Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship

Living Edition
| Editors: Elias G. Carayannis (Editor-in-Chief)

Models for Creative Inventions

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6616-1_381-2


Key Concepts and Definition of Terms

A model is characterized by representing objects, phenomena, or processes of the world. Stachowiak (1973) introduces three key features of models: imaging feature, reduction feature, and pragmatic feature. Creativity can be defined quantitatively or qualitatively and has three directions of impact (Hanke et al. 2011): the creative product, the creative process, and the creative person. In general, creativity is referred to the creation of novel and useful artifacts (Mumford 2003). Models for creative inventions are representations of the world that are novel, i.e., different from already existing representations, and originate after an iterative model-building process.

Theoretical Background

Taking into account that creative inventions are understood as artifacts that are new as well as useful and are created by a divergent way of thinking, this requires an iterative process of model building...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access


  1. Clariana RB, Strobel J. Modeling technologies. In: Spector JM, Merrill MD, van Merrienboer JJG, Driscoll MP, editors. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. New York: Taylor & Francis Group; 2008. p. 329–44.Google Scholar
  2. de Jong T, van Joolingen WR. Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Rev Educ Res. 1998;68(2):179–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Greeno JG. Situations, mental models and generative knowledge. In: Klahr D, Kotovsky K, editors. Complex information processing. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1989. p. 285–318.Google Scholar
  4. Hanke U, Ifenthaler D, Seel NM. Modeling the world of instruction: creative insight or learnt by advise? Open Educ J. 2011;4(Suppl 1:M10):113–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ifenthaler D. Effects of experimentally induced emotions on model-based reasoning. Learn Individ Differ. 2014;43:191–8. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2015.09.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ifenthaler D, Pirnay-Dummer P. Model-based tools for knowledge assessment. In: Spector JM, Merrill MD, Elen J, Bishop MJ, editors. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. New York: Springer; 2014. p. 289–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ifenthaler D, Seel NM. A longitudinal perspective on inductive reasoning tasks. Illuminating the probability of change. Learn Instr. 2011;21(4):538–49. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ifenthaler D, Seel NM. Model-based reasoning. Comput Educ. 2013;64:131–42. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jonassen DH. Computers as mindtools for schools: engaging critical thinking. 2nd ed. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs; 1999.Google Scholar
  10. Jonassen DH, Cho YH. Externalizing mental models with mindtools. In: Ifenthaler D, Pirnay-Dummer P, Spector JM, editors. Understanding models for learning and instruction. Essays in honor of Norbert M. Seel. New York: Springer; 2008. p. 145–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mumford MD. Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research. Creat Res J. 2003;15:107–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Murray T, Winship L, Bellin R, Cornell M. (2001). Toward glass box educational simulation. Reifying models for inspection and design. AI-ED Workshop. External Representations in AIED: Multiple Forms and Multiple Roles, San Antonio; 2001.Google Scholar
  13. Seel NM. Model-centered learning and instruction. Technol Instr Cogn Learn. 2003;1(1):59–85.Google Scholar
  14. Seel NM, Ifenthaler D, Pirnay-Dummer P. Mental models and problem solving: technological solutions for measurement and assessment of the development of expertise. In: Blumschein P, Hung W, Jonassen DH, Strobel J, editors. Model-based approaches to learning: using systems models and simulations to improve understanding and problem solving in complex domains. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers; 2009. p. 17–40.Google Scholar
  15. Smith JP, DiSessa AA, Roschelle J. Misconceptions reconceived: a constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. J Learn Sci. 1993;3(2):115–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Stachowiak FJ. Allgemeine Modell theorie. Berlin: Springer; 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Learning, Design and TechnologyUniversity of MannheimMannheimGermany