Search

Most studies investigating the effects of motivation on creativity have employed a social-psychological approach and used a dichotomous conceptualization of motivation (i.e., intrinsic and extrinsic). However, trait motivation may exist on a continuum and, although individual differences in motivation have also been found to predict creativity, no scales exist to directly assess creative trait motivation. The current report describes two studies examining the factor structure and psychometric properties of the creative trait motivation (CTM) scales. In the first study, participants (N = 580) completed three domain-specific scales (art, everyday, and science) and a well-established measure of creative self-perception. All three CTM scales demonstrated a similar factor structure, strong internal consistency for each of the factors, and evidence for construct validity. In the second study, the factor structures of the three scales were replicated employing a different sample (N = 597). The scales continued to demonstrate strong internal consistency and additional evidence for construct validity was provided, using well-established scales of both creativity and trait motivation. Together, the studies demonstrate that the domain-specific CTM scales are valuable tools for assessing creative trait motivation.

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.

Today's workers spend upwards of 80% of their time collaborating and teams have become the fundamental unit within organizations. Creative Success in Teams summarizes for practitioners and researchers what drives team creativity. Utilizing research from psychology, organizational behavior/management, business, and education, the book discusses how best to start, manage, and foster creativity in team environments, how to encourage participation and collaboration, what makes for the most creative team, and how best to lead and evaluate creative teams. Summarizes creativity research from psychology, education, and business Identifies how best to form a team for creative output Discusses how to foster team participation and collaboration Includes multicultural, interdisciplinary, and diverse teams

Today's workers spend upwards of 80% of their time collaborating and teams have become the fundamental unit within organizations. Creative Success in Teams summarizes for practitioners and researchers what drives team creativity. Utilizing research from psychology, organizational behavior/management, business, and education, the book discusses how best to start, manage, and foster creativity in team environments, how to encourage participation and collaboration, what makes for the most creative team, and how best to lead and evaluate creative teams. Summarizes creativity research from psychology, education, and business Identifies how best to form a team for creative output Discusses how to foster team participation and collaboration Includes multicultural, interdisciplinary, and diverse teams

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. © 2020 Creative Education Foundation(CEF)

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.

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., Este manifiesto, discutido por 20 académicos y académicas que representan diversas líneas de investigación sobre la creatividad, marca un cambio conceptual dentro de los estudios de este campo. Los enfoques socioculturales han hecho contribuciones sustanciales al concepto de creatividad en las últimas décadas y hoy pueden proporcionar un conjunto de propuestas para guiar nuestra comprensión de la investigación anterior y generar nuevas direcciones en investigación y práctica. Estas proposiciones son urgentemente necesarias en respuesta a la transición de una Sociedad de la Información a una Sociedad Post-Información. A través de las proposiciones descritas aquí, nuestro objetivo es construir un terreno común e invitar a la comunidad de investigadores y profesionales de la creatividad a reflexionar, estudiar y cultivar la creatividad como un fenómeno sociocultural.

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.

Our goal with this chapter is to theorize and systematically review the evidence about how interruptions of different types: intrusions, breaks, IT interruptions, distractions and multitasking may influence creativity. We first identify the cognitive and affective mechanisms through which certain job designs, in particular interruptions and multitasking, may influence creativity and the creative process – first, through the provision or depletion of cognitive resources, and second, through their effect on positive and negative affect. We review the research and evidence on how different types of interruptions and multitasking can have differential effects, both positive and negative, on cognitive resources and affect, and through these mechanisms on creativity. We also review some conditions and factors, such as time and frequency of interruptions, discretion to multitask, nature of intervening task that may influence the interruptions – creativity relations. One of the biggest implications of our review and theorizing is that managers and individuals need to be aware of the complex and more nuanced picture in the interruptions-creativity relation and the differential effects of interruptions and multitasking on creativity, as well as the conditions that may make them more valuable. Organizations can structure tasks and interruptions in a way to facilitate incubation and creativity by using the interruptions to replenish cognitive resources and influence affective mechanisms.

Identifying the extent and nature of the creativity of new products is a key for innovation management. The revised Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale (CSDS) is a 27-item scale based on a theoretical model of functional creativity, consisting of five main criteria: Relevance & Effectiveness, Problematization, Propulsion, Elegance and Genesis. The CSDS offers potential for differentiated assessments of product creativity as part of the larger process of innovation. Non-expert judges rated a series of mousetrap designs using a 30-item version of the CSDS. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a simple structure that corresponded closely to the a priori theoretical model of functional creativity. The untrained judges were able to use the scale with a high degree of reliability and internal consistency. The scale offers a tool for managing innovation, especially for stimulating creativity and diagnosing the creativity of products.

Language use is widely regarded as an important indicator of high quality learning and reasoning ability. Yet this masks an irony: language is fundamentally a social, collaborative tool, yet despite the widespread recognition of its importance in relation to learning, the role of dialogue is undervalued in learning contexts. In this chapter we argue that to see language as only a tool for individual thought presents a limited view of its transformative power. This power, we argue, lies in the ways in which dialogue is used to interthink – that is, to think together, to build knowledge co-constructively through our shared understanding. Technology can play an important role in resourcing thinking through the provision of information, and support to provide a space to think alone. It can moreover provide significant support for learners to build shared representations together, particularly through giving learners access to a wealth of ‘given’ inter-related texts which resource the co-construction of knowledge.

Language use is widely regarded as an important indicator of high quality learning and reasoning ability. Yet this masks an irony: language is fundamentally a social, collaborative tool, yet despite the widespread recognition of its importance in relation to learning, the role of dialogue is undervalued in learning contexts. In this chapter we argue that to see language as only a tool for individual thought presents a limited view of its transformative power. This power, we argue, lies in the ways in which dialogue is used to interthink – that is, to think together, to build knowledge co-constructively through our shared understanding. Technology can play an important role in resourcing thinking through the provision of information, and support to provide a space to think alone. It can moreover provide significant support for learners to build shared representations together, particularly through giving learners access to a wealth of ‘given’ inter-related texts which resource the co-construction of knowledge.