If you find yourself routinely reaching for your phone to consult Google every time a tricky question or creative challenge arises, you’re not alone. In the digital age, the search engine has become something of an intellectual crutch, always within arm’s reach to provide an answer—any answer—at a moment’s notice. But while this hyper-accessibility of information seems like a gift, a new study suggests it may be quietly undermining our own creative powers.
The research, published this month in the journal Computers in Human Behavior, offers a cautionary tale for the generation raised on instant answers. According to the study’s authors, the more we rely on search engines to fill gaps in our knowledge, the less inclined we become to engage the deeper, more generative processes that fuel creativity. The implication is both sobering and profound: in our quest for efficiency and accuracy, we may be eroding the very mental muscles that allow us to innovate.
The study, led by a team of psychologists at the University of Toronto, sought to explore the relationship between internet searching and creative thinking. Over several experiments, participants were tasked with solving a series of open-ended problems—classic tests that measure divergent thinking, the cognitive ability to generate novel ideas by combining different concepts. Some participants were permitted to use Google, while others had to rely on their own wits.
The results revealed a subtle but significant pattern. Those with unrestricted access to Google were more likely to offer conventional, predictable answers. Their solutions tended to converge on widely accepted or easily searchable facts, rather than branching out into more unusual or original territory. In contrast, individuals who were forced to wrestle with the questions unaided produced responses that were not only more imaginative, but also more varied.
The researchers suggest that this effect is rooted in how search engines shape our mental habits. Google, after all, is optimized to surface the “right” answer—the most popular, the most relevant, the most clicked. In doing so, it subtly nudges us toward consensus thinking. When we search, we’re not just looking for information; we’re also being guided, often unconsciously, toward the mainstream.
This is not to say that Google is inherently detrimental, or that the internet is a blight on human ingenuity. The democratization of information has been one of the most transformative developments of the past century, breaking down barriers and opening up worlds of knowledge to billions. For rote memorization, factual recall, or technical definitions, the search engine is a marvel beyond anything imagined by previous generations.
But creativity—true, generative creativity—thrives on ambiguity and struggle. It is in the moments of not-knowing, of wrestling with uncertainty, that the mind is forced to stretch, to forge new connections, to invent. By short-circuiting that process with a few taps and keystrokes, we may be cheating ourselves out of the very experiences that drive innovation.
The implications extend beyond the individual to the broader culture. In creative industries, from advertising to film to technology, there is a growing sense of sameness, a flattening of originality. Ideas echo one another, trends replicate, and the new often feels suspiciously like the old. Some of this, cultural critics argue, can be traced to a generation of creators who have never known a world without the omnipresent safety net of search. The temptation to look up “what’s been done before” is ever-present, and with it, the risk of unconsciously imitating rather than inventing.
Educational institutions are not immune from this trend. As classrooms become increasingly digital, the challenge for teachers is no longer simply to impart knowledge, but to cultivate the skills that machines cannot replicate—curiosity, critical thinking, and, above all, the capacity to create. Pedagogical experts warn that if students grow accustomed to outsourcing their thinking to algorithms, they may struggle to develop the resilience and intellectual independence that creativity demands.
So what is to be done? The answer, it seems, is not to eschew Google or the internet altogether—an unrealistic and, many would argue, undesirable prospect. Rather, it is to be more mindful of when and how we use these tools. The researchers behind the University of Toronto study recommend that individuals, especially those engaged in creative work, periodically “unplug” from the search engine and allow themselves to dwell in uncertainty. “The discomfort of not knowing is often where the best ideas are born,” notes Dr. Julia Soares, the study’s lead author.
This approach echoes the wisdom of creative luminaries throughout history, many of whom have extolled the value of boredom, daydreaming, or “staring into space” as essential to their process. Steve Jobs famously credited his most innovative ideas to long walks where he allowed his mind to wander. The novelist Toni Morrison spoke of the importance of “sitting in the nothingness” before beginning to write. In a world that prizes speed and productivity, these practices may seem quaint, even countercultural. But the evidence is mounting that they are more necessary than ever.
There are practical steps that individuals and organizations can take to nurture creativity in the digital age. Setting aside “no search” periods during brainstorming sessions, for example, can encourage teams to grapple with problems using only their collective knowledge. Engaging in activities that promote divergent thinking—such as free writing, improvisational games, or simply allowing time for reflection—can help keep creative muscles limber. And perhaps most importantly, fostering a culture that values original thought over quick answers can make it safer for people to experiment, fail, and try again.
The rise of artificial intelligence, with its promise of even faster and more comprehensive answers, only heightens the stakes. As machines become ever more adept at retrieving, synthesizing, and even generating information, the uniquely human ability to imagine—to come up with something truly new—will be the skill that sets us apart. If we hope to keep that edge, we must resist the urge to reach for Google at every turn, and learn to embrace the productive discomfort of not knowing.
In the end, the lesson is both simple and profound: creativity cannot be outsourced. The next time you find yourself tempted to consult the oracle of Mountain View, consider pausing for just a moment. The answer you’re looking for may not be at the top of the search results, but somewhere deeper—lurking in the back of your own mind, waiting for the chance to emerge.
