Psychology Of Creativity Research Articles

Social Psychology of Creativity: Concept, Methods, Trends and Topics

인간의 근본 욕구이자 최적 경험이며 자기실현인 창조성은 그 중요성과 사회적 관심에 비해 과학적 심리학의 연구주제로서는 위상이 낮은 편이다. 그 중요한 원인 중 하나는 연구자들이 창조성 개념의 정의와 그 측정 방법의 타당도에 확신을 갖지 못하는 것인데, 이는 창조성을 확산적 사고 능력, 즉 창의성(創意性)으로 정의하는 심리측정론적 개념과 그 방법의 타당성 문제에 상당 부분 기인한다. 반면 사회문화적 맥락에서 새롭고 유용하다고 합의되는 산물을 생산하는 개인과 창조과정의 특징으로 창조성(創造性)을 정의하는 창조성의 사회문화적 정의 및 방법은 과학적 연구 주제로 타당하며, 특히 이러한 개념과 방법에 따르는 창조성의 사회심리학적 연구는 창조성에 대한 온전한 이해에 독특하게 기여한다. 이에 본 논문은 창조성에 대한 사회심리학적 연구의 활성화와 발전을 위해 창조성의 사회문화적 개념과 그 연구방법을 살펴보고, 창조성의 사회심리학적 연구 흐름을 개관한다. 특히 각 연구의 함의에 주목하여 (1) 창조과정의 절차적 전체성에 주목하고 창조의 사회적 체계를 강조하는 ‘과정과 체계의 창조성 이론’, (2) 내적 동기 및 몰입을 중심으로 창조자의 동기와 정서가 창조성에 미치는 영향을 파악하고, 창조에 적합한 마음 상태를 만드는 환경요소를 탐구하는 ‘맥락과 동기의 창조성 이론’, 그리고 (3) 2인 이상의 창조자가 관여하는 창조과정에 주목하여 집단의 효과적 기능 조건을 탐구하는 ‘집단 과정의 창조성 이론’의 세 가지 흐름으로 구분하여 각 연구주제를 개관하였다. 마지막으로 세 가지 흐름의 상호관련성을 바탕으로 창조성의 사회심리학적 연구가 창조성의 넓고 깊은 이해에 기여하는 바를 강조하고, 한국사회의 창조성 연구에 대한 함의를 논하였다.

Analyses Upon the Essence and Effect Thought of Creative Creativity and Psychology in the Book of Changes

Analyses Upon the Essence and Effect Thought of Creative Creativity and Psychology in the Book of Changes

Creative thinking in music: Its nature and assessment through musical exploratory behaviors.

Creative thinking in music has received only limited attention in the psychology of art and creativity, yet it appears to be one of the most important issues in the field of music education. As creative thinking in music exists in the general population and increasing evidence suggests the positive effects of active engagement with music, it seems that research on this topic offers promising implications beyond musical education itself. However, there is a lack of suitable measures of creative ability in music for individuals without prior musical training, and many important facets, such as the original use of sound material, are often disregarded in existing assessments. To fill these conceptual and empirical gaps—a prerequisite to any research on musical creativity—we present a new multimethod framework for its evaluation: the Musical Expression Test (MET). This method combines a systematic observational approach with a focus on musical exploratory behaviors and a product-based assessment of musical pieces resulting from musical activities, involving a sound-production set and a computer-based recording system. A study with the MET on a sample of adolescents with and without musical training is presented and provides the first empirical evidence of the MET’s reliability, convergence between behavioral and product-based assessment, and suitability for individuals without particular musical skills. A typology of product-based “creative styles” and their behavioral correlates is presented. The potential uses and implications of the MET for the future of musical creativity assessment and research are discussed.

New Bulgarian Work on Psychology of Creativity

A new Bulgarian work on Psychology of Creativity has been published recently. This book focuses on theoretical and methodological approaches to creativity. The results from a study of students' creativity are presented. They are related to the motives for success. Language: Bulgarian

Discussion: The Analyst's Involvement in the Creative Aspect of Analysis

Recent formulations on the psychology of creativity in the analytic context, such as Albert Rothenberg's “homospacial thinking,” Arnold Modell's “unconscious metaphoric thought,” and Thomas Ogden's “transformational thinking,” are discussed. These concepts enable previously unconnected experiences to be combined within the mind, while emphasizing interpersonal imaginative processes such as identification and empathic knowledge; the dual cognitive features of these formulations permit awareness of the complexity of feelings in oneself and others, essential for psychoanalytic creativity. Further, the articles in this issue are synthesized, highlighting the importance of the analyst making creative (new and valuable) use of his or her entire life experience, feelings, attitudes, and fantasies in treatment. From this dicussion, it is evident that the analyst's creative use of self should be more systematically incorporated into psychoanalytic theory of technique.

