The Relationship Between Diverse Components of Intelligence and Creativity

Intelligence and creativity are accounted for in terms of two different mental operations referred to as ‘convergent thinking’ and ‘divergent thinking’, respectively. Nevertheless, psychometric evidence on the relationship between intelligence and creativity has been controversial. To clarify their relationship, we characterized the relationship between diverse components of intelligence and creativity through the administration of psychometric tests on a large sample (WAIS, RPM, and TTCT‐figural: n = 215; TTCT‐verbal: n = 137). The general intelligence factor (g) score showed significant correlations with both TTCT‐figural and TTCT‐verbal scores. However, sub‐dimensional analysis demonstrated that their association was attributable to the specific components of both TTCTs (TTCT‐figural: Abstractness of Titles, Elaboration, and Resistance to Premature Closure; TTCT‐verbal: Flexibility) rather than to their common components (Fluency and Originality). Among the intelligence sub‐dimensions, crystallized intelligence (gC) played a pivotal role in the association between g and the specific components of both TTCTs. When the total sample was divided into two IQ groups, these phenomena were more evident in the average IQ group than in the high IQ group. These results suggest that the mental operation of creativity may be different from that of intelligence, but gC may be used as a resource for the mental operation of creativity.     

The Myths of Heaven-Sent Creativity: Toward a Perhaps Less Democratic But More Down-to-Earth Understanding

Creativity is surrounded by a cluster of long-held beliefs—referred to here as myths—which regard it as confined to aesthetic/spiritual domains and as a divine gift to a tiny few, and thus render it ineluctable, ineffable and inscrutable. As a result, treating it as part of normal psychological functioning and emphasizing its usefulness seems almost blasphemous, and is regarded by some as devaluing creative talent or even rendering the idea of creativity meaningless. Indeed, there really does seem to be a danger of commodifying creativity and reducing it to fast food creativity—attractively packaged but lacking genuine nutritional value. However, a phase model of the process of creativity makes it possible to distinguish between sublime creativity, mundane creativity, and commodified creativity without attributing the former to forces beyond mere human existence. This conceptualization has practical consequences for, for instance, education.     

Creativity in Learning Environments: The Case of Two Sixth Grade Art‐Rooms

The four elements of creativity — the person, process, product, and environment — that come together for the purpose of clearly and completely defining creativity, form the structure of the research. Two sixth grade art‐rooms have been chosen as the setting, as a likely place to observe creativity and sixth graders as the sample group. Observations of each child in an art‐room, her/his creative process, product, and the assessment of a 1/20 model of the art‐room made by each student, were analyzed to form a complete picture of creativity. Results showed that the three elements of creativity (person, process, and product) were significantly different from each other. In addition, process and product occurring within the same environment were highly correlated with each other.     

A Visual Representation to Quantitate,Diagnose, and Improve Creativity in Insight Problem Solving

A new visual representation for insight problems permits 22 new quantitative measures; which leads to a detailed diagnosis of a person's (or team's) creative weaknesses; which then leads to prescribing targeted, effective counter‐techniques for each weakness. Currently, only two measures are consistently used for insight problem solving: the number of problems solved and the time to solve the problems. These coarse measurements do not reveal the intricate dynamics of solving insight problems. Furthermore, four commonly used creativity measures (i.e., fluency, originality, flexibility, and elaboration) are often not applied to insight problems. This new visualization permits the easy application of all four creativity measures. I challenge creativity researchers to help determine which of the 22 proposed quantitative measures are the most diagnostic for insight problem solving in isolation and, in a weighted linear combination, which might yield an effective quotient (i.e., overall measure) of insight problem solving ability.     

Do performance approach‐oriented individuals generate creative ideas? The roles of outcome instrumentality and task persistence

The literature is inconclusive about the positive and negative effects of performance approach goal orientation (PAGO) (i.e., a focus on demonstrating high performance and outperforming others) on creativity. To address this issue, this study examines when and how PAGO stimulates or hinders employee creativity. Drawing on trait activation theory and a self‐regulatory perspective, we propose that outcome instrumentality (i.e., the perception that one will receive desired organizational outcomes when performing well) moderates the effects of PAGO on task persistence bidirectionally, which, in turn, facilitates or hinders employee creativity. Results based on a two‐wave, multi‐source field survey provided strong support for our hypotheses. We found that the relationship between PAGO and task persistence was positive when outcome instrumentality was high but became negative when outcome instrumentality was low. Moreover, we found a moderated mediation effect, such that the indirect effect of PAGO on creativity through task persistence was positive when outcome instrumentality was high but negative when outcome instrumentality was low. These findings extend the PAGO literature by elucidating the goodness and badness of PAGO and provide practical implications on how to manage performance approach‐oriented employees to capitalize on their creative potentials and minimize the possible detrimental effects of PAGO on creativity.     

Measuring Functional Creativity: Non‐Expert Raters and the Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale

The Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale (CSDS) is a 30‐item scale based on a core of four criteria: Relevance & Effectiveness, Novelty, Elegance, and Genesis. The CSDS offers potential for the consensual assessment of functional product creativity. This article describes an empirical study in which non‐expert judges rated a series of mousetrap designs using the 30‐item CSDS. A confirmatory factor analysis revealed a simple structure that corresponded closely to the a priori theoretical model of functional creativity, resulting in a revised 24‐item CSDS. Non‐expert judges were able to use the scale with a high degree of reliability and internal consistency. The revised CSDS paves the way for further research into the use of non‐expert judges as a possible replacement for more costly, harder‐to‐obtain experts when measuring product creativity using the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT).     

Motivated or Demotivated to Be Creative: The Role of Self‐Regulatory Focus in Transformational and Transactional Leadership Processes

Numerous studies have recognised the importance of transformational leadership style for encouraging employees’ creativity. Self‐regulation studies have highlighted the influence of a promotion focus on employees’ creative behaviours. Yet both leadership and self‐regulation theories have paid less attention to the role transactional leadership style and situational prevention regulatory focus may play in affecting employees’ creativity. In this article we present a theoretical model which examines transformational and transactional leadership styles and both promotion and prevention situational self‐regulatory focus (SRF). The model suggests that while transformational leadership promotes creativity, at least partially by enhancing follower's situational promotion SRF, transactional leadership style (transactional active) is aligned with followers’ prevention situational SRF, which is associated with leaders’ hindering of followers’ creativity. Findings from two studies, an experimental study (N = 189) and a field study (N = 343 employees and 75 managers), support this model, showing that the relationship between different types of leadership and creativity are more complex than previously regarded. The theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

The Alignment of Measures and Constructs in Organizational Research: The Case of Testing Measurement Models of Creativity

Purpose  

Organizational creativity research has a curious misalignment between construct definitions and measurement model specifications—definitions embrace multiple facets, but empirical measures do not. The purpose of this study was to examine potential measurement model misspecification in organizational creativity research. We compare whether creativity is best assessed as a unidimensional common latent construct model with reflective indicators or as a multi-dimensional composite latent construct model with formative indicators.     

Creative Employees: A Challenge to Managers

Employee creativity and corporate innovation have become important topics in management literature. Because the broadcast industry is dependent upon entertainment to attract viewers and listeners, most radio and television stations are staffed by artistic, creative personnel. These creative employees do not always respond to standard management and motivational techniques. Recent theories focus upon the end product to define creativity. Artists, however, often consider the process of creativity as more important than the final product. A new modified-process definition of creativity is suggested in which the artistic concerns of production personnel and the goal-oriented business requirements of management combine to form a structured system for creative endeavors. Characteristics of creative people are discussed along with techniques to manage creative personnel.     

A Multilevel Analysis of the Relationship between Shared Leadership and Creativity in Inter‐Organizational Teams

An inter‐organizational team, which consists of diverse members from different organizations to conduct an initiative, has been widely treated as a critical method to improve organizational innovation. This study proposes a multilevel model to test the relationship between shared leadership and creativity at both team‐ and individual level in the context of inter‐organizational teams. Multisource data were collected from 53 inter‐organizational teams. We obtain the following findings: first, shared leadership is positively related to both team creativity and individual creativity via knowledge sharing. Second, task interdependence positively moderates the relationship between shared leadership and knowledge sharing. Third, task interdependence positively moderates the relationship between knowledge sharing and team creativity, but does not moderate the relationship between knowledge sharing and individual creativity. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of the findings.     

Psychometrics of a simple method for scoring organizational approach on the Rey‐Osterrieth complex figure

The Rey‐Osterrieth Complex Figure (ROCF) is a commonly used neuropsychological measure that assesses visuospatial processing, planning and visuomotor integration. Using samples of clinically referred (N=20) and non‐clinical (N=44) adults, the present study examines the psychometric properties of a simple method of scoring organizational approach to the ROCF. Developed by Savage et al. (1999) and refined by Deckersbach et al. (2000) , this simple 5‐point organizational scoring system allows for the quick and accurate assessment of organizational quality. Results suggest that this system is internally consistent and can be scored reliably. Correlations with measures of visuomotor integration and accuracy of rendition after a delay provide evidence of convergent validity. Organization scores were independent of both Verbal and Performance IQ estimates. However, discriminant validity analyses found that high‐functioning patients referred for a neuropsychological assessment did not score significantly different from a non‐clinical sample, raising questions about the diagnostic utility of this measure with less impaired populations. Implications for clinical practice are discussed, as are directions for future research.     

Personality and biological markers of creativity

The aim of the present study was to test (i) Eysenck's theory that psychoticism (P) should be related to creativity, (ii) whether testosterone (T), due to its association with P claimed in the literature, can be identified as a biological marker of creativity, and (iii) whether the SEEK dimension of the Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales (ANPS) was also related to creativity and to testosterone due to its relationship to Sensation Seeking. In a sample of N = 48 male and female subjects, test scores on figural, verbal, and numeric creativity were compared between high and low P‐scorers as well as between high and low SEEK‐scorers. Effects were controlled for fluid intelligence as measured by Cattell's CFT‐3 and crystallized intelligence as assessed by the Structure‐of‐Intelligence‐Test (Intelligenz‐Struktur‐Test, I‐S‐T 2000 R). Neither a main effect of P or T nor an interaction effect P×T on creativity could be obtained. Instead, SEEK was related to all components of creativity and explained more than 15% of the variance of total creativity. Moreover, significant differences in SEEK could be explained by differences in T, independently of gender. Furthermore, 39% of the variance of SEEK could be explained by the two uncorrelated indicators testosterone and creativity. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Productivity,counterproductivity and creativity: The ups and downs of job insecurity

Organizations frequently downsize in the hopes of creating a ‘lean and mean’ company able to be flexible and quick to adapt to changing environmental needs. The purpose of the current research was to assess the effects of job insecurity on productivity, counterproductivity, and creativity in a simulated organizational environment and a field setting. In the first study, 104 non‐traditional undergraduate students (M = 30.48 years) participated in a laboratory experiment that manipulated the threat of lay‐offs (job insecurity) and measured creativity and productivity over two time periods. Compared to control group participants, results indicate that participant productivity increased in the condition of higher levels of job insecurity, whereas creative problem solving decreased. In the second study, 144 employees in five organizations completed a survey measuring their job insecurity perceptions, enactment of counterproductive work behaviours, and creative problem‐solving ability. Regression analyses indicate that job insecurity predicted lower creativity scores, yet was also related to lower numbers of counterproductive work behaviours. Taken together, these studies suggest that job insecurity may have adverse effects on creativity, yet moderately beneficial effects on productivity. Results are interpreted in light of the increasing prevalence of job insecurity and organizational downsizing in today's workplace.     

Organizational Creativity and Innovation in Relation to Psychological Well-Being and Organizational Factors

The two objectives of the research reported in this article were to investigate the relationship between organizational creativity and innovation and psychological well-being of employees, as well as the relationship between organizational factors and organizational creativity and innovation. Ninety-five employees working in a high-tech field of industry participated in the study. The relationships were tested in a LISREL model and the result showed a significant relationship between perceived organizational creativity and innovation and individual psychological well-being. Of the organizational factors included in the model, organizational climate and work resources were found to be significantly related to perceived creativity and innovation in the organization. Taken together, the results suggest that enhancing the conditions for creativity and innovation is beneficial for the individual in terms of better psychological well-being.     

The Cross‐Level Mediating Effect of Psychological Capital on the Organizational Innovation Climate–Employee Innovative Behavior Relationship

Organizational innovation climates have been found to be effective predictors of employee creativity and organizational innovation. As such, climate assessments provide a basis for useful organizational interventions in enhancing creativity and innovation. Researchers now call for better articulation of the motivational mechanisms that link social context to employee innovation. In responding to the above call, this study found that employee positive psychological capital (PsyCap) is more influential than organizational innovation climate on employee innovative behavior. With a large sample (N  = 781) from 16 organizations and a cross‐level analysis, we examined the relationship between organizational innovation climate and employee innovative behavior with employee PsyCap as mediator. The results showed that both organizational innovation climate and employee PsyCap significantly affect employee innovative behavior, and more importantly, employee PsyCap fully mediates this relationship. The innovation journey is a challenging and risky one with many frustrations and discouraging moments from idea generation to idea implementation. The research results presented here imply that to be innovatively effective, organizations are advised to manage both social (organizational innovation climate) and psychological (PsyCap) resources of employees in enhancing employee innovative behavior. Other theoretic and practical implications are discussed.     

Perception of the most creative Chinese by undergraduates in Beijing,Guangzhou, Hong Kong,and Taipei

This study surveys 489 undergraduates in Beijing, Guangzhou, Hong Kong and Taipei about their nomination of most creative Chinese people in history and in modern times. Politicians were nominated by all four samples as being the most creative individuals in the past and at present. Scientists and inventors ranked second in position. Taken together, they occupy over 90 percent of the total number of nominations. Artists, musicians and businessmen are rarely nominated. More than half of the reasons given for nominating these people are not directly related to creativity. This finding is attributed to a strong utilitarian view of creativity that lies in Chinese young people's perception of creativity. They are much more concerned with a creator's social influence or contribution in society than with his or her innovativeness in thinking. The paper concludes by addressing some methodological implications for further studies on the issue.     

Age,Emotion Regulation Strategies,Temperament, Creative Drama,and Preschoolers' Creativity

Based on Yeh's (2004) Ecological Systems Model of Creativity Development, this study investigated the effects that age, the use of emotion regulation strategies, temperament, and exposure to creative drama instruction have on the development of creativity among preschool children. Participants were 1164‐ to 6‐year‐old preschool children. This study categorized the emotion regulation strategies used by preschool children and developed a creativity test which includes the measurement of usefulness, an indicator of creativity that has, until now, been ignored. The main findings are that (a) 6‐year‐olds outperform 4‐ and 5‐year‐olds in terms of creativity; (b) emotion regulation strategies as well as a positive temperament have positive effects on children's creativity; (c) creative drama instruction contributes to children's creativity; and (d) age group, emotion regulation strategies, temperament, and creative drama instruction can collectively predict children's creativity.     

Defining Creativity: Don't We Also Need to Define What Is Not Creative?

I argue that any attempt to define creative ideas cannot fully succeed without also defining uncreative ideas. This argument begins by defining three parameters that characterize a potentially creative thought: the idea's initial probability (p), the final utility (u), and the creator's prior knowledge of that utility (v). The three parameters then lead to a three‐criterion multiplicative definition of personal creativity, namely, c = (1 ? p)u(1 ? v), where the first factor indicates originality and the third factor surprise. Although creativity can only maximize as originality, utility, and surprise all approach unity, the same definition indicates that there are seven different ways that creativity can minimize. These alternatives were identified as (a) routine, reproductive, or habitual ideas, (b) fortuitous response bias, (c) irrational perseveration, (d) problem finding, (e) rational suppression, (f) irrational suppression, and (g) blissful ignorance. If the third parameter v is omitted, then the number of creative and noncreative outcomes reduces to just four, making creativity indistinguishable from irrational suppression. The alternative outcomes are then illustrated using the classic two‐string problem. Besides providing a more finely differentiated conception of creativity failures, the definition has critical implications regarding the processes and procedures required to generate highly creative ideas.     

Through Multiple Lenses: Implicit Theories of Creativity Among Indian Children and Adults*

This constructivist qualitative enquiry reveals a multiplicity of implicit theories of creativity extant in Indian culture with generic and domain specific usage of indigenous terms. Creativity was dominantly construed as a faculty of the nature of ‘pratibha’, in keeping with Indian philosophical thought, and with reference to the self, with participants invoking the holistic self, cognitive self, experiential/emotional self and physical self to describe creativity. The sense of creativity in these seemingly disparate, self‐based construals, the uncovering of which is the unique contribution of this study, derived from the person's experience of a sense of agency, rather than merely the production of novelty per se. This emphasis on process; novelty being central for some but epiphenomenal for others; the varied meanings of ‘newness’; experiencing creativity as self‐expression, self‐extension, self‐fulfillment and self‐actualization; and equating creativity with the act of learning reflect distinctive elements of implicit theories that have emerged in this study.     

Stimulating Children's Creativity and Curiosity: Does Content and Medium Matter?

Effects of print, television and content on children's creativity, and measures of possibility and curiosity were examined. Eight science TV programs were identified as low or high creative and eight illustrated booklets were developed to mirror the programs' content. Fifth and sixth on‐grade‐level‐readers were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: High Content TV, Low Content TV, High Content Print or Low Content Print. Students then completed the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking, The Possibilities Index and The Children's Science Curiosity Scale. Low Content significantly outscored High Content on Visual Originality and High Content significantly outscored Low Content on measures of possibility and curiosity. Results suggest content has more effect on creativity and attitude than media.