The Creative Brain/The Creative Mind

In the past few decades, neuroscience research has greatly expanded our understanding of how the human brain functions. In particular, we have begun to explore the basis of emotions, intelligence, and creativity. These brain functions also have been applied to various aspects of behavior, thought, and experience. We have also begun to develop an understanding of how the brain and mind work during aesthetic and religious experiences. Studies on these topics have included neuropsychological tests, physiological measures, and brain imaging. These different techniques have enabled us to open up a window into the brain. It is by understanding the functioning of the creative brain that we begin to understand the concept of the creative mind. It is through the use of emotions and other higher cognitive functions that the brain and mind can create ideas, music, literature, and ultimately our entire repertoire of behaviors. How these different creative abilities are derived can also be traced to various parts of the brain and how they function. Modern neuroscience allows us to begin to understand the creative aspect of the brain and mind and perhaps can take us one step further toward understanding the most profound types of aesthetic and religious experiences.     

创造性认知风格、创造性人格与创造性思维的关系

对315名初中生施测Kirton适应–创新认知风格问卷、Williams创造性倾向量表和Torrance创造性思维测验任务,以考察创造性认知风格、创造性人格与创造性思维之间的关系。相关分析表明,在创造性认知风格中,效率性、规则性均与创造性思维呈显著负相关;在创造性人格中,冒险性、好奇心及挑战性均与创造性思维显著正相关。回归分析进一步表明,在创造性认知风格中,创新性、效率性分别正向、负向预测创造性思维,在创造性人格中,好奇心正向预测创造性思维;对回归系数的逐步检验发现,创新性维度通过创造性人格而对创造性思维具有间接的积极影响。结构方程模型结果则显示,创新性维度、规则性维度以创造性人格为中介分别对创造性思维发生间接的积极、消极影响。可见,创新认知风格有利于创造性思维,而适应认知风格不利于创造性思维;创造性人格有利于创造性思维;创造性人格在创造性认知风格与创造性思维之间具有一定的中介作用,创新性认知风格通过创造性人格而促进创造性思维,规则性认知风格通过创造性人格而抑制创造性思维。     

Creative Thinking

Life, and therefore evolution, is a creative process; creativity is not an attribute of a few gifted people. The way we think obscures this truth. Three ways of dealing with a problem are creativity, calculation, and choice. Creativity can occur when a single idea is held in two contradictory frames of reference. Thus to be creative we have to put aside our usual ways of thinking, which are based on either/or. When we put aside this way of thinking we will see that things do not change: they are change.     

Creative value

Free agents can create and destroy value, for how much value is realized may well depend on what such agents choose to do. Not only may such agents create and destroy value, but such creation and destruction seem to involve a dimension of value: I call it creative value. An explication of the twin concepts of creating value and creative value is given, motivated by two desiderata. It is then shown that creative value turns out to be equivalent to what Nozick has dubbed originative value, when his suggestive remarks are given a rigorous, although very natural, interpretation. Thus two highly plausible, but quite different, ways of characterizing creative value converge on a single concept. Furthermore, the account throws considerable light on two further areas of moral theory (namely, moral satisficing and the comparison principle) which turn out, rather unexpectedly, to be linked.     

Creative Failure: Why Can't People Solve Creative Problems

Although people attempt many creative problem solutions, in general, most creative problem-solving efforts, at least real-world efforts, fail. In the present effort, we examine the reasons creative problem-solving efforts typically fail. We argue that creative problem-solving efforts fail, in part, due to the fundamental nature of the kinds of problems that call for creative thought. However, the nature of people's creative problem-solving skills and the context in which they attempt to develop and implement creative problem solutions also results in failed attempts to solve creative problems. Based on these observations, we discuss how one might seek to develop people to encourage more success in creative problem-solving efforts.     

The Dynamics of Creative Self-Concept: Changes and Reciprocal Relations Between Creative Self-Efficacy and Creative Personal Identity

Although creative self-concept constructs are intensively studied in the creativity literature, little is known about the dynamics of their changes during the life span and the relationships between different aspects of the creative self-concept. Using a longitudinal and a cross-sequential design, this investigation aimed to test changes in two important creative self-concept constructs—creative self-efficacy and creative personal identity—over short (6 months) and longer (20 months) periods of time, while simultaneously examining reciprocal relationships between them. The results showed the short-term stability of both constructs, but they also revealed significant change over the longer period―specifically, a growth of creative self-efficacy and creative personal identity in people from late adolescence to early adulthood and a drop among older participants. Reciprocal longitudinal relationships between creative self-efficacy and creative personal identity were also demonstrated, with creative self-efficacy being a more stable predictor of creative personal identity than the reverse.     

Personal Characteristics that Distinguish Creative Scientists from Less Creative Scientists

What are the personal characteristics that distinguish the creative scientist from the less creative scientist? This study used the concept of implicit theory in a four‐part study of scientists and graduate students in science. In the first part, we collected 1382 adjective words that describe the personal characteristics of the creative scientist from 354 scientists. In the second part of the study, 542 additional scientists assessed these adjectives. We determined that the personal characteristics of the creative scientist fit into four factors: personality, thinking ability, research ability, and uniqueness. In the third part of the study, we found that the concepts of thinking ability and uniqueness would positively predict 221 graduate students' self‐perceived creativity, and research ability would positively predict their creative motivation. The last part of the study involved having 283 creative scientists and 264 less creative scientists from 30 research institutions rated by three colleagues on the above four factors. A logistic regression found that thinking ability was best able to identify creative scientists while personality best predicted less creative scientists.     

Managing Creative People

This article discusses three essential steps that are necessary for effective managing of creative people. It recommends that attention be paid to understand the nature of the creative process. It also suggests steps that can lead to better appreciation of the creative person. Thirdly, the paper outlines action that can assist to encourage a creative work climate.     

Creative Process Groups

Many nonverbal and artistic modes of expression have been used to communicate in counseling and education. This article investigates one mode of expression-the slide/tape show-as implemented in a group format in a college setting. The Creative Process Group, using the task of creating a slide/tape show, has group members (1) explore a relevant issue using an alternate means of expression, (2) experience a group creative process, and (3) learn about group dynamics and how individuals, including themselves, function in groups.