certain setting (e.g., Prieske et al., 2015). Yet, affordances are more than mere opportunity provided by the material world. Rietveld and Kiverstein (2014) suggest that affordances “have an existence that is relative to a form of life” (p.335). That is, the experiential knowledge we have as humans, of what objects and spaces are for, is influenced by cultural norms and social interactions. In this vein, because of the sociocultural practice we engage in, affordances are also “dependent on the abilities available in a particular ecological niche” (Rietveld and Kiverstein, 2014, p.326). This means that an affordance can be perceived (or not) differently by individuals coming from different sociocultural backgrounds and possessing a distinct set of skills and thus invite distinct behaviors which influence the likelihood of creative outputs.

To better exploit the relational and resourceful nature of affordances in the design of creativity intervention, the next section highlights the bidirectional transaction between actors and their cultural, social, and material context. We explore how the environment can itself be a source of creativity, one which, on one hand, influences the actor directly, and, on the other hand, can be influenced by the actor through its actions making “the whole an emergent property of the interactions of the members of a group or, more generally, the interacting parts of a system.” (Montuori, 2011, p.418).

There are various attributes, skills, and states that dispose an actor to perceive and then act on affordances in ways that enhance his/her potential for creative growth. Accordingly, componential theories have been developed to gather the main personal attributes and abilities necessary for creativity to emerge (Kaufman and Glăveanu, 2019). For instance, the Componential Model of Creativity (Amabile, 1996; Amabile and Pratt, 2016) posits that domain-relevant skills (e.g., expertise, technical skills, and talent in a specific domain) creativity-relevant processes (e.g., tolerance to ambiguity and willingness to take appropriate risks) and task motivation are key inter-connected variables supporting individual creativity. Similarly, the Investment Theory of Creativity (Sternberg, 2012) holds that creativity requires a confluence of six distinct, but interrelated, resources grouped under three umbrellas; cognitive resources (i.e., thinking styles and knowledge), affective resources (i.e., motivation and personality), and environmental resources. Although we acknowledged that domain-relevant skills are essential for someone to reach pro-c and Big-C achievements (Baer, 2015), we adopt here a “system approach that operates at the level of generality necessary to address the contextual variation of creativity” (Poutanen, 2013, p.208). Consequently, the following focuses on creativity-relevant skills grouped under three interacting variables: affective attributes/states, cognitive skills, and physical expression. Following an embodied conceptualization of creativity, we consider these three variables as being closely (if not fully) intertwined. However, because creative potential is frequently associated with affective states and cognitive skills in the literature while the role of the body is ignored, we create distinct sections to review existing frameworks as a heuristic strategy, one that is not intended to imply there are separate elements. We aim at reuniting these variables in our suggested framework.

The goal of the first section was to review the elements that have been linked to creative potential fulfilment. In accordance with the embedded individual potential definition (Corazza and Glăveanu, 2020), we depict the creative potential as a complex system where creative actions arise from highly interactive environmental and actor elements. For instance, when an actor’s openness, willingness to take risk, and cognitive flexibility, interact with a risk-friendly environment, the actor’s perception of affordances is facilitated, increasing the likelihood of creative actions to emerge. Hence, compared to unidimensional approaches adopted by many studies aiming at enhancing creativity (Scott et al., 2004; Valgeirsdottir and Onarheim, 2017), interventions should not only be about developing individual skills (e.g., divergent thinking) but also about improving environmental factors. To facilitate the emergence of creative actions, interventions should favor activities that integrate a combination of multiple elements of the system. We thus suggest that creative potential can be nurtured through a systemic approach because it captures interactions between various elements while providing different levels of explanation and perspectives which predict the emergence of creative actions (Poutanen, 2013).

If learning is defined as “the modification of a pre-existing repertoire that is unique to each individual” (Kelso, 2019, p.85), interventions must provide participants with opportunities to challenge their creative potential system repertoire at multiple levels. Building on the review, Figure 1 represents the elements of an individual system repertoire that could be supported and/or challenged to foster someone’s creative potential. It summarizes ‘what’ a creativity enhancement intervention should be directed toward. Whereas the review divided the elements in distinct sections, Figure 1 reunites them to emphasize a holistic and embodied perspective of creativity. The black strand represents the actor’s elements while the gray strand represents the environmental ones. Both strands are intertwined to support creative actions through these interactions influencing the perception of affordances. Of course, not all systems initially present facilitating interacting elements. Each element act as rate limiters on the emergence of creative actions (Renshaw et al., 2009). This can be exemplified by actors exhibiting cognitive rigidity or environments governed by an authoritarian culture limiting the creative potential of the system. In this latter case, well designed creativity enhancement interventions could potentially improve the system or provide additional resources to provoke or accelerate the growth of creative potential.

Because “perception, cognition, emotion, human relations, and behavior are grounded in our bodies” (Marmeleira and Duarte Santos, 2019, p.410), whether body-oriented creativity training could be a holistic way to enhance the creative potential system is a path worth exploring (Valgeirsdottir and Onarheim, 2017). As mentioned previously, the transformational potential of using creative movement to nurture the creative potential system has been underexplored. Hence, using philosophical, theoretical, and empirical movement science perspectives, the second section of this paper sheds light on the potential of movement-based activities to design creativity enhancement interventions.

One way of thinking about embodied movement is through the lens of what scholars in physical education refer to as physical literacy (Dudley et al., 2017). We introduce it here given the rapid uptake of the concept by practitioners and influential non-governmental organizations such as the WHO and UNESCO. According to Whitehead (2007), “the capacity to capitalize fully on our embodied dimension could be encapsulated in the term physical literacy” (p. 286). Broadly, physical literacy can be defined as “the motivation, confidence, physical competence, knowledge and understanding to value and take responsibility for maintaining purposeful physical pursuits/activities throughout the life course” (Whitehead, 2013, p.29). Moving away from fundamental movement skills, a recent conceptual model describes physical literacy as the “multidimensional, experiential convergence of motor, affect, social and cognitive components” interacting with various physical environments (Cairney et al., 2019, p.373).

Activities recruiting physical literacy can thus be conceived as enriched multidimensional learning experiences (Roetert et al., 2017). Not only is moving essential for health and increasing movement proficiency, but it can also alter cognitive, affective, social, and cultural repertoires. For instance, a community-based movement skill and preliteracy program produced synergistic gains in both gross-motor and preliteracy skills in preschool-aged children in addition to facilitating the engagement of parents in such activities at home (Bedard et al., 2017). In a cross-sectional study conducted on children aged 9–12 years old, physical literacy was found to be a predictor of resilience. Specifically, authors concluded that “if the affective domains of confidence and motivation developed in physical literacy go beyond just motor action, then they may also provide or help young people acquire the skills and abilities to better negotiate for, and navigate to, resources that sustain their well-being in different contexts” (Jefferies et al., 2019, p.4). Although not specifically referring to physical literacy, a recent review of embodied-related literature highlighted the holistic benefits of various movement-based interventions such as dance/movement therapy to help people achieve new states of mind or body-exercises to support mood, emotions, and cognition in older adults (Marmeleira and Duarte Santos, 2019). These studies support the assumption that physical literacy provides insight into creating optimal physical-psycho-social environments that could foster the development of key processes underlying creativity (Jefferies et al., 2019). To achieve this goal though, some principles must be followed to design enriched movement experiences.

Not all movement-based activities provide the same level of ‘enrichment.’ In movement sciences, the term enrichment refers to an embedded approach to motor learning which highlights rich and varied possibilities to achieve task goals through interactions constrained by the body, the task, and the environment (Rudd et al., 2020). For instance, rather than using repetitive prescriptive learning methods to acquire one single ‘optimized’ movement pattern, non-linear pedagogy (NLP) stipulates that, because there is an infinite number of individual intrinsic dynamics (Phillips et al., 2010), it is by manipulating specific constraints, removing barriers, and increasing freedom, that movers uncover novel, flexible, and functional movement patterns (Chow et al., 2006; Hristovski et al., 2006). Specifically, NLP is informed by non-proportionality (i.e., small changes in the system may significantly impact learners’ behaviors), multi-stability (i.e., one cause may have multiple behavioral effects), functional role of noise (i.e., variability in the system dynamics is encouraged), and parametric control (i.e., manipulating specific parameters to effectively guide a learning system) (Chow et al., 2011).

To design enriched movement experiences and inspire creativity, the manipulation of key constraints is central to NLP (Chow et al., 2006, 2011; Santos et al., 2016). Defined as “boundaries or features that shape the emergence of behavior by a learner seeking a stable state of organization” (Chow et al., 2006, p.262; refering to Newell, 1986) constraints are classified among three categories: organismic, environmental, and task related. Organismic constraints refer to personal characteristics that are either structural meaning they remain relatively stable over time (e.g., body composition and personality) or functional implying a faster change rate potential (e.g., fatigue, heart rate, motivation, and cognitive state). Environmental constraints encompass all those outside of the person such as climate, apparatus, material, and sociocultural factors. Task constraints can be considered as being instructional such as rules and instructions provided by a leader or informational such as visual or acoustic cues coming from the environment (Newell, 1986).

The same way affordances are relational, task constraints have recently been conceptualized as distributed between the environment and the organism. This means they are emergent properties of the organism-environment system. Because the material environment can only become a task constraint when interacting with a goal-oriented organism (‘actor’ in this paper), designing an enriched movement task to foster creative potential implies designing an inviting relation between the actor and the environment. Furthermore, organismic, environmental, and task constraints are nested in timescales impacting behaviors differently. Faster-changing constraints (e.g., perceptions, emotions, social interactions) have short-term effect on behavioral variables while slower-changing constraints (e.g., personality, cultural norms) have more durable impacts on behaviors. A circular causality relationship links these constraints as intervention at the slow-changing constraint level support changes at the fast-changing level and vice-versa (see Balagué et al., 2019, for more details).

Constraining the actor-environment system to stimulate creative movement may sound paradoxical since we argued earlier in the paper that creativity was linked to free, autonomous, and risk-permissive environments. Nevertheless, whether it is a painter that self-imposes a technique to explore something different or a circus artist that uses a piece of equipment to force his/her body toward new directions, the careful manipulation of constraints can lead to the exploration of underused repertoire potentially facilitating the discovery of novel solutions (Torrents et al., 2020). This assumption is supported by studies looking to improve movement creativity in various populations and settings. For example, constraining the distance to a punching bag target while asking novice boxers to perform efficient strikes led to the exploration of a rich range of striking actions (Hristovski et al., 2006). Similarly, the manipulation of hand hold, design to instill uncertainty and instability in climbers’ motor system, impacted positively on exploratory behaviors (Orth et al., 2018). In dance, Torrents et al. (2015) explored the effect of evolving constraints (free dancing, pelvis as close as possible, and pelvis as far as possible) on three pairs of contemporary dancers. Results indicate that task constraints have a significant effect on the type of configurations performed by the dancers. In a more ecological setting, a conventional elementary school fitness program was metamorphosed into a more creative one using NLP. The use of constraints, variability, fantasy play, and problem solving to encourage children to move differently resulted in significantly more original thoughts, as well as fluent and flexible movements compare to the children that continued the conventional exercise program (Richard et al., 2018).

In sum, these studies support the idea that perturbating the motor system by constraining ‘traditional’ or ‘familiar’ movement patterns while allowing the freedom to explore various solutions create enriched learning experiences in which creative movement are more inclined to emerge. What remains underexplored though is the impact of such enriched movement activities on the other elements of the creative potential system. As mentioned earlier, the research connecting movement and creativity focuses mostly on optimizing motor performance (Rasmussen et al., 2020). However, because of the holistic nature of movement underlined in this section, there are reasons to believe that enriched movement activities can also impact the system at the affective, cognitive, social, and cultural level. The next section introduces movement improvisation to exemplify how enriched movement activities can ignite the whole creative potential system.

The complexity and non-linearity of the creative potential system can be described by its multistability, meaning that it is composed of multiple stable states or what is also sometimes called attractors. These pre-existing states/attractors (i.e., intrinsic dynamics landscape) are shaped by prior experiences and dictates the very nature of learning and change. When perturbated (e.g., through constraints), multistability allows the system to switch rapidly among states/attractors to sustain functionality and meet environmental and/or internal demands (Kelso, 2012). Another way for the system to preserve functionality when one part of the system is perturbated is through synergies; “context-sensitive functional groupings of elements that are temporarily assembled to act as a single coherent unit” (Kelso, 2012, p.907).

Because learning is about acquiring new patterns of behaviors, stable states/attractors must be perturbated to allow the exploration of new states (Kelso, 2019). Once the system is perturbated by constraints, it falls into a state of disequilibrium (Davids et al., 1994; Vaughan et al., 2019). The instability caused by internal and/or external constraints on the system triggers self-organization mechanisms which refers to “the spontaneous formation of pattern and pattern change in complex systems whose elements adapt to the very patterns of behavior they create” (Kelso, 2001, p.13845). Transition routes then become possible depending on the system initial intrinsic dynamics. On one hand, the bifurcation route reorganizes the system by adding new stable patterns implying novelty while the shift route generates smooth adaptation by altering the disposition of pre-existing patterns (Kelso, 2012). These two routes provide the minimum conditions for movement creativity to emerge (Hristovski et al., 2011). On the other hand, constraining the system can direct individuals toward metastable performance regions (Hristovski et al., 2006; Pinder et al., 2012; Orth et al., 2018) “where a system ‘hovers’ in a state of dynamic stability, switching between functional states of organization in response to changing constraints, and displaying subsequent behavioral flexibility” (Headrick et al., 2015, p.84). Because the system never really ‘settles’ in one state, metastability allows a flexible exploration and exploitation of affordances potentially resulting in novel and original movements (Chow et al., 2011; Hristovski et al., 2011). Because a person’s perception of affordances might be altered momentarily by these mechanisms, actions might also become unstable; they might get worse before they get creative.

The same way self-organization processes have been shown to lead to enhance creative movements (e.g., Hristovski et al., 2006; Orth et al., 2018, as described above), we suggest that it can explain how enriched movement activities can expand cognitive, affective, social, and cultural repertoire increasing the likelihood of creative actions emergence. Using movement improvisation, this assumption is exemplified next.

So, how can we examine movement improvisation processes using ecological dynamics principles? Figure 2 illustrates the hypothetical mechanisms initiated during the ‘walking away from the obvious’ and operating throughout a movement improvisation session. Disrupted by the task constraints imposed upon established walking patterns (i.e., walking like substances) and the rules of the activity, the pre-existing state of each individual’s creative potential system is momentarily destabilized. Building on the idea that constraints are nested in levels and timescales (Balagué et al., 2019), Figure 2 exemplified changes for both actor (black strand) and environmental (gray strand) constraints and the resulting self-organized behaviors emerging from their interactions (i.e., The white space between the strands. Above the arrow line are the changes in motor behaviors while below the arrow line are the changes in other expressed behaviors). In the first few seconds of the ‘walking away from the obvious’ activity, participants’ perceptions of the affordances rapidly change. At this stage, a slight disequilibrium can be perceived by participants observing others, laughing, and hesitating. Participants are usually stuck within the attractor of ‘biped walking.’ Although the ‘rule’ of freely responding to stimuli in any way they want is well established at the onset, participants usually only perform movements that are close to the ‘biped walking’ attractor by embodying the substance with their arms or legs. They are mainly showcasing the multistability of the system alternating between stable states resulting in few original walking patterns.

Because the activity is conducted in a group, after a few minutes, one member of the group will usually ‘push’ the exploration to another level by starting to roll, crawl, or quadruped walk on the floor (‘walking,’ after all, is not limited to human bipedal motion only). Due to a change in the level of willingness to take risk, this participant moves away from the ‘biped walking’ attractor and starts, therefore, to explore unstable states. By doing so, it creates a competition between the pre-existing repertoire of the members of the group and influence the new behaviors to be achieved (Torrents et al., 2021). In other words, this changing environmental constraint ‘unlocks’ some participants from their main attractors and induces a metastable dynamic where participants can easily navigate between stable and unstable movements.

