Jump to content

Creativity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mattergy (talk | contribs) at 22:49, 10 June 2006 (→Neurology of creativity). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

For other uses of "Creativity", see "Creativity" (disambiguation).

Creative (or creativeness) is a mental process involving the generation of new ideas or concepts, or new associations between existing ideas or concepts. The products of creative thought (sometimes referred to as divergent thought) usually have both originality and appropriateness. Although intuitively a simple phenomenon, it is in fact quite complex. It has been studied from the perspectives of behavioural psychology, social psychology, psychometrics, cognitive science, philosophy, history, economics, design research, business, and management, among others. The studies have covered everyday creativity, exceptional creativity and even artificial creativity. Unlike many phenomena in science, there is no single, authoritative perspective or definition of creativity. Unlike many phenomena in psychology, there is no standardized measurement technique.

Creativity has been attributed variously to divine intervention, cognitive processes, the social environment, personality traits, and chance ("accident," "serendipity"). It has been associated with genius, mental illness and humour. Some say it is a trait we are born with; others say it can be taught with the application of simple techniques. Although popularly associated with art and literature, it is also an essential part of innovation and invention and is important in professions such as business, economics, architecture, industrial design, science and engineering.

Despite, or perhaps because of, the ambiguity and multi-dimensional nature of creativity, entire industries have been spawned from the pursuit of creative ideas and the development of creativity techniques. This mysterious phenomenon, though undeniably important and constantly visible, seems to lie tantalizingly beyond the grasp of most people.

"Creativity, it has been said, consists largely of re-arranging what we know in order to find out what we do not know." George Keller

Leonardo Da Vinci is well known for his creative works

Definitions of creativity

"The problem of creativity is beset with mysticism, confused definitions, value judgments, psychoanalytic admonitions, and the crushing weight of philosophical speculation dating from ancient times." Albert Rothenberg

Creativity and creative people have been regarded with wonder and admiration for most of human history. It is fair to say that without creativity, human beings would have remained in a palaeolithic existence. Creativity is a central and powerful mode of human activity and thought.

More than 60 different definitions of creativity can be found in the psychological literature[1], and it is beyond the scope of this article to list them all. The etymological root of the word in English and most other European languages comes from the Latin creatus, literally "to have grown."

Colloquial definitions of creativity are typically descriptive of activity that results in producing or bringing about something partly or wholly new; in investing an existing object with new properties or characteristics; in imagining new possibilities that were not conceived of before; and in seeing or performing something in a manner different from what was thought possible or normal previously.

A useful distinction has been made by Rhodes[2] between the creative person, the creative product, the creative process, and the creative 'press' or environment. Each of these factors are usually present in creative activity. This has been elaborated by Johnson[3], who suggested that creative activity may exhibit several dimensions including sensitivity to problems on the part of the creative agent, originality, ingenuity, unusualness, usefulness, and appropriateness in relation to the creative product, and intellectual leadership on the part of the creative agent.

Perhaps the most widespread conception of creativity in the scholarly literature is that creativity is regarded to have occurred when there takes place the production of a creative product (for example, a new work of art or a scientific hypothesis) that is both novel and useful.

Often implied in the notion of creativity is a concomitant presence of inspiration, cognitive leaps or intuitive insight as a part of creative thinking and acting[4]. Pop psychology sometimes associates creativity with right or forehead brain activity or even specifically with lateral thinking.

Some students of creativity have emphasized an element of chance in the creative process. Linus Pauling, asked at a public lecture how one creates scientific theories, replied that one must endeavor to come up with many ideas — then discard the useless ones.

History of the term and the concept

The ancient Greeks had no terms corresponding to "to create" or "creator." The expression "poiein" ("to make") sufficed. And even that was not extended to art in general, but only to poiesis (poetry) and to the poietes (poet, or "maker") who made it. Plato asks in The Republic, "Will we say, of a painter, that he makes something?" and answers, "Certainly not, he merely imitates." To the ancient Greeks, the concept of a creator and of creativity implied freedom of action, whereas the Greeks' concept of art involved subjection to laws and rules. Art (in Greek, "techne") was "the making of things, according to rules." It contained no creativity, and it would have been — in the Greeks' view — a bad state of affairs if it had.

This understanding of art had a distinct premise: Nature is perfect and is subject to laws, therefore man ought to discover its laws and submit to them, and not seek freedom, which will deflect him from that optimum which he can attain. The artist was a disoverer, not an inventor.

The sole exception to this Greek view — a great exception — was poetry. The poet made new things — brought to life a new world — while the artist merely imitated. And the poet, unlike the artist, was not bound by laws. There were no terms corresponding to "creativity" or "creator," but in reality the poet was understood to be one who creates. And only he was so understood. In music, there was no freedom: melodies were prescribed, particularly for ceremonies and entertainments, and were known tellingly as "nomoi" ("laws"). In the visual arts, freedom was limited by the proportions that Polyclitus had established for the human frame, and which he called "the canon" (meaning, "measure"). Plato argued in Timaeus that, to execute a good work, one must contemplate an eternal model. Later the Roman, Cicero, would write that art embraces those things "of which we have knowledge" ("quae sciuntur").

Poets saw things differently. Book I of the Odyssey asks, "Why forbid the singer to please us with singing as he himself will?" Aristotle had doubts as to whether poetry was imitation of reality, and as to whether it required adherence to truth: it was, rather, the realm of that "which is neither true nor false."

In Rome, these Greek concepts were partly shaken. Horace wrote that not only poets but painters as well were entitled to the privilege of daring whatever they wished to ("quod libet audendi"). In the declining period of antiquity, Philostratus wrote that "one can discover a similarity between poetry and art and find that they have imagination in common." Callistratos averred that "Not only is the art of the poets and prosaists inspired, but likewise the hands of sculptors are gifted with the blessing of divine inspiration." This was something new: classical Greeks had not applied the concepts of imagination and inspiration to the visual arts but had restricted them to poetry. Latin was richer than Greek: it had a term for "creating" ("creatio") and for "creator," and had two expressions — "facere" and "creare" — where Greek had but one, "poiein." Still, the two Latin terms meant much the same thing.

A fundamental change, however, came in the Christian period: "creatio" came to designate God's act of "creation from nothing" ("creatio ex nihilo"). "Creatio" thus took on a different meaning than "facere" ("to make"), and ceased to apply to human functions. As the 6th-century Roman official and literary figure Cassiodorus wrote, "things made and created differ, for we can make, who cannot create."

Alongside this new, religious interpretation of the expression, there persisted the ancient view that art is not a domain of creativity. This is seen in two early and influential Christian writers, Pseudo-Dionysius and St. Augustine. Later medieval men such as Hraban the Moor, and Robert Grosseteste in the 13th century, thought much the same way. The Middle Ages here went even further than antiquity; they made no exception of poetry: it too had its rules, was an art, and was therefore craft and not creativity.

All this changed in modern times. Renaissance men had a sense of their own independence, freedom and creativity, and sought to give voice to this sense of independence and creativity. The philosopher Marsilio Ficino wrote that the artist "thinks up" ("excogitatio") his works; the theoretician of architecture and painting, Leon Battista Alberti, that he "preordains" ("preordinazione"); Raphael, that he shapes a painting according to his idea; Leonardo da Vinci, that he employs "shapes that do not exist in nature"; Michelangelo, that the artist realizes his vision rather than imitating nature; Giorgio Vasari, that "nature is conquered by art"; the Venetian art theoretician, Paolo Pino, that painting is "inventing what is not"; Paolo Veronese, that painters avail themselves of the same liberties as do poets and madmen; Federigo Zuccaro (1542-1609), that the artist shapes "a new world, new paradises"; Cesare Cesariano (1483-1541), that architects are "demi-gods." Among musicians, the Dutch composer and musicologist Jan Tinctoris (1446-1511) demanded novelty in what a composer did, and defined a composer as "one who produces new songs."

Still more emphatic were those who wrote about poetry: G.P. Capriano held (1555) that the poet's invention springs "from nothing." Francesco Patrizi (1586) saw poetry as "fiction," "shaping," "transformation."

Finally, at long last, someone ventured to use the word, "creation." He was the 17th-century Polish poet and theoretician of poetry, Maciej Kazimierz Sarbiewski (1595-1640), known as "the last Latin poet." In his treatise, De perfecta poesi, he not only wrote that a poet "invents," "after a fashion builds," but also that the poet "creates anew" ("de novo creat"). Sarbiewski even added: "in the manner of God" ("instar Dei").

Sarbiewski, however, regarded creativity as the exclusive privilege of poetry; creativity was not open to visual artists. "Other arts merely imitate and copy but do not create, because they assume the existence of the material from which they create or of the subject." As late as the end of the 17th century, André Félibien (1619-1675) would write that the painter is "so to speak [a] creator." The Spanish Jesuit Baltasar Gracián (1601-1658) wrote similarly as Sarbiewski: "Art is the completion of nature, as it were a second Creator..."

By the 18th century, the concept of creativity was appearing more often in art theory. It was linked with the concept of imagination, which was on all lips. Joseph Addison wrote that the imagination "has something in it like creation." Voltaire declared (1740) that "the true poet is creative." With both these authors, however, this was rather only a comparison of poet with creator.

Other writers took a different view. Denis Diderot felt that imagination is merely "the memory of forms and contents," and "creates nothing" but only combines, magnifies or diminishes. It was precisely in 18th-century France, indeed, that the idea of man's creativity met with resistance. Charles Batteux wrote that "The human mind cannot create, strictly speaking; all its products bear the stigmata of their model; even monsters invented by an imagination unhampered by laws can only be composed of parts taken from nature." Luc de Clapiers, marquis de Vauvenargues (1715-1747), and Étienne Bonnot de Condillac (1715-1780) spoke to a similar effect.

Their resistance to the idea of human creativity had a triple source. The expression, "creation," was then reserved for creation ex nihilo (Latin: "from nothing"), which was inaccessible to man. Secondly, creation is a mysterious act, and Enlightenment psychology did not admit of mysteries. Thirdly, artists of the age were attached to their rules, and creativity seemed irreconcilable with rules. The latter objection was the weakest, as it was already beginning to be realized (e.g., by Houdar de la Motte, 1715) that rules ultimately are a human invention.

In the 19th century, art took its compensation for the resistance of preceding centuries against recognizing it as creativity. Now not only was art regarded as creativity, but it alone was so regarded. When later, at the turn of the 20th century, there began to be discussion as well of creativity in the sciences (e.g., Jan Łukasiewicz, 1878-1956) and in nature (e.g., Henri Bergson), this was generally taken as the transference, to the sciences and to nature, of concepts proper to art.

Creativity in various contexts

Henry Moore's Reclining Figure

Creativity in art & literature

Most people associate creativity with the fields of art and literature. In these fields, originality is considered to be a sufficient condition for creativity, unlike other fields where both originality and appropriateness are necessary[5].

Within the different modes of artistic expression, one can postulate a continuum extending from "interpretation" to "innovation". Established artistic movements and genres pull practitioners to the "interpretation" end of the scale, whereas original thinkers strive towards the "innovation" pole. Note that we conventionally expect some "creative" people (dancers, actors, orchestral members, etc.) to perform (interpret) while allowing others (writers, painters, composers, etc.) more freedom to express the new and the different.

The word "creativity" conveys an implication of constructing novelty without relying on any existing constituent components (ex nihilo - compare creationism). Contrast alternative theories, for example:

  • artistic evolution, which stresses obeying established ("classical") rules and imitating or appropriating to produce subtly different but unshockingly understandable work. Compare with crafts.

In the art practice and theory of Davor Dzalto, human creativity is taken as a basic feature of both the personal existence of human being and art production.

Creativity in psychology & cognitive science

The study of the mental representations and processes underlying creative thought belongs to the domains of psychology and cognitive science.

Creativity has also been studied from the perspective of cognitive science

A psychodynamic approach to understanding creativity was proposed by Sigmund Freud, who suggested that creativity arises as a result of frustrated desires for fame, fortune, and love, with the energy that was previously tied up in frustration and emotional tension in the neurosis being sublimated into creative activity. Freud later retracted this view.

Graham Wallas, in his work Art of Thought, published in 1926, presented one of the first models of the creative process. In the Wallas stage model, creative insights and illuminations may be explained by a process consisting of 5 stages:

(i) preparation (preparatory work on a problem that focuses the individual's mind on the problem and explores the problem's dimensions),
(ii) incubation (where the problem is internalized into the subconscious mind and nothing appears externally to be happening),
(iii) intimation (the creative person gets a 'feeling' that a solution is on its way),
(iv) illumination or insight (where the creative idea bursts forth from its subconscious processing into conscious awareness); and
(v) verification (where the idea is consciously verified, elaborated, and then applied).

Wallas considered creativity to be a legacy of the evolutionary process, which allowed humans to quickly adapt to rapidly changing environments. Simonton[6] provides an updated perspective on this view in his book, Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity.

Guilford[7] performed important work in the field of creativity, drawing a distinction between convergent and divergent production (commonly renamed convergent and divergent thinking). Convergent thinking involves aiming for a single, correct solution to a problem, whereas divergent thinking involves creative generation of multiple answers to a set problem. Divergent thinking is sometimes used as a synonym for creativity in psychology literature. Other researchers have occasionally used the terms flexible thinking or fluid intelligence, which are roughly similar to (but not synonymous with) creativity.

In The Act of Creation, Arthur Koestler[8] lists three types of creative individual - the Artist, the Sage and the Jester. Believers in this trinity hold all three elements necessary in business and can identify them all in "truly creative" companies as well. Koestler introduced the concept of bisociation - that creativity arises as a result of the intersection of two quite different frames of reference.

In 1992 Finke et al. proposed the 'Geneplore' model, in which creativity takes place in two phases: a generative phase, where an individual constructs mental representations called preinventive structures, and an exploratory phase where those structures are used to come up with creative ideas. Weisberg[9] argued, by contrast, that creativity only involves ordinary cognitive processes yielding extraordinary results.

Creativity and madness

A study by the psychologist J. Philippe Rushton found that creativity correlated with intelligence and psychoticism[10]. Additionally, a different study found that creativity is greater in schizotypal individuals than either normal or fully schizophrenic individuals. While divergent thinking was associated with bilateral activation of the prefrontal cortex, schizotypal individuals were found to have much greater activation of their right prefrontal cortex[11]. This study hypothesizes that these individuals are better at accessing both hemispheres, allowing them to make novel associations at a faster rate. In agreement with this hypothesis, ambidexterity is also associated with schizotypal and schizophrenic individuals. Creativity has also been associated with bipolar disorder.

Creative industries & services

Today, creativity forms the core activity of a growing section of the global economy — the so-called "creative industries" — capitalistically generating (generally non-tangible) wealth through the creation and exploitation of intellectual property or through the provision of creative services. The Creative Industries Mapping Document 2001 provides an overview of the creative industries in the UK.

Creativity in other professions

Isaac Newton's law of gravity is popularly attributed to a creative leap he experienced when observing a falling apple.

Creativity is also seen as being important in a variety of other professions. Architecture and industrial design are the fields most often associated with creativity, and more generally the fields of design and design research. These fields explicitly value creativity, and journals such as Design Studies have published many studies on creativity and creative problem solving.[12]

Fields such as science and engineering have, by contrast, experienced a less explicit (but arguably no less important) relation to creativity. Simonton[13] shows how some of the major scientific advances of the 20th century can be attributed to the creativity of individuals. This ability will also be seen as increasingly important for engineers in years to come[14].

Accounting has also been associated with creativity with the popular euphemism creative accounting. Although this term often implies unethical practices, Amabile[15] has suggested that even this profession can benefit from the (ethical) application of creative thinking.

Creativity and innovation

In many cases in the context of examining creativity in organizations, it is useful to explicitly distinguish between creativity and innovation.

In such cases, the term innovation is often used to refer to the entire process by which an organization generates creative new ideas and converts them into novel, useful and viable commercial products, services, and business practices, while the term creativity is reserved to apply specifically to the generation of novel ideas by individuals, as a necessary step within the innovation process.

For example, Amabile et al. suggest that while innovation "begins with creative ideas,"

". . . creativity by individuals and teams is a starting point for innovation; the first is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the second". [16]

Creativity in organisations

Amabile[17] argued that to enhance creativity in business, three components were needed: Expertise (technical, procedural & intellectual knowledge), Creative thinking skills (how flexibly and imaginatively people approach problems), and Motivation (especially intrinsic motivation).

Economic views of creativity

In the early 20th century, Joseph Schumpeter introduced the economic theory of creative destruction, to describe the way in which old ways of doing things are endogenously destroyed and replaced by the new.

Creativity is also seen by economists such as Paul Romer as an important element in the recombination of elements to produce new technologies and products and, consequently, economic growth. Creativity leads to capital, and creative products are protected by intellectual property laws.

Creativity is also an important aspect to understanding Entrepreneurship.

The creative class is seen by some to be an important driver of modern economies. In his 2002 book The Rise of the Creative Class, economist Richard Florida popularized the notion that regions with high concentrations of creative people such as hi-tech workers, artists, musicians, gay men and a group he describes as "high bohemians", tend to have a higher level of economic development.

Measuring creativity

Creativity quotient

Several attempts have been made to develop a creativity quotient of an individual similar to the Intelligence quotient (IQ), however these have been unsuccessful[18]. Most measures of creativity are dependent on the personal judgement of the tester, so a standardized measure is difficult to develop.

Psychometric approach

J. P. Guilford's group[19], who pioneered the modern psychometric study of creativity, constructed several tests to measure creativity:

  • Plot Titles, where participants are given the plot of a story and asked to write original titles.
  • Quick Responses is a word-association test scored for uncommonness.
  • Figure Concepts, where participants were given simple drawings of objects and individuals and asked to find qualities or features that are common by two or more drawings; these were scored for uncommonness.
  • Unusual Uses is finding unusual uses for common everyday objects such as bricks.
  • Remote Associations, where participants are asked to find a word between two given words (e.g. Hand _____ Call)
  • Remote Consequences, where participants are asked to generate a list of consequences of unexpected events (e.g. loss of gravity)

Building on Guilford's work, Torrance[20] developed the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. They involved simple tests of divergent thinking and other problem-solving skills, which were scored on:

  • Fluency. The total number of interpretable, meaningful, and relevant ideas generated in response to the stimulus.
  • Flexibility. The number of different categories of relevant responses.
  • Originality. The statistical rarity of the responses among the test subjects.
  • Elaboration. The amount of detail in the responses.

Social-personality approach

Some researchers have taken a social-personality approach to the measurement of creativity. In these studies, personality traits such as independence of judgement, self-confidence, attraction to complexity, aesthetic orientation and risk-taking are used as measures of the creativity of individuals[21]. Other researchers[22] have related creativity to the trait, openness to experience.

Other approaches to measurement

Genrich Altshuller in the 1950s introduced approaching creativity as an exact science with TRIZ and a Level-of-Invention measure.

The creativity of thousands of Japanese, expressed in terms of their problem-solving and problem-recognizing capabilities, has been measured in Japanese firms[23].

Fostering creativity

Main article: creativity techniques

Daniel Pink, in his 2005 book A Whole New Mind, argues that we are entering a new age where creativity is becoming increasingly important. In this conceptual age, we will need to foster and encourage right-directed thinking (representing creativity and emotion) over left-directed thinking (representing logical, analytical thought).

Nickerson[24] provides a summary of the various creativity techniques that have been proposed. These include approaches that have been developed by both academia and industry:

  1. Establishing purpose and intention
  2. Building basic skills
  3. Encouraging acquisitions of domain-specific knowledge
  4. Stimulating and rewarding curiosity and exploration
  5. Building motivation, especially internal motivation
  6. Encouraging confidence and a willingness to take risks
  7. Focusing on mastery and self-competition
  8. Promoting supportable beliefs about creativity
  9. Providing opportunities for choice and discovery
  10. Developing self-management (metacognitive skills)
  11. Teaching techniques and strategies for facilitating creative performance
  12. Providing balance

Some see the conventional system of schooling as "stifling" of creativity and attempt (particularly in the pre-school/kindergarten and early school years) to provide a creativity-friendly, rich, imagination-fostering environment for young children. Compare Waldorf School.