Perspectives on the Social Psychology of Creativity

AbstractScholars began serious study into the social psychology of creativity about 25 years after the field of creativity research had taken root. Over the past 35 years, examination of social and environmental influences on creativity has become increasingly vigorous, with broad implications for the psychology of human performance, and with applications to education, business, and beyond. In this article, we revisit the origins of the social psychology of creativity, trace its arc, and suggest directions for its future.

Towards a Comprehensive Understanding of Lead Userness: The Search for Individual Creativity

In innovation research the identification of lead users has attracted considerable research effort. While lead user research has made important advances, there is still a significant lack in terms of understanding antecedents to lead userness. Therefore the aim of this paper is to offer a framework which is rooted in creativity psychology in order to provide a more comprehensive understanding of who leading‐edge users are. It will allow for a systematic investigation and detection of innovative users. We conducted an empirical study in the field of small kitchen appliances in co‐operation with Philips Consumer Lifestyle, a field which lacks some of the typical characteristics that have been emphasized in markets traditionally studied in lead user research. With our research we show that (1) lead userness is fundamentally linked to individual creativity; (2) particularly creativity‐ and domain‐relevant skills (cognitive style, product knowledge and use experience) are related to lead userness; (3) creativity‐relevant skills can be explained by personal characteristics, such as education, gender and openness to experience.

Psychobiography as a method. The revival of studying lives: New perspectives in personality and creativity research

Psychobiography was invented by Sigmund Freud while investigating the psychological determinants of Leonardo da Vinci’s artistic creativity. Following the founder of psychoanalysis there were about 300 psychobiographic analyses published until 1960. From the 1930’s psychoanalysis also influenced the unfolding personality psychology trend called personology in the USA, led by G. W. Allport and Henry A. Murray, who also worked with life stories. However, the major methodological problems of classic psychobiography and the rising of nomothetic approaches in personality research effaced studying lives between the 1950’s and the 1980’s. The narrative turn in psychology made life story analysis accepted and popular again, and from the 90’s we can talk about “a renaissance of psychobiography”. The new endeavors encompass psychoanalytical and personological traditions and also integrate narrative perspectives. Contemporary psychobiography is constantly widening its focus: not only artists, but scientists, political and historical figures are also analyzed with more explicit methodology and comparative proceedings. In addition to the fact that psychobiography is a qualitative research method, it is very useful in exploring the psychology of creativity and personality itself and hence can be used as an instrument to train psychology students and prepare them for practical activities like psychotherapy or consultations. With the application of psychobiography the knowledge about human functioning and self-awareness is deepening, since it can be viewed as a practical realization of hermeneutical dialogue leading to the understanding of the human mind.

Interview with Mark Batey, R&D Director of E‐Metrixx and Joint Chairman of the Psychometrics at Work Research Group at Manchester Business School

PurposeTo provide an interview with Mark Batey, R&D Director of E‐Metrixx & Joint Chairman of the Psychometrics at Work Research Group at Manchester Business School.Design/methodology/approachThis briefing is prepared by an independent interviewer.FindingsDr Batey is an international authority on the Psychology of Creativity. In 2009, he was ranked second in the world for published research into creativity and in 2010, appeared with Lord Robert Winston on BBC's Child of Our Time. He presented at the 2010 HR Conference on the topic of “Addressing the Creativity Crisis,” looking at what we should be doing to develop creativity within ourselves and our organizations.Practical implicationsProvides guidance on how to change the culture of an organization to encourage creativity and how creativity can help businesses to survive turbulent markets.Originality/valueDr Batey draws on his experiences as a Psychologist and Chair of the Psychometrics at Work Research Group to offer businesses a new model for working. His research and training covers areas including: creativity, personality, financial behaviour, risk behaviour; attitudes towards fraud, emotional intelligence, and a whole different range of things related to how individuals can be different from one another. Through his interview, Dr Batey highlights how we can use this knowledge to work more effectively.

Introduction to special issue: The psychology of creativity and innovation in the workplace.

Introduction to special issue: The psychology of creativity and innovation in the workplace.

Creativity in interpreting

The objective of this paper is to examine how the findings of psychological research concerning creativity can be explored within the framework of interpreting studies. I will begin by reviewing the literature on the psychology of creativity, followed by the presentation and analysis of an empirical survey. Finally, I will suggest that creativity in interpreting can be examined on three levels, depending on the aspect we are focusing on: (1) the products; (2) mental processes; or (3) the behaviour of the interpreter. In the first case, the primary object is the product, while in the second and third, it is the process. What makes interpreting a special area of study in terms of creativity is not only the creative nature of the mental processes involved, but also, and perhaps even primarily, the creativity required of interpreters in terms of their professional behaviour in a communicational situation, where they are present but in which they are not natural participants.

The passions of modernism: Eliot, Yeats, Woolf, and Mann

This title offers an alternative approach to modernism as confronting helplessness and passivity. Upending the traditional view of modernism as defined by elitism, skepticism, and emotional detachment, Anthony Cuda argues that there is another view beneath this facade, one that emphasizes modernism's deep commitment to understanding human vulnerability, powerlessness, and the unpredictable energies of passion. In The Passions of Modernism, Cuda explores how four modernist writers - T. S. Eliot, W. B. Yeats, Virginia Woolf, and Thomas Mann - conceptualize passion, how they dramatize its upheavals and illuminations, and how it affects their ideas about the creative act. Resuscitating the classical definition of passion from the Latin passio, 'to be moved' or 'to be acted on', Cuda's study suggests that the modernist attraction to passivity arises from a desire to gauge the limits of the active mind and to rethink psychology, aesthetics, and theories of creativity from the perspective of the moved instead of the mover. Focusing on well-known texts as well as uncollected and archival materials, Cuda sheds new light on four canonical writers by examining their work in terms of 'passion scenes', vivid, intense tropes situated somewhere between exhilaration and terror that recur with insistent regularity over an artist's entire career, exerting an unusual psychological force on the creative mind that conjures them.

Principles for a Cultural Psychology of Creativity

This article focuses on a novel theoretical paradigm emerging in the study of human creativity: the cultural-psychological approach. It starts by differentiating between the long past of individualistic accounts of creativity (the lonely genius) and the short history of psychological understandings (the creative individual). The social and the cross-cultural psychology of creativity are both considered, together with their advantages and current limitations. Creativity is generally conceptualized as a process of artifact generation and five broad principles for a cultural psychology of creativity are presented. In clarifying the nature of creativity, a special consideration is given to the relationship between individuals, creativity, and culture. Finally, the role of the community in fostering and assessing creativity is suggested as a more realistic solution to the individual—society debate.

Creativity

The psychological study of creativity is essential to human progress. If strides are to be made in the sciences, humanities, and arts, we must arrive at a far more detailed understanding of the creative process, its antecedents, and its inhibitors. This review, encompassing most subspecialties in the study of creativity and focusing on twenty-first-century literature, reveals both a growing interest in creativity among psychologists and a growing fragmentation in the field. To be sure, research into the psychology of creativity has grown theoretically and methodologically sophisticated, and researchers have made important contributions from an ever-expanding variety of disciplines. But this expansion has not come without a price. Investigators in one subfield often seem unaware of advances in another. Deeper understanding requires more interdisciplinary research, based on a systems view of creativity that recognizes a variety of interrelated forces operating at multiple levels.

Paradigms in the study of creativity: Introducing the perspective of cultural psychology

This article identifies three paradigms in creativity theory and research in psychology. The He-paradigm, focused on the solitary genius, has been followed, mainly after the 1950s, by the I-paradigm, equally individualistic in nature but attributing creativity to each and every individual. Extending this view, the We-paradigm incorporates what became known as the social psychology of creativity. The cultural psychology of creativity builds upon this last theoretical approach while being critical of some of its assumptions. This relatively new perspective, using the conceptual and methodological framework of cultural psychology, investigates the sociocultural roots and dynamics of all our creative acts and employs a tetradic framework of self – community – new artifact – existing artifacts in its conceptualization of creativity. The theoretical basis of the cultural psychology approach is analyzed as well as some of its main implications for both the understanding and study of creativity.

Science and art: biology and psychology of creativity

Charles Percy Snow first talked of two cultures in a Rede Lecture he delivered in Cambridge 50 years ago (Snow in The two cultures and the scientific revolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1959). In the lecture he had only spoken of scientific and literary cultures, but the concept has gradually become extended beyond the literary culture, to encompass the broader world of arts. Thus, the expression is now routinely used to define the scientific and the artistic cultures. Which have important intrinsic differences: the scientific culture is objective and generates products that require verification [The term verification is used here in a general sense. It would perhaps be more appropriate to use the term falsification. In Popper’s (The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Basic Books, New York, 1959; Conjectures and Refutations, Rutledge, London, 1963) lexicon, a theory or, more generally, an assertion, is only scientific if it is falsifiable: which, however, does not mean that it is false]. The artistic culture is subjective, and, as a rule, does not demand verification. Science progresses, art changes, but the notion of progress is alien to it. These undisputable differences have been frequently underlined, however, the two cultures also have important points of contact. This contribution will discuss the most important, i.e., the commonality of their general aims, and the structure of the creativity process.

Creativity Training in Higher Design Education

ABSTRACTCreativity training plays a significant role in design education. However, it is sometimes difficult for design educators to design and implement effective creativity training in a design school due to the diversity of interpretations of creativity. Thus, the aim of this paper is to foster further discussions on providing creativity training in higher design education. In this paper, using reference to the theory on creative design practice, thinking habits, styles, motivation, psychology and behaviour, I suggest that design educators should consider six factors before formulating their creativity training. They are: (1) identifying design students' thinking habits; (2) developing students' intrinsic motivation by fun; (3) developing students' positive and forward thinking; (4) enhancing students' self-determination; (5) managing students' emotions; and (6) removing students' obstacles to creativity. Moreover, a proposed learning process is also presented in this paper.

Alexander Scriabin'sMysteriumand the Transcendence of Music: Psychoanalytic Notes on Genius, Mysticism and Art

Alexander Scriabin's Mysterium and the Transcendence of Music: Psychoanalytic Notes on Genius, Mysticism and ArtEmanuel E. GarciaEmanuel E. GarciaPsychoanalyst and Psychiatrist who now practices in New Zealand, with interests in the psychology of creativity and music. His recently published novella, “Sherlock Holmes and the Mystery of Hamlet,” (Breese Books) sets forth a radical new interpretation of the Shakespearean play, based upon a slip discovered in the text.Hott Hospital, High Street, Lower Hutt 5010, New Zealand. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:June 2009https://doi.org/10.1521/prev.2009.96.3.461PDFPDF PLUS ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations About Previous article Next article FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 96Issue 3Jun 2009 Information© 2009 N.P.A.P.PDF download

Co-constructing an understanding of creativity in drama education that draws on neuropsychological concepts

Background: Neuroscience is unlikely to produce findings for immediate application in the classroom. The educational significance and practical implications of knowledge about mind and brain inevitably require some level of interpretation, yet the multiplying examples of unscientific ‘brain-based’ educational concepts suggest this process of interpretation is potentially problematic. Research is needed into the most appropriate ways of developing such concepts. Purpose: This paper reports on an attempt to develop a process of ‘co-construction’ of pedagogical concepts, enriched by insights about the brain and the mind, with a group of trainee teachers led by a team with both educational and scientific expertise. Sample, design and methods: A research team consisting of two teacher trainers and a psychologist followed an action research spiral involving 16 trainee teachers who explored their own creativity, and the psychology and cognitive neuroscience of creativity in seminars, discussions and practical workshops, with the pedagogical aim of developing their own reflective capability. Results: Outcomes illustrated both dangers and opportunities associated with developing concepts bridging neuroscience and education. Trainees' understanding developed in stages that might broadly be described as initial enchantment, mythologising, disenchantment, an increased focus on metacognition and, finally, a demonstrable ability to reflect on their own classroom practice with a heightened sensitivity to issues of underlying cognitive processes. Conclusions: The type of ‘co-construction’ process reported here may help reduce some of the more popular and problematic misconceptions that arise when developing pedagogical concepts involving the brain and mind. Further research is needed to assess impact of such concepts upon practice.

Whether “Malevolent” or “Negative,” Creativity Is Relevant to Terrorism Prevention: Lessons From 9/11 and Hazardous Material Trucking

Cropley, Kaufman, and Cropley (this issue) make an important contribution in arguing for the value of creativity for terrorism prevention. Their message will be, though, somewhat more novel for scientific researchers and theorists than for the intelligence and security communities. It also leaves out many concepts and techniques, from the Psychology of Creativity literature, which are relevant to the theme of preventing terrorism. In this article, we give some attention to examining the constructs and analyses presented by Cropley et al. Most of our effort is, however, devoted to using Cropley et al.'s ideas as the starting point for a more detailed discussion of applying cognitive psychology, social psychology, organizational psychology, and security-profession ideas to creatively anticipating potential creative terrorism attacks, and devising creative counter-measures against such attacks. To illustrate the potential application of the Psychology of Creativity to terrorism, results are presented of a pilot study on using the Red-Team/Green-Team, Attack-Defense Tree, and Nominal Group techniques to generate possible creative approaches to anticipating and countering terrorism.