Creativity in Doubt: Toward Understanding What Drives Creativity in Learning

Part of the Advances in Mathematics Education book series (AME)


What propels creativity in learning? In this chapter, we discuss a long-standing—yet often overlooked—form of reasoning that helps address this question. That form of reasoning is called abductive reasoning (introduced by the early American Pragmatist, Charles Sanders Peirce). Abductive reasoning represents a special form of creative reasoning that is triggered by states of genuine doubt. Genuine doubt occurs whenever our everyday habits and beliefs fall short in making sense of a situation. In the context of learning, genuine doubt occurs anytime a learner is unable to inductively or deductively reason through an academic task or situation. As we will discuss, these states of doubt represent opportunities for creative learning. Specifically, our aim in this chapter is to demonstrate, by way of example, how abduction and creativity work together in every day learning. We will also discuss how understanding this link will help clarify efforts aimed at supporting creativity in the classroom, expand current conceptions of creativity, and provide directions for research on creativity in educational settings.


Creativity learning motivation 


  1. Arici, A. D., Schreiber, J. B., Sugioka, H., & Cunningham, D. J. (1998, April). Abductive reasoning and the problem solving on the World Wide Web. A paper presented at the Annual American Education Research Association, San Diego California.Google Scholar
  2. Beghetto, R. A. (2007). Ideational code-switching: Walking the talk about supporting student creativity in the classroom. Roeper Review, 29, 265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beghetto, R. A. (2013). Killing ideas softly? The promise and perils of creativity in the classroom. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Beghetto, R. A. (2016a). Creative learning: A fresh look. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 15, 6–23.Google Scholar
  5. Beghetto, R. A. (2016b). Learning as a creative act. To appear in T. Kettler (Ed.), Modern curriculum for gifted and advanced Learners. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. 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
  7. Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High Ability Studies, 25, 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beghetto, R. A., & Plucker, J. A. (2006). The relationship among schooling, learning, and creativity: All roads lead to creativity or you can’t get there from here? In J. C. Kaufman & J. Bear (Eds.), Creativity and reason in cognitive development (pp. 316–332). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burks, A. W. (1946). Peirce’s theory of abduction. Philosophy of Science, 13, 301–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cole, D. (2014). The Chinese room argument. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2014 ed.). Retrieved from
  11. Cunningham, D. J., Arici, A., Schreiber, J., & Lee, K. (2002). Navigating the World Wide Web: The role of abductive reasoning. International Journal of Applied Semiotics, 3(2), 39–58.Google Scholar
  12. Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guilford, J. P. (1967). Creativity and learning. In D. B. Lindsley & A. A. Lumsdaine (Eds.), Brain function (Brain function and learning, Vol. IV). Los Angles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  14. Houser, N. (1987). Toward a Peircean semiotic theory of learning. The American Journal of Semiotics, 5(2), 251–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Josephson, J. R., & Josephson, S. G. (Eds.). (1996). Abductive inference: Computation, philosophy, technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2013). In praise of Clark Kent: Creative metacognition and the importance of teaching kids when (not) to be creative. Roeper Review, 35, 155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Littleton, K., & Mercer, N. (2013). Interthinking: Putting talk to work. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Mumford, M. D., Medeiros, K. E., & Partlow, P. J. (2012). Creative thinking: Processes, strategies, and knowledge. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 30–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pharies, D. A. (1985). Charles S. Peirce and the linguistic sign (Vol. 9). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Piaget, J. (1973). To understand is to invent: The future of education. New York: Grossman.Google Scholar
  22. Plucker, J., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potential, pitfalls, and future directions in creativ- ity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rothenberg, A. (1996). The Janusian process in scientific creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 207–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Schreiber, J. B. (2001, April). Problem based learning and Peircean reasoning: Barry a case study. Paper presented at the National Consortium for Instruction and Cognition Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  26. Shank, G., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996, October). Modeling the six modes of Peircean abduction for educational purposes. In Annual meeting of the Midwest AI and Cognitive Science Conference, Bloomington, IN.Google Scholar
  27. Stein, M. I. (1953). Creativity and culture. The Journal of Psychology, 36, 311–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vygotsky, L. S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. M. E. Sharpe, Inc. (Trans.). Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42, 7–97. (Original work published 1967).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ConnecticutStorrsUSA
  2. 2.Duquesne UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations