Creativity Research Overlooks the Study of Resilience among Young Children: A Bibliometric Network Review

Creativity researchers are increasingly interested in understanding when, how, and for whom creativity can be beneficial. Previous reviews have demonstrated that creativity research largely ignores the study of its impact on factors that promote health, and well-being among populations of adults. It is unclear, in fact, whether this gap in research also extends to creativity research among young children. This paper addresses this issue. Early childhood is a crucial stage for the cognitive development of young children who remain highly sensitive to stress, and adversity. It is therefore essential to identify and promote factors that are beneficial to early childhood resilience, thereby contributing to documenting more of the effects of creative activities on positive outcomes. This paper presents a review with a bibliometric analysis of 1000 randomly selected articles from the Web of Science, without bias towards any specific peer-reviewed journal. The analysis of 454 included articles shows that approximately 80% of the included studies focus on creativity as an outcome (replicating previous findings with a larger sample), with only 3.78% investigating creative activities as predictors among young children. In this small percentage, most of the studies addressed creative activities in young children related to resilience outcomes.     

中小学生创造性倾向、智力及学业成绩的相关研究

本研究采用威廉斯创造性倾向量表和瑞文标准推理测验,结合中小学生语文、数学成绩,对524名中小学生进行创造性倾向、智力和学业成绩的相关研究.研究发现:(1)中小学生创造性倾向从小学到初中都处于发展阶段,高中以后基本趋于稳定,中小学生的智力一直处于发展增长趋势;(2)小学生的语文、数学成绩与创造性倾向总分有显著相关,初中生的数学成绩与创造性倾向总分以及四项行为特质都有显著相关,小学、初中和高中学生的语文、数学成绩与智力有显著相关;(3)小学中、低分段语文成绩和低分段数学成绩与其创造性倾向有显著相关,初中学生的语文成绩只有高分段与创造性倾向有显著相关,小学和高中语、数成绩三个分段学生的学业成绩跟智力显著相关.     

不同学业成就中学生创造性思维的差异研究

本研究采用创造力量表对990名不同学业成就中学生的创造性思维进行研究,结果发现:(1)高学业成就组中学生的创造性思维、发散思维和聚合思维显著高于低学业成就组.(2)高低学业成就组中学生创造性思维、发散思维和聚合思维表现出年级差异性.(3)高低学业成就组中学生的创造性思维都随着年级发展而上升,但是两组的高峰期却出现差异,高学业成就组创造力高峰出现在初二和高二,而低学业成就组出现在高一.(4)发散思维的发展趋势上,高学业成就组呈现出曲折上升的趋势,而低学业成就组整体的发展趋势平稳.(5)高低学业成就组中学生聚合思维的发展趋势相似,都呈现出在初中阶段上升到高中阶段趋于稳定,并且在高中阶段两组的水平接近.     

协和育才模式与创造性人格

创造性人格是个体创造力的主体部分。协和医科大学的教育模式有助于培养医学生积极的人生态度、高度的自我肯定评价、强烈的内在动机、自主的认知风格以及丰富的情感。在我国高等医学教育改革进程中,普通医学院校应将协和模式与本校实际相结合,加强对医学生创造性人格的培养,增强其创造力,更好地适应国际医学发展的需求。     

创造者与大学生群体创造性思维品质的比较

比较两类群体在创造性思维品质的敏捷性、灵活性、深刻性和独创性四个方面的差异,进而分析差异产生的原因。采用词汇联想测验收集数据,被试为28位社会科学和艺术领域的创造者,30位相应学科大学生。结果:思维的深刻性和独创性方面差异显著,创造者明显优于领域新手,其他两方面没有显著差异。结论:作为专家的创造者在创造性思维的深度方面明显优于领域新手。在创造性人才的培养方面,应当注重学生思考力和思考深度的培养。     

超常与常态儿童的兴趣、动机与创造性思维的比较研究

在超常儿童研究领域存在着许多争议的问题,超常儿童的智力与创造力的关系问题就是其中的一个。为了更好地解释超常儿童的创造力与智力的本质关系,我们曾提出了“创造性系统模型”。本研究的主要目的是进一步证实模型提出的假设。本研究以超常和常态儿童为被试对儿童的兴趣、动机与创造性思维的关系作了进一步的考察。结果发现：（１）超常儿童的图形、数字和实用创造性思维的流畅性和独创性成绩都明显高于常态儿童;（２）超常和常态儿童的创造性思维与兴趣、动机之间存在显著的相关;（３）兴趣和动机得分较高的被拭的创造性思维得分显著高于兴趣和动机得分较低的被试;（４）超常儿童中有相当部分处于低兴趣和低动机水平,而常态儿童中却有相当部分处于高兴趣和高动机水平。因此,本研究从一个侧面进一步支持了系统模型中提出的有关儿童创造性的假设     

Creative reasoning in formal discussion

Systems of formal dialectics articulate methods of conflict resolution. To this end they provide norms to regulate verbal exchanges between the Proponent of a thesis and an Opponent. These regulated exchanges constitute what are known as formal discussions.One may ask what moves, if any, in formal discusions correspond to arguing for or against the thesis. It is claimed that certain moves of the Proponent's are properly designated as arguing for the thesis, and that certain moves of the Opponent purport to criticize the tenability or the relevance of the reasons advanced. Thus the usefulness of formal dialectic systems as models for reasonable argument is vindicated.It is then proposed to make these systems more realistic by incorporating in them a norm of Creative Reasoning that removes the severe restrictions to which the Proponent's arguing was hitherto subject. As a consequence, a certain type of irrelevant reason is no longer automatically excluded. Therefore, it is proposed to extend the Opponent's rights to exert relevance criticism. The new dialectic systems are shown to be strategically equivalent to the original ones. Finally, it is stressed that the Opponent's criticism should not be designated as arguing against the thesis. The Opponent criticizes, but does not argue.     

Thinking “Outside the Box”: Unconstrained Creative Generation in Adults with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Creative generation is structured around existing knowledge and task examples, yet overreliance on specific examples may limit imagination (Ward, T. B., Finke, R. A., & Smith, S. M., 1995). The constraining influence of knowledge during creative generation may be offset by conceptual expansion, a process of thinking outside traditional conceptual boundaries, which may be heightened by distractibility and mild executive dysfunction (Abraham, A., Windmann, S., Daum, I., & Güntürkün, O., 2005). The present study explored the constraining effects of knowledge in adults with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), a disorder characterized by impaired attention and inhibitory control (Barkley, R. A., 1997). College students with and without ADHD were compared on two creative generation measures: an alien fruit invention task that required participants to imagine fruit that might exist on another planet (Ward, T.B., 1994), and a product label invention task wherein the goal was to invent product names without using elements of task examples (Kray, L.J., Galinski, A.D. & Wong, E.M., 2006). ADHD participants created alien fruit that diverged more from Earth fruit and labels that conformed less to examples, relative to non-ADHD peers. Results suggest that adults with ADHD may be less constrained by knowledge during creative generation. Findings are discussed in terms of theoretical import and practical implications for individuals with ADHD.     

三种压力与创意自我效能感对创造力的影响

以216名初中二年级学生为被试,采用现场实验,探讨个体创意自我效能感在竞争、评价和时间三种压力情境下对创造力的影响。结果发现,三种压力对于总体创造力的影响不同;时间、评价压力分别提高了流畅性和新颖性,竞争压力既提高了流畅性又提高了新颖性,但三种压力情境都降低了变通性;创意自我效能感中间组的学生在压力情境下具有最好的变通表现,而效能感低分组表现最差。     

试论中医基础研究中的创造性思维

创造性思维对于中医基础研究非常重要.在中医基础研究中过分依赖高新技术,或者不敢直面问题、遇到困难退缩将阻碍创造性思维.中医基础研究的创造性思维需要研究者在传统知识、现代知识、高新技术与仪器等方面作好充分的准备.为使研究保持正确的方向,在研究中要处理好"已知"与"未知"的关系并以"和"的态度对待学术争论.