Amabile, T. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar

Amabile, T. (1955). The disposition towards originality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 478–485.Google Scholar

Amabile, T. (1957). Originality in relation to personality and intellect. Journal of Personality, 25, 730–742.Google Scholar

Amabile, T. (1963). Creativity and psychological health. New York: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar

Cattell, R. B., and Drevdahl, J. E. (1955). A comparison of the personality profile (16PF) of eminent researchers with that of eminent teachers and administrators, and the general population. British Journal of Psychology, 46, 248–261.Google Scholar

Cole, J. R., and Cole, S. (1973). Social stratification in science. Chicago: University of Chicago University.Google Scholar

Costa, P. T., and McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO-PI professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar

Domino, G. (1994). Assessment of creativity with the ACL: An empirical comparison of four scales. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 21–33.Google Scholar

Dume, B. (2006). Worlds most creative physicist revealed. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2006/aug/17/worlds-most-creative-physicist-revealed.Google Scholar

Eysenck, H. J. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1991). The psychology of science: Personality, cognitive, motivational and working styles of eminent and less eminent scientists. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1993). A structural model of scientific eminence. Psychological Science, 4, 366–371.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1994). Personality and working style predictors of integrative complexity: A study of scientists’ thinking about research and teaching. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 474–484.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1997). Quantity, impact, and depth of research as influences on scientific eminence: Is quantity most important? Creativity Research Journal, 10, 325–335.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of the impact of personality on scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychological Review, 2, 290–309.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (2006). The psychology of science and the origins of the scientific mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (2010). The function of personality in creativity: The nature and nurture of creative personality. In The Cambridge handbook of creativity, edited by Kaufman, J. C. and Sternberg, R. J., 113–130. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J., and Barron, F. (2003). Predicting creativity from early to late adulthood: Intellect, potential, and personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 62–88.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J., Dostal, D., and Kwan, V. (2017). Testing the “mad-genius” myth: Lifetime rates of mental disorders of creative artists, creative scientists, and famous athletes. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J., and Gorman, M. E. (1998). Psychology of science: Review and integration of a nascent discipline. Review of General Psychology, 2, 3–47.Google Scholar

Feist, J., Feist, G. J., and Roberts, T. A. (2018). Theories of personality (9th edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Gerbing, D. W., and Tuley, M. R. (1991). The 16PF related to the Five-Factor Model in personality: Multiple-indicator measurement versus a priori scales. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, 271–289.Google Scholar

Gholson, B., Shadish, W. R., Neimeyer, R. A., and Houts, A. C. (Eds.). (1989). Psychology of science: Contributions to metascience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Gough, H. G. (1961). A personality sketch of the creative research scientist. Paper presented at the fifth annual conference on Personnel and Industrial Research, University of California, Los Angeles, February.Google Scholar

Gough, H. G., and Woodworth, D. G. (1960). Stylistic variations among professional research scientists. Journal of Psychology, 49, 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grosul, M., and Feist, G. J. (2014). The creative person in science. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 30–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hall, W. B., and MacKinnon, D. W. (1969). Personality inventory correlates of creativity among architects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 322–326.Google Scholar

Helson, R., and Crutchfield, R. (1970). Mathematicians: The creative researcher and the average PhD. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 34, 176–186.Google Scholar

Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 46, 16569–16572.Google Scholar

Kessler, R. C., Berglund, P., Demler, O., Jin, R., Merikangas, K. R., and Walters, E. E. (2005). Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62(6), 593–602.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar

Lakatos, I., and Musgrave, A. (Eds.). (1970). Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Liu, W., and Lu, Q. (2008). The study of structure of creative personality about preschool children aged 3 to 5. Psychological Research, 1.Google Scholar

MacKinnon, D. W. (1970). Creativity: A multi-faceted phenomenon. In Creativity, edited by Roslanksy, J., 19–32. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar

Mansfield, R. S., and Busse, T. V. (1981). The psychology of creativity and discovery: Scientists and their work. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R. (1991). The Five Factor Model and its assessment in clinical settings. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 399–414.Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T., and Piedmont, R. L. (1993). Folk concepts, natural language, and psychological constructs: The California Psychological Inventory and the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Personality, 61, 1–26.Google Scholar

Plucker, J. A., and Renzulli, J. S. (1999). Psychometric approaches to the study of human creativity. In Handbook of creativity, 3rd ed., edited by Sternberg, R. J., 35–62. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Popper, K. (1959). Logic of scientific discovery. New York: Science Editions.Google Scholar

Runco, M. (2004). Everyone has creative potential. In Creativity: From potential to realization, edited by Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., and Singer, J. L., 21–30. Washington, DC: APA Books.Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1988). Scientific genius: A psychology of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2004). Creativity in science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Soler, J. M. (2007). A rational indicator of scientific creativity. Journal of Infometrics, 1, 123–130.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (1988). A three-facet model of creativity. In The nature of creativity, edited by Sternberg, R. J., 125–147. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Jovanovich.Google Scholar