Cultural Difference in Stereotype Perceptions and Performances in Nonverbal Deductive Reasoning and Creativity

A total of 182 undergraduate students from China and the United States participated in a study examining the presence of stereotypical perceptions regarding creativity and deductive reasoning abilities, as well as the influence of stereotype on participants' performance on deductive reasoning and creativity in nonverbal form. The results showed that participants from both China and the United States believed that Americans have better creativity abilities than Chinese and that Chinese have better deductive reasoning skills than Americans. Significant cultural difference in the performances on the measures of creativity was found. The cultural difference in deductive reasoning was found between Chinese participants in China and the Caucasian (not the Asian) participants in the United States, which were somewhat congruent to the stereotypical perceptions. However, the study did not find that stereotypic perceptions directly influenced participants' performance on deductive reasoning and creativity.     

Metaphors and creative thinking

This study examined how working memory plays different roles in open-ended versus closed-ended creative problem-solving processes, as represented by divergent thinking tests and insight problem-solving tasks. With respect to the analysis of different task demands and the framework of dual-process theories, the hypothesis was that the idea generation in a divergent thinking test relies more on associative, effortless system 1 processing, but insight problem solving requires rule-based, resource-limited system 2 processing, in addition to system 1 processing. Since system 1 was suggested to be more active in resource deprivation conditions, Experiment 1 adopted the dual-task paradigm, which increased participants' working memory load. The results showed that divergent thinking performance was enhanced and insight problem-solving performance was hindered. Experiment 2 using the individual differences approach found that individuals' working memory capacity correlated with insight problem solving but not with divergent thinking performance, indicating a possible involvement of system 2 processing in insight problem solving. These findings suggested that open-ended and closed-ended creative problem solving involve different processes and helped to clarify some past inconsistencies when considering the relationship of factors with creativity.     

Strategy Induction Enhances Creativity in Figural Divergent Thinking

Instructional effects in creative‐thinking tasks are important to understand in order to promote creative performance of individuals. In divergent‐thinking tasks, for example, instructional and strategic enhancement effects have been extensively studied for verbal tasks. However, while studies on instructional enhancement effects on creative drawing tasks exist, it is surprising that strategy enhancement in figural divergent thinking is still underresearched. In this study, we used a strategy manipulation approach to reassess the role of executive strategy implementation and the moderating role of an indicator of fluid intelligence, figural analogical reasoning, in two types of figural divergent‐thinking tasks (abstract vs. concrete). The sample comprised N = 75 high‐school students. Importantly, we found strategic enhancement effects by combining strategy instructions with a prompt to “be creative.” This combined instruction was contrasted with a standard instruction, and main effects were found for overall, concrete, and abstract creativity. Moreover, we found in a regression analysis a main effect for figural analogical reasoning on overall creativity and creativity for only the concrete object tasks. An expected interaction effect of instruction and figural analogical reasoning was not found. As another addition, the role of current motivation in figural divergent thinking was explored.     

Generality of creativity across performance domains

The existence of general creative‐thinking skills was investigated. In the first study, 50 eighth‐grade students wrote poems, stories, mathematical equations, and mathematical word problems, all of which were rated for creativity by experts. When the effects of IQ reading achievement, and math achievement were controlled through multiple regression analyses, creativity scores on the four tasks were not correlated. This suggests that general creative‐thinking skills did not contribute to creative performance in these different tasks. Subjects also responded to a brief verbal fluency test. Scores on this test correlated significantly with story‐writing creativity (r = .34) but not with the other three tasks. Three follow‐up studies were conducted with second‐, fourth‐, and fifth‐grade students, and adults. These studies also produced no significant correlations among creativity ratings of various products.     

The Relationship between Creativity and Interpersonal Problem-Solving Skills in Adults

The present study evaluated whether creativity training and interpersonal problem-solving training reflect equivalent or complementary skills in adults. A sample of 74 undergraduates received interpersonal problem-solving training, creativity training, neither, or both. Dependent variables included measures of problem-solving and creative performance, and problem-solving and creative style. The results suggested that creativity and interpersonal problem-solving represent complementary skills, in that each training program specifically affected performance only on related measures of performance. A combination of programs affected both abilities. Creativity training and interpersonal problem-solving training are popular psychoeducational interventions that developed in isolation from each other. Originally thought of as a mysterious process, the empirical analysis of the creative act can be traced to the work of Wallas (1926). Under the assumption that creativity is a desirable trait, a number of scales and training programs have been developed to measure and enhance creative skills. Creativity training has been used primarily in educational and industrial settings (e.g., Basadur, 1981). The principles of interpersonal problem-solving training have emerged more recently, in the work of Spivack and Shure (1974; Spivack, Platt, & Shure, 1976) and D'Zurilla (D'Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971; D'Zurilla & Nezu, 1982). These authors conceptualized interpersonal problem-solving training in the context of behavior therapy, and for this reason the literature on interpersonal problem-solving is more closely associated with therapeutic settings. Creativity and interpersonal problem-solving skills can be conceptually distinguished on the basis of their goals. Interpersonal problem-solving refers to one's skill in determining the means by which to achieve a specific end or overcome a specific problem. Creativity, on the other hand, need not be oriented towards achieving specific ends; it is associated with the capacity for thinking in new and different ways. Koestler (1964) has even argued that these two goals can be inimical, at least in adults, in that the ability to combine information in unique ways may be. hindered when the individual focuses his or her thinking on a specific problem. At the same time, there are clear similarities between the two domains of skills. Guilford (1977) noted that “creative thinking produces novel outcomes, and problem-solving involves producing a new response to a new situation, which is a novel outcome” (p. 161). Edwards and Sproull (1984) saw creativity training as a method for improving the quality of solutions to problems and increasing personal effectiveness. They considered problem-solving synonymous with creativity, since both training programs offer a variety of techniques to help identify useful solutions to problems. Similarly, Noller (1979) and others (e.g., Isaksen, Dorval, & Treffinger, 1994) have discussed the concept of creative problem solving, which attempts to integrate principles in the literature on creativity and on problem solving. Isaksen et al. conceptualized the process of creative problem solving as consisting of six steps which fall within three stages. The first stage involves understanding the problem, consisting of three steps: mess-finding, data-finding, and problem-finding. This is followed by the stage of generating ideas, involving the idea- finding step. Finally, there is planning for action, which involves solution-finding and acceptance-finding. The most important difference between the various creativity training models and the interpersonal problem-solving model lies in their emphasis. Creativity training models focus primarily on enhancing skill at generating solutions. The interpersonal problem-solving model places equal emphasis on the implementation and evaluation of potential solutions. Although many authors have suggested that participation in creativity training will have positive effects on social and interpersonal functioning (e.g., Parnes, 1987), only two studies have been conducted examining the relationship between the interpersonal problem-solving training model and creativity skills. Miller, Serafica, and Clark (1989) and Shondrick, Serafica, Clark, and Miller (1992) found that interpersonal problem-solving training for children also enhanced creativity skills, and that children's creative abilities appear to be predictive of their interpersonal problem-solving skills. The question of whether creativity and interpersonal problem-solving are equivalent, complementary, or even inimical has not been adequately addressed in the existing literature. For one thing, there are no studies examining the relationship between the two constructs in adults. This is an important question, given Koestler's (1964) conclusion that they are potentially inconsistent among adults. Second, there are no studies at all regarding the impact of creativity training on problem-solving skills in adults. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether creativity and interpersonal problem-solving skills can be distinguished in an adult sample.     

工作记忆容量对创造性思维的预测

创造性思维(CT)是人类高级认知的重要组成部分,而工作记忆容量(WMC)是个体认知功能的重要指标,对于WMC能否预测CT存在不同的观点。本文先从正向预测、负向预测和不能预测的角度分类总结了相关研究证据,然后用游乐园模型(APT)、双通道模型(DPCM)和注意控制理论(CAT)对不同结果进行解释,分析了以往研究可能存在的问题,包括测量WMC和测量CT的任务类型不匹配、测量CT的领域特殊性问题、忽略其他认知能力差异以及未考虑智力、人格等因素对二者关系的影响等。最后,结合已有问题与当前的研究重点对未来研究进行了相应的展望。     

The use of imagery by intelligent and by creative schoolchildren

Two studies focusing on differences in thinking strategies between intellectually gifted and creative children were undertaken. In the first study (N = 29), ethnographic techniques of observation along with testing and problem-solving interviews were used in a regular classroom. Three subjects (one high IQ and high creativity, one high IQ and low creativity, and one low IQ and high creativity) were identified for intensive observation. In the second study, testing procedures and problem-solving interviews were completed with 30 children who were placed in a gifted program within an urban school system. Both studies produced evidence supporting the link between imaging abilities and creative thinking.     

Apollo 13 creativity: in-the-box innovation

A study of the Apollo 13 mission, based on the themes showcased in the acclaimed 1995 film, reveals the grace under pressure that is the condition of optimal creativity. "Apollo 13 Creativity" is a cultural and creative problem-solving appreciation of the thinking style that made the Apollo mission succeed: creativity under severe limitations. Although creativity is often considered a "luxury good," of concern mainly for personal enrichment, the arts, and performance improvement, in life-or-death situations it is the critical pathway not only to success but to survival. In this case. the original plan for a moon landing had to be transformed within a matter of hours into a return to earth. By precluding failure as an option at the outset, both space and ground crews were forced to adopt a new perspective on their resources and options to solve for a successful landing. This now-classic problem provides a range of principles for creative practice and motivation applicable in any situation. The extreme situation makes these points dramatically.     

Creative Thinking in an Emotional Context: Specific Relevance of Executive Control of Emotion-Laden Representations in the Inventiveness in Generating Alternative Appraisals of Negative Events

Although divergent thinking ability in different domains may largely rely on the same basic executive functions, domain-specific functions may also be important, in particular when it comes to more real-life creativity demands. This study investigated if functional executive control of emotion-laden representations may be specifically relevant in cognitive reappraisal, which implies being creative in an affective context. In a sample of 88 healthy individuals, the relation between the participants’ inventiveness in generating positive reappraisals of adverse events (Reappraisal Inventiveness Test) and in generating novel ideas without emotional component (conventional divergent thinking test) to their executive functioning in tasks without (Mittenecker Pointing Test) and with emotional contribution (humor processing task) was studied. In line with hybrid models of creative thinking, poorer basic inhibition skills were found to be associated with poorer fluency performance in both divergent thinking tasks. Relations applied more specifically to reappraisal inventiveness when it came to executive processes with a more prominent emotional component. Creative performance in both tasks may have been hampered by time limits. The results support the notion that, in addition to basic executive functioning, more specific cognitive control functions are implicated in more real-life creative performance, according to related domain-specific demands.     

Exploring the Effect of Perceived Teacher Support on Multiple Creativity Tasks: Based on the Expectancy–Value Model of Achievement Motivation

The present study explores the effect of perceived teacher support on three forms of thinking related to creativity. Tests of convergent thinking (by means of the Remote Associates Test), insight thinking (explored through a brain‐teaser test), and divergent thinking (by means of a verbal creativity test) were given to 512 middle school students in China, along with assessments of their perceived teacher support and creative self‐efficacy. The results of this study indicate that perceived teacher support positively predicts convergent thinking and insight thinking, with creative self‐efficacy playing a partial mediating role between perceived teacher support and convergent thinking. However, no significant relationships were found between perceived teacher support and divergent thinking. The findings partly lend support to the expectancy–value model of achievement motivation that teacher’s behavior influences student performance through self‐belief pathway.     

Are Individuals with Schizophrenia or Schizotypy More Creative? Evidence from Multiple Tests of Creative Potential

Schizophrenia and schizotypy have been often associated with above average creativity; however, empirical studies on the relationship between schizophrenia spectrum disorders and enhanced creativity generated inconsistent results. This research investigates if the association between schizophrenia spectrum disorders and creative potential levels is dependent upon which cognitive processes are examined during administered tests of creative potential. Our study examined 117 participants stratified into the following three subgroups: (a) 39 psychometrically determined low-schizotypal individuals, (b) 35 psychometrically determined high-schizotypal individuals, and (c) 43 patients with schizophrenia. Each participant completed 2 divergent thinking (DT) tasks, 2 convergent thinking (CT) tasks, and 2 creative tasks that combine both DT and CT processes. The data suggest that Group C had typical abilities in the DT, CT, and the combined creative thinking tasks; however, the group as a whole had intact originality during the Figural Completion (DT task) and the Tangram Construction (combined task). Notably, Group B showed significant advantages in both verbal and figural DT tasks. Group A and Group B demonstrated no significant differences in the creative thinking processes of CT; however, both groups outperformed Group C in these tasks.     

科学发明中原型启发的创造性思维成分及其脑机制

目前对创造性思维的测量及神经机制的研究, 国际上大多采用发散思维任务、远距离联想测验、顿悟问题解决等任务。但这些测量工具大多停留在对非科学类问题解决的研究上, 因此生态效度和预测效度都不高。本项目在前面研究的基础上, 探讨更符合现实生活的科学发明中原型启发的创造性思维成分及机制。研究一通过两个行为实验探索原型启发能力的创造性思维成分测试的结构效度; 研究二运用大样本磁共振数据, 从脑机制上进一步验证创造性思维成分的结构效度; 研究三通过3个核磁任务态探索原型启发能力的主要创造性思维成分的脑机制; 研究四试图在高校和企业研发机构进行跟踪研究, 检验创造性思维成分测试的预测效度。通过本项目的开展, 希望开发具有更高预测效度和生态效度的用于发明创造领域的创造性测量工具。     

The development of creative cognition across adolescence: distinct trajectories for insight and divergent thinking

We examined developmental trajectories of creative cognition across adolescence. Participants (N = 98), divided into four age groups (12/13 yrs, 15/16 yrs, 18/19 yrs, and 25–30 yrs), were subjected to a battery of tasks gauging creative insight (visual; verbal) and divergent thinking (verbal; visuo‐spatial). The two older age groups outperformed the two younger age groups on insight tasks. The 25–30‐year‐olds outperformed the two youngest age groups on the originality measure of verbal divergent thinking. No age‐group differences were observed for verbal divergent thinking fluency and flexibility. On divergent thinking in the visuo‐spatial domain, however, only 15/16‐year‐olds outperformed 12/13‐year‐olds; a model with peak performance for 15/16‐years‐old showed the best fit. The results for the different creativity processes are discussed in relation to cognitive and related neurobiological models. We conclude that mid‐adolescence is a period of not only immaturities but also of creative potentials in the visuo‐spatial domain, possibly related to developing control functions and explorative behavior.     

Implications of counterfactual structure for creative generation and analytical problem solving

In the present research, the authors hypothesized that additive counterfactual thinking mind-sets, activated by adding new antecedent elements to reconstruct reality, promote an expansive processing style that broadens conceptual attention and facilitates performance on creative generation tasks, whereas subtractive counter-factual thinking mind-sets, activated by removing antecedent elements to reconstruct reality, promote a relational processing style that enhances tendencies to consider relationships and associations and facilitates performance on analytical problem-solving tasks. A reanalysis of a published data set suggested that the counterfactual mind-set primes previously used in the literature tend to evoke subtractive counterfactuals. Studies 1 and 2 then demonstrated that subtractive counterfactual mind-sets enhanced performance on analytical problem-solving tasks relative to additive counterfactual mind-sets, whereas Studies 3 and 4 found that additive counterfactual mind-sets enhanced performance on creative generation tasks relative to subtractive counterfactual mind-sets.     

Creativity and Ethics: The Relationship of Creative and Ethical Problem-Solving

Students of creativity have long been interested in the relationship between creativity and deviant behaviors such as criminality, mental disease, and unethical behavior. In this study we wished to examine the relationship between creative thinking skills and ethical decision-making among scientists. Accordingly, 258 doctoral students in the health, biological, and social sciences were asked to complete a measure of creative processing skills (e.g., problem definition, conceptual combination, idea generation) and a measure of ethical decision-making examining four domains: data management, study conduct, professional practices, and business practices. It was found that ethical decision-making in all four of these areas was related to creative problem-solving processes with late-cycle processes (e.g., idea generation and solution monitoring) proving particularly important. The implications of these findings for understanding the relationship between creative and deviant thought are discussed.     

Convergent and divergent thinking in verbal analogy

Individual differences in convergent and divergent thinking may uniquely explain variation in analogical reasoning ability. Across two studies we investigated the relative influences of divergent and convergent thinking as predictors of verbal analogy performance. Performance on both convergent thinking (i.e., Remote Associates Test) and divergent thinking (i.e., Alternative Uses Task) uniquely predicted performance on both analogy selection (Studies 1 and 2) and analogical generation tasks (Study 2). Moreover, convergent and divergent thinking were predictive above and beyond creative behaviours in Study 1 and a composite measure of crystallised intelligence in Study 2. Verbal analogies in Study 2 also varied in semantic distance, with results demonstrating divergent thinking as a stronger predictor of analogy generation for semantically far than for semantically near analogies. Results thus further illuminate the link between analogical reasoning and creative cognition by demonstrating convergent and divergent thinking as predictors of verbal analogy.     

The Relationship Between Nonclinical Schizotypy and Handedness on Divergent and Convergent Creative Problem-Solving Tasks

Previous research indicated a relationship between hemispherical dominance, the extent of schizotypal tendencies, and creativity. Little research has been conducted to assess the degree of schizotypy in nonclinical samples. The aim of this study was to determine the extent to which measures of multidimensional schizotypy and predominant handedness could predict measures of creativity, as assessed by both divergent and convergent tasks. One hundred and twenty-six participants participated in a quasi-experiment involving tests of predominant handedness, schizotypal tendencies, and divergent and convergent thinking. Results suggest that individuals who scored high on a test for schizotypal tendencies performed better on divergent problem-solving tasks, as opposed to low scoring individuals who performed better on convergent problem-solving tasks. Furthermore, results suggest that there was relationship between handedness on divergent and convergent thinking. There was, however, a relationship between handedness (right hemisphere) on the degree of schizotypal tendencies with left-handed individuals demonstrating greater schizotypal tendencies.     

The Effects of a Verbal and a Figural Creativity Training on Different Facets of Creative Potential

This study investigated the effects of different types of creativity interventions on different facets of creative potential, also including more school-related creativity demands. In a sample of 77 fourth-graders in the age between 9 and 12 years, we administered a verbal and a figural creativity training, realized in two school lessons over two consecutive days each. As outcome measures, creative potential in both the verbal and the figural domain by means of two well-established divergent thinking tasks was assessed. As additional measures of creative potential, a story completion task and a picture painting task were administered to examine training effects on more school-related types of creative behavior. The verbal training was found to increase both verbal and figural divergent thinking ability, but not creative potential in the story completion and the picture painting task. The figural training yielded significant training effects only regarding the picture painting task. Findings suggest a specific training effect of the figural creativity training, and moreover indicate that the verbal creativity training, rather than stimulating “verbal” creative abilities per se, was more strongly concerned with domain-general creativity processes including ideational fluency, flexibility, and originality that are characteristics of divergent thinking tasks across different domains.     

Identifying Creativity During Problem Solving Using Linguistic Features

Creativity is commonly assessed using divergent thinking tasks, which measure the fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration of participant output on a variety of different tasks. This study assesses the degree to which creativity can be identified based on linguistic features of participants’ language while completing collaborative divergent thinking tasks. To this end, 78 participants’ conversational dialogs (i.e., 39 dyads) within a chat environment were collected while completing three open-ended problem-solving tasks. Expert raters scored the dialogs in terms of fluency, flexibility, elaboration, and originality, as well as three types of creative language (metaphor and simile, humor, and word play). Factor analyses indicated that these scores captured two main constructs (creativity and elaboration). The linguistic features of the participants’ language (captured computationally using natural language processing tools) accounted for significant amounts of variation in both the creativity (R² = .640) and elaboration (R² = .550) scores within linear mixed effect (LME) models. These results highlight specific linguistic features that can be used to explain large amounts of variance in constructs related to creativity.     

The interrelationship between speeded and unspeeded divergent thinking and reasoning, and the role of mental speed

The relationship between intelligence and creativity is still subject to substantial debate in the research literature. In the present study, we focused on core dimensions of both constructs, that is divergent thinking and reasoning. We hypothesized their relationship to depend both on the speededness of test tasks and on the subject's mental speed, positing that with increasing speededness of the tasks, mental speed would have a stronger impact on task outcomes. We disentangled the effects of task speededness and mental speed experimentally, testing 261 participants (mean age 14.48 years) with 12 divergent thinking and 12 reasoning tasks, 6 of each under power conditions, 6 time-constrained. In addition, we assessed mental speed with 6 tasks. We analyzed the data through structural equation modeling. Results confirmed our expectations: test speededness contributed significantly to mental speed variance in divergent thinking task performance. Divergent thinking assessed under time constraints was fully explained by divergent thinking assessed under power conditions and by mental speed. Divergent thinking and reasoning showed no correlation when controlling for mental speed. Our findings suggest that the correlations between divergent thinking and reasoning are mainly the result of variance both constructs share with mental speed, and that timed versus untimed test-taking plays a minor role.