Advertisement

On the Path Towards the Science of Creative Thinking

Chapter
Part of the Creativity in the Twenty First Century book series (CTFC)

Abstract

In this introductory Chapter, we state the fundamental elements that underpin the science of creative thinking, recognizing at the same time that we are following a path towards the establishment of that science, and that many challenges are yet to be met. Considering theoretical models for the creative thinking process, we discuss the minimum number of stages, the concept of optimal originality, and we review the most important existing models, outlining their features and limitations. The discussion then moves from the individual to the social level. After reviewing the generally accepted approaches in social creativity analysis, we call for balanced fusion of the individual and social points of view, avoiding artificial contrasts. Two macro domains are then analysed: engineering and design and art. In the former, we introduce the concepts of creative reproduction of nature, extension of capabilities and of conditions for life, and we discuss the use of metaphors in various forms. For the latter, we start with a scientific definition of inspiration, then move on to discuss the delicate balance between discipline and spontaneity in artistic education. Also, we touch upon the state-of-the-art of artificial creators that can produce mimicking the style of great artists. We conclude the Chapter by addressing some areas which we consider to be both urgent and necessary in the development of the science of creative thinking.

Keywords

Science Creativity Creative thinking Individual creativity Social creativity Creative thinking process modeling Domain specific creativity 

References

  1. Altshuller, G. (1984). Creativity as an exact science. New York: Gordon and Breach.Google Scholar
  2. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualisation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. New York: Westview.Google Scholar
  4. Amabile, T. M., Barsade, S. G., Mueller, J. S., & Staw, B. M. (2005). Affect and creativity at work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 367–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Batey, M., & Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, personality and intelligence: A critical review of the scattered literature. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 132, 355–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becattini, N., & Cascini, G. (2015). Improving self-efficacy in solving inventive problems with TRIZ. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Botella, M., & Lubart, T. (2015). Creative processes: Art, design and science. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Cattani, G., Colucci, M., & Ferriani, S. (2015). Chanel’s creative trajectory in the field of fashion: The optimal network structuration strategy. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Corazza, G. E., & Agnoli, S. (2013). DIMAI: An universal model for creative thinking. Report: Marconi Institute for Creativity Internal, 1.Google Scholar
  10. Cropley, D. H. (2015). Creativity in engineering. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp. 325–339). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dawis, M. A. (2009). Understanding the relationship between mood and creativity: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dietrich, A. (2004). The cognitive neuroscience of creativity. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11, 1011–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dietrich, A., & Kanso, R. (2010). A review of EEG, ERP and neuroimaging studies of creativity and insight. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 822–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dorniak-Wall, K. (2015). A Review of integrated approaches to the study of creativity: A proposal for a systems framework for creativity. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.), Mechanisms of insight (pp. 365–395). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Eysenck, H. J. (1993). Creativity and personality: Suggestions for a theory. Psychological Inquiry, 4, 147–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of the impact of personality on scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychological Review, 2, 290–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Freud, S. (1962). Creative writers and daydreaming. In Strachy, J. (Ed.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 9, pp. 142–152). London: Hogarth. (Original work published 1908).Google Scholar
  21. Ghedini, F., Pachet, F., & Roy, P. (2015). Creating music and texts with flow machines. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Glăveanu, V. P. (2015). Distributing creativity: Three thought experiments. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Helms, M. K., Farzaneh, H. H., & Lindemann, U. (2015). Creating bio-inspired solution ideas using biological research articles. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hennessey, B. A., & Watson, M. W. (2015). The defragmentation of creativity: Future directions with an emphasis on educational applications. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Ivcevic, Z., Bracket, M. A., & Mayer, J. D. (2007). Emotional intelligence and emotional creativity. Journal of Personality, 75, 199–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Journeaux, J., & Mottram, J. (2015). Creativity and art education: Gaps between theories and practices. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Kaufman, A. B., Butt, A. E., Kaufman, J. C., & Colbert-White, E. N. (2011). Towards a neurobiology of creativity in nonhuman animals. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 125, 255–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kirsch, C., Lubart, T., & Houssemand, C. (2015). Creativity in student architects: Multivariate approach. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Kounios, J., Frymiare, J. L., Bowden, E. M., Fleck, J. I., Subramaniam, K., Parrish, T. B., & Jung-Beeman, M. J. (2006). The prepared mind: Neural activity prior to problem presentation predicts sub-sequent solution by sudden insight. Psychological Science, 17, 882–890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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
  33. Mumford, M. D., Mobley, M. I., Uhlman, C. E., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Doares, L. M. (1991). Process analytic models of creative capacities. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 91–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Poincarè, H. (1952). Science and method (Francis Maitland, Trans.). London: Dover. (Original work published 1914).Google Scholar
  35. Rahman, S., & Bhattacharya, J. (2015). Neurocognitive aspects of musical improvisation and performance. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  36. Runco, M. A. (2014). Journal of Genius and Eminence.Google Scholar
  37. Runco, M. A., & Pritzker, S. (2011). Encyclopedia of creativity (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  38. Sanchez-Ruiz, M. J., Hernandez-Torrano, D., Perez-Gonzales, J. C., Batey, M., & Petrides, K. V. (2011). The relationship between trait emotional intelligence and creativity across subject domains. Motivation and Emotion, 35, 461–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sawyer, K. (2006). Explaining creativity. The science of human innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Sgourev, S. V. (2015). Dangerous liaisons: Bridging micro and macro levels in creativity research. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  41. Silvia, P. J. (2008). Discernment and creativity: How well can people identify their most creative ideas. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2, 139–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Simonton, D. K. (2012). Quantifying creativity: Can measures span the spectrum? Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 14, 100–104.Google Scholar
  43. Simonton, D. K., & Ting, S. S. (2010). Creativity in eastern and western civilizations: The lessons of historiometry. Management and Organization Review, 6, 329–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sintoni, C. (2015). Music listening, composition and performance: An experience of creativity for education. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  45. Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The nature of creativity. Creativity Research, 18, 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1991). On short-selling the investment theory of creativity: A reply to Runco. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 200–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51(7), 677–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. von Thienen, J., & Meinel, C. (2015). Tele-board MED: Supporting creative problem solving in behaviour psychotherapy. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  49. Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  50. Walton, W. P. (2015). Creativity and a human dichotomy: Individual or part of a team? In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  51. Zhou, C., & Valero, P. (2015). A comparison of creativity in project groups in science and engineering education in Denmark and China. In G. E. Corazza & S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.DEI DepartmentUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  2. 2.Marconi Institute for CreativityPontecchio Marconi (BO)Italy

Personalised recommendations