A growing number of pop psychologists are making money off the idea that one can learn to become more "creative". Several different researchers have proposed approaches to prop up this idea, ranging from psychological-cognitive, such as:

to the highly-structured, such as:

Social attitudes to creativity

"The man who invented fire was probably burned at the stake." Ayn Rand

Although the benefits of creativity to society as a whole have been noted[25], social attitudes about this topic remain divided. The wealth of literature regarding the development of creativity[26], and the profusion of creativity techniques, indicate wide acceptance, at least among academics, that creativity is desirable.

There is, however, a dark side to creativity, in that it represents a "quest for a radical autonomy apart from the constraints of social responsibility"[27]. In other words, by encouraging creativity we are encouraging a departure from society's existing norms and values. Expectation of conformity runs contrary to the spirit of creativity. Nevertheless, employers are increasingly valuing creative skills. A report by the Business Council of Australia, for example, has called for a higher level of creativity in graduates[28]. The ability to "think outside the box" is highly sought after. However, although the above-mentioned paradox may well imply that firms pay lipservice to thinking outside the box while maintaining traditional, hierarchical organization structures in which individual creativity is not rewarded.

Ambivalence to creativity in the West may perhaps be due to the prevailing culture's image of creativity; the ingestion of drugs to generate visions; the celebration of eccentric behaviour; a possible cross-over between creativity and mental illness; the often bohemian sexual tastes of artists; the culture's association of artists with a life of poverty and misery.

Neurology of creativity

The neurology of creativity has been discussed by Fred Balzac in an article on "Exploring the Brain's Role in Creativity" (NeuroPsychiatry Reviews, May 2006).

Albert Einstein recognized that a useful approach to understanding the brain's role in creativity is to study the brains of highly-creative persons, and he willed that upon his death, before his body was cremated, his brain be removed for examination. Unfortunately, nearly all the 240 blocks into which it had been dissected were lost and never analyzed. Thirty years later, when the Brodmann's area 39 portion was analyzed histologically, it was found to contain an unusually high proportion of glial cells to neurons. Kenneth M. Heilman, M.D., has suggested that this high ratio was an indication of a high degree of "connectivity."

According to Heilman, connectivity is a key component of "creative innovation," a concept that combines two of the four stages of creativity — incubation and illumination (the others are preparation and verification — that were identified in the 19th century by Hermann Helmholtz.

Heilman and two medical colleagues have defined "creative innovation" as "the ability to understand and express novel orderly realtionships." This requires high general intelligence, domain-specific knowledge, special skills, and "divergent thinking" (the ability to develop alternative solutions). But, in addition, creative innovation may require coactivation and communication between regions of the brain that ordinarily are not strongly connected.

Periods and Personalities

File:Archimedes' screw.jpg
Archimedes' inventions are an early example of creative insight

Ancient Greece

3rd century
4th century of the Christian Era

1000s - 1500s

1200s

About 1275, in an early attempt to use logical means to produce knowledge, Ramon Llull designed a method of combining attributes selected from a number of lists, which he first published in full in his Ars generalis ultima or Ars magna (1305). This used concept structures of the mind-map form.

1470s

1500s - 2000s

There was no real demand for such a science until the 19th century, when the Industrial Revolution started:

Following along Miles’ line of thought were:

  • beginning in the mid-1940s - start of knowledge-based creativty era by TRIZ
Early 20th century
1940s
1950s
1960s
1970s
1980s
1990s

Undated

  • Reviewed Dendrogram technique, relies on the experience of designers which may be limited to certain areas of expertise such as chemistry or electronics. Thus, a solution that might be simpler and cheaper using magnetism could be missed.

