Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

‘Problems’ in the Concept of Creativity


Affiliations
1 Zakir Husain Centre for Educational Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The study of creativity is marked by the various disciplinary perspectives, diverse conceptual histories and divergent theoretical stands within the discipline of psychology. The mechanism underlying creativity lays both in the human thought process and in culture. After the influential speech of J.P. Guilford in 1950, creativity as a phenomenon has got special attention in every sphere of knowledge. In the present context of changing circumstances due to globalization and technological advancement, creativity becomes omnipresent and indispensable more than ever before. As a result of innumerable studies, creativity is theorized in numerous ways and the theoretical knowledge is applied in various domains. The future of the creativity research is on both deep-down scientific studies involving cognitive science and neurology, and also on the cultural and cross-cultural study. Although it is too early to anticipate, yet there is end number scope for its development and growth. Interdisciplinary research should be carried out considering internal and external interrelated factors that assumed to influence one’s creativity. Further, problem-solving often has a creative aspect, but creativity is not always mean problem-solving. Problem-solving and creativity are closely related believing that manifestation of new and novel outcomes happens in response to a problem. Since, restricting the concept of creativity within the disciplinary boundary hinders the expansion, clarity, and functionality of the phenomenon as a whole. Creativity needs more exploration and multi-dimensional explanation.

Keywords

Creativity, Culture, Cognition, Problem-solving, Behavioristics Approach, Humanistic Psychology, Psychoanalytic Approach, Domain.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Aggarwal, I., and Woolley, A. W. Team creativity, cognition, and cognitive style diversity. Management of Science. 2018.
  • Agrawal, V. and Kushwaha, V. S. Creative and Innovative Good Practices in Compulsory Education. Asian J. Management. 2012; 3(2): 114-116.
  • Aktas, F. The Emergence of Creativity as an Academic Discipline in Higher Education Institution, 2017.
  • Amabile, T. M. Creativity and Innovation in Organizations. Harvard Business School Background Note, 1996.
  • Amabile, T. M., and Pillemer, J. Perspectives on the social psychology of creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 2012; 46(1): 3-15.
  • Amiraghaie, M. A. Imagination and Imagery. Research J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 2014; 5(4): 379-383
  • Arieti, S. Creativity The Magic Synthesis. New York: Basic Books. 1976.
  • Arons, M. Creativity, Humanistic Psychology, and the Emerging American Consciousness. Meeting of the Association for Humanistic Psychology, Oahu, HI. Retrieve from https://www.westga.edu/academics/cross/psychology/assets/docs/AronsCreativity.pdf, 1972
  • Baer, J. Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 2012; 46(1): 16-29.
  • Bjorklund, D. F. A metatheory for cognitive development (or “Piaget is dead” revisited). Child Development, 2018; 89(6): 2288-2302.
  • Candolle, A. de. Histoire des sciences et des savants depuis deux siècles. Geneve: Georg. 1873.
  • Cautilli, J. (2004). Toward a behavioral theory of “creativity”: A preliminary essay. The Behavior Analyst Today, 2004; 5(1): 126.
  • Corbolan-Berna, F. J. Creativity as a cognitive style. Journal of Creative Behavior, 1992; 26(3): 163-164.
  • Cropley, D. H., Cropley, A. J., Kaufman, J. C., and Runco, M. A. (Eds.). The dark side of creativity. Cambridge University Press. 2010.
  • Cummins, J. A. Brief Historical Ontology Research in the United States: Tracing the Zeitgeist SFU Educational Review, 2013, 6.
  • Darwin, C. The origin of species by means of natural selection. In R. M. Hutchins (Ed.), Great Books of the Western world. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica. (Original second edition published 1859). 1952; 49: 1-251.
  • Dasgupta, S. A Cognitive-Historical Approach to Creativity. Routledge. 2019.
  • Davis, G. A. Creativity is forever. Kendall Hunt Publishing Company. 2004.
  • Fabian, J. Creative thinking and problem-solving. CRC Press. 2018.
  • Feist, G. J. Domain-specific creativity in the physical sciences. In Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse, ed. J. C. Kaufman and J. Baer. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum. 2004.
  • Fredrickson, B. L. The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society: Biological Sciences, 2004; 359: 1367–1377.
  • Freud, S. Creative Writers, and Day-Dreaming. SE. 1908; 9: 143-153.
  • Gabora, L., Kaufman, S. B. Evolutionary approaches to creativity. The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity, 2010; 23:279-300.
  • Galton, F. Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry into Its Laws and Consequences. London: Macmillan. 1869.
  • Galton, F. English men of science: Their nature and nurture. London: MacMillan. 1874.
  • Gould, S. J. The structure of the evolutionary theory. Harvard University Press. 2002.
  • Green, M. F. Impact of cognitive and social cognitive impairment on functional outcomes in patients with schizophrenia. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. 2016; 77:8-11.
  • Guilford, J. P. Creativity. The American Psychologist, 1950; 5: 444-454.
  • Hilal Ahmad Wani. Impact of Globalization on World Culture. Research J. Humanities and Social Sciences, 2011; (2): 33-39.
  • Hoffman, R. R. and Deffenbacher, K. A. A Brief History of Applied Cognitive Psychology. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 1992; 6: 1-8.
  • Hoffman, L., Richards, R. and Pritzker, S. Creativity in the Evolution of Humanistic Psychology, Self and Society, 2012; 40(1): 10-15
  • Jagtap, A. A. Factors Influencing Scholastic Achievement of Secondary School Students-A Study. J. Ad. Social Sciences, 2014; 2(2): 87-91.
  • James, W. Great men, great thoughts, and the environment. Atlantic Monthly, 1980; 46:441-459.
  • Jha, S. Self-Reflection for Personal Effectiveness: Insights from Literature. Asian Journal of Management. 2018; 9(2): 1015-1019.
  • Kaufman, J.C., &Glaveanu, V. P. 2 A Review of Creativity Theories. The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. 2019; 27.
  • Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W.B., Martin, C.E. and Gebhard, P.H. Sexual behavior in the human female. Philadelphia: Saunders. 1953.
  • Kwan, L. Y. Y., Leung, A. K. Y., and Liou, S. Culture, creativity, and innovation. Mumford, M. D. (2003). Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research. Creativity research journal, 2018; 15(2-3): 107-120.
  • Leoncini, R. How to Learn from Failure. Organizational Creativity, Learning, Innovation and the Benefit of Failure. Organizational Creativity, Learning, Innovation and the Benefit of Failure. Rutgers Business Review, 2017; 2(1).
  • Maslow, A. H. The creative attitude. The Structurist, 1963; 3: 4-10.
  • May, Rollo. The Courage to Create. Toronto: Bantam. 1975.
  • Mayer, R. 22 Fifty years of creativity research. In R.Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 449-460). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1999.
  • Mohanasundari, S. K. and Padmaja, A. Visual Imagery Technique in Caring for Children “Imagination is more Powerful than Knowledge”-by Albert Einstein. Int. J. of Advances in Nur. Management. 2018; 6(3): 236-268.
  • Nalini, R and Panneerselvam, S. Histrionic Personality Disorder. Int. J. of Advances in Nur. Management. 2018; 6(4): 329-333.
  • Newton, D. P. Moods, emotion and creative thinking: A framework for teaching. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2013; 8: 34-44.
  • Padhee. S. Theories of Punishment All Over the World. Research J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 2014; 5(2): 163-165.
  • Parthasarathy, K., Monika, M., and Aswini, P.M. Skill Development: A Perception Study of Top-Level Functionaries on. Asian J. Management; 2017; 8(2): 279-283.
  • Plucker, J. A., &Beghetto, R. A. Why Creativity Is Domain General, Why It Looks Domain Specific, and Why the Distinction Does Not Matter. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko, & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 153-167). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. 2004.
  • Pramanik, A. Role of interdisciplinary studies in higher education in India. Journal of Education and Human Development, 2014; 3(2): 589-595.
  • Quételet, A. A treatise on man and the development of his faculties. New York: Franklin. (Reprint of 1842 Edinburgh translation of 1835 French original). 1968.
  • Rogers, Carl R. Towards a theory of creativity. ETC:A Review of General Semantics. 1954; 11: 249-260.
  • Roussillon, R. Creativity: a new paradigm for Freudian psychoanalysis. In Playing and Reality Revisited (pp. 89-110). Routledge. 2018.
  • Runco, M. A. Parents’ and teachers’ ratings of the creativity of children. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 1989; 4(1): 73-83.
  • Runco, M. A. (Ed.). Problem finding, problem-solving, and creativity. Greenwood Publishing Group. 1994.
  • Runco, M. A., and Jaeger, G. J. The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 2012; 24(1): 92-96.
  • Sawyer, R. K. An Interdisciplinary Study of Group Creativity. The Nature of Human Creativity, 2018; 280.
  • Simonton, D. K. Giving credit where credit’s due: Why it’s so hard to do in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2016; 11(6), 888-892.
  • Simonton, D. K. Defining creativity: Don't we also need to define what is not creative?.The Journal of Creative Behavior, 2018; 52(1): 80-90.
  • Skinner, B. F. A lecture on "having a poem." In B. F. Skinner (Ed.), Cumulative record. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. 1972. 3rd Ed, 345-355.
  • Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., and Finke, R. A. Cognitive processes in creative contexts. The creative cognition approach, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1995; 1-7.
  • Sternberg, R. J. The domain generality versus specificity debate: How should it be posted? In J. C. Kauffman, and J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity across domains. Faces of the muse. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 2005. 299-306.
  • Sternberg, R. J. A triangular theory of creativity. Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts, 2018; 12(1): 50.
  • Thorndike, E. L. The Mental Antecedents of Voluntary Movements. The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, 1907; 40-42.
  • Tomasello, M. The CulturalOrigins of Human Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1999.
  • Ville, S. Historical approaches to creativity and innovation. Creativity and innovation in business and beyond: Social science perspectives and policy implications, 2011; 64-81.
  • Vlad, G. Paradigms in the study of creativity: introducing the perspective of cultural psychology. New ideas in psychology, 2010; 28(1): 79-93.
  • Vygotsky, L. Interaction between learning and development. Mind and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1978; 79-91.
  • Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M. and Vaid, J. Creative Thought: An Investigation of Conceptual Structures and Processes. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Books. 1997.
  • Watson, J. B. Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 1913. 20(2): 158.
  • Weisberg, R. Creativity: Genius and other myths. WH Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co. 1986.
  • Wissink, G. Creativity and Cognition: A study of creativity within the framework of cognitive science, artificial intelligence and the dynamical system theory. Amsterdam, July 10th. 2001.
  • Young-Mee Kim, Hye-Jeon Hong. Effect of Creative Rhythmical Movement Program on Perceptional Motor Ability, Emotional Experience and Facial Emotion Recognition Ability of Adults with Developmental Disability. Research J. Pharm. and Tech. 2019; 12(3): 1031-1038.

Abstract Views: 24

PDF Views: 0




  • ‘Problems’ in the Concept of Creativity

Abstract Views: 24  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Auditi Pramanik
Zakir Husain Centre for Educational Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi, India

Abstract


The study of creativity is marked by the various disciplinary perspectives, diverse conceptual histories and divergent theoretical stands within the discipline of psychology. The mechanism underlying creativity lays both in the human thought process and in culture. After the influential speech of J.P. Guilford in 1950, creativity as a phenomenon has got special attention in every sphere of knowledge. In the present context of changing circumstances due to globalization and technological advancement, creativity becomes omnipresent and indispensable more than ever before. As a result of innumerable studies, creativity is theorized in numerous ways and the theoretical knowledge is applied in various domains. The future of the creativity research is on both deep-down scientific studies involving cognitive science and neurology, and also on the cultural and cross-cultural study. Although it is too early to anticipate, yet there is end number scope for its development and growth. Interdisciplinary research should be carried out considering internal and external interrelated factors that assumed to influence one’s creativity. Further, problem-solving often has a creative aspect, but creativity is not always mean problem-solving. Problem-solving and creativity are closely related believing that manifestation of new and novel outcomes happens in response to a problem. Since, restricting the concept of creativity within the disciplinary boundary hinders the expansion, clarity, and functionality of the phenomenon as a whole. Creativity needs more exploration and multi-dimensional explanation.

Keywords


Creativity, Culture, Cognition, Problem-solving, Behavioristics Approach, Humanistic Psychology, Psychoanalytic Approach, Domain.

References