Original Article
Creative Subprocess Frequencies and Their Relation to Personal Characteristics and Product Creativity: Insights from a Drawing Task Think Aloud Study
Gregory T. Boldt,
James C. Kaufman,
Corresponding Author
Gregory T. Boldt
University of Connecticut
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Gregory T. Boldt, Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorGregory T. Boldt,
James C. Kaufman,
Corresponding Author
Gregory T. Boldt
University of Connecticut
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Gregory T. Boldt, Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorABSTRACT
Most research on the creative process has focused on idea generation, and the prevalence and influence of many other creative subprocesses remain poorly understood. To clarify different subprocesses' respective roles in creative work, this study investigated their frequencies and associations with creativity-related personal characteristics and product creativity. Undergraduate students (n = 266) articulated their creative thought processes via the think aloud method while completing an open-ended drawing task and completed questionnaires assessing creativity-relevant personal characteristics. Drawings were rated for creativity by quasi-expert judges. Transcripts were coded using an a priori coding scheme informed by models of the creative process, including generation (14%), elaboration (26%), association (9%), selection (4%), evaluation (13%), anchoring (13%), metacognition (7%), and filler (14%). Subprocess frequencies correlated minimally with measures of personal characteristics, although several significant, albeit weak, relationships emerged. A hierarchical regression analysis indicated that the best predictors of drawing creativity were aesthetic fluency, the frequency of anchoring, time spent on task, and, marginally, the frequency of generation. Together, these results provide insight into how relevant personal characteristics and subprocess engagement contribute to drawing creativity and highlight the particular importance of anchoring, which involves monitoring and refining task-related goals and constraints, throughout the creative process.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors report that there are no competing interests to declare.
Open Research
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The data that support the findings of this study will be made available, upon reasonable request.
REFERENCES
- Acar, S., Tadik, H., Myers, D., Van der Sman, C., & Uysal, R. (2020). Creativity and well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(3), 738–751; doi: 10.1002/jocb.485.
- Amabile, T.M. (1982). The social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997–1013.
- Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
- Amabile, T.M., & Pratt, M.G. (2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 157–183; doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2016.10.001.
- Anderson, R.C., & Haney, M. (2020). Reflection in the creative process of early adolescents: The mediating roles of creative metacognition, self- efficacy, and self-concept. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(4), 612–626; doi: 10.1037/aca0000324.
- Baer, J., & Kaufman, J.C. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The amusement park theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27(3), 158–163; doi: 10.1080/02783190509554310.
10.1080/02783190509554310 Google Scholar
- Baer, J., & Kaufman, J.C. (2017). The Amusement Park theoretical model of creativity: An attempt to bridge the domain specificity/generality gap. In J.C. Kaufman, V.P. Glăveanu, & J. Baer (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity across domains (pp. 8–17). New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/9781316274385.002 Google Scholar
- Baer, J., & McKool, S.S. (2009). Assessing creativity using the consensual assessment. In C. Schreiner (Ed.), Handbook of research on assessment technologies, methods, and applications in higher education (pp. 65–77). London, UK: IGI Global; doi: 10.4018/978-1-60566-667-9.ch004.
10.4018/978-1-60566-667-9.ch004 Google Scholar
- Barbot, B., Besançon, M., & Lubart, T. (2015). Creative potential in educational settings: Its nature, measure, and nurture. Education 3-13, 43(4), 371–381; doi: 10.1080/03004279.2015.1020643.
- Baruah, J., Paulus, P.B., & Kohn, N.W. (2021). The effect of the sequence of creative processes on the quality of the ideas: The benefit of a simultaneous focus on originality and feasibility. Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(4), 946–961; doi: 10.1002/jocb.500.
- Basadur, M., Runco, M.A., & Vega, L.A. (2000). Understanding how creative thinking skills, attitudes and behaviors work together: A causal process model. Journal of Creative Behavior, 34(2), 77–100; doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.2000.tb01203.x.
- Baughman, W.A., & Mumford, M.D. (1995). Process-analytic models of creative capacities: Operations influencing the combination-and-reorganization process. Creativity Research Journal, 8(1), 37–62; doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj0801_4.
- Beaty, R.E., Silvia, P.J., Nusbaum, E.C., Jauk, E., & Benedek, M. (2014). The roles of associative and executive processes in creative cognition. Memory & Cognition, 42(7), 1186–1197; doi: 10.3758/s13421-014-0428-8.
- Beaty, R.E., Benedek, M., Silvia, P.J., & Schacter, D.L. (2016). Creative cognition and brain network dynamics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(2), 87–95; doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.004.
- Beaty, R.E., Seli, P., & Schacter, D.L. (2019). Network neuroscience of creative cognition: Mapping cognitive mechanisms and individual differences in the creative brain. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 27, 22–30; doi: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.08.013.
- Beghetto, R.A., & Kaufman, J.C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High Ability Studies, 25(1), 53–69; doi: 10.1080/13598139.2014.905247.
- Benedek, M., & Fink, A. (2019). Toward a neurocognitive framework of creative cognition: the role of memory, attention, and cognitive control. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 27, 116–122; doi: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.11.002.
- Benedek, M., Jauk, E., Kerschenbauer, K., Anderwald, R., & Grond, L. (2017). Creating art: An experience sampling study in the domain of moving image art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(3), 325–334; doi: 10.1037/aca0000102.
- Boldt, G.T. (2019). Artistic creativity beyond divergent thinking: Analysing sequences in creative subprocesses. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 34, 100606; doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100606.
- Boldt, G.T., & Strub, H. (2023). Associations between drawing creativity, task-related divergent thinking, and other creative subprocesses. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49, 101332; doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101332.
- Botella, M., Zenasni, F., & Lubart, T. (2011). A dynamic and ecological approach to the artistic creative process of arts students: An empirical contribution. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 29(1), 17–38; doi: 10.2190/em.29.1.b.
- Callan, G.L., Rubenstein, L.D., Ridgley, L.M., & McCall, J.R. (2021). Measuring self-regulated learning during creative problem-solving with SRL microanalysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(1), 136–148; doi: 10.1037/aca0000238.
- Calwelti, S., Rappaport, A., & Wood, B. (1992). Modeling artistic creativity: An empirical study. Journal of Creative Behavior, 26(2), 83–94.
- Campbell, D.T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review, 67(6), 380–400; doi: 10.1037/h0040373.
- Chan, D.W., & Zhao, Y. (2010). The relationship between drawing skill and artistic creativity: Do age and artistic involvement make a difference? Creativity Research Journal, 22(1), 27–36; doi: 10.1080/10400410903579528.
- Cicchetti, D.V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed andstandardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284–290.
10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284 Google Scholar
- Collard, P., & Looney, J. (2014). Nurturing creativity in education. European Journal of Education, 49(3), 348–364; doi: 10.1111/ejed.12090.
- Corazza, G.E., & Agnoli, S. (2018). The creative process in science and engineering. In T. Lubart (Ed.), The creative process: Perspectives from multiple domains (pp. 155–180). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
10.1057/978-1-137-50563-7_6 Google Scholar
- Costa, S., Páez, D., Sánchez, F., Garaigordobil, M., & Gondim, S. (2015). Personal factors of creativity: A second order meta-analysis. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 31, 165–173; doi: 10.1016/j.rpto.2015.06.002.
10.1016/j.rpto.2015.06.002 Google Scholar
- Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 391–404; doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1803_13.
- Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
- Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
- Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Collier, C., Digby, R., Hay, P., & Howe, A. (2013). Creative learning environments in education—A systematic literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8(1), 80–91; doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2012.07.004.
10.1016/j.tsc.2012.07.004 Google Scholar
- Diedrich, J., Jauk, E., Silvia, P.J., Gredlein, J.M., Neubauer, A.C., & Benedek, M. (2018). Assessment of real-life creativity: The inventory of creative activities and achievements (ICAA). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(3), 304–316; doi: 10.1037/aca0000137.
- Eon Duval, P., Frick, A., & Denervaud, S. (2023). Divergent and convergent thinking across the schoolyears: A dynamic perspective on creative thinking development. Journal of Creative Behavior, 57(2), 186–198; doi: 10.1002/jocb.569.
- Fayena-Tawil, F., Kozbelt, A., & Sitaras, L. (2011). Think global, act local: A protocol analysis comparison of artists' and nonartists' cognitions, metacognitions, and evaluations while drawing. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(2), 135–145; doi: 10.1037/a0021019.
- Feist, G.J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309; doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5.
- Finke, R.A., Ward, T.B., & Smith, S.M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. London, UK: MIT Press.
10.7551/mitpress/7722.001.0001 Google Scholar
- Florida, R. (2012). The rise of the creative class revisited. New York, NY: Basic Books.
- Forgeard, M.J.C., & Mecklenburg, A.C. (2013). The two dimensions of motivation and a reciprocal model of the creative process. Review of General Psychology, 17(3), 255–266; doi: 10.1037/a0032104.
- Fürst, G., Ghisletta, P., & Lubart, T. (2012). The creative process in visual art: A longitudinal multivariate study. Creativity Research Journal, 24(4), 283–295; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2012.729999.
- Fürst, G., Ghisletta, P., & Lubart, T. (2014). Toward an integrative model of creativity and personality: Theoretical suggestions and preliminary empirical testing. Journal of Creative Behavior, 50(2), 87–108; doi: 10.1002/jocb.71.
- Fürst, G., Ghisletta, P., & Lubart, T. (2017). An experimental study of the creative process in writing. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(2), 202–215; doi: 10.1037/aca0000106.
- Gilhooly, K.J., Fioratou, E., Anthony, S.H., & Wynn, V. (2007). Divergent thinking: strategies and executive involvement in generating novel uses for familiar objects. British Journal of Psychology, 98(4), 611–625; doi: 10.1348/096317907X173421.
- Glǎveanu, V.P. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: The five A's framework. Review of General Psychology, 17(1), 69–81; doi: 10.1037/a0029528.
- Goor, A., & Sommerfeld, R.E. (1975). A comparison of problem-solving processes of creative students and noncreative students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(4), 495–505.
- Guilford, J.P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53(4), 267–293; doi: 10.1037/h0040755.
- Honaker, J., King, G., & Blackwell, M. (2022). Amelia: A program for missing data. The comprehensive R archive network. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/Amelia/index.html.
- Hong, E., O'Neil, H.F., & Peng, Y. (2016). Effects of explicit instructions, metacognition, and motivation on creative performance. Creativity Research Journal, 28(1), 33–45; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2016.1125252.
- Ivcevic, Z. (2009). Creativity map: Toward the next generation of theories of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(1), 17–21; doi: 10.1037/a0014918.
- Ivcevic, Z. (2022). Conceptual and measurement specificity are key: The case of creativity and emotions. Creativity Research Journal, 34(4), 391–400; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2022.2122373.
- Karwowski, M., & Lebuda, I. (2016). The Big Five, the huge two, and creative self-beliefs: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10(2), 214–232; doi: 10.1037/aca0000035.
- Karwowski, M., Czerwonka, M., Wiśniewska, E., & Forthmann, B. (2021). How is intelligence test performance associated with creative achievement? A meta-analysis. Journal of Intelligence, 9(2), 28; doi: 10.3390/jintelligence9020028.
- Kaufman, J.C. (2012). Counting the muses: Development of the Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 298–308; doi: 10.1037/a0029751.
- Kaufman, J.C. (2018). Finding meaning with creativity in the past, present, and future. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(6), 734–749; doi: 10.1177/1745691618771981.
- Kaufman, J.C., & Baer, J. (2012). Beyond new and appropriate: Who decides what is creative? Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 83–91; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2012.649237.
- Kaufman, J.C., & Beghetto, R.A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1–12; doi: 10.1037/a0013688.
- 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(3), 155–165; doi: 10.1080/02783193.2013.799413.
- Kaufman, J.C., Baer, J., & Cole, J.C. (2009). Expertise, domains, and the consensual assessment technique. Journal of Creative Behavior, 43(4), 223–233; doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01316.x.
- Khandwalla, P.N. (1993). An exploratory investigation of divergent thinking through protocol analysis. Creativity Research Journal, 6(3), 241–259; doi: 10.1080/10400419309534481.
10.1080/10400419309534481 Google Scholar
- Kim, K.H. (2008). Meta-analyses of the relationship of creative achievement to both IQ and divergent thinking test scores. Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(2), 106–130; doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01290.x.
- Koo, T.K., & Li, M.Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163; doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012.
- Kumar, M., Roy, S., Bhushan, B., & Sameer, A. (2022). Creative problem solving and facial expressions: A stage based comparison. PLoS ONE, 17(6), e0269504; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269504.
- Lasky, D., & Yoon, S. (2020). A creative classroom for everyone: An introduction to a small ‘c’ creativity framework. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 36, 100660; doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100660.
- Lebuda, I., & Benedek, M. (2023). A systematic framework of creative metacognition. Physics of Life Reviews, 46, 161–181; doi: 10.1016/j.plrev.2023.07.002.
- Lee, C.S., & Therriault, D.J. (2013). The cognitive underpinnings of creative thought: A latent variable analysis exploring the roles of intelligence and working memory in three creative thinking processes. Intelligence, 41(5), 306–320; doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2013.04.008.
- Leone, S., Japp, P., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2023). The emergence of problem construction at the team-level. Small Group Research, 54(5), 639–670; doi: 10.1177/10464964231152877.
- Leung, A.K.-Y., Koh, B., Phang, R., Lee, S.T.H., & Huang, T. (2021). Linking creativity to psychological well-being: Integrative insights from the instrumental emotion regulation theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 56(2), 194–214; doi: 10.1002/jocb.524.
- Long, H. (2014). An empirical review of research methodologies and methods in creativity studies (2003–2012). Creativity Research Journal, 26(4), 427–438; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2014.961781.
- Lubart, T. (2001). Models of the creative process: Past, present and future. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3–4), 295–308; doi: 10.1037/h0040373.
- Ma, H.H. (2009). The effect size of variables associated with creativity: A meta-analysis. Creativity Research Journal, 21(1), 30–42; doi: 10.1080/10400410802633400.
- McKay, A.S., Karwowski, M., & Kaufman, J.C. (2017). Measuring the muses: Validating the Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(2), 216–230; doi: 10.1037/aca0000074.
- Mednick, S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3), 220–232; doi: 10.1037/h0048850.
- Miller, A.L. (2014). A self-report measure of cognitive processes associated with creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 26(2), 203–218; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2014.901088.
- Mumford, M.D., Mobley, M.I., Reiter-Palmon, R., Uhlman, C.E., & Doares, L.M. (1991). Process analytic models of creative capacities. Creativity Research Journal, 4(2), 91–122; doi: 10.1080/10400419109534380.
10.1080/10400419109534380 Google Scholar
- Mumford, M.D., Supinski, E.P., Baughman, W.A., Costanza, D.P., & Threlfall, K.V. (1997). Process-based measures of creative problem solving skills. Creativity Research Journal, 10(1), 73–85.
- Nazzal, L.J., & Kaufman, J.C. (2020). The relationship of the quality of creative problem solving stages to overall creativity in engineering students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 38, 100734; doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100734.
- Palmiero, M., & Piccardi, L. (2020). Is visual creativity embodied? Thinking aloud while performing the creative mental synthesis task. Brain Sciences, 10(7), 455.
- Park, N.K., Chun, M.Y., & Lee, J. (2016). Revisiting individual creativity assessment: Triangulation in subjective and objective assessment methods. Creativity Research Journal, 28(1), 1–10; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2016.1125259.
- Patrick, C. (1937). Creative thought in artists. The Journal of Psychology, 4, 35–73.
- Pinheiro, I.R., & Cruz, R.M. (2014). Mapping creativity: Creativity measurements network analysis. Creativity Research Journal, 26(3), 263–275; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2014.929404.
- Plucker, J.A., Beghetto, R.A., & Dow, G.T. (2004). Why isn't creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 83–96; doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1.
- Pringle, A., & Sowden, P.T. (2017a). The Mode Shifting Index (MSI): A new measure of the creative thinking skill of shifting between associative and analytic thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 23, 17–28; doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2016.10.010.
- Pringle, A., & Sowden, P.T. (2017b). Unearthing the creative thinking process: Fresh insights from a think-aloud study of garden design. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(3), 344–358; doi: 10.1037/aca0000144.
- Pringle, A., Sowden, P.T., Deeley, C., & Sharma, S. (2016). Shifting between modes of thought: a domain-general creative thinking skill? In F.K. Reisman (Ed.), Creativity in Arts, Science and Technology: Research Papers on Knowledge, Innovation and Enterprise Volume IV (pp. 220–259). Rome, Italy: KIE Conference Publications.
- Puryear, J.S. (2015). Metacognition as a moderator of creative ideation and creative production. Creativity Research Journal, 27(4), 334–341; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2015.1087270.
- Reiter-Palmon, R., & Arreola, N.J. (2015). Does generating multiple ideas lead to increased creativity? A comparison of generating one idea vs. many. Creativity Research Journal, 27(4), 369–374; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2015.1087274.
- Reiter-Palmon, R., & Robinson, E.J. (2009). Problem identification and construction: What do we know, what is the future? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(1), 43–47; doi: 10.1037/a0014629.
- Reiter-Palmon, R., Forthmann, B., & Barbot, B. (2019). Scoring divergent thinking tests: A review and systematic framework. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 13(2), 144–152; doi: 10.1037/aca0000227.supp.
- Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappa International, 42(7), 305–310.
- Rubenstein, L.D.V., Callan, G.L., & Ridgley, L.M. (2018). Anchoring the creative process within a self-regulated learning framework: Inspiring assessment methods and future research. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 921–945; doi: 10.1007/s10648-017-9431-5.
- Rubenstein, L.D.V., Callan, G.L., Ridgley, L.M., & Henderson, A. (2019). Students' strategic planning and strategy use during creative problem solving: The importance of perspective-taking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 34, 100556; doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2019.02.004.
- Runco, M.A., & Chand, I. (1995). Cognition and creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 7(3), 243–267.
- Ruscio, J., Whitney, D.M., & Amabile, T.M. (1998). Looking inside the fishbowl of creativity: Verbal and behavioral predictors of creative performance. Creativity Research Journal, 11(3), 243–263.
- Said-Metwaly, S., Taylor, C.L., Camarda, A., & Barbot, B. (2022). Divergent thinking and creative achievement — How strong is the link? An updated meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/aca0000507.
- Sakao, T., Gero, J., & Mizuyama, H. (2020). Analyzing cognitive processes of a product/service-system design session using protocol analysis. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 34, 515–530; doi: 10.1017/S0890060420000402.
- Sawyer, R.K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation ( 2nd edn). New York, NY: Oxford University Press; doi: 10.1037/1931-3896.1.1.47.
10.1037/1931?3896.1.1.47 Google Scholar
- Sawyer, R.K. (2018). How artists create: An empirical study of MFA painting students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 52(2), 127–141; doi: 10.1002/jocb.136.
- Sawyer, R.K. (2021). The iterative and improvisational nature of the creative process. Journal of Creativity, 31, 100002; doi: 10.1016/j.yjoc.2021.100002.
10.1016/j.yjoc.2021.100002 Google Scholar
- Schooler, J.W., Ohlsson, S., & Brooks, K. (1993). Thoughts beyond words: When language overshadows insight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(2), 166–183; doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.122.2.166.
- Scott, G., Leritz, L.E., & Mumford, M.D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16(4), 361–388; doi: 10.1080/10400410409534549.
- Silvia, P.J. (2007). Knowledge-based assessment of expertise in the arts: Exploring aesthetic fluency. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1(4), 247–249; doi: 10.1037/1931-3896.1.4.247.
10.1037/1931-3896.1.4.247 Google Scholar
- Silvia, P.J., Martin, C., & Nusbaum, E.C. (2009). A snapshot of creativity: Evaluating a quick and simple method for assessing divergent thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4(2), 79–85; doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2009.06.005.
- Simonton, D.K. (2015). On praising convergent thinking: Creativity as blind variation and selective retention. Creativity Research Journal, 27(3), 262–270; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2015.1063877.
- Simonton, D.K. (2023). The blind-variation and selective-retention theory of creativity: Recent developments and current status of BVSR. Creativity Research Journal, 35(3), 304–323; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2022.2059919.
- Smith, L.F., & Smith, J.K. (2006). The nature and growth of aesthetic fluency. In P. Locher, C. Martindale, & L. Dorfman (Eds.), New directions in aesthetics, creativity, and the arts (pp. 47–58). Amityville, NY: Baywood.
- Someren, M.W., Barnard, Y.F., & Sandberg, J.A.C. (1994). The think aloud method: A practical guide to modeling cognitive processes. London, UK: Academic Press.
- Stanton, J.D., Sebesta, A.J., & Dunlosky, J. (2021). Fostering metacognition to support student learning and performance. CBE Life Sciences Education, 20(3), 1–7; doi: 10.1187/cbe.20-12-0289.
10.1187/cbe.20?12?0289 Google Scholar
- Stefanic, N., & Randles, C. (2015). Examining the reliability of scores from the consensual assessment technique in the measurement of individual and small group creativity. Music Education Research, 17(3), 278–295; doi: 10.1080/14613808.2014.909398.
- Sternberg, R.J. (2006). Stalking the elusive creativity quark: Toward a comprehensive theory of creativity. In P. Locher, C. Martindale, & L. Dorfman (Eds.), New directions in aesthetics, creativity, and the arts (pp. 79–104). Amityville, NY: Baywood.
- Sternberg, R.J. (2021). Transformational creativity: The link between creativity, wisdom, and the solution of global problems. Philosophies, 6(3), 75; doi: 10.3390/PHILOSOPHIES6030075.
- Teng, J., Wang, X., Lu, K., Qiao, X., & Hao, N. (2021). Domain-specific and domain-general creativity differences between expert and novice designers. Creativity Research Journal, 34(1), 55–67; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2021.1997175.
- Toulouse, I. (2018). How do they do it? The importance of being … eArNe(ARTI)ST. In T. Lubart (Ed.), The creative process: Perspectives from multiple domains. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
10.1057/978-1-137-50563-7_2 Google Scholar
- Treffinger, D.J. (1995). Creative problem solving: Overview and educational implications. Educational Psychology Review, 7(3), 301–312; doi: 10.1007/BF02213375.
- Treffinger, D.J., & Isaksen, S.G. (2005). Creative problem solving: The history, development, and implications for gifted education and talent development. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(4), 342–353; doi: 10.1177/001698620504900407.
- Vartanian, O., Vartanian, A., Beaty, R.E., Nusbaum, E.C., Blackler, K., Lam, Q., … Silvia, P.J. (2017). Revered today, loved tomorrow: Expert creativity ratings predict popularity of architects' works 50 years later. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(4), 386–391; doi: 10.1037/aca0000092.
- Viera, A.J., & Garrett, J.M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: The kappa statistic. Family Medicine, 37(5), 360–363. http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~julia/courses/CS6998/Interrater_agreement.Kappa_statistic.pdf.
- Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace.
- Willemsen, R.H., Schoevers, E.M., & Kroesbergen, E.H. (2019). The structure of creativity in primary education: An empirical confirmation of the amusement park theory. Journal of Creative Behavior, 54(4), 857–870; doi: 10.1002/jocb.411.
- Williams, R., Runco, M.A., & Berlow, E. (2016). Mapping the themes, impact, and cohesion of creativity research over the last 25 years. Creativity Research Journal, 28(4), 385–394; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2016.1230358.
- Wilson, T.D. (1994). The proper protocol: Validity and completeness of verbal reports. Psychological Science, 5(5), 249–252.
- Woodward, J., & Sikes, P. (2015). The creative thinking ability of musicians and nonmusicians. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(1), 75–80.
- Yuan, Y.-H., Wu, M.-H., Hu, M.-L., & Lin, I.-C. (2017). Teacher's encouragement on creativity, intrinsic motivation, and creativity: The mediating role of creative process engagement. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 53(3), 312–324; doi: 10.1002/jocb.181.
- Zeng, L., Proctor, R.W., & Salvendy, G. (2011). Can traditional divergent thinking tests be trusted in measuring and predicting real-world creativity? Creativity Research Journal, 23(1), 24–37; doi: 10.1080/10400419.2011.545713.
- Zimmerman, B.J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70; doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2.
