The Nature of Creativity: Mayflies, Octopi, and the Best Bad Idea We Have

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Creativity Theory and Action in Education book series (CTAE, volume 1)

Abstract

What is creativity? This chapter explores various definitions of creativity that have been proposed since the inception of creativity research, along with models and measures of the creative process. Classical approaches to creativity focus on what are known as two-criterion and three-criterion models. All models include some variation of novelty and usefulness as two of the three criteria, with three-criterion models employing surprisingness or quality as a third criterion. We propose a definition of creativity that focuses on the process through which people arrive at good ideas, and argue for a “1.5” criterion model. Specifically, we argue that creativity involves novelty (that becomes surprisingness toward the high end of the spectrum) as one criterion. And we argue that the .5 of a criterion relates to the notion that an idea has to have the potential to be useful in order for it to be creative. That is, an idea does not have to ultimately prove to be fruitful in order for the process that generated it to be considered to be creativity; it only needs to have a possibility of being useful. This allows for great ideas that did not come to useful fruition (e.g., Leonardo’s “helicopter”) still to be considered creative, while relegating fundamentally silly or inappropriate ideas to the non-creative bin. We show how this definition and approach to the criterion problem solves a number of thorny issues in creativity scholarship.

Keywords

Criterion Model Creative Idea Selective Retention Reality Check Creative Behavior 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Affleck, B., Clooney, G., & Heslov, G. (Producers), & Affleck, B. (Director). (2012). Argo [Motion picture]. Hollywood, CA: Warner Bros. Pictures.Google Scholar
  2. Baas, M., Koch, S., Nijstad, B. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2015). Conceiving creativity: The nature and consequences of laypeople’s beliefs about the realization of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9, 340–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barron, F. (1955). The disposition toward originality. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 478–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Creative self-efficacy: Correlates in middle and secondary students. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 447–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2007). Toward a broader conception of creativity: A case for “mini-c” creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1, 73–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bock, R. D. (1973).Personal communication.Google Scholar
  7. Bruner, J. S. (1962). The conditions of creativity. In Contemporary approaches to creative thinking, 1958, University of Colorado, CO, US. New York, NY: Atherton.Google Scholar
  8. Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retentions in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review, 67, 380–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cropley, A. J., & Cropley, D. (2009). Fostering creativity: A diagnostic approach for higher education and organizations. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  10. Eysenck, H. J. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 290–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P. W. (1962). Creativity and intelligence: Explorations with gifted students. Oxford, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Guilford, J. P. (1967). Creativity: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 1(1), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaufman, A. B., Kornilov, S. A., Bristol, A. S., Tan, M., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2010). The neurobiological foundation of creative cognition. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 216–232). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (2010). The Cambridge handbook of creativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Kozbelt, A., Beghetto, R. A., & Runco, M. A. (2010). Theories of creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 20–47). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lipscomb, A. A., & Bergh, A. E. (Eds.). (1905). The writings of Thomas Jefferson (Vol. 3). Washington, DC: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association.Google Scholar
  18. Martindale, C. (1990). The clockwork muse: The predictability of artistic styles. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  19. Merrotsy, P. (2013). A note on Big-C creativity and little-c creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 25, 474–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Plucker, J. A., & Makel, M. C. (2010). Assessment of creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 48–73). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305–310.Google Scholar
  23. Richards, R. (Ed). (2007). Everyday creativity and new views of human nature: Psychological, social, and spiritual perspectives (xiii, 349 pp). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  24. Richards, R. (2010). Everyday creativity: Process and way of life – Four key issues. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 189–215). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Runco, M. A. (2004). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 657–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Runco, M. A. (2003). Education for creative potential. Scandinavian Journal of Education, 47, 317–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 92–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Silvia, P. J., Beaty, R. E., Nusbaum, E. C., et al. (2014). Everyday creativity in daily life: An experience-sampling study of “little c” creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 183–188. doi: 10.1037/a0035722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Simonton, D. K. (1990). History, chemistry, psychology, and genius: An intellectual autobiography of historiometry. In M. A. Runco & R. S. Albert (Eds.), Theories of creativity (pp. 92–115). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Simonton, D. K. (2001). Creativity as cognitive selection: The blind-variation and selective retention model. Behaviorial and Brain Sciences, 24, 554–556.Google Scholar
  31. Simonton, D. K. (2011). Creativity and discovery as blind variation: Campbell’s (1960) BVSR model after the half-century mark. Review of General Psychology, 15, 158–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Simonton, D. K. (2012). Taking the US Patent Office creativity criteria seriously: A quantitative three-criterion definition and its implications. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 97–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Simonton, D. K. (in press). Defining creativity: Don’t we also need to define what is not creative? Journal of Creative Behavior.Google Scholar
  34. Smith, J. K., & Smith, L. F. (2010). Educational creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 250–264). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thorndike, E. L. (1918). The nature, purposes, and general methods of measurement of educational products. In S. A. Courtis (Ed.), The measurement of educational products (17th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Pt. 2. pp. 16–24). Bloomington, IL: Public School.Google Scholar
  37. Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Torrance, E. P., & Khatena, J. (1970). “What Kind of Person Are You?” A brief screening device for identifying creatively gifted adolescents and adults. Gifted Child Quarterly, 14(2), 71–75.Google Scholar
  39. Weisberg, R. W. (2015). Expertise, nonobvious creativity, and ordinary thinking in Edison and others: Integrating blindness and sightedness. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9, 15–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations