Advertisement

Theories for Innovative Thought and Communication

  • Yukio Ohsawa
  • Yoko Nishihara
Chapter
Part of the Understanding Innovation book series (UNDINNO)

Abstract

Creativity and innovation represented by invention and discovery are symbols of knowledge-based interactions between human beings. Human creativity has been studied using various approaches: the anagogic approach (Reichardt 1969), the educational approach (de Bono 1971; Gordon 1961), the psychoanalytic approach (Sternberg 1999), the computational psychology approach (Torance 1974), the social science approach (Simonton 1997), the congregative, developmental psychology, artificial intelligence, and cognitive approaches (Runco 1997), design science (Gero and Maher 1993), case studies, and practices (Ghiselin 1952 Wallance and Howard 1989). Of these, the cognitive approach is most useful for revealing the creative process in the human mind – that underlies all thought and communication related to innovation. Experimental methods based on the paradigm of cognitive psychology and observational methods like participant observation have been used to study the process of human creativity in detail.

Keywords

Tacit Knowledge SECI Model Innovative Product Divergent Thinking Target Problem 
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.

References

  1. Brown AL (1987) Metacognition executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanisms. In: Weinert FE, Kluwe RH (eds) Metacognition, motivation, and understanding. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  2. Buzan T, Buzan B (1995) The mind map book. BBC Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Carrol JM (2000) Making use: scenario-based design of human-Computer interactions. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. Cooper A (1999) The inmates are running the Asylum. Sams Publishing, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  5. Corbridge C, Rugg G, Major NP, Shadbolt NR, Burton AM (1994) Laddering: technique and tool use in knowledge acquisition. Knowl Acquis 6–3:315–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. de Bono E (1971) New think: the use of lateral thinking in the generation of new ideas. Basic books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Dillon TJ (1984) The classification of research questions. Rev Educ Res 54:327–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eris O (2004) Effective inquiry for innovative engineering design. Kluwer Academic Publishers, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Finke RA, Ward TB, Smith SM (1992) Creative cognition: theory, research, and applications. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Flavell JH (1987) Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In: Weinert FE, Kluwe RH (eds) Metacognition, motivation, and understanding. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  11. Gentner D, Markman AB (1997) Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. Am Psychol 42:45–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gentner D, Rattermann MJ, Forbus KD (1993) The roles of similarity in transfer: separating retrievability for inferential soundness. Cogn Psychol 25:524–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gero JS, Maher ML (1993) Modeling creativity and knowledge-based creative design. Lawrence Eribaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  14. Ghiselin B (1952) The creative process. University of California Press, BerkleyGoogle Scholar
  15. Gordon W (1961) Synetics: the development of creative capacity. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Grasser A, McMahen C (1993) Anomalous information triggers questions when adults solve quantitative problems and comprehend stories. J Educ Psychol 85(1):136–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gomes P, Seco N, Pereira FC, Paiva P, Carreiro P, Ferreira JL, Bento C (2006) The importance of retrieval in creative design analogies. Knowl Based Syst 19:480–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Holyoak KJ, Thagard PR (1995) Mental leaps: analogy in creative thought. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Kurz T, Stoffel K (2002) Going beyond Stemming: creating concept signatures of complex medical terms. Knowl Based Syst 15(5–6):309–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kushiro N, Ohsawa Y (2006) A requirement acquisition process as an evolved chance discovery, chance discoveries in real world decision making. Springer, Berlin, pp 315–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lehnert GW (1978) The process of question answering. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  22. Lindberg T, Meinel C, Wanger R (2010) Design thiking: a fruitful concept for IT development? In: Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer L (eds) Design thinking: understand – improve – apply. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp 3–18Google Scholar
  23. Mahmoud-Jouini SB, Charue-Duboc F (2008) Enhancing discontinuous innovation through knowledge combination: the case of an exploratory unit within an established automotive firm. Creat Innov Manag 17/2:127–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nishihara Y, Sunayama W, Yachida M (2007) Creative activity support by discovering effective combinations. Syst Comput Jpn 38(12):99–111. WileyGoogle Scholar
  25. Nonaka I (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ Sci 5(1):14–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ohsawa Y, McBurney P (2003) Chance discovery. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ohsawa Y, Tsumoto S (2005) Chance discoveries in real world decision making. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  28. Reichardt J (1969) Cybernetic serendipity: the computer and the arts. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Runco MA (1997) The creativity research handbook. Hampton Press, CresskillGoogle Scholar
  30. Sternberg RJ (1999) Handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Simonton DK (1997) Historiometric studies of creative genius. In: Runco MA (ed) The creativity research handbook. Hampton Press, Cresskill, pp 3–28Google Scholar
  32. Skogstad P, Leifer L (2010) A unified innovation process model for engineering designers and managers. In: Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer L (eds) Design thinking: understand – improve – apply. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp 19–43Google Scholar
  33. Torance E (1974) Torrance test of creative thinking. Scholastic Testing Service, BensenvilleGoogle Scholar
  34. Waldron RA (1979) Sense and sense development. Andre Deutsch Ltd., LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Wallance D, Howard EG (1989) Creative people of work: twelve cognitive case studies. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Engineering Department of Systems InnovationThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations