Search

The "standard" definition of creativity as novel and useful describes creative products, but creativity is constituted by processes. This misalignment contributes to the oft-noted challenges of operationalizing creativity. Here, we distinguish creativity as a process from creativity as an attribute (i.e. "creative-ness"). Operating from a priori premises of creativity theory, we develop a process definition of creativity. Specifically, creativity is defined as internal attention constrained by a generative goal. This definition comprises three criteria: 1) attention is directed internally (toward mental representations); 2) attentional operations (e.g. search, manipulation) are constrained to fit parameters of a to-be-achieved goal state (whether or not a goal is actually achieved); and 3) the goal state is generative (not already precisely held in memory). We illustrate how these three definitional process elements align with insights yielded by creativity neuroscience, clarify ontological distinctions (e.g. from mind-wandering and retrieval), and relate the process definition to process-based models. The process definition provides minimal necessity and sufficiency criteria for whether a process should be considered creativity, but does not exclude the many other perceptual, emotional, etc. elements that can contribute to creativity processes. Researchers should specify whether they are studying creativity-as-process vs. "creative-ness," and consider including process-focused assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Domain‐specificity is a topic of debate within the field of creativity. To shed light on this issue, we conducted a meta‐analysis of cross‐domain correlations based on the Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K‐DOCS). To evaluate the model fit of one general factor versus two factors that encompass the primary K‐DOCS subscales (Scholarly, Everyday, Artistic, Scientific, and Performance), we employed the one‐stage meta‐analytic structural equation modeling (OSMASEM) approach. Poor fit of these models would provide evidence of domain‐specificity, as the proposed models would not outperform the independence model. Our analysis included 45 correlation matrices from 30 studies, with a total sample size of 31,136 participants. The results provided support for a general domain of creativity, as well as a two‐factor solution consisting of Arts and Sciences factors. Among the subscales, the highest correlation was found between the Artistic and Performance domains (r =.478), while the smallest correlation was observed between the Everyday and Scientific domains (r =.178). Furthermore, moderator analyses incorporating age and gender revealed that the Scientific and Everyday subscales exhibited a stronger factor load in older participants compared to younger participants. Implications are discussed for research and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Historical narratives can satisfy basic individual psychological needs. However, an over-reliance on a group's past can marginalize those who think differently – thus, homogenizing the culture and stifling creativity. By revising narratives to balance the power of collective narratives with the richness of individuality, we foster groups that encourage varied identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The unbridled positivity toward curiosity and creativity may be excessive. Both aid species survival through exploration and advancement. These beneficial effects are well documented. What remains is to understand their optimal levels and contexts for maximal achievement, health, and well-being. Every beneficial element to individuals and groups carries the potential for harm – curiosity and creativity included. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this exchange, the authors each address five questions about creativity, and then provide a final synthesizing response. The five questions they address are: (1) What is creativity? Are there different processes, types, or kinds of creativity, and if so, what are they? (2) What are the major obstacles to people thinking and acting creatively? (3) Do you believe that creativity is intrinsically positive? Why or why not? (4) What are the main ways in which schools and parents should develop creativity in young people? (5) Can creativity be measured? If so, how should creativity be measured, and under what kinds of circumstances? Their answers highlight both similarities and differences in their points of view on creativity as a phenomenon and approaches to theorizing about it, studying it, teaching for it, and measuring it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the advent of artificial intelligence (AI), the field of creativity faces new opportunities and challenges. This manifesto explores several scenarios of human–machine collaboration on creative tasks and proposes "fundamental laws of generative AI" to reinforce the responsible and ethical use of AI in the creativity field. Four scenarios are proposed and discussed: "Co‐Cre‐AI‐tion," "Organic," "Plagiarism 3.0," and "Shut down," each illustrating different possible futures based on the collaboration between humans and machines. In addition, we have incorporated an AI‐generated manifesto that also highlights important themes, ranging from accessibility and ethics to cultural sensitivity. The fundamental laws proposed aim to prevent AIs from generating harmful content and competing directly with humans. Creating labels and laws are also highlighted to ensure responsible use of AIs. The positive future of creativity and AI lies in a harmonious collaboration that can benefit everyone, potentially leading to a new level of creative productivity respecting ethical considerations and human values during the creative process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We developed a novel conceptualization of one component of creativity in narratives by integrating creativity theory and distributional semantics theory. We termed the new construct divergent semantic integration (DSI), defined as the extent to which a narrative connects divergent ideas. Across nine studies, 27 different narrative prompts, and over 3500 short narratives, we compared six models of DSI that varied in their computational architecture. The best-performing model employed Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT), which generates context-dependent numerical representations of words (i.e., embeddings). BERT DSI scores demonstrated impressive predictive power, explaining up to 72% of the variance in human creativity ratings, even approaching human inter-rater reliability for some tasks. BERT DSI scores showed equivalently high predictive power for expert and nonexpert human ratings of creativity in narratives. Critically, DSI scores generalized across ethnicity and English language proficiency, including individuals identifying as Hispanic and L2 English speakers. The integration of creativity and distributional semantics theory has substantial potential to generate novel hypotheses about creativity and novel operationalizations of its underlying processes and components. To facilitate new discoveries across diverse disciplines, we provide a tutorial with code (osf.io/ath2s) on how to compute DSI and a web app (osf.io/ath2s) to freely retrieve DSI scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Creativity researchers typically focus on the who, what, why, where, and how of creativity. A noticeable omission is when. The when is not completely ignored in the field; it surfaces in developmental and evolutionary perspectives, the study of eminent creators, and other avenues of scholarship. In this paper, we assert that for the concept of when to be fully addressed researchers need to more actively consider the past, present, and future and how they interact. More specifically, we propose an expanded way of thinking about the when of creativity by introducing a temporal dimension to the definition of creativity. Our definition offers a broader lens for researchers to consider the temporal dimensions of originality, meaningfulness, and impact of creativity. After introducing our definition and describing its unique features, we discuss how researchers can use our definition to trace creative phenomena across a full temporal trajectory and thereby provide more nuanced and dynamic representation of how the features of creativity change across time and contexts. Finally, we apply this temporal definition to the Four Cs Model of Creativity to illustrate how considering the when can help resolve lingering questions about this perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. Practitioner Points: Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may have creative strengths that differ from their neurotypical peers. The arts may be an avenue for individuals with ASD to connect with others, gain satisfaction from life, and even explore vocations. Creativity should be encouraged in all children, including, and perhaps particularly among those with ASD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00584.x Byline: James C. Kaufman (*), Weihua Niu ([dagger]), Janel D. Sexton ([double dagger]), Jason C. Cole (s.) Abstract: Creativity has been proposed as a supplement to ability tests as a way to reduce bias, as a result of the typical lack of ethnic or gender differences. Yet, creativity is usually measured through a consensus of rater judgment. Could there be implicit biases against people of different ethnicities or gender? This study examined stories and poems written by 205 students and rated by 108 different students. Females wrote poems that were judged to be more creative; there were no significant differences by ethnicity across all raters. Among notable findings, European Americans and African Americans both preferred stories written by European Americans. Reasons for this and other findings are discussed. Author Affiliation: (*)Learning Research InstituteCalifornia State University at San Bernardino ([dagger])Pace University ([double dagger])Johns Hopkins University (s.)Consulting Measurement Group Article note: (1) James C. Kaufman, Learning Research Institute, California State University at San Bernardino, Department of Psychology, 5500 University Parkway, San Bernardino, CA 92407. E-mail: jkaufman@csusb.edu

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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, Mage = 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dark side of creativity entails using original thought to meet a selfish, negative, or evil goal, with or without the deliberate intent to harm others. Recent empirical advances have studied the behavioral correlates of such creativity, including associations with aggression, deception, and subclinical psychopathy. The time, therefore, seems apt to propose a theoretical framework for dark creativity's development and manifestation. This article outlines the AMORAL model of dark creativity, which traces a creative action from its Antecedents to Mechanisms and Operants to its Realization, and to the subsequent Aftereffects and Legacy of the act. We use both real-life and simulated examples to illustrate the application of the theory across multiple domains, from law enforcement to interpersonal relationships. Our goal is to help guide future scholarship and measurement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article we raise two linked questions in relation to positive creativity (creativity that can help transform the world to a better place): (1) Why does a great deal of positive creativity fly under the radar? and (2) What can be accomplished to enhance the visibility and frequency of positive creativity? Building off of the recent CASE model (Capital, Awareness, Spark, Exceptionality Model), which is focused on creativity that is hidden and overlooked, we unpack some of the reasons why positive creativity is often ignored in classroom settings. Using this framework as an intervention tool allows us, conversely, to identify those elements that can be enhanced to make positive creativity more visible and, overall, more present in education (and beyond). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For much of 2020, countries around the world fought against the COVID-19 pandemic. Many countries went into lockdown to control the fast spread of the virus. The unusual restrictions and confinement of the lockdown brought about new challenges for people's everyday lives. With flexibility, adaptability, and problem-solving at the core of its nature, creativity has the potential to help people cope with harsh and uncertain circumstances. Were people more, the same, or less creative in their everyday life during the period of lockdown, and in which ways? What are the emotions and motivations underlying their creative or non-creative behaviors? The current study aims to explore these questions from a cross-cultural perspective. A total of 754 comparable employee samples from three Chinese and three German cities were asked about their moods during the lockdown period, their self-rated level of creativity in daily lives before and during the lockdown, and their motivations behind their creative activities. Significant increases in creativity were observed in all everyday activities in both countries with only two exceptions in the German sample. Despite minor differences, a common pattern was found across cultures: whereas the activating positive mood could directly lead to the increase in creativity in some everyday activities, such a direct Mood-Creativity link was limited in the activating negative mood circumstances. In such circumstances, motivation intervened to enable the link to creativity. It was also found that this indirect effect of motivation between mood and creativity was more pronounced with the German participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an abrupt change in routines and livelihoods all around the world. This public health crisis amplified a number of systemic inequalities that led to populations needing to grapple with universally difficult truths. Yet some individuals, firms, and countries displayed resilient and creative responses in coping with pressing demands on healthcare and basic sanity. Past work has suggested that engaging in creative acts can be an adaptive response to a changing environment. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to describe how entities at the personal, community, and national levels cultivated and expressed creativity in an effort to make meaning during COVID-19. By overlaying the Four C model of creativity on such responses, we aim to (a) to connect mini, little, Pro, and Big creative behaviors with our attempts to make meaning of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and (b) to suggest how engaging in creative expression can be used to guard against the adverse consequences of this outbreak. Acknowledging that this time has been and continues to be distressing and filled with uncertainty, we propose some ways of making sense of current events by applying original thinking across domains. Further, we propose how engaging in creativity can serve to buffer against the negative effects of living through the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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.52 to.77). These findings add to the nuanced relationship between emotional intelligence and creativity and serve as a call for more work of this nature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses the Broadway musical The Mystery of Edwin Drood, by Rupert Holmes, as a case study through which to discuss and highlight modern creativity theories. The musical is viewed through the lens of the Five As, Four Cs, and many other person and product approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Creativity self-assessments (CSAs) are frequently used in empirical research. However, they are often chosen for the sake of expediency. If used as outcome variables, there are legitimate concerns with their accuracy or validity. However, CSAs are most valuable when serving other purposes. In this review, I establish a categorization of CSAs based on their primary focus: Activities, Evaluation, Process, and Beliefs. I give a brief description and some examples of each type. Finally, I highlight specific instances of how CSAs can offer information and insights beyond performance-based measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Uni-Pluri/Versidad is the property of Universidad de Antioquia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Being creative is considered a desirable trait, yet most empirical studies emphasize how to increase creativity rather than explore its possible benefits. A natural connection is how creativity can enhance life’s meaning. Many of the core concepts in work on the meaning of life, such as the needs for coherence, significance, and purpose or the desire for symbolic immortality, can be reached through creative activity. The synthesis of these two constructs—creativity and the meaning of life—is discussed with a temporal model encompassing past, present, and future pathways to creativity. The past pathway can help one understand and reflect on life. The present pathway can remind one of life’s joy and the many possible connections with humanity. Finally, the future pathway strives to ensure some type of legacy that may resonate with younger generations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Empirical studies on the relationship between affect and creativity often produce conflicting results. This inconsistency has led us to believe that the relationship between affect and creativity may be better understood by looking at potential moderators. Our study looked specifically at trait affect and self‐perceived creativity. Using the Affect Infusion Model (AIM) theory with problem clarity as the potential moderator, we hypothesized that when individuals are faced with problems that lack clarity, trait affect has greater sway over their self‐perceived creativity. Our results provided evidence that problem clarity moderated the relationship between positive trait affect and self‐perceived creativity; the positive relationship between positive trait affect and self‐perceived creativity is stronger when problem clarity is low and weaker when problem clarity is high. No moderating effect was found in the relationship between negative trait affect and self‐perceived creativity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How does the current replication crisis, along with other recent psychological trends, affect scientific creativity? To answer this question, we consider current debates regarding replication through the lenses of creativity research and theory. Both scientific work and creativity require striking a balance between ideation and implementation and between freedom and constraints. However, current debates about replication and some of the emerging guidelines stemming from them threaten this balance and run the risk of stifling innovation. Although we recognize the importance of doing rigorous science, we argue that any "one size fits all" research guidelines being proposed or enforced will do more harm than good for scientific creativity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Context: Creativity is an indispensable force in intellectual, social, cultural, and economic development. Yet societal forces conspire to erode it. Educators have despaired for many years over how schools often fail to encourage creativity, but society as a whole is just as guilty. But how do schools and society fail to encourage, or actually even erode, creativity? This essay addresses this question. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: The goal of our research was to specify the specific societal forces that erode creativity. We have labeled these forces ERODE: Education, Resources, Opportunities, Diffusion, and Exaggeration. The bottom line is that, although our society claims to want creativity, it most wants it when no one is negatively affected. Because creativity almost always negatively affects some people and groups, society tends to be much more supportive of creativity in theory than in practice. We show why. Research Design: Our research design is an analysis of the forces in society that erode creativity. We used historical analysis, media analysis, and analysis of educational practice to draw our conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An important step in understanding domain-specific qualities of creativity is determining what patterns exist in self-perceived creativity across domains and how these patterns associate with other characteristics relevant to creativity. In two studies involving high school (Study 1) and undergraduate (Study 2) students, hierarchical cluster analyses revealed four clusters in self-perceived creativity: “I am creative,” “I am not creative,” “I might be creative in math/science,” and “I might be creative, but not in math/science.” In the first study, a discriminant function analysis indicated that the “I am creative” and “I might be creative, but not in math/science” clusters were associated with higher openness and extraversion. In the second study, the “I am creative” and “I might be creative, but not in math/science” clusters were similarly associated with higher openness, extraversion, creative self-efficacy, and self-esteem, whereas lower agreeableness and conscientiousness were associated with the “I am creative” and “I might be creative in math/science” clusters. These findings suggest that clusters of self-perceived creativity are described by both overall magnitude (low vs. high) and domain (math/science vs. other domains), and relative associations with different personal characteristics vary across these clusters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reviews the relationship between creativity and equitable thinking and the individual differences in personality, demographic, and experiential factors that influence both concepts as they affect each other. Given the nationwide push to increase equity in public schools, interventions beyond teaching about equity are becoming progressively more vital to school improvement. The work suggests that schools may be able to increase equitable thinking and, accordingly, community equity by employing creative thinking strategies in classrooms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this response, we commend Sternberg’s Active Concerned Citizenship and Ethical Leadership (ACCEL) model yet urge him to consider an ACCEL-S model that more fully incorporates society’s integrative role in giftedness. ACCEL-S builds on the highly complex and contextual view of giftedness proposed by Sternberg and transforms it into a participatory framework. Within it, the skills associated with giftedness shape but are also shaped by social context; they generate meaningful forms of collaboration as well as grow out of them. The concept of giftedness itself is transformed from a person-centric one to a distributed model in which being gifted is a relational instead of purely personal achievement. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

College admissions decisions have traditionally focused on high school academic performance and standardized test scores. An ongoing debate is the validity of these measures for predicting success in college; part of this debate includes how success is defined. One potential way of defining college success is a student's creative accomplishments. We tested the hypothesis that traditional admissions criteria fail to capture adequately the creativity of applicants by asking 610 college applicants to complete several creativity tasks. These included divergent thinking, caption-writing, an essay, and self-report measures of creativity in numerous domains. Creativity scores were compared to data from the college application, including high school rank, standardized test scores, and admissions interview scores. Results showed that traditional admissions criteria were only weakly related to creativity. Indeed, students who report the highest creative self-efficacy can be perceived as weaker applicants according to traditional criteria. Findings are discussed in light of the goals of higher education to increase diversity of the student body and the abilities of its students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined the associations between love, personality, and creativity for people in relationships of varying durations. Participants (N = 1,529) from regions across the United States completed an online survey. Consistent with prior work, we found that relationship length was negatively associated with passion, positively associated with commitment, and did not exhibit a significant association with intimacy. For personality, agreeableness was positively associated with passion, intimacy, and commitment, and conscientiousness was positively associated with intimacy and commitment. Additionally, openness was significantly associated with passion and intimacy for men, and emotional stability was significantly associated with intimacy for women. Of note, artistic creative behaviors were negatively associated with all three love components, whereas everyday creative behaviors and self-assessed creativity were positively associated with each love component. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Creativity is sexy, but are all creative behaviors equally sexy? We attempted to clarify the role of creativity in mate selection among an ethnically diverse sample of 815 undergraduates. First we assessed the sexual attractiveness of different forms of creativity: ornamental/aesthetic, applied/technological, and everyday/domestic creativity. Both males and females preferred ornamental/aesthetic forms of creativity in a prospective sexual partner than applied/technological and everyday/domestic forms of creativity. Secondly, we assessed the simultaneous prediction of general cognitive ability, personality, divergent thinking, self-perceptions of creativity, and creative achievement on preferences for different forms of creativity in a prospective sexual partner. The results were generally consistent with assortative mating. The most robust predictors of a preference for applied/technological forms of creativity in a potential sexual partner were intellectual interests and creative achievement in applied/technological domains. In contrast, the most robust predictor of a preference for ornamental/aesthetic forms of creativity was openness to experience. The results suggest that openness to experience and its associated aesthetic, perceptual, and affective aspects are the primary characteristics influencing the sexual attractiveness of a creative display. Further, the results demonstrate the importance of also taking into account individual differences in personality, interests, and creative achievement when considering the sexual attractiveness of different manifestations of creativity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Creative metacognition (CMC) refers to a combination of self- and contextual-knowledge used to make decisions about one's own creative efforts and accomplishments. Competent creators use CMC to judge whether their contributions might be considered creative. Do novice creators have the ability estimate their own level of creativity? The purpose of this study was to examine this question. Specifically, this article reports on an exploratory study that examined whether elementary students' domain specific mini-c and little-c self-ratings aligned with external ratings of creativity. Students (N = 242) completed three performance tasks (i.e., a visual, verbal, and scientific task). Immediately following each task, students were asked to judge whether their resulting product was creative at the mini-c level (i.e., creative to the self, but not others) and little-c level (i.e., recognized as creative by others). External raters also scored the creativity of each completed task. Results indicate that students were able to differentiate their performance on different creative domains (i.e., visual, verbal, scientific) and across levels of quality (i.e., mini-c and little-c). In addition, their self-ratings were also predictive of creativity scores as assigned by expert raters. The specific patterns of the relationships between students' self-ratings and creativity are discussed and implications for subsequent research are provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What, if any, benefit might there be to applying creativity research to cooking? The purpose of this paper was to address this question. Specifically, we draw on concepts and theories from creativity research to help clarify what is meant by creative cooking. This includes exploring creative cooking through the lens of the 4-C and Propulsion models of creativity. We close with a brief discussion of why applying creativity research to cooking is both beneficial and an area in need of further work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Do researchers who study imagination, creativity, and innovation (ICI) explain to their audience why this topic is important, and if so, what reasons do they put forward? To answer this question, the present review examined a randomly selected sample of 200 empirical peer-reviewed articles published over the course of 3 years (2009-2012). The sample was stratified to include 50 articles in 4 disciplines (psychology journals, creativity journals, business or industrial/organizational psychology journals, and education journals). Across this sample of articles, ICI were treated as dependent variables most of the time, suggesting that scientists may be more interested in investigating what predicts ICI, rather than what ICI can predict. Approximately a third of articles examined did not explicitly address why researchers should care about ICI. Less than 10% included any type of substantive discussion of the issue. Qualitative analysis highlighted 9 main themes among the explicit reasons provided by researchers for studying ICI. Results varied according to journal types considered. Overall, findings from this review suggest that scientists may often assume that that their readers already share the implicit assumption that ICI constitute inherently valuable traits/behaviors, and thus pass up opportunities to explain why they think that ICI are important to study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many federal definitions and popular theories of giftedness specify creativity as a core component. Nevertheless, states rely primarily on measures of intelligence for giftedness identification. As minority and culturally diverse students continue to be underrepresented in gifted programs, it is reasonable to ask if increasing the prominence of creativity in gifted identification may help increase balance and equity. In this paper, we explore both layperson and psychometric conceptions of bias and suggest that adding creativity measures to the identification process alleviates both perceptions and the presence of bias. We recognize, however, the logistic and measurement-related challenges to including creativity assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, I highlight some of Arthur Cropley's work that has been the most influential to me as a scholar. Cropley's work has continually pushed the boundaries by exploring what creativity is and isn't, squashing myths, and not making assumptions. I specifically discuss Cropley's research and theory on the importance of convergent thinking, on the role of creativity in science and engineering, and on the potential for evil with creativity. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The present study investigates how the construct intellect, according to the Theoretical Intellect Framework (TIF), predicts creativity. The TIF is a theoretical model describing the structure of the construct intellect, a sub-dimension of the Big Five domain openness to experience. People (N = 2709) from two sub-samples (undergraduate students and Amazon MTurkers) completed one of three creativity tasks (self-reported, remote associates, or rated photo caption) and the Intellect Scale. The results support hypotheses derived from the TIF, as the operation Create, rather than the operations Think or Learn, significantly and in some cases uniquely predicted the self-reported creativity indicators. Creativity indicators with a strong cognitive load (remote associates test and rated photo caption), however, were predicted by the operation Think. Results are discussed with regards to the nomological net of the operation Create and the construct validity of the creativity assessments. We provide implications for applied purposes and call for further examination of the TIF with additional creativity measures. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study examines the factor structure of a Chinese version of the Revised Creativity Domain Questionnaire ( CDQ-R; Kaufman, Waterstreet, Ailaouni, Whitcomb, Roe, & Riggs, 2009) as well as its relation to Big Five personality traits within a Chinese sample ( N = 787). Analyses indicate the appropriateness of the Chinese version of the CDQ-R in terms of internal consistency, factorial validity as well as convergent and divergent validity concerning the Big Five personality factors. Revealing some culture-specific variation, confirmatory factor analysis indicated a slight superiority of a five-factor model for this Chinese sample over the existing four-factor model established with American samples. This higher level of differentiation in terms of one factor of the creativity domain could be explained on the basis of the specific characteristics of the Chinese culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines whether and why emotional intelligence may result in enhanced creativity in the workplace. Using a time-lagged data set collected from employees in three firms, we examined a mediation model where emotional intelligence is indirectly related to creativity serially, through generosity and vigor. The results of structural equation modeling ( SEM) indicate a sequential mediation model where emotionally intelligent employees display a high level of generosity; these acts of generosity nurture a sense of vigor, which in turn fosters creative behaviors. We discuss the implications for research on emotional intelligence, generosity, vigor, and creativity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relationship between creativity and intelligence has been explored in many ways, including using the CHC theory's constructs of Fluid Reasoning ( G f ) and Crystallized Knowledge (Gc). Yet the primary CHC broad factor theoretically associated with creativity is considered to be Long-term storage and retrieval (Glr). To test the relationship between Glr and creativity, 116 participants were tested on 4 Glr subtests from the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children-II (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004), a Gc subtest from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement - II Brief (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2005), and multiple creativity measures including self-assessments and rated creative performance in drawing and writing. Glr was significantly related to creative drawing, but not creative writing or most self-assessed creativity measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Various factors influence the development of creative potential, including everything from individual differences to the kinds of experiences and opportunities that creators experience throughout the lifespan. When it comes to nurturing creativity in the classroom, the learning environment is one of the most important factors – determining, in large part, whether creative potential will be supported (or suppressed). In short, classroom context matters. It is one thing to recognize that the classroom environment impacts the development of creative potential, it is quite another to understand just what it takes to develop an optimally supportive creative learning environment. This is because many of the features of optimal learning environments are quite subtle and even counterintuitive. In this paper, we discuss insights from the research on how teachers might establish a creativity-supportive learning environment in their classroom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined self-reported drug use (legal, illegal, and psychotropic) and creativity (using self-assessments, behavioral checklists, and a photo caption task). Drug usage was first analyzed using EFA and CFA; these factors were then entered into SEM analyses in order to predict creativity on each of the four measures while controlling for openness to experience. Although openness to experience was the strongest predictor of creativity on all scales, self-reported drug use did provide some incremental effects beyond personality on the creativity measures. Results are explained in terms of possible expectancy/placebo effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What influences our perception of art? Past aesthetics research has covered such variables as theme (e.g., positive, negative), style (e.g., surreal, abstract), and level (e.g., artist eminence). Less research has examined the background of the artist. In this study, 314 participants blind to artist type rated paintings by five different groups of artists (outsider artists: average-deviant artists, prison inmates, serial killers, and nonoutsider artists: average-regular artists and eminent creators) on the following three dimensions: warmth, creativity, and likability. "Average-deviant" artists were rated the highest on all three dimensions, and serial killer artists received the lowest ratings on all three dimensions, suggesting that some element of an artist's background may impact how their work is perceived. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]