Notes

  1. ^ (Taylor, 1988)
  2. ^ (Rhodes, 1961)
  3. ^ (Johnson, 1972)
  4. ^ (Koestler, 1964)
  5. ^ (Amabile, 1998)
  6. ^ (Simonton, 1999)
  7. ^ (Guilford, 1967)
  8. ^ (Koestler, 1964) and various imprints
  9. ^ (Weisberg, 1993)
  10. ^ (Rushton, 1990)
  11. ^ http://exploration.vanderbilt.edu/news/news_schizotypes.htm (Actual paper)
  12. ^ for a typical example see (Dorst et al., 2001)
  13. ^ (Simonton, 1999)
  14. ^ (National Academy of Engineering 2005)
  15. ^ (Amabile, 1998)
  16. ^ (Amabile et al., 1996 p. 1154-1155, emphasis added)
  17. ^ (Amabile, 1998)
  18. ^ (Kraft, 2005)
  19. ^ (Guildford, 1967)
  20. ^ (Torrance, 1974)
  21. ^ (Sternberg, 1999)
  22. ^ for example McCrae (1987)
  23. ^ Details: http://iccincsm.at.infoseek.co.jp
  24. ^ (Nickerson, 1999)
  25. ^ (Runco 2004)
  26. ^ see (Feldman, 1999) for example
  27. ^ (McLaren, 1999)
  28. ^ (BCA, 2006)

References

  • Amabile, T.M. (1998). "How to kill creativity". Harvard Business Review. 76 (5).
  • Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context. Westview Press.
  • Amabile, T. M., R. Conti, H. Coon, et al. (1996). 'Assessing the work environment for creativity', Academy of Management Review, 39 (5), pp. 1154-1184.
  • Anderson, J.R. (2000). Cognitive psychology and its implications. Worth Publishers.
  • BCA (2006). New Concepts in Innovation: The Keys to a Growing Australia. Business Council of Australia. {{cite book}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  • Dorst, K. (2001). "Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution". Design Studies. 22 (5): 425–437. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Feldman, D.H. (1999). "The Development of Creativity". In ed. Sternberg, R.J. (ed.). Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)
  • Finke, R. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. MIT Press. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. Basic Books.
  • Guilford, J.P. (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence.
  • Johnson, D.M. (1972). Systematic introduction to the psychology of thinking. Harper & Row.
  • Kraft, U. (2005). "Unleashing Creativity". Scientific American Mind. April: 16–23.
  • Koestler, A. (1964). The Act of Creation.
  • McLaren, R.B. (1999). "Dark Side of Creativity". In ed. Runco, M.A. & Pritzker, S.R. (ed.). Encyclopedia of Creativity. Academic Press. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
  • McCrae, R.R. (1987). "Creativity, Divergent Thinking, and Openness to Experience". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 52 (6): 1258–1265.
  • National Academy of Engineering (2005). Educating the engineer of 2020 : adapting engineering education to the new century. National Academies Press.
  • Nickerson, R.S. (1999). "Enhancing Creativity". In ed. Sternberg, R.J. (ed.). Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)
  • Pink, D.H. (2005). A Whole New Mind: Moving from the information age into the conceptual age. Allen & Unwin.
  • Rhodes, M. (1961). "An analysis of creativity". Phi Delta Kappan. 42: 305–311.
  • Rushton, J.P. (1990). "Creativity, intelligence, and psychoticism". Personality and Individual Differences. 11: 1291–1298.
  • Runco, M.A. (2004). "Creativity". Annual Review of Psychology. 55: 657–687.
  • Simonton, D.K. (1999). Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity. Oxford University Press.
  • Sternberg, R.J. (1999). "The Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms". In ed. Sternberg, R.J. (ed.). Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Tatarkiewicz, Władysław , A History of Six Ideas: an Essay in Aesthetics, translated from the Polish by Christopher Kasparek, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1980. (Traces the history of key aesthetics concepts, including art, beauty, form, creativity, mimesis, and the aesthetic experience.)
  • Taylor, C.W. (1988). "Various approaches to and definitions of creativity". In ed. Sternberg, R.J. (ed.). The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives. Cambridge University Press. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)
  • Torrance, E.P. (1974). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Personnel Press.
  • Wallas, G. (1926). Art of Thought.
  • Weisberg, R.W. (1993). Creativity: Beyond the myth of genius. Freeman.

See also

The following terms are sometimes used interchangeably with creativity, although each has slightly different meanings: creative problem solving, invention, ideation, ingenuity, imagination, inspiration, intuition, insight, originality.

Wikiquote has quotations related to Creativity.

Essays:

Wikibooks has more on the topic of: Creativity
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Creativity&oldid=57945144"