Creativity

doi:10.1017/9781108290876.010

9 - Creativity

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 May 2019

Christa L. Taylor ,

Vlad P. Gla˘veanu ,

Allison B. Kaufman and

James C. Kaufman

Edited by

Robert J. Sternberg and

Wade E. Pickren

Show author details

Robert J. Sternberg: Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Wade E. Pickren: Affiliation:
Ithaca College, New York

Book contents

Get access

Summary

The way that we define and think about creativity today is rooted in a myriad of past theories and beliefs, dating back to ancient times. Over the years, our idea of creativity has gone from being the purview of the divine to a gift for a select few to a basic human characteristic. Modern creativity research has also evolved over time, from research primarily focusing on individual differences in creative ability to more dynamic and complex models of creativity, which focus on how personal and contextual factors interact to influence creativity across domains and at different levels. Changes in both the philosophy and science of creativity have reflected the concerns and visions of human agency and society that were dominant at a given time. This chapter explores how the philosophy and science of creativity have evolved over time within this socio-historical context.

Keywords

creativity genius sociohistorical context creativity models history

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of the Intellectual History of Psychology , pp. 250 - 266

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108290876.010 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agars, M. D., Kaufman, J. C., & Locke, T. R. (2008). Social influence and creativity in organizations: A multilevel lens for theory, research, and practice. In Mumford, M. D., Hunter, S. T., & Bedell-Avers, K. E. (Eds.), Multi-Level Issues in Organizational Innovation (Multi-Level Issues Series) (pp. 3–62). Amsterdam: JAI Press.Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997–1013. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997.CrossRef Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357.Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1985). Motivation and creativity: Effects of motivational orientation on creative writers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 393–399. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.2.393.CrossRef Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in Context: Update to “The Social Psychology of Creativity.” Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar

Baer, J. (2011). How divergent thinking tests mislead us: Are the Torrance Tests still relevant in the 21st century? The Division 10 debate. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 309–313. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025210.CrossRef Google Scholar

Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The amusement park theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27, 158–163.CrossRef Google Scholar

Barron, F. (1955). The disposition toward originality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 478–485.Google Scholar

Becker, G. (2014). A socio-historical overview of the creativity–pathology connection: From antiquity to contemporary times. In Kaufman, J. C. (Ed.), Creativity and Mental Illness (pp. 3–24). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Becker, H. S. (2008). Art Worlds. (Updated and expanded ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Beghetto, R. A. (2016). Creative learning: A fresh look. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 15, 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.15.1.6.CrossRef Google Scholar

Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2007). Toward a broader conception of creativity: A case for “mini-c” creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1, 73–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.1.2.73.CrossRef Google Scholar

Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2013). Fundamentals of creativity. Educational Leadership, 70, 10–15.Google Scholar

Boden, M. A. (2004). The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar

Cramond, B., Matthews-Morgan, J., Badnalos, D., & Zuo, L. (2005). A report on the 40-year follow-up of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Alive and well in the new millenium. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 283–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620504900402.CrossRef Google Scholar

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar

Dacey, J. (1999). Concepts of creativity: A history. In Runco, M. & Pritzker, S. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity (Vol. 1, pp. 309–322). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar

De Bono, E. (1968). New Think: The Use of Lateral Thinking in the Generation of New Ideas. New York: Avon.Google Scholar

De Bono, E. (1973). CoRT Thinking. Blandford, UK: Direct Educational Services.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 290–309. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., Book, A. B., & Finke, A. (1996). Creative Cognition Theory, Research, and Applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Freud, S. (1989). Creative writers and day-dreaming. In Gay, P. (Ed.), The Freud Reader (pp. 436–443). New York: Norton. (Original work published 1908).Google Scholar

Galton, F. (1874). English Men of Science: Their Nature and Nurture. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Gardner, H. (1993). Creating Minds: An Anatomy as Seen through the Lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham and Gandhi. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Glăveanu, V. P. (2010a). Paradigms in the study of creativity: Introducing the perspective of cultural psychology. New Ideas in Psychology, 28, 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2009.07.007.Google Scholar

Glăveanu, V. P. (2010b). Principles for a cultural psychology of creativity. Culture and Psychology, 16, 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X10361394.CrossRef Google Scholar

Glăveanu, V. P. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: The five A’s framework. Review of General Psychology, 17, 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029528.Google Scholar

Glăveanu, V. P. (2017a). Creativity in craft. In Kaufman, J. C., Glăveanu, V. P., & Baer, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity in Different Domains (pp. 616–632). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Glăveanu, V. P. (2017b). From fantasy and imagination to creativity: Towards both a “psychology with soul” and a “psychology with others.” In Wagoner, B., Bresco, I., & Awad, S. H. (Eds.), The Psychology of Imagination: History, Theory and New Research Horizons (pp. 175–189). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.Google Scholar

Glăveanu, V. P., Gillespie, A., & Valsiner, J. (Eds.). (2014). Rethinking Creativity: Contributions from Social and Cultural Psychology. New York: Routledge.CrossRef Google Scholar

Glăveanu, V. P., & Kaufman, J. C. (in press). Creativity: A historical perspective. To appear in Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Gough, H. G. (1979). A creative personality scale for the Adjective Check List. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1398–1405. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.8.1398.Google Scholar

Gruber, H. E. (1988). The evolving systems approach to creative work. Creativity Research Journal, 1, 27–51.Google Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.Google Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040755.Google Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1987). Creativity research: Past, present and future. In Isaksen, S. G. (Ed.), Front of Creativity Research: Beyond the Basics (pp. 33–65). New York: Bearly.Google Scholar

Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569–598. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100416.Google Scholar

Hoff, E. V., Carlsson, I. M., & Smith, G. J. W. (2012). Personality. In Mumford, M. D. (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Creativity (pp. 241–270). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Karwowski, M., Gralewski, J., & Szumski, G. (2015). Teachers’ effect on students’ creative self-beliefs is moderated by students’ gender. Learning and Individual Differences, 44, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.10.001.Google Scholar

Kaufman, A. S. (2009). IQ Testing 101. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C. (2016a). Creativity 101 (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C. (2016b). Creativity and mental illness: So many studies, so many wrong conclusions. In Plucker, J. A. (Ed.), Creativity and Innovation: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 199–204). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2004). The amusement park theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving, 14, 15–25.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2005). The Amusement Park Theory of creativity. In Kaufman, J. C. & Baer, J. (Eds.), Creativity across Domains: Faces of the Muse (pp. 321–328). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2012). Beyond new and appropriate: Who decides what is creative? Creativity Research Journal, 24, 83–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.649237.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Cole, J. C., & Sexton, J. D. (2008). A comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the consensual assessment technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410802059929.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Cropley, D. H., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Sinnett, S. (2013). Furious activity vs. understanding: How much expertise is needed to evaluate creative work? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7, 332. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034809.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013688.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Glăveanu, V. P. (in press). A review of creativity theories: What questions are we trying to answer? To appear in Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kim, K. H. (2011). The APA 2009 Division 10 debate: Are the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking still relevant in the 21st century? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 302–308. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021917.Google Scholar

Lee, C. S., Huggins, A. C., & Therriault, D. J. (2014). A measure of creativity or intelligence? Examining internal and external structure validity evidence of the Remote Associates Test. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 446–460. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036773.Google Scholar

Mason, J. H. (2003). The Value of Creativity: The Origins and Emergence of a Modern Belief. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1258–1265. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1258.Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81.Google Scholar

Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048850.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Mendelsohn, G. A. (1976). Associative and attentional processes in creative performance. Journal of Personality, 44, 341–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1976.tb00127.x.Google Scholar

Merrotsy, P. (2013). A note on Big-c creativity and little-c creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 25, 474. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2013.843921.Google Scholar

Negus, K., & Pickering, M. (2004). Creativity, Communication and Cultural Value. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Nusbaum, E. C., Silvia, P. J., & Beaty, R. E. (2014). Ready, set, create: What instructing people to “be creative” reveals about the meaning and mechanisms of divergent thinking. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 423–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036549.Google Scholar

Osborn, A. (1953). Applied Imagination. New York: Scribner’s.Google Scholar

Osborn, A. (1963). Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Thinking. New York: Scribner’s.Google Scholar

Paulus, P. B., & Brown, V. R. (2007). Toward more creative and innovative group idea generation: A cognitive‐social‐motivational perspective of brainstorming. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1, 248–265.CrossRef Google Scholar

Plucker, J. A., & Beghetto, R. A. (2004). Why creativity is domain general, why it looks domain specific, and why the distinction doesn’t matter. In Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., & Singer, J. L. (Eds.), Creativity: From Potential to Realization (pp. 153–167). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1.Google Scholar

Plucker, J. A., & Makel, M. C. (2010). Assessment of creativity. In Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (pp. 48–73). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Pope, R. (2005). Creativity: Theory, History, Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Deltan Kappan, 42, 305–310. www.jstor.org/stable/20342603.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., & Acar, S. (2012). Divergent thinking as an indicator of creative potential. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.652929.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., Millar, G., Acar, S., & Cramond, B. (2010). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking as predictors of personal and public achievement: A fifty-year follow-up. Creativity Research Journal, 22, 361–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2010.523393.Google Scholar

Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Schlesinger, J. (2009). Creative mythconceptions: A closer look at the evidence for the “mad genius” hypothesis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013975.Google Scholar

Schlesinger, J. (2012). The Insanity Hoax. New York: Shrinktunes Media.Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1999). Creativity as blind variation and selective retention: Is the creative process Darwinian? Psychological Inquiry, 10, 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1004_4.Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2012). Taking the US Patent Office creativity criteria seriously: A quantitative three-criterion definition and its implications. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 97–106.Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2014a). More method in the mad-genius controversy: A historiometric study of 204 historic creators. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035367.CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2014b). The mad-genius paradox: Can creative people be more mentally healthy but highly creative people more mentally ill? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 470–480. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614543973.Google Scholar

Skinner, B. F. (1966). An operant analysis of problem solving. In Kleinmuntz, B. (Ed.), Problem Solving: Research, Method, and Theory. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Stein, M. I. (1953). Creativity and culture. Journal of Psychology, 36, 311–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1953.9712897.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (1988). A three-facet model of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), The Nature of Creativity (pp. 125–147). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Successful Intelligence. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (2003). WICS: Wisdom, Intelligence, and Creativity Synthesized. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (2018). A triangular theory of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12, 50–67.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). Guilford’s structure of intellect model and model of creativity: Contributions and limitations. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2001). The propulsion model of creative contributions applied to the arts and letters. Journal of Creative Behavior, 35, 75–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2001.tb01223.x.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its development. Human Development, 34, 1–31.CrossRef Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1992). Buy low and sell high: An investment approach to creativity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.1992.tb00002.x.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J., Pretz, J. E., & Kaufman, J. C. (2003). Types of innovations. In Shavinina, L. (Ed.), The International Handbook of Innovation (pp. 158–169). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Taft, R., & Rossiter, J. R. (1966). The Remote Associates Test: Divergent or convergent thinking? Psychological Reports, 19, 1313–1314. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1966.19.3f.1313.Google Scholar

Taylor, C. L. (2017). Creativity and mood disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617699653.Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding Creative Talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1966). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Norms-Technical Manual Research Edition-Verbal Tests, Forms A and B-Figural Tests, Forms A and B. Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press.Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1969). Prediction of adult creative achievement among high school seniors. Gifted Child Quarterly, 13, 223–229.Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1972a). Career patterns and peak creative achievements of creative high school students twelve years later. Gifted Child Quarterly, 16, 75–88.Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1972b). Predictive validity of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Journal of Creative Behavior, 6, 236–252.Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1981a). Predicting the creativity of elementary school children (1958–80) – And the teacher who ‘‘made a difference.’’ Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 55–62.Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1981b). Empirical validation of criterion-referenced indicators of creative ability through a longitudinal study. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 6, 136–140.Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (2008). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking Norms-Technical Manual Figural (Streamlined) Forms A and B. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P., & Ball, O. E. (1984). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Streamlined (Revised) Manual, Figural A and B. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.Google Scholar

Wallas, G. (1926). The Art of Thought. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar

Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J. (1997). Conceptual structures and processes in creative thought. In Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J. (Eds.), Creative Thought: An Investigation of Conceptual Structures and Processes (pp. 1–27). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Weiner, R. P. (2000). Creativity and Beyond: Cultures, Values, and Change. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Welsh, G. S., & Barron, F. (1959). Barron–Welsh Art Scale. Mountain View, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar

Westwood, R., & Low, D. R. (2003). The multicultural muse: Culture, creativity and innovation. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 3, 235–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/14705958030032006.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.