A number of years ago, Wilma was part of the organising committee when the University of Wollongong in New South Wales hosted the Australian Psychological Society's annual conference. We invited students to submit entries into an art contest that addressed the theme of the conference, ‘Why Psychology?’. We had invited two experts from the City Art Gallery to select the winning entry. In awarding the first prize, one of the judges said that he had selected the artwork after being told that the two melted-plastic masses that were a focal part of the piece had originally been a Ken and a Barbie doll. For Wilma, a self-confessed non-artist, this raised an important question, which was whether the artwork would still have gained first place if the judge had not known the original source of the melted plastic. In other words, was the creativity inherent in the piece itself or was additional information required to appreciate its creative contribution?