During a movement improvisation session, there is no motor performance expectations. The goal of improvising with movements is to perturbate the entire system to instill growth at all levels. So, what other cognitive, affective, social, and cultural changes happened to the system throughout a whole 2-h session? When debriefing with participants after the session, they often share how cognitively, affectively, and socially challenged they were. Some report not ‘knowing’ how to respond to certain stimuli (i.e., cognitively destabilize), having experienced anxiety or confusion (i.e., affectively destabilize), or being worried to look like a fool (i.e., socially destabilize). When we discuss the strategies they used to manage those experiences, some disclose focusing on the music, connecting with the body, entering a ‘bubble,’ imagining the stimuli, etc. As illustrated in Figure 2, after more than an hour, synergies form between participants increasing trust which led to the adoption of freedom and permission to take risk as shared values within the group. Changes in these environmental constraints can impact, for instance, on participants’ cognitive flexibility and openness which can be observed through enhanced fluency in movements. By the end of the session, these changes in constraints allow participants to completely engage and produce flexible and original movements. Because constraints correlated through circular causality, it is also important to note that adopting freedom as a group norm also impact the interpersonal trust which influence the actions of the participants in the group, making affordances more inviting. The same principle could apply for individual constraints. This supports the idea that affect, cognition, and behaviors as well as social and cultural factors also exhibit self-organizational tendencies which can transform the system intrinsic dynamics (Davids et al., 2001).

In summary, the movement improvisation constraints challenge more than movement patterns, it destabilizes the whole creative potential system. To regain stability, participants must explore multiple cognitive, affective, social, or cultural solutions to reorganize in more functional states. “Adopting novel and potentially functional states of system organization is a consequence of learning and/or development, as individuals transit from the ‘known’ to the ‘unknown,’ i.e., moving from a familiar task or situation to one that is new or different” (Headrick et al., 2015, p.84). This supports the underexplored idea that enriched movement activities can challenge the actor-environment creative potential system resulting in more creative actions, at least at the everyday level. Through movements, participants experience how they feel, think, behave, and interact when anchored patterns, such as walking, are disrupted. This embodied metaphor might facilitate the transfer of creativity-related skills to other activities (Malinin, 2019). It also broadens the envelop of creativity enhancement interventions by providing a rationale for movement activities as a holistic method.

Building on creativity and movement sciences literature, this review aims at highlighting the holistic power of movement as a creative potential system igniter. We argue that by directly perturbating the elements of the system through well-designed activities such as movement improvisation, cognitive, affective, social, and cultural repertoires can be enhanced. To move away from dualistic cognitive science perspectives and combine creativity and movement sciences, we build on ecological dynamics principles and an underlying pedagogical approach (i.e., NLP) to explain how and why enriched movement activities are promising candidates to provide the environment needed to support creative potential enhancement. To test the hypothesis raised in this paper and empirically unify movement and creativity sciences within an evidenced-based intervention, some challenges must be addressed.

The first challenge concerns the lack of knowledge about the impact of enriched movement activities on variables beyond motor variables. Studies using NLP or improvisation provide evidence for the benefit of tasks emerging from the manipulation of environmental constraints (e.g., distance, material, space) and/or organismic constraints (e.g., usual movement patterns) forcing the exploration of movement solutions resulting in the emergence of creative motor patterns (Torrents et al., 2020). However, to date, most movement science research has failed to address the nested organization in levels and timescales at the systemic level (actor’s and environmental elements) and their circular causality. Noteworthy, interventions triggering movement exploration rarely address the initial state of slow-changing elements such as personality (e.g., openness) and cultural values (e.g., risk-permissive) and their impact on faster-changing elements like motivation and cognitive states (e.g., flexibility). For instance, how is moving creatively influenced by a risk-permissive cultural value and influence cognitive flexibility and willingness to take risk?

To answer this question, researchers must shift away from “the empiricist preoccupation of reducing the universe to a series of simple, testable relationships” (Davids et al., 1994, p.501). Creative potential is defined throughout this article as a complex system where cultural values, social interactions, material world, and individual’s cognitive skills, affective states and physical expression are intricately linked (see Figure 1). Therefore, studying each of these elements individually “often disrupts their usual interactions so much that an isolated unit may behave quite differently from the way it would behave in its normal context” (Clarke and Crossland, 1985, p.16). The systemic and complex characteristic of creativity raises the thorny challenge of developing research and applied approaches that integrate rather than isolate interdependencies between all elements (Vaughan et al., 2019). According to Glăveanu et al. (2020), “even if one single study or intervention cannot address all these [creativity] dimensions simultaneously, the questions, methods, general design, and interpretation of findings should be chosen in view of this complexity” (p.742).

Building on this recommendation, we thus invite movement creativity researchers to look beyond movement outcome variables and start questioning whether and how disrupting usual movement patterns through enriched movement activities triggers the emergence of individual and environmental repertoire. Designing research questions and hypothesis using the model presented in Figure 2 could be a good starting point for researchers to examine more precisely the nested organization of variables in levels and timescales and provide a much more complete picture of the impacts of enriched movement activities on creative potential elements.

Using this approach raises the challenge of measurement. To assess changes in the creative potential system, one must assess its intrinsic dynamics (Kelso, 2019). Although efforts were deployed to develop measurement taxonomies such as the heuristic framework for creativity measurement that provide a multidimensional measurement structure (see Batey, 2012, for a review), most studies still adopt a siloed measurement approach. For instance, intervention studies usually used either variation of divergent thinking tasks to assess the cognitive elements (e.g., Torrance and Ball, 1984; Runco and Acar, 2012), self-reported measures to gather data about affective elements such as openness to experience, risk-taking, and motivational orientations (see Kaufman, 2019), or consensual assessment to evaluate the creative ‘product’ (e.g., Amabile, 1996). Yet, to reliably assess creative potential changes and developments throughout an intervention, unidimensional measurement approach is no longer sufficient. Optimizing measurement methods is thus pressing (Barbot, 2019). We believe Figures 1, 2 can serve as a useful guide to develop multidimension assessment tool.

We also call for ecological research designs where enriched movement activities are integrated as part of the regular ‘curriculum’ rather than isolated. Naturally, this suggestion makes sport organizations, exercise facilities and schools intuitively appealing milieu to conduct this type of applied research. But what would be the impact of integrating enriched movement activities in less intuitively movement-related domains such as medicine, architecture, or engineering where creativity is also key? What if before medical case study classes or brainstorm meetings, professionals were invited to improvise with movement? How would this transform the material, social and cultural environment and invite more creative behaviors thereafter? Could moving creatively regularly impact embedded individual creative potential and push these fields further? Longitudinal research adopting multidimensional measurement methods could answer these questions and support the benefits of integrating movement activities in all sorts of milieu keeping in mind that the goal is to improve how “people relate to the world, to others, and to themselves, making them more flexible, more open to the new and, at least in principle, to differences in perspective” (Glăveanu et al., 2020, p.743).

This cross-context approach however raises yet another challenge; the transferability of general training to other indirect (non-linear) outcomes. Of course, to become a eminent creator in any domain, specific training is needed to develop the appropriate skill set to move a field forward (Sternberg, 2012). Yet, as it was clearly established, the goal of using movement activities is to foster creativity-related skills. So, how does transferability apply to ‘general’ creative skill development? Like certain movement competences (e.g., agility, endurance, flexibility, power and stability) can be developed through non-specific experiences and then transferred to a specific sport (Rudd et al., 2020), we argue that the foundational elements of the creative potential system can be improved through enriched movement experiences. Accordingly, “it is suggested that the role of behavioral enrichment, conferred by generality of transfer has typically been misunderstood and undervalued in athlete development programs” (Rudd et al., 2020, p.7). In attempt to circumvent this, researchers have been interested in the role of Donor Sport to enriched foundational skills development and enhance a whole array of skills transferable to sport performance (Strafford et al., 2018). For instance, Parkour (described above) has been shown to be a suitable donor sport because it can ‘donate’ agility (i.e., physical skills), problem solving, risk-management and self-efficacy (i.e., psychological skills) as well as initiative and receptiveness to feedback (i.e., social skills) (Strafford et al., 2020). Following this argument, we suggest that creative movement activities such as movement improvisation can be considered donor activities. Future research should thus test whether movement activities can ‘donate’ affective, cognitive, social, and cultural elements to enable people to fulfill their creative potential in any domain.