Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts Who Cares About Imagination, Creativity, and Innovation, and Why? A Review Marie J. C. Forgeard and James C. Kaufman Online First Publication, November 16, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aca0000042

CITATION Forgeard, M. J. C., & Kaufman, J. C. (2015, November 16). Who Cares About Imagination, Creativity, and Innovation, and Why? A Review. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aca0000042

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 2015, Vol. 9, No. 4, 000

© 2015 American Psychological Association 1931-3896/15/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aca0000042

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Who Cares About Imagination, Creativity, and Innovation, and Why? A Review

Marie J. C. Forgeard

James C. Kaufman

McLean Hospital, Belmont, MA and University of Pennsylvania

University of Connecticut

Do researchers who study imagination, creativity, and innovation (ICI) explain to their audience why this topic is important, and if so, what reasons do they put forward? To answer this question, the present review examined a randomly selected sample of 200 empirical peer-reviewed articles published over the course of 3 years (2009 –2012). The sample was stratified to include 50 articles in 4 disciplines (psychology journals, creativity journals, business or industrial/organizational psychology journals, and education journals). Across this sample of articles, ICI were treated as dependent variables most of the time, suggesting that scientists may be more interested in investigating what predicts ICI, rather than what ICI can predict. Approximately a third of articles examined did not explicitly address why researchers should care about ICI. Less than 10% included any type of substantive discussion of the issue. Qualitative analysis highlighted 9 main themes among the explicit reasons provided by researchers for studying ICI. Results varied according to journal types considered. Overall, findings from this review suggest that scientists may often assume that that their readers already share the implicit assumption that ICI constitute inherently valuable traits/behaviors, and thus pass up opportunities to explain why they think that ICI are important to study. Keywords: imagination, creativity, innovation

Despite their training and commitment to the scientific method, academic psychologists are also prone to confirmation bias and may unintentionally let their prior beliefs and expectations influence their judgments (Goodstein & Brazis, 1970; Hergovich, Schott, Burger, 2010). Do researchers interested in the study of creativity consider whether or not others share their views when it comes to the importance of their field of study? Kaufman (2009) introduced the concept of the WGASA test, named after the (now revamped and renamed) WGASA Bush Line Railway at the Wild Animal Park in San Diego. The official explanation for WGASA’s meaning ranged from an African word that meant “peace” to an acronym for “World’s Greatest Animal Show Anywhere.” It is an acronym, but for a different phrase. Years ago, the park had a contest to name the monorail. After much fruitless debate, one zoo executive wrote down in frustration: “WGASA.” According to legend, no one knew what it meant but they liked how it sounded; apparently, however, it was in fact a common acronym at the time. It stood for, “Who Gives a (Spit) Anyway?” (Mikkelson & Mikkelson, 2011). Applying this concept to academia, how can researchers know whether a topic actually matters, and to whom? How can one tell if anyone not immersed knee-deep in the minutiae would truly care about an area of study? Most academics probably assume that their pet topic passes the WGASA test and creativity scholars (or those who study the related topics of imagination and innovation) are no different. It is perhaps natural, therefore, that researchers may be more inclined to study how to enhance creativity, rather than to examine why

Most academics assume that their subject matter of choice (whether it is the plays of David Mamet, the chemical properties of Threonine, or the psychological study of creativity) is inherently important. Such a perspective is not shocking. Our search for meaning is at the core of our being (Frankl, 1959), and it is unsurprising that people do not choose to devote their lives to studying something they find meaningless. It is, however, easy to be so immersed in one’s esoteric area of expertise that it may become difficult to see the broader picture. It can be hard to resist the tendency to become entrenched in one’s points of view (Frensch & Sternberg, 1989; Sternberg, 1996).

Marie J. C. Forgeard, Behavioral Health Partial Program, McLean Hospital, Belmont, MA and Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania; James C. Kaufman, Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut. This publication was made possible through the support of a grant from the John Templeton Foundation and from the Imagination Institute, Philadelphia, PA. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the John Templeton Foundation. Additional funding for this project was generously provided by Dr. Eva Kedar. We thank Anne Mecklenburg, Jeanette Elstein, and Marcus Robinson for their work on this project. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Marie J. C. Forgeard, McLean Hospital, Behavioral Health Partial Program, 115 Mill Street, Mailstop 113, Belmont, MA 02478. E-mail: mforgeard@ mclean.harvard.edu 1


2

FORGEARD AND KAUFMAN

creativity is important in the first place. For example, organizational psychology researchers interested in creativity may be more prone to focus on how to increase creativity in the workplace, as opposed to determining whether a creative workforce leads to enough extra profit or other benefits (short-term or long-term) to be worth the energy and expense consumed to foster creativity. Similarly, education researchers might be most excited to study how creativity can be stimulated in the classroom, and not whether it is worth devoting limited resources to that end instead of teaching moral judgment, resiliency, or basic literacy. Why might most scientists assume that creativity is a good thing? Although researchers have recently begun to study whether creativity can be used toward malevolent ends (Cropley, Cropley, Kaufman, & Runco, 2010; Cropley, Kaufman, & Cropley, 2008), this attribute has across times and cultures been viewed as an intrinsically valued personal asset serving benevolent purposes (Forgeard & Eichner, 2014; Kampylis & Valtanen, 2010; Peterson & Seligman, 2004; Sternberg, 2009). In keeping with this view, creativity is generally defined as the generation of ideas or products that are both original (i.e., novel, original) and useful/task appropriate (i.e., valuable, effective, meaningful) as judged by others (Csikszentmihalyi, 1999; Forgeard & Mecklenburg, 2013; Stein, 1953; Sternberg & Lubart, 1999). Accordingly, the scientific study of creativity is considered part of the positive psychology movement (Adams, 2012; Kaufman & Beghetto, 2014; Simonton, 2002). Among other reasons, creativity may therefore be worth studying because it is an inherently interesting phenomenon (regardless of other benefits); it is the basis for historical, technological, or cultural advances (Gabora, 1997; Simonton, 2000); it may enhance entrepreneurial or business performance (Amabile, 1988; Florida, 2002); it may promote positive educational outcomes (Beghetto & Kaufman, 2010); it may enhance mental health and well-being (A. Cropley, 1990; Forgeard & Elstein, 2014; Forgeard, Mecklenburg, Lacasse, & Jayawickreme, 2014; Kaufman & Sexton, 2006; Richards, 2007). Yet, there are important and legitimate reasons to question whether creativity is always an inherently positive and desired attribute. Public reaction is one reason. Although most people explicitly endorse positive views of creativity, they may still hold implicit biases against it. For example, Mueller, Melwani, and Goncalo (2012) found that such implicit biases emerged when their participants were primed to feel intolerant of uncertainty. These findings make sense given the risks involved in investing in creative ideas (Sternberg & Lubart, 1991). Domain-specific biases against creativity, often subtle and unconscious, have been shown in business (Mueller, Goncalo, & Kamdar, 2011) and education (Westby & Dawson, 1995), among other settings. Another reason is that there might be genuine downsides to creativity that remain unexplored. In the workplace, creativity requires a notable investment of time and resources (Amabile, Conti, Coon, Lazenby, & Herron, 1996; Unsworth & Clegg, 2010). The energy spent on creativity could be spent elsewhere. Further, creative workers can be less thorough, attentive, and conscientious (Miron, Erez, & Naveh, 2004), more devoted to their individual careers than to their company (Madjar, Greenberg, & Chen, 2011), and more likely to increase conflict (Miron-Spektor, Erez, & Naveh, 2011). A similar picture can be painted in the classroom. Teachers often do not like the in-class behaviors of creative students (Aljughaiman & Mowrer-Reynolds, 2005). They may

view bright students as less impulsive, disruptive, and nonconformist (Scott, 1999; Torrance, 1963), and creative students as more hyperactive, impulsive, and disruptive (Brandau et al., 2007). Similarly, Kim and VanTassel-Baska (2010) found that creative thinking was related to behavioral problems in underachieving high school students. Our main point here is of course not to claim that the downsides of creativity outweigh its positive contributions. Rather, it is to question whether researchers carefully consider and investigate these issues, or whether they assume that creativity’s benefits and importance are so obvious that they do not need to study or even state them explicitly. These concerns lead us to the central questions examined in the present review. Researchers who study creativity likely assume that their subject of investigation is “worth it,” but is this belief communicated in their articles? If so, what arguments do they put forth to justify their claim?

The Present Review The first step toward answering these questions is to survey the field and see what current practice is. To reflect a variety of perspectives, we decided to include studies examining three closely related constructs—imagination, creativity, and innovation (ICI) in different kinds of journals. Imagination refers to mental representations of things or ideas not immediately present to the senses (Markman, Klein, & Suhr, 2009), whereas innovation refers to the successful implementation of creative ideas by organizations (Amabile, 1988). The main goals of this review were to systematically assess how researchers operationalize and hypothesize roles for ICI in their studies (e.g., as predictor or outcome variables) and to assess whether they explicitly put forth reasons to study ICI and, if so, to examine what those reasons are. We see this exploratory review as another snapshot of the growing field of creativity research, following in the footsteps of Plucker, Beghetto, and Dow’s (2004) landmark study of whether and how researchers defined the term creativity in their published works. Similar studies have included investigations of how creativity journals have fluctuated in their publication and citation patterns (Long, Plucker, Yu, Ding, & Kaufman, 2014), authorship patterns (Feist & Runco, 1993), and author productivity (Beghetto, Plucker, & MaKinster, 2001). Such reviews invite researchers to take a step back and critically examine the big picture of research endeavors in their field, as well as help them take into account important trends, strengths, and shortcomings, when planning future projects.

Method We randomly selected a stratified sample of 200 articles on ICI using the following procedures (see Figure 1 and Appendix A).

Database Search and Inclusion Criteria Using a ProQuest search for PsycINFO, we searched for articles with the wildcard terms creativⴱ or imaginatⴱ or innovatⴱ appearing in the title. We also specified additional inclusion criteria: articles needed to be peer-reviewed, to describe quantitative empirical work (e.g., reviews and solely qualitative work were excluded), and to be written in English. As the search was conducted


WHO CARES AND WHY

Figure 1.

3

Procedures followed to construct random stratified sample of 200 articles.

on December 6, 2012, we limited our search to articles published during a period of three years between November 30, 2009 and November 30, 2012 to examine trends in this area of research.

Additional Exclusion Criteria Following this initial search (which yielded 1,090 articles), our lead research assistant manually checked all abstracts to exclude studies that did not actually examine a topic related to ICI. In addition, we a priori decided to include only research published in four disciplines that use psychological/behavioral methods: specialty journals dedicated to the academic study of creativity (from here on referred to as “creativity journals”), all other psychology journals (regardless of subdisciplines within psychology), education journals, and business or industrial/organizational (I/O) psychology journals. As a result, we excluded 257 articles out of 1,090 prior to selecting our stratified random sample of articles. For example, we excluded articles published in journals outside of the four disciplines specified above (e.g., specialty health care journals unrelated to psychology or psychological health, such as Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal Nursing). We also excluded studies that did not actually examine ICI, although they included a relevant keyword in their title (e.g., studies looking at the efficacy of “innovative” treatments but do not examine innovation as a construct).

Information Extraction: Variables Related to ICI A team of eight research assistants read and extracted basic information about variables related to ICI from all articles. All

research assistants participated in a 1-hr training session to learn about procedures to follow for this project. They were then trained on a subset of 10 articles to ensure understanding and accuracy. Following this training phase, they divided articles among themselves. Their work was continuously supervised by the lead research assistant and the authors, who provided feedback as needed. Research assistants extracted the following information about each article: • •

•

Which construct was studied (imagination, creativity, innovation) Whether variables related to ICI were treated as independent or dependent variables (or neither). Given the high prevalence of correlational data, we did not assess whether studies could show causal effects—rather, we relied on how researchers set up their analyses and described their hypotheses/results. How they were operationalized (i.e., what instruments or tasks were used to measure ICI).

Quantitative Ratings: Should We Care About ICI? In addition to information extraction, two trained research assistants rated the extent to which researchers explicitly addressed and explained the importance of studying ICI in each article. To do so, they first independently extracted explicit verbatim reasons for studying ICI (i.e., quotes from the articles) and provided a rating for each article using a 5-point Likert scale to describe the extent to which authors discussed reasons to care about creativity. The Likert scale provided objective anchors to facilitate ratings, rang-



4

ing from no explicit discussion (1 ⫽ no mention), little discussion (2 ⫽ one to two sentences maximum), a short discussion (3 ⫽ several sentences), a substantive discussion (4 ⫽ several paragraphs or a whole section), to an extensive discussion (5 ⫽ several sections, or the discussion is a major focus of the paper). The initial interrater reliability of the two raters was Cronbach’s alpha ⫽ .76. Following this, the two raters met to reconcile the explicit verbatim reasons they had both independently extracted from articles to establish a corpus of passages to be used for subsequent qualitative data analysis (see the following text). They were then given the opportunity to independently adjust their 1 to 5 ratings accordingly. The resulting interrater reliability following adjustments was Cronbach’s alpha ⫽ .94.

Qualitative Analysis: Reasons to Care About ICI Three members of the research team (two research assistants and one of the authors) then performed qualitative data analysis on verbatim explicit reasons to care about ICI to extract themes emerging from the data. All three team members first independently generated a list of broad themes. The final list of themes (representing categories of reasons to care about creativity) was then determined via consensus. Next, the three raters coded each article for the absence or presence of themes (multiple themes could be present in one article) as expressed in explicit verbatim reasons. The average Fleiss’ kappa describing the interrater reliability for the categorical judgments made by the three raters for all themes was .59, reflecting moderate agreement (Fleiss, 1981; Landis & Koch, 1977). For subsequent analyses (see following text), articles were counted as endorsing a theme if at least two out of the three raters endorsed it.

Results Variables Related to ICI The information extraction carried out by trained research assistants revealed the following findings regarding the constructs examined, the role of variables related to ICI, and their operationalization in the studies included in our sample. Constructs. Results showed that across all articles, approximately two thirds of the sample studied the construct of creativity, and slightly less than one third studied the construct of innovation. In contrast, very few articles (4%) studied imagination. Creativity was the construct most often examined in creativity journals, psychology journals, and education journals. Innovation was the construct most often studied in business or I/O psychology journals (see Table 1). Variable role. ICI was treated as a dependent variable in 72% of articles, an independent variable in 20% of articles, and neither in 17% of articles (see Figure 2). A large majority of studies therefore examined how other variables predicted ICI (rather than how ICI predicted them). This pattern appeared to hold across journal type (i.e., for all disciplines, the largest proportion of articles treated ICI as dependent variables). The number of articles treating ICI as an independent variable or neither dependent nor independent variables did not differ according to journal type (p ⬎ .10 for both chi-square tests). The number

Table 1 Distribution of Articles Studying Imagination vs. Creativity vs. Innovation (ICI) by Journal Type Construct

Total

Psychology Creativity

Business or I/O

Education

Imagination 7 (4%) 5 (10%) 1 (2%) 1 (2%) 0 (0%) Creativity 131 (66%) 37 (74%) 48 (96%) 13 (26%) 33 (66%) Innovation 62 (31%) 8 (16%) 1 (2%) 36 (72%) 17 (34%) Total 200 (100%) 50 (100%) 50 (100%) 50 (100%) 50 (100%) Note. Numbers in bold represent highest frequency counts and percentages by journal type.

of articles treating ICI as a dependent variable differed according to journal type, though this effect only approached significance, ␹2(3) ⫽ 7.34, p ⫽ .06. Examination of the adjusted standardized residuals for each cell revealed that articles published in business or I/O psychology journals were significantly more likely than expected to treat ICI as dependent variables (z ⫽ 2.55, p ⫽ .01). None of the adjusted standardized residuals for other journal types were significant. Operationalization. A wide variety of methods and measures or tasks were used to assess ICI (see Table 2). Of these, the most commonly used were self-report measures asking participants to describe participation in creative behavior or activities. Divergentthinking tasks constituted the next most commonly used type of instrument, followed by self-report measures asking participants to focus on creative traits, and creative production tasks rated using the Consensual Assessment Technique (Amabile, 1982). The following findings emerged when disaggregating findings by journal type.1 Studies published in psychology journals used the following types of methods and measures more often than studies published in other journals: traditional divergent-thinking tasks, convergentthinking tasks, and insight problem-solving tasks. Studies published in creativity journals used the following types of methods and measures more often than studies published in other journals: the Consensual Assessment Technique, divergent-thinking tasks focusing on problem-solving, and tasks measuring cognitive abilities thought to underlie ICI. Studies published in business or I/O psychology journals used the following types of methods and measures more often than studies published in other journals: self-reported behaviors, external assessments, qualitative measures, and objective measures. Finally, studies published in education journals used the following types of methods and measures more often than studies published in other journals: self-reported traits, experimental manipulations or interventions, and selfreported preferences.

Quantitative Ratings: Should We Care About ICI? As described in preceding text, two trained research assistants rated the extent to which researchers explicitly addressed and explained the importance of studying ICI in their articles using a 5-point Likert scale. The resulting mean rating for all articles was 1 We could not conduct chi-square tests because several cells either had low frequency counts or equaled 0 (Yates, Moore, Moore, & McCabe, 1999).

WHO CARES AND WHY

5

journals most frequently mentioned reasons related to education (13.5% and 4.5%, respectively).


Discussion

Figure 2.

Role of imagination, creativity, and innovation (ICI) variables.

2.16 (SD ⫽ 1.07), suggesting that articles on average only included one to two brief phrases or sentences to explain why ICI are important to study. More than one third of the articles did not provide any explicit reasons for studying ICI. Another one third included one or two sentences. Finally, the other one third provided more substantive discussions (at least three sentences, a brief passage, or a longer section; see Figure 3). A one-way analysis of variance showed that ratings differed according to journal type, F(3, 196) ⫽ 4.00, p ⫽ .009. Post hoc tests using Bonferroni corrections showed that business or I/O psychology journals provided longer explanations of reasons to care about ICI than did both psychology (p ⫽ .046, Cohen’s d ⫽ .51) and creativity (p ⫽ .015, Cohen’s d ⫽ .60) journals. None of the other post hoc comparisons were significant.

Qualitative Analysis: Reasons to Care About ICI The qualitative analysis of verbatim explicit reasons to care about ICI revealed the following nine themes: (a) job satisfaction; (b) business, economics, and productivity; (c) education; (d) individual achievement and performance; (e) social, political, and historical progress; (f) health and well-being; (g) problem-solving and cognition; (h) communication, collaboration, and interpersonal skills; and (i) their intrinsic value. Table 3 includes illustrative quotes from articles included in our sample reflecting each theme (Dai et al., 2012; Hoffmann & Russ, 2012; Janssen et al., 2004; Jarosz et al., 2012; Joo et al., 2012; Limiñana Gras et al., 2010; Moran, 2010c; Shawareb, 2011; Shih & Susanto, 2011; Sousa & Coelho, 2011). The mean number of themes per article was 1.07 (SD ⫽ 1.07; minimum ⫽ 0, maximum ⫽ 5). The reason endorsed most often across all articles was business, economics, and productivity (34.5% of sample) followed by education (21%) and social, political, and historical progress (14.5%). All other themes were mentioned by less than 10% of articles in samples. The following findings emerged when disaggregating findings by journal type (see Table 4).2 Articles in business or I/O psychology journals and in psychology journals most frequently mentioned reasons related to business, economics, and productivity (19.5% and 6.5% of articles, respectively). Education journals as well as creativity

The primary goal of this paper was to provide a critical examination of the ways in which academic psychologists think and write about the importance of imagination, creativity, and innovation (ICI) when they study these constructs. We sought to clarify which terms scientists use, what role they assign to ICI, and whether and how they articulate reasons why these constitute worthwhile research topics. Our review of 200 empirical studies randomly selected to represent four types of journals (general psychology journals, creativity journals, business or I/O psychology journals, and education journals) revealed important trends in the study of ICI. First, we found that creativity was the most common term employed, with nearly two thirds of the articles using this term. In contrast, innovation was used by nearly one third of articles, whereas only 4% used the term imagination. Constructs of interest differed according to the discipline considered. Perhaps not surprisingly, studies published in business or I/O psychology journals examined the construct of innovation most frequently, whereas other studies published in psychology, creativity, and education journals most frequently examined the construct of creativity. Second, approximately 40% of the articles included used some type of self-report creativity measure, whereas approximately 20% used either some measure of divergent or convergent thinking (such as the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking; Torrance, 1974) and another 20% used some type of expert rating (such as the Consensual Assessment Technique; Amabile, 1982). Again, these findings differed according to journal type. Results confirmed some of the preconceived notions that researchers may have about the methods used by their colleagues in various specialty areas. For example, and as expected, studies published in business or I/O psychology journals used external assessments (e.g., supervisor ratings) or objective measures (e.g., patents filed) more often than other studies. These findings confirm that researchers in this field may be especially interested in enhancing performance and productivity in the workplace. Also as expected, studies published in education journals used experimental manipulations or interventions more often than other studies, as educational psychologists may be especially interested in the development of applied methods to enhance outcomes. These studies also used subjective measures (i.e., self-reported traits and preferences) more often than other studies, highlighting that educational psychologists may be especially interested in the personal experiences of their participants. Studies published in psychology journals used tests of divergent and convergent-thinking more often than other studies, demonstrating a preference for standardized tasks specifically designed to assess creative ideation. Finally, studies published in creativity journals used the Consensual Assessment Technique more often than studies in other journals, suggesting that researchers publishing in these journals may pay particular attention to the role of the audience and expert judgments in creativity. 2 Again, we could not conduct chi-square tests because several cells either had low frequency counts or equaled 0 (Yates et al., 1999).


6

Table 2 Operationalization of ICI Variables: Number and Percentage by Journal Category


Total

Psychology

Creativity

Business I/O

Education

Variable

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Self-report measure focusing on behaviors Traditional divergent-thinking task (e.g., unusual uses task) Self-report measure focusing on traits Consensual assessment technique External assessments (e.g., ratings by supervisors, teachers) Experimental manipulation/intervention (e.g, priming task, behavior) Divergent-thinking task focusing on problem-solving Qualitative measures (e.g., interviews) Objective measures (e.g., patents filed) Self-report of preferences (e.g., for creative innovative products) Underlying cognitive ability (tasks measuring a cognitive ability thought to underlie ICI that is not ICI, per se; e.g., set breaking) Convergent thinking task (one solution, not open-ended, e.g., the RAT) Insight/convergent problem-solving task (one solution, open-ended, e.g., Duncker’s candle problem)

45 35 26 25 17 16 13 13 11 10

22.5 17.5 13 12.5 8.5 8 6.5 6.5 5.5 5

12 17 7 2 3 6 3 1 0 3

24 34 14 4 6 12 6 2 0 6

7 15 6 14 2 2 5 4 1 0

14 30 12 28 4 4 10 8 2 0

17 1 3 1 9 0 1 5 9 3

34 2 6 2 18 0 2 10 18 6

9 2 10 8 3 8 4 3 1 4

18 4 20 16 6 16 8 6 2 8

9 5

4.5 2.5

3 4

6 8

5 1

10 2

0 0

0 0

1 0

2 0

3

1.5

2

4

1

2

0

0

0

0

Note. Numbers in bold represent highest frequency counts and percentages by journal type.

Third, and related to one of the core questions guiding this review, only 17% of the papers used ICI as an independent measure, whereas 72% used ICI as a dependent measure (20% used neither). This pattern held within all journal types. Across journal types, studies published in business or I/O journals seemed even more likely than others to treat ICI as a dependent measure. This difference means that researchers typically think of ICI as outcomes, rather than predictors. In other words, they appear to be more interested in understanding which variables or factors influence ICI than how ICI predicts other outcomes or constructs. The study designs and language used by researchers in their studies therefore likely reflect an important emphasis on finding ways to predict or enhance creativity, innovation, or imagination. In contrast, fewer studies looked at how creativity might predict or impact other outcomes, such as happiness, success, health, or achievement (among others).

Figure 3. Mean quantitative ratings by journal type. Error bars represent standard errors.

Indeed, 71% of the articles surveyed here offered little or no discussion explaining why readers should care about ICI. Less than 10% offered any type of substantive or extensive analysis on why creativity is an important variable to study. Certainly, comprehensive discussions of the importance of ICI may be best suited for review articles (rather than the empirical papers included here). Yet a third of articles did not answer this question in any way, and most articles on average included only one to two sentences to that effect. Such a pattern suggests that researchers may assume that their readers already share their interest and enthusiasm for the study of ICI. Of the articles that did offer reasons, the most common ones consisted of the possibilities that creativity may enhance business outcomes, improve school performance, help general progress, aid cognitive or problem-solving abilities, or improve one’s health. Although these findings varied by journal type, differences were small: on average, articles published in business or I/O journals (which offered the longest discussions of this question) provided only one or a few sentences more than did articles published in creativity journals (which offered the shortest discussions of this question). There are, of course, important reasons why researchers may not dedicate many words to explaining the importance of ICI in their articles. Space limitations may motivate authors to keep the rationale for their work brief. They may also think about whether or not their audience needs an extensive discussion of this topic and how such a discussion would be received. For example, readers of creativity journals may already be familiar with reasons why ICI is important and may find extensive background information redundant. In addition, authors submitting their work for consideration by creativity journals may worry that spending too much space explaining why ICI is important could inadvertently signal to expert reviewers a lack of familiarity with research in this area (though spending too little space on this question may produce the same effect!). On the other hand, authors submitting their work for consideration by psychology journals may benefit from explaining

