Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2017
  • Online publication date: September 2017

14 - Creativity in Psychology

from Part III - Creativity in the Sciences
Summary
Abstract

Although creativity in psychology involves the same processes and procedures discussed in the earlier chapter on domain-general creativity, sufficient differences arise in their application that it becomes important to distinguish psychology’s various subdisciplines as well as discern the discipline’s overall placement in the hierarchy of the sciences, a placement that determines the amount of field consensus regarding the most creative contributors to the domain. Discussion then turns to the four major ways of assessing creativity in the domain, namely, peer evaluations, research citations, professional recognition, and historical eminence. This then sets the stage for reviewing key creativity studies regarding individual differences (including both general personality characteristics and specific theoretical and methodological orientation) and longitudinal changes (viz. early development and career trajectories). The chapter closes with recommendations regarding future research on creativity in the domain of psychology.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity across Domains
  • Online ISBN: 9781316274385
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316274385
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×
Annin, E. L., Boring, E. G., & Watson, R. I. (1968). Important psychologists, 1600–1967. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 4, 303315.
Bachtold, L. M., & Werner, E. E. (1970). Personality profiles of gifted women: Psychologists. American Psychologist, 25, 234243.
Boring, M. D., & Boring, E. G. (1948). Masters and pupils among the American psychologists. American Journal of Psychology, 61, 527534.
Bridgwater, C. A., Walsh, J. A., & Walkenbach, J. (1982). Pretenure and posttenure productivity trends of academic psychologists. American Psychologist, 37, 236238.
Campbell, D. P. (1965). The vocational interests of American Psychological Association presidents. American Psychologist, 20, 636644.
Cattell, R. B. (1963). The personality and motivation of the researcher from measurements of contemporaries and from biography. In Taylor, C. W. & Barron, F. (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 119131). New York: Wiley.
Cattell, R. B., & Drevdahl, J. E. (1955). A comparison of the personality profile (16 P. F.) of eminent researchers with that of eminent teachers and administrators, and of the general population. British Journal of Psychology, 46, 248261.
Chambers, J. A. (1964). Relating personality and biographical factors to scientific creativity. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 78 (7, whole no. 584).
Christensen, H., & Jacomb, P. A. (1992). The lifetime productivity of eminent Australian academics. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 7, 681686.
Clark, K. E. (1954). The APA study of psychologists. American Psychologist, 9, 117120.
Coan, R. W. (1968). Dimensions of psychological theory. American Psychologist, 23, 715722.
Coan, R. W. (1973). Toward a psychological interpretation of psychology. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 9, 313327.
Coan, R. W. (1979). Psychologists: Personal and theoretical pathways. New York: Irvington Publishers.
Coan, R. W., & Zagona, S. V. (1962). Contemporary ratings of psychological theorists. Psychological Record, 12, 315322.
Cole, S. (1979). Age and scientific performance. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 958977.
Cole, S. (1983). The hierarchy of the sciences? American Journal of Sociology, 89, 111139.
Conway, J. B. (1988). Differences among clinical psychologists: Scientists, practitioners, and scientist-practitioners. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 19, 642655.
Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671684.
Davis, S. F., Thomas, R. L., & Weaver, M. S. (1982). Psychology’s contemporary and all-time notables: Student, faculty, and chairperson viewpoints. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 20, 36.
Dennis, W. (1954). Productivity among American psychologists. American Psychologist, 9, 191194.
Dennis, W., & Girden, E. (1954). Current scientific activities of psychologists as a function of age. Journal of Gerontology, 9, 175178.
Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Park, J. (2014). An incomplete list of eminent psychologists of the modern era. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 2, 2032.
Fanelli, D. (2010). “Positive” results increase down the hierarchy of the sciences. PLoS ONE 5(4): e10068. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0010068.
Fanelli, D., & Glänzel, W. (2013). Bibliometric evidence for a hierarchy of the sciences. PLoS ONE, 8(6): e66938. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0066938
Grosul, M., & Feist, G. J. (2014). The creative person in science. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 3043.
Guyter, L., & Fidell, L. (1973). Publications of men and women psychologists. American Psychologist, 28, 157160.
Haggbloom, S. J., Warnick, R., Warnick, J. E., Jones, V. K., Yarbrough, G. L., Russell, T. M., & Monte, E. (2002). The 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th Century. Review of General Psychology, 6, 139152.
Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., Beane, W. E., Lucker, G. W., & Matthews, K. A. (1980). Making it in academic psychology: Demographic and personality correlates of attainment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 896908.
Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., & Pred, R. S. (1988). Making it without losing it: Type A, achievement motivation, and scientific attainment revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 495504.
Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., & Thorbecke, W. L. (1981). On the stability of productivity and recognition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7, 516522.
Heyduk, R. G., & Fenigstein, A. (1984). Influential works and authors in psychology: A survey of eminent psychologists. American Psychologist, 39, 556559.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 1656916572.
Horner, K. L., Rushton, J. P., & Vernon, P. A. (1986). Relation between aging and research productivity of academic psychologists. Psychology and Aging, 1, 319324.
Johnson, J. A., Germer, C. K., Efran, J. S., & Overton, W. F. (1988). Personality as the basis for theoretical predilections. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 824835.
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 113.
Kimble, G. A. (1984). Psychology’s two cultures. American Psychologist, 39, 833839.
Kinnier, R. T., Metha, A. T., Buki, L. P., & Rawa, P. M. (1994). Manifest value of eminent psychologists: A content analysis of their obituaries. Current Psychology: Developmental, Learning, Personality, Social, 13, 8894.
Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all? Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 86, 148161.
Lee, J. D., Vicente, K. J., Cassano, A., & Shearer, A. (2003). Can scientific impact be judged prospectively? A bibliometric test of Simonton’s model of creative productivity. Scientometrics, 56, 223232.
Lehman, H. C. (1966). The psychologist’s most creative years. American Psychologist, 21, 363369.
Ludwig, A. M. (1998). Method and madness in the arts and sciences. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 93101.
Lyons, J. (1968). Chronological age, professional age, and eminence in psychology. American Psychologist, 23, 371374.
Matthews, K. A., Helmreich, R. L., Beane, W. E., & Lucker, G. W. (1980). Pattern A, achievement striving, and scientific merit: Does Pattern A help or hinder? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 962967.
Myers, C. R. (1970). Journal citations and scientific eminence in contemporary psychology. American Psychologist, 25, 10411048.
Overskeid, G., Grønnerød, C., & Simonton, D. K. (2012). The personality of a nonperson: Gauging the inner Skinner. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 187197.
Over, R. (1981). Affiliations of psychologists elected to the National Academy of Sciences. American Psychologist, 36, 744752.
Over, R. (1982a). The durability of scientific reputation. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 18, 5361.
Over, R. (1982b). Research productivity and impact of male and female psychologists. American Psychologist, 37, 2431.
Platz, A. (1965). Psychology of the scientist: XI. Lotka’s law and research visibility. Psychological Reports, 16, 566568.
Platz, A., & Blakelock, E. (1960). Productivity of American psychologists: Quantity versus quality. American Psychologist, 15, 310312.
Roe, A. (1953). The making of a scientist. New York: Dodd, Mead.
Rodgers, R. C., & Maranto, C. L. (1989). Causal models of publishing productivity in psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 636649.
Ruscio, J., Seaman, F., D’Oriano, C., Stremlo, E., & Mahalchik, K. (2012). Measuring scholarly impact using modern citation-based indices. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 10, 123146.
Rushton, J. P. (1984). Evaluating research eminence in psychology: The construct validity of citation counts. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 37, 3336.
Rushton, J. P. (1990). Creativity, intelligence, and psychoticism. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 12911298.
Shadish, W. R. Jr. (1989). The perception and evaluation of quality in science. In Gholson, B., Shadish, W. R. Jr., Neimeyer, R. A., & Houts, A. C. (Eds.), The psychology of science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 383426). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Simon, H. A. (1954). Productivity among American psychologists: An explanation. American Psychologist, 9, 804805.
Simonton, D. K. (1992). Leaders of American psychology, 1879–1967: Career development, creative output, and professional achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 517.
Simonton, D. K. (2000). Methodological and theoretical orientation and the long-term disciplinary impact of 54 eminent psychologists. Review of General Psychology, 4, 1324.
Simonton, D. K. (2002). Great psychologists and their times: Scientific insights into psychology’s history. Washington, DC: APA Books.
Simonton, D. K. (2004). Psychology’s status as a scientific discipline: Its empirical placement within an implicit hierarchy of the sciences. Review of General Psychology, 8, 5967.
Simonton, D. K. (2005). Creativity in psychology: On becoming and being a great psychologist. In Kaufman, J. C. & Baer, J. (Eds.), Faces of the muse: How people think, work, and act creatively in diverse domains (pp. 139151). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Simonton, D. K. (2008). Gender differences in birth order and family size among 186 eminent psychologists. Journal of Psychology of Science and Technology, 1, 1522.
Simonton, D. K. (2009). Varieties of (scientific) creativity: A hierarchical model of disposition, development, and achievement. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 441452.
Simonton, D. K. (2013). What is a creative idea? Little-c versus Big-C creativity. In Chan, J. & Thomas, K. (Eds.), Handbook of research on creativity (pp. 6983). Cheltenham Glos, UK: Edward Elgar.
Simonton, D. K. (2014a). Hierarchies of creative domains: Disciplinary constraints on blind-variation and selective-retention. In Paul, E. S. & Kaufman, S. B. (Eds.), The philosophy of creativity: New essays (pp. 247261). New York: Oxford University Press.
Simonton, D. K. (2014b). More method in the mad-genius controversy: A historiometric study of 204 historic creators. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 5361.
Simonton, D. K. (2015). Psychology as a science within Comte’s hypothesized hierarchy: Empirical investigations and conceptual implications. Review of General Psychology, 9, 334344.
Simonton, D. K. (2017). Eminent female psychologists in family context: Historical trends for 80 women born 1847–1950. Journal of Genius and Eminence, 1(2), 1525.
Song, A. V., & Simonton, D. K. (2007). Personality assessment at a distance: Quantitative methods. In Robins, R. W., Fraley, R. C., & Krueger, R. F. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 308321). New York: Guilford Press.
Stevens, G., & Gardner, S. (1985). Psychology of the scientist: LIV. Permission to excel: A preliminary report of influences on eminent women psychologists. Psychological Reports, 57, 10231026.
Suedfeld, P. (1985). APA presidential addresses: The relation of integrative complexity to historical, professional, and personal factors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 848852.
Taylor, M. S., Locke, E. A., Lee, C., & Gist, M. E. (1984). Type A behavior and faculty research productivity: What are the mechanisms? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 402418.
Tracy, J. L., Robins, R. W., & Sherman, J. W. (2009). The practice of psychological science: Searching for Cronbach’s two streams in social-personality psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 12061225.
Terry, W. S. (1989). Birth order and prominence in the history of psychology. Psychological Record, 39, 333337.
Vance, F. L., & MacPhail, S. L. (1964). APA membership trends and fields of specialization of psychologists earning doctoral degrees between 1959 and 1962. American Psychologist, 9, 654658.
White, K. G., & White, M. J. (1978). On the relation between productivity and impact. Australian Psychologist, 13, 369374.
Wispé, L. G. (1963, September 27). Traits of eminent American psychologists. Science, 141, 12561261.
Wispé, L. G. (1965). Some social and psychological correlates of eminence in psychology. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 7, 8898.
Wispé, L. G., & Parloff, M. B. (1965). Impact of psychotherapy on the productivity of psychologists. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 70, 188193.
Wispé, L. G., & Ritter, J. H. (1964). Where America’s recognized psychologists received their doctorates. American Psychologist, 19, 634644.
Wray, K. B. (2010). Rethinking the size of scientific specialties: Correcting Price’s estimate. Scientometrics, 83, 471476.
Zachar, P., & Leong, F. T. L. (1992). A problem of personality: Scientist and practitioner differences in psychology. Journal of Personality, 60, 665677.
Zusne, L. (1976). Age and achievement in psychology: The harmonic mean as a model. American Psychologist, 31, 805807.
Zusne, L. (1985). Contributions to the history of psychology: XXXVIII. The hyperbolic structure of eminence. Psychological Reports, 57, 12131214.
Zusne, L. (1987). Contributions to the history of psychology: XLIV. Coverage of contributors in histories of psychology. Psychological Reports, 61, 343350.
Zusne, L., & Dailey, D. P. (1982). History of psychology texts as measuring instruments of eminence in psychology. Revista de Historia de la Psicología, 3, 742.