Search

A deeper understanding of the processes leading to problem framing and behind finding solutions to problems should help explain variability in the quality of the solutions to those problems. Using Sternberg's WICS model as the conceptual basis of problem solving, this article discusses the relations between creative, analytical, practical, and wisdom-based approaches as bases for solutions to problems. We use a construct of "meta-intelligence" to encompass understanding, control, and coordination between these constructs. We propose that constraints can act at each of three levels--individual, contextual, and interactive. Individual constraints include the metacomponents (executive processes) that underpin each of the four kinds of solutions. Contextual constraints direct which of the four approaches are preferred under what circumstances. Finally, interactive constraints involve individual and contextual constraints directly impacting each other's actions. The model of meta-intelligence and its functioning helps to explain the variability in the ways that individuals frame problems and, as a consequence, in the solutions that are found. The model of meta-intelligence also helps explain why some solutions to problems are so much more comprehensive, and often better, than others.

The term "creativity" can conjure various ideas and meanings. It's no surprise that methods for measuring such a concept vary widely and are not without controversy. This is particularly true among people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), who are a unique yet incredibly diverse group of individuals. This article provides an overview of the assessment of creativity among individuals with ASD. Findings among studies that have sought to determine whether individuals with ASD are more or less creative than their neurotypical peers are mixed, yet the authors propose that intentional development of creativity in all youth, including those with ASD, can be beneficial.

The original 90-item Creative Behavior Inventory (CBI) was a landmark self-report scale in creativity research, and the 28-item brief form developed nearly 20 years ago continues to be a popular measure of everyday creativity. Relatively little is known, however, about the psychometric properties of this widely used scale. In the current research, we conduct a detailed psychometric investigation into the 28-item CBI by applying methods from item response theory using a sample of 2,082 adults. Our investigation revealed several strengths of the current scale: excellent reliability, suitable dimensionality, appropriate item difficulty, and reasonably good item discrimination. Several areas for improvement were highlighted as well: (1) the four-point response scale should have fewer options; (2) a handful of items showed gender-based differential item functioning, indicating some gender bias; and (3) local dependence statistics revealed clusters of items that are redundant and could be trimmed. These analyses support the continued use of the CBI for assessing engagement in everyday creative behaviors but suggest that the CBI could benefit from thoughtful revision.

Immersive virtual reality (IVR) takes advantage of exponential growth in our technological abilities to offer an array of new forms of entertainment, learning opportunities, and even psychological interventions and assessments. The field of creativity is a driving force in both large-scale innovations and everyday progress, and imbedding creativity assessment in IVR programs has important practical implications for future research and interventions in this field. Creativity assessment, however, tends to either rely on traditional concepts or newer, yet cumbersome methods. Can creativity be measured within IVR? This study introduces the VIVA, a new IVR-based visual arts creativity assessment paradigm in which user create 3D drawings in response to a prompt. Productions are then rated with modern extensions of a classic product-based approach to creativity assessment. A sample of 67 adults completed the VIVA, further scored using item-response modeling. Results demonstrated the strong psychometric properties of the VIVA assessment, including its structural validity, internal reliability, and criterion validity with relevant criterion measures. Together, this study established a solid proof-of-concept of the feasibility of measuring creativity in IVR. We conclude by discussing directions for future studies and the broader importance and impact of this line of work for the field of creativity and virtual reality.

What is the aim of giftedness? Is the goal to narrow in on the gifts of a select few or to nurture everyone's gifts such that they may be exchanged with each other? Drawing from creativity theory, we emphasize the possible interactive element of giftedness. Current paradigms risk ignoring hidden creativities and for potential to remain in the shadows. Is the promise of one possible eminent creator worth thousands of everyday creators? Do we need to make such a choice? By fostering perspective-taking and other collaborative skills, we may try to have it all.

Creativity, and more recently dark creativity, have yet to be studied in relation to moral foundations, especially against the background of dark traits. This study identified moral foundations that predicted creativity, particularly malevolent creativity, after accounting for Dark Triad/Tetrad traits. Data (N = 529, M[subscript age] = 20.10 years, SD = 4.55) on self-reported creativity, personality, and moral foundations were collected. Results indicated that lower concerns for binding foundations (loyalty, authority, and purity) explained creativity, especially malevolent creativity. In contrast, higher concern for individualizing foundations (care and fairness) predicted creativity, whereas lower regard for these morals predicted malevolent creativity. Planned mediations indicated that lower concerns for all foundations explained greater malevolent creativity due to higher dark personality dispositions. Limitations and implications are discussed.

Students display resistance, including academic dishonesty, at all educational levels. In the present study, we qualitatively examined the extent and incidence of academic misbehaviors by 101 US college students (M[subscript age] = 22.98 years, SD = 6.70). Using a combination of self-reported closed- and open-ended questions, we developed a multi-faceted understanding of how students perceived their own classroom misbehaviors to avoid work as being original, clever, deceptive, and unethical. Questions pertaining to possible prevention, impact on grade, and repetition of the misbehavior were also included. Further, environmental contributors of such behavior were explored, inclusive of the teacher, curriculum, larger school/institutional reasons, peers, and out-of-school issues. Thematic analyses identified distinct themes related to each factor, with poor time management emerging as a salient antecedent across factors. The present study also reviews and provides strategies to improve time management among students to mitigate future instances of academic misbehavior.

Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS) is a self-report of creative behavior in five distinct domains. The present study aims to translate K-DOCS into Russian and evaluate its psychometric properties. The psychometric analysis was performed on a sample of adults recruited through Yandex Toloka (N = 1011; M[subscript age] = 35.94, SD[subscript age] = 10.95) from various regions of Russia and Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) countries. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses indicated that the model with five correlated factors showed the best fit to empirical data. All factors demonstrated good internal consistency and moderate test-retest reliability. The correlation and hierarchical regression analyses for K-DOCS factors, creative achievements by CBI (Creative Behavior Inventory), and personality traits by BFI-2 (Big Five Inventory -- 2) yielded evidence for an adequate level of convergent and discriminant validity. We also examined differences across K-DOCS factors among occupations defined by Holland's typology and attempted to investigate K-DOCS measurement invariance across gender. As a result, we obtained evidence supporting the construct validity of K-DOCS and established its partial measurement invariance across gender. The current study shows that Russian K-DOCS has satisfactory psychometric properties and can serve as a trusted guide into various manifestations of humans' creative behavior.

The Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS; Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Counting the muses: Development of the Kaufman domains of creativity scale (K-DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 298-308. doi:10.1037/a0029751) is a self-report assessment of five creative domains: Everyday, Scholarly, Performance, Scientific, and Artistic. This investigation was designed to reassess the factor structure of the K-DOCS, examine its measurement invariance across men and women, and develop norms across the five domains. Data on 22,013 American participants who had completed the assessment as part of past or ongoing studies between 2012 and 2020 were collated across multiple samples. Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that both five- and nine-factor solutions had superior fit compared to a one-factor solution. The models were also gender invariant, indicating that creative domains were assessed similarly across male and female samples. Norms across gender and age-groups were provided to enable future comparisons in research settings; it is not recommended to use these norms in clinical or diagnostic contexts. The investigation concluded that the K-DOCS is a robust psychometric tool for the self-assessment of creativity across domains.

The present study examines effort in narrative creative writing (operationalized as time-on-task) using a new assessment approach, the storyboard task. Participants (N = 125) completed alternate forms of the storyboard task in two sessions five weeks apart. They also completed measures of divergent thinking and self-reported ideational behavior. Time-on-task, story length, and rated creativity scores were obtained for the participants' stories. The storyboard task demonstrated good alternate form reliability and convergent validity with the criterion measures. Although time-on-task was strongly, positively associated with creativity scores, this relationship was confounded by the contribution of story length. Relationships amongst these variables were similar when creativity was rated by novice raters using a rubric or experienced raters using the consensual assessment technique. Additionally, story length and time-on-task were moderately correlated with the external criterion measures of creativity. Thus, the strong associations between rated creativity, story length, and time in creative writing raise important issues and avenues for future research, and results for the storyboard task suggest that it is a valuable assessment of narrative creative writing.

Past research has demonstrated that the hierarchical value structures of creative individuals differ systematically from their less creative counterparts. However, earlier studies used a global creativity score, which is inconsistent with both creativity's movement toward a domain-specific viewpoint, and Lebedeva et al.'s 2019 study suggests the relationship between values and the frequency of creative behaviors differs by domain. We conducted two studies to determine if different creative domains are associated with distinct value hierarchies in creative ability, self-perception, and achievement. Study 1 (N = 156) examined whether Schwartz's core values demonstrated a different pattern of correlations with verbal versus visual creative performance, assessed with story and drawing tasks. Study 2 (N = 492) examined the pattern of values across a broader set of domains (i.e., artistic, everyday/self, science, performance, and scholarly), assessed using measures of creative self-concept and self-reported creative achievement. The value hierarchies associated with each of the domains were not consistent with each other or with the findings of past studies. The implications of these results for creative domain specificity and motivation are discussed.

Students display resistance in the classroom in numerous ways, often in the form of academic misconduct. Some argue that resistance can reflect cleverness and creativity, rather than apathy. This investigation aimed to develop a psychometric tool to examine classroom resistance as well as identify individual and situational determinants of the same. Data from 853 participants (M[subscript age] = 19.36 years, SD = 1.93) was collected on measures of resistance behaviors in educational contexts and their environmental contributors, creativity, personality, and deception. Further, participants indicated their frequency of resistance across two time periods: kindergarten through middle school, and high school through college. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses identified a robust three-factor structure for the Classroom Resistance Scale, comprising Test-Oriented Cheating, Blatant Academic Dishonesty, and Unethical Shortcuts. The person-situation analysis indicated that students who engaged in resistance shared some consistent characteristics: they were more likely to be closed to new experiences, unimaginative, more extraverted, and highly influenced by their peers. Moreover, the frequency of classroom resistance increased in higher grades as compared to lower ones. Implications of spillover effects of academic dishonesty into the workplace are discussed, in addition to suggestions for future research.

A critical need exists in engineering education to draw on the non-traditional divergent thinking and risk-taking necessary for making radical technological breakthroughs. Literature suggests that individuals with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) characteristics demonstrate unparalleled creativity and risk-taking potential. While this group of students may offer significant benefits to the advancement of the nation, they are currently significantly underrepresented in engineering programs because of the major academic and emotional challenges that the rigidly structured engineering programs impose on them. Funded by the Division of Engineering Education and Centers of the National Science Foundation, this study is aimed at understanding creative potential and challenges of engineering students with ADHD characteristics. A cohort of 18 female and 36 male undergraduate students were recruited from the School of Engineering at the University of Connecticut (n=54). To quantify the level of ADHD-related characteristics and the creative potential of the participants, the investigators administered Brown ADD Scales for Adults and Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT) Figural Form A, respectively. A 40-question instrument was designed and administered to understand the learning styles, the perception of current engineering programs in terms of rewarding creativity and risk-taking, and the difficulties of the participants in engineering programs. It was found that there is a statistically significant positive correlation between the Brown total score and the Creativity Index (r=.45, p=.001). Among Brown subscale scores, attention was found to have the largest correlation with the Creativity Index. There were positive significant correlations with the Creativity Index and all of the Brown subscales except for memory. The Brown scores were found to have positive significant correlations with three of the TTCT sub-categories: fluency, originality, and resistance to premature closure. A negative correlation exists between the GPA and total Brown score, suggesting weaker academic accomplishments of students with ADHD characteristics. GPA showed no correlation with the Creativity Index, suggesting a lack of creativity appreciation in current engineering programs. The Mann-Whitney test on survey questions revealed that students with a higher Brown t-score are significantly more willing to take a chance in which they may fail in order to pursue innovation. This study found that only three of the eighteen students who are formally diagnosed with ADHD are receiving services from the Center of Students with Disabilities CSD. It is expected that the outcomes of this study lead to a paradigm shift in how these individuals are perceived by both our society and our engineering educational system. The knowledge generated through this study will help to identify the academic struggles of this group of students and facilitate development of specialized education programs that foster largely unrecognized talents and unique potential of this underrepresented population.

The concept of "creativity" as a desirable attribute within education is long-standing. The fields of education and creativity have developed, and periodically intersected with, government reports, policies, commentaries, and advice. Recently, an increasing number of countries have emphasized creativity in their official curricula. However, the journey from openly acknowledging the importance of creativity to systematically and purposefully supporting its promotion in the classroom is a long one. The research reported in this article focuses on what might be regarded as the first step in this journey: school curriculum. This article analyzes curricula in 12 countries and asks three key questions: if and how creativity is defined, where is it placed in the curriculum, and what concrete advice is provided for teachers? Despite widespread interest and a productive field of research in creativity, our examination reveals little support for teachers to turn policy into practice.

One common self-assessment of creativity is the Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS). This article provides support for a Turkish translation of the instrument, offering exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to determine whether the factors were consistent across cultures. The participants consisted of two groups. The first group consisted of 1,260 undergraduate students (912 females, 348 males) at a public university in Turkey and was utilized for the principal axis factoring analysis. Horn's parallel analysis, a robust statistical technique, was employed to determine the number of factors to be extracted from a scale. The second group consisted of 1,215 participants (885 females and 330 males) who were utilized for confirmatory factor analysis. Results supported a nine-factor solution as a better fit for this sample than the five-solution originally used by Kaufman. Of the original five factors, four factors were divided into two sub-factors, which were distinct although moderately correlated. Finally, we determined the relationship between K-DOCS factors and college major. We also found good evidence for the construct, discriminant, and convergent validity of the scale. Relationships between K-DOCS factors and college major were largely consistent with predictions, providing additional evidence for the construct validity of the scale.

In this paper, we organize past and present theories and models of creativity by using a new conceptual framework--the creativity matrix--with the aim of highlighting the dimensions of creativity we know a lot about and those we tend to either ignore or find difficult to study. This matrix is formed by bringing together a developmental model of creativity (the 4 C's) and a structural one (the 5 A's). We start by briefly describing these two conceptual frameworks, and then, we proceed to exploring the matrix itself by describing how the 5 A's are dynamically organized at each "level" of the 4 C's. Importantly, our overview of the matrix is informed by existing models and concepts that address one of more of the C's and the A's. This gives us a unique opportunity to take stock of what has been studied so far and, toward the end, consider new avenues for the development of theory and research agendas within creativity studies.

Who should evaluate the originality and task-appropriateness of a given idea has been a perennial debate among psychologists of creativity. Here, we argue that the most relevant evaluator of a given idea depends crucially on the level of expertise of the person who generated it. To build this argument, we draw on two complimentary theoretical perspectives. The model of domain learning (MDL) suggests that, for novices in a domain, creativity is by-necessity self-referenced, but as expertise develops, more socially referenced creativity is possible. Relatedly, the four-C model posits four forms of creativity that fall along a continuum of social impact: mini-c, little-c, Pro-c, and Big-C. We show that the MDL implies a learning trajectory that connects the four Cs because, as socially referenced creativity develops, greater societal impact becomes available to a creator. Then, we describe four sources of evaluations that become relevant as an individual learns: judgments from the creators themselves, their local community, consumers of the idea, and finally, critics in the domain. We suggest that creators’ judgments are of essential importance for mini-c, community judgments are paramount for little-c, Pro-c requires either positive evaluations from consumers or critics, and Big-C requires both consumers and critics to evaluate an idea positively for an extended time. We identify key insights and imperatives for the field: aligning our measures (both human and AI scored) with the most relevant evaluations of ideas to support the reliability and validity of our measurements, using evaluations as feedback for learners to support the development of creative metacognition, and the importance of considering domain differences when evaluating ideas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This manifesto, discussed by 20 scholars, representing diverse lines of creativity research, marks a conceptual shift within the field. Socio-cultural approaches have made substantial contributions to the concept of creativity over recent decades and today can provide a set of propositions to guide our understanding of past research and to generate new directions of inquiry and practice. These propositions are urgently needed in response to the transition from the Information Society to the Post-Information Society. Through the propositions outlined here, we aim to build common ground and invite the community of creativity researchers and practitioners to reflect up, study, and cultivate creativity as a socio-cultural phenomenon.

Although the relationship between creativity and ADHD is uncertain, recent studies examining how dimensionally assessed characteristics of ADHD relate to creativity and divergent thinking in adults suggest an occasional positive, linear relationship between the constructs. However, the executive functions proposed to underlie characteristics of ADHD have not been examined in relation to creativity. This study was conducted to determine how different characteristics of ADHD related to executive functioning (as assessed by the Brown ADD Scales) predict different components of figural divergent thinking, intellectual risk-taking, and creative self-efficacy. Undergraduate engineering students (N = 60) completed the Brown ADD Scales, a figural divergent thinking task, and self-report measures of intellectual risk-taking and creative self-efficacy. A series of multivariate regression models demonstrated that several components of divergent thinking (i.e., fluency, originality, and resistance to closure) were predicted by different characteristics of ADHD. Although fluency was predicted by affect only and originality was predicted by activation only, resistance to closure was predicted by activation, effort, and attention. Additionally, intellectual risk-taking was predicted by memory, effort, and activation, whereas creative self-efficacy was predicted by effort. The implications of these results relating to the relationship between ADHD and creativity, as well as for engineering undergraduate education are discussed.

The Amusement Park Theory of Creativity, which represents both domain-specific and domain-general perspectives of creativity, calls for more research on how individual difference constructs are related to creativity at all ends of the domain-specificity and general spectrum. Toward this goal, this study examined emotional intelligence (using the Emotional Intelligence Scale) in relationship with both a domain-general measure (the Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults) and a domain-specific measure (Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale) in a sample of 281 Chinese undergraduates. Although emotional intelligence demonstrated no relationship with divergent thinking, it did positively predict all five domains of creativity on the self-report measure (ranging from 0.52 to 0.77). These findings add to the nuanced relationship between emotional intelligence and creativity and serve as a call for more work of this nature.

Background: Creativity is increasingly recognized as an important skill for success in the field of engineering, but most traditional, post-secondary engineering education programs do not reward creative efforts. Failing to recognize creativity or creative efforts can have particularly negative effects for those students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), who may exhibit enhanced divergent thinking ability yet struggle in the traditional educational environment. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study was conducted to investigate how ADHD characteristics, academic aptitude, and one important component of creativity (divergent thinking) contribute to academic performance in engineering programs and how traditional markers of academic performance and ADHD characteristics predict divergent thinking. Design/Method: Undergraduate engineering students (n = 60) completed measures of ADHD symptoms and divergent thinking. Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores and grade point average (GPA) were collected from university records, and hypotheses were tested using a series of multivariate regression models. Results: Verbal SAT scores were the only positive predictor of overall GPA and engineering GPA. ADHD characteristics did not significantly predict overall GPA but negatively predicted engineering GPA. ADHD characteristics were the only positive predictor of divergent thinking ability. Conclusions: ADHD characteristics negatively predict academic performance (i.e., GPA) in engineering programs but are more predictive of divergent thinking ability than traditional markers of academic performance.