WHO CARES AND WHY

7

Table 3 Themes Expressed (Derived From Qualitative Data Analysis) and Illustrative Quotes Theme and description

Illustrative quote

Job satisfaction Employee satisfaction, usually in businesses, as a means to greater business performance

“Innovative employees may enjoy more job satisfaction, achieve better performance in the workplace, develop better relationship with other colleagues, experience relatively low stress, enjoy higher personal growth (West & Anderson, 1996), and produce positive conflicts (Janssen et al., 2004)” (Shih & Susanto, 2011, p. 113). “To continuously prosper in a competitive market, organizations need to unleash their employees’ innate creative potential because employees’ creative ideas can function as building blocks for organizational innovation and change” (Joo et al., 2012, p. 78). “Educators and researchers are attempting to identify which intellectual skills can be developed, and what are the most effective ways to encourage learning in the classroom. Such questions have led to a renewed focus upon the development of children’s critical and creative thinking skills, as well as an interest in instructional approaches that facilitate the development of such abilities” (Shawareb, 2011, p. 214). “The nature of creativity and its causes is a topic that has long been of interest. Creative thought drives both artistic products and scientific innovations, yet the mechanisms underlying great accomplishments have been notoriously difficult to study due to the rarity of these events” (Jarosz et al., 2012, p. 487). “There are profound policy and practical implications of a possible creativity gap, no less than the well-researched academic achievement gap. The issue not only concerns equity, the equal right to an enriched social and educational environment, and ultimately, the equal opportunity for creative expression and productivity; it also raises new possibility for increasing social capital so that optimal adolescent development can be facilitated” (Dai et al., 2012, p. 197). “Children who can generate more solutions to a problem and more original solutions should be better equipped to problem-solve in distressing situations. A creative child will be able to think of more responses, behaviors, or activities that she might use to better handle her emotions when necessary” (Hoffmann & Russ, 2012, p. 182). “The evaluation of creativity in a school context allows us to improve the individual profile of pupils, providing an estimation of the divergent cognitive abilities; to identify the convergent cognitive abilities related or contained in creativity; and to study the contribution of creativity to the academic performance of pupils” (Limiñana Gras et al., 2010, p. 213). “Many service activities involve a high degree of interpersonal interaction between employees and customers [. . .] the degree of creativity of frontline service employees is likely to exert a strong effect on customers’ satisfaction. Thus, researching the creativity of frontline service employees seems to be of the utmost importance [. . .] For instance, bank employees might benefit from using creativity in presenting services in a way that meets customers’ needs, in building customer relationships, in crafting the service mix that fits customers’ needs, and in addressing customer complaints” (Sousa & Coelho, 2011, p. 3, p. 24). “Despite its unpredictability, creativity remains an ideal to strive for in many schools (Moran 2010a, 2010b) and cultures (Lubart 1999; Moran 2009)” (Moran, 2010c, p. 121).

Business, economics, and productivity Improving organizations and businesses, increasing productivity and competitive advantage


Education Pedagogy, school organization, and student performance

Individual achievement and performance Accomplishments in creative fields (generally arts and sciences), personal achievement in academia or employment. Social, political, and historical progress Positive historical, social, and political consequences, on a societal/global level.

Health and well-being Benefits to physical, mental, and spiritual health

Problem solving and cognition Solving problems in day-to-day life, and performing cognitive tasks (e.g., memory, attention, etc.). Communication, collaboration, and interpersonal skills Communicating well with others, working as part of a team, and improving interpersonal relations.

Intrinsic value of ICI ICI as inherently valued human characteristics

to readers and reviewers why ICI is an important topic deserving of inclusion in these journals. Despite these considerations, the findings from our review suggest that across the board, researchers offered very little or no discussion of reasons to care about ICI. We offer a call and a challenge to researchers studying ICI to do better. One thing that we can do is to not assume that everyone already believes that creativity and related topics are important. Most studies make the fundamental assumption that creativity is inherently valuable and therefore warrants resources and attention. As discussed in preceding text, some research does highlight creativity’s role in personal and professional success as well as in societal progress. Yet the vast majority of empirical studies focus on understanding determinants of, and catalysts for, creativity. This work is very important, of course, but we must ensure that it does not come at

the expense of investigating and reinforcing the fundamental importance of creativity at the macro and micro levels (Simonton, 2002)—to a person’s well-being, to academic and financial success, and to the world. By conducting additional research on the benefits of creativity, researchers ensure that they do not leap prematurely when developing methods to enhance creative thinking and that they better tailor creativity interventions toward specific aims that carefully assess how to maximize their benefits while acknowledging and minimizing the downsides that creativity may present in certain situations. Such research will help answer the real question; that is, not whether but when creativity is important and beneficial (and when it is not). By providing answers to these questions, scientists can help others adopt a flexible and pragmatic attitude toward creativity through the development of metacognitive abilities to


8

Table 4 Total Number and Percentage of Articles and Number and Percentage of Articles Addressing Specific Themes by Journal Category


Article

Psychology

Creativity

Business or I/O

Education

Theme

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Job satisfaction Business, economics, and productivity Education Individual achievement and performance Social, political, and historical progress Health and well-being Problem solving and cognition Communication, collaboration, and interpersonal skills Intrinsic value of ICI

2 69 42 12 29 15 18

1% 34.5% 21% 6% 14.5% 7.5% 9%

0 13 4 3 7 5 7

0% 6.5% 2% 1.5% 3.5% 2.5% 3.5%

0 8 9 3 8 4 4

0% 4% 4.5% 1.5% 4% 2% 2%

2 39 2 0 2 2 1

1% 19.5% 1% 0% 1% 1% .5%

0 9 27 6 12 4 6

0% 4.5% 13.5% 3% 6% 2% 3%

11 16

5.5% 8%

3 8

1.5% 4%

3 3

1.5% 1.5%

4 0

2% 0%

1 5

.5% 2.5%

Note. Articles can address more than one theme. Numbers in bold represent highest frequency count and percentage.

determine when creativity may or may not be effective (Davidson & Sternberg, 1998; Feldhusen, 1995; Kaufman & Beghetto, 2013). There is another important problem with keeping the dialogue of creativity’s importance implicit or with limiting this discussion to the general message that “Creativity is important for X and Y reasons,” which is a problem that could make creativity easy to be disregarded in comparison to other subjects of investigation. Baseball guru Bill James (1989) wrote about the basic fallacy of this type of argument in baseball arbitration. A baseball player and a team can agree to go to a judge and make a case for the size of the salary the player should receive (typically, the player believes that he should get a larger sum than the team is offering). During this process, what some players (or their agents) present is a litany of the player’s accomplishment: “Joe Shlabotnik should make $15 million dollars. He hit 25 home runs and stole 20 bases and batted .315 last year.” To which, as James attests, the team can easily respond, “Exactly! And this is why we are offering to pay him $10 million dollars. Because he is so good!” By basing his entire case on proving a certain level of accomplishment, rather than demonstrating how he compares with other players, the player puts himself at a disadvantage during the negotiation process. If the player or his agent instead compares Shlabotnik’s worth to other players’ accomplishments and salaries (i.e., another player who hit 20 home runs and stole 10 bases and batted .285 earned $20 million dollars), they may more effectively convince an impartial source to award the higher amount. We asked, “Is creativity important?” The answer is clearly yes. But an even more crucial question is, “Is creativity more important than all of the other attributes that are perfectly worthy and demand our time, attention, and resources?” There is a limited amount of class time, government funding, and organizational budgeting. An hour spent primarily enhancing creativity is an hour not spent developing mathematical skills or building resiliency (unless, of course, we can show that fostering creativity also leads to these outcomes). To truly and appropriately value creativity, researchers need to go beyond showing that creativity predicts positive outcomes (e.g., happiness, income, etc.), and also assess how creativity compares to other predictors. Kaufman and Beghetto (2013), in discussing creative metacognition, argued for the importance of knowing when to be creative and when not to be creative. As researchers, we must help by showing when creativity is superior to other constructs (and when it is not).

Conclusion The present review assessed whether researchers interested in the study of imagination, innovation, and creativity explain to their audience why they should care about these constructs. Why is this question important? Our findings suggest that most researchers may assume that their readers already share the perspective that creativity is worth being studied and enhanced. Although past findings have shown that creativity has a number of important personal and societal benefits, researchers should continue to investigate the nature of these benefits, as well as the circumstances under which creativity does or does not lead to positive outcomes. Such scholarship will help produce a nuanced understanding of the effects of creativity, as well as guide the development of empirically grounded interventions (Forgeard & Eichner, 2014; Scott, Leritz, & Mumford, 2004; Simonton, 2002). At a time when funding dollars and classroom hours are at a premium, it is not enough to show that creativity is important. Researchers also need to investigate and show when and how creativity is notably more important than similar constructs.

References Adams, N. (2012). Skinner’s Walden Two: An anticipation of positive psychology? Review of General Psychology, 16, 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/a0026439 Aljughaiman, A., & Mowrer-Reynolds, E. (2005). Teachers’ conceptions of creativity and creative students. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 17–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2005.tb01247.x Amabile, T. M. (1982). The social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997–1013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997 Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123–167. Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1154 –1184. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256995 Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (Eds.). (2010). Nurturing creativity in the classroom. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx .doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511781629 Beghetto, R. A., Plucker, J. A., & MaKinster, J. G. (2001). Who studies creativity and how do we know? Creativity Research Journal, 13, 351–357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_12


WHO CARES AND WHY Brandau, H., Daghofer, F., Hollerer, L., Kaschnitz, W., Kellner, K., Kitchmair, G., . . . Schlagbauer, A. (2007). The relationship between creativity, teacher ratings on behavior, age, and gender in pupils from seven to ten years. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 41, 91–113. http://dx.doi .org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2007.tb01283.x Cropley, A. J. (1990). Creativity and mental health. Creativity Research Journal, 3, 167–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419009534351 Cropley, D. H., Cropley, A. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Runco, M. A. (Eds.). (2010). The dark side of creativity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511761225 Cropley, D. H., Kaufman, J. C., & Cropley, A. J. (2008). Malevolent creativity: A functional model of creativity in terrorism and crime. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 105–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 10400410802059424 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–335). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Dai, D. Y., Tan, X., Marathe, D., Valtcheva, A., Pruzek, R. M., & Shen, J. (2012). Influences of social and educational environments on creativity during adolescence: Does SES matter? Creativity Research Journal, 24, 191–199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.677338 Davidson, J. E., & Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Smart problem solving: How metacognition helps. In D. J. Hacker, A. C. Graesser, & J. Dunlosky (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 47– 69). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Feist, G. J., & Runco, M. A. (1993). Trends in the creativity literature: An analysis of research in the Journal of Creative Behavior (1967–1989). Creativity Research Journal, 6, 271–286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 10400419309534483 Feldhusen, J. F. (1995). Creativity: A knowledge base, metacognitive skills, and personality factors. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 29, 255–268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1995.tb01399.x Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. New York, NY: Basic Books. Forgeard, M. J. C., & Eichner, K. V. (2014). Creativity as a target and tool for positive interventions. In A. C. Parks & S. M. Schueller (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychological interventions (pp. 137–154). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118315927 .ch7 Forgeard, M. J. C., & Elstein, J. G. (2014). Advancing the clinical science of creativity. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 613. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2014.00613 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, 255–266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0032104 Forgeard, M. J. C., Mecklenburg, A. C., Lacasse, J. J., & Jayawickreme, E. (2014). “Bringing the whole universe to order:” Creativity, healing, and posttraumatic growth. In J. C. Kaufman (Ed.), Creativity and mental illness (pp. 321–342). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Frankl, V. (1959). Man’s search for meaning. An introduction to logotherapy. Boston, MA: Beacon Press Books. Frensch, P. A., & Sternberg, R. J. (1989). Expertise and intelligent thinking: When is it worse to know better? In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 5, pp. 157–188). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gabora, L. (1997). The origin and evolution of culture and creativity. Journal of Memetics, Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 1. Retrieved from http://cogprints.org/794/1/oecc.html Goodstein, L. D., & Brazis, K. L. (1970). Psychology of scientist: XXX. Credibility of psychologists: An empirical study. Psychological Reports, 27, 835– 838. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1970.27.3.835

9

Hergovich, A., Schott, R., & Burger, C. (2010). Biased evaluation of abstracts depending on topic and conclusion: Further evidence of a confirmation bias within scientific psychology. Current Psychology, 29, 188 –209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-010-9087-5 Hoffmann, J., & Russ, S. (2012). Pretend play, creativity, and emotion regulation in children. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 175–184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0026299 James, B. (1989). This time let’s not eat the bones: Bill James without the numbers. New York, NY: Villard. Janssen, O., van de Vliert, E., & West, M. (2004). The bright and dark sides of individual and group innovation: A special issue introduction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 129 –145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job .242 Jarosz, A. F., Colflesh, G. J., & Wiley, J. (2012). Uncorking the muse: Alcohol intoxication facilitates creative problem solving. Consciousness and Cognition, 21, 487– 493. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2012.01 .002 Joo, B. K. B., Song, J. H., Lim, D. H., & Yoon, S. W. (2012). Team creativity: The effects of perceived learning culture, developmental feedback and team cohesion. International Journal of Training and Development, 16, 77–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2419.2011 .00395.x Kampylis, P., & Valtanen, J. (2010). Redefining creativity—Analyzing and definitions, collocations, and consequences. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 44, 191–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2010 .tb01333.x Kaufman, J. C. (2009). Creativity 101. New York, NY: Springer. 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, 155–165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 02783193.2013.799413 Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2014). Creativity in the schools: Renewed interest and promising new directions. In M. J. Furlong, R. Gilman, & E. S. Huebner (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in the schools (pp. 165–175). New York, NY: Routledge. Kaufman, J. C., & Sexton, J. D. (2006). Why doesn’t the writing cure help poets? Review of General Psychology, 10, 268 –282. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/1089-2680.10.3.268 Kim, K. H., & VanTassel-Baska, J. (2010). The relationship between creativity and behavior problems among underachieving elementary and high school students. Creativity Research Journal, 22, 185–193. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2010.481518 Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159 –174. http://dx.doi .org/10.2307/2529310 Limiñana Gras, R. M., Bordoy, M., Ballesta, G. J., & Corbalán Berna, J. (2010). Creativity, intellectual abilities and response styles: Implications for academic performance in the secondary school. Anales de Psicología, 26, 212–219. Long, H., Plucker, J. A., Yu, Q., Ding, Y., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Research productivity and performance of journals in the creativity sciences: A bibliometric analysis. Creativity Research Journal, 26, 353– 360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2014.929425 Lubart, T. J. (1999). Creativity across cultures. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (339 –350). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Madjar, N., Greenberg, E., & Chen, Z. (2011). Factors for radical creativity, incremental creativity, and routine, noncreative performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 730 –743. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ a0022416 Markman, K. D., Klein, W. M., & Suhr, J. A. (2009). Overview. In K. D. Markman, W. M. Klein, & J. A. Suhr (Eds.), Handbook of imagination and mental simulation (vii-xvi). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.


10


Mikkelson, B., & Mikkelson, D. (2011). WGASA. Retrieved on November, 22, 2014, from http://www.snopes.com/business/names/wgasa.asp Miron, E., Erez, M., & Naveh, E. (2004). Do personal characteristics and cultural values that promote innovation, quality, and efficiency compete or complement each other? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 175–199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.237 Miron-Spektor, E., Erez, M., & Naveh, E. (2011). The effect of conformist and attentive-to-detail members on team innovation: Reconciling the innovation paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 740 –760. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2011.64870100 Moran, S. (2009). Why multiple intelligences? In J. Chen, S. Moran, & H. Gardner (Eds.), Multiple intelligences around the world (pp. 365–373). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Moran, S. (2010a). Assessing and developing multiple intelligences purposefully In K. Tirri, & P. Nokelainen (Eds.), Educating multiple intelligences and moral sensitivities in urban schools. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Moran, S. (2010b). Creativity in and out of school In K. S. Littleton, C. Wood, & J. K. Staarman (Eds.), International handbook of educational psychology: New perspectives on learning and teaching (pp. 319 –360). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing. Moran, S. (2010c). Changing the world: Tolerance and creativity aspirations among American youth. High Ability Studies, 21, 117–132. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2010.525342 Mueller, J. S., Goncalo, J. A., & Kamdar, D. (2011). Recognizing creative leadership: Can creative idea expression negatively relate to perceptions of leadership potential? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 494 – 498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.11.010 Mueller, J. S., Melwani, S., & Goncalo, J. A. (2012). The bias against creativity: Why people desire but reject creative ideas. Psychological Science, 23, 13–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611421018 Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 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, 83–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1 Richards, R. R. (2007). Everyday creativity and new views of human nature. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Scott, C. L. (1999). Teachers’ biases toward creative children. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 321–337. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326 934crj1204_10 Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 361–388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400410409534549

Shawareb, A. (2011). The effects of computer use on creative thinking among kindergarten children in Jordan. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 38, 213–220. Shih, H. A., & Susanto, E. (2011). Is innovative behavior really good for the firm? Innovative work behavior, conflict with coworkers and turnover intention: Moderating roles of perceived distributive fairness. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 22, 111–130. http://dx .doi.org/10.1108/10444061111126666 Simonton, D. K. (2000). Creativity. Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55, 151–158. Simonton, D. K. (2002). Creativity. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 189 –201). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Sousa, C. M., & Coelho, F. (2011). From personal values to creativity: Evidence from frontline service employees. European Journal of Marketing, 45, 1029 –1050. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/0309056111113 7598 Stein, M. I. (1953). Creativity and culture. The Journal of Psychology, 36, 31–322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1953.9712897 Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Costs of expertise. In K. A. Ericsson (Ed.), The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports, and games (pp. 347–354). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The nature of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 87–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_10 Sternberg, R. J. (2009). WICS: A new model for liberal education. Liberal Education, 95, 20 –25. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its development. Human Development, 34, 1–31. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1159/000277029 Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–15). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Torrance, E. P. (1963). Education and the creative potential. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota. Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance tests of creative thinking. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service. Unsworth, K. L., & Clegg, C. W. (2010). Why do employees undertake creative action? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 77–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/096317908X398377 West, M. A., & Anderson, N. R. (1996). Innovation in top management teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 680 – 693. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.680 Westby, E. L., & Dawson, V. (1995). Creativity: Asset or burden in the classroom? Creativity Research Journal, 8, 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1207/s15326934crj0801_1 Yates, D., Moore, D., McCabe, G. (1999). The practice of statistics. New York, NY: Freeman.

(Appendix follows)

WHO CARES AND WHY

11

Appendix Articles Included in This Review (N ⴝ 200)


Authors

Year

Article title

Articles Published in Business or Industrial/Organizational Psychology Journals Ashley, Oliver 2010 Creative leaders: Thirty years of big ideas Avey, Luthans, Hannah, Sweetman, Peterson 2012 Impact of employees’ character strengths of wisdom on stress and creative performance Binyamin, Carmeli 2010 Does structuring of human resource management processes enhance employee creativity? The mediating role of psychological availability Camarero, Garrido 2012 Fostering innovation in cultural contexts: Market orientation, service orientation, and innovations in museums Camison, Villar-Lopez 2011 Non-technical innovation: Organizational memory and learning capabilities as antecedent factors with effects on sustained competitive advantage Chang, Hughes 2012 Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in smallto medium-sized firms Chang, Hughes, Hotho 2011 Internal and external antecedents of SMEs’ innovation ambidexterity outcomes Chen, Zhao, Liu, Wu 2012 Improving employees’ job satisfaction and innovation performance using conflict management Cui, O’Connor 2012 Alliance portfolio resource diversity and firm innovation de Jong, den Hartog 2010 Measuring innovative work behaviour Gebauer, Worch, Truffer 2012 Absorptive capacity, learning processes and combinative capabilities as determinants of strategic innovation Goktan, Miles 2011 Innovation speed and radicalness: Are they inversely related? Harmancioglu, Grinstein, Goldman 2010 Innovation and performance outcomes of market information collection efforts: The role of top management team involvement Hemlin 2009 Creative knowledge environments: An interview study with group members and group leaders of university and industry R&D groups in biotechnology Hoffmann, Soyez 2010 A cognitive model to predict domain-specific consumer innovativeness Hoholm, Olsen 2012 The contrary forces of innovation: A conceptual model for studying networked innovation processes Hon 2011 Enhancing employee creativity in the Chinese context: The mediating role of employee self-concordance Hon, Leung 2011 Employee creativity and motivation in the Chinese context: The moderating role of organizational culture Hung, Wyer 2011 Shaping consumer imaginations: The role of self-focused attention in product evaluations Iacono, Martinez, Mangia, Galdiero 2012 Knowledge creation and inter-organizational relationships: The development of innovation in the railway industry Jansson, Marell, Nordlund 2010 Green consumer behavior: Determinants of curtailment and eco-innovation adoption

(Appendix continues)

Journal (n ⫽ 50) Journal of Advertising Human Resource Management Journal Human Resource Management

Journal of Service Research Industrial Marketing Management

European Management Journal Management Decision International Journal of Conflict Management Journal of Marketing Creativity and Innovation Management European Management Journal Management Decision International Journal of Research in Marketing Creativity and Innovation Management

Journal of Business Research Industrial Marketing Management International Journal of Hospitality Management Cornell Hospitality Quarterly Journal of Marketing Research Journal of Knowledge Management Journal of Consumer Marketing


12 Appendix (continued)


Authors

Year

Article title

Joo, Song, Lim, Yoon

2012

Kessel, Kratzer, Schultz

2012

Ko, To, Zhang, Ngai, Chan

2011

Koch

2011

Kotha, Zheng, George

2011

Kuhne, Vanhonacker, Gellynck, Verbeke

2010

Lahiri

2010

Lee, Kim

2011

Leiponen, Helfat

2011

Leiponen, Helfat

2010

Liao, Chang, Hu, Yueh

2012

Matias-Reche, Garcia-Morales, Martin-Tapia

2010

Messmann, Mulder

2012

Molina-Morales, Martinez-Fernandez

2010

Mooi, Frambach

2012

Ng, Feldman

2010

Puccio, Grivas

2009

Shih, Susanto

2011

Si, Wei

2012

Sosa

2011

Sousa, Coelho

2011

Sparke, Menrad

2011

Tajeddini

2010

Team creativity: The effects of perceived learning culture, developmental feedback and team cohesion Psychological safety, knowledge sharing, and creative performance in healthcare teams Analytic collaboration in virtual innovation projects Firm-internal knowledge integration and the effects on innovation Entry into new niches: The effects of firm age and the expansion of technological capabilities on innovative output and impact Innovation in traditional food products in Europe: Do sector innovation activities match consumers’ acceptance? Geographic distribution of R&D activity: How does it affect innovation quality? Integrating suppliers into green product innovation development: An empirical case study in the semiconductor industry Location, decentralization, and knowledge sources for innovation Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth Relationships among organizational culture, knowledge acquisition, organizational learning, and organizational innovation in Taiwan’s banking and insurance industries Staffing services quality and innovativeness in pharmaceutical companies Development of a measurement instrument for innovative work behaviour as a dynamic and context-bound construct Social networks: Effects of social capital on firm innovation Encouraging innovation in business relationships: A research note The impact of job embeddedness on innovation-related behaviors Examining the relationship between personality traits and creativity styles Is innovative behavior really good for the firm? Innovative work behavior, conflict with coworkers and turnover intention: Moderating roles of perceived distributive fairness Transformational and transactional leaderships, empowerment climate, and innovation performance: A multilevel analysis in the Chinese context Where do creative interactions come from? The role of tie content and social networks From personal values to creativity: Evidence from frontline service employees Food consumption style determines food product innovations’ acceptance Effect of customer orientation and entrepreneurial orientation on innovativeness: Evidence from the hotel industry in Switzerland


Journal International Journal of Training and Development Creativity and Innovation Management Journal of Business Research Journal of Knowledge Management Strategic Management Journal

Food Quality and Preference Academy of Management Journal Business Strategy and the Environment Organization Science Strategic Management Journal International Journal of Human Resource Management International Journal of Selection and Assessment Human Resource Development International Journal of Small Business Management Journal of Business Research Human Resource Management Creativity and Innovation Management International Journal of Conflict Management

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology Organization Science European Journal of Marketing Journal of Consumer Marketing Tourism Management

WHO CARES AND WHY

13

Appendix (continued)


Authors

Year

Article title

Un Urbach, Fay, Goral

2011 2010

Vaccaro, Jansen, Van Den Bosch, Volberda

2012

Wei, Wang

2011

Wu

2011

Zhou, Wu

2010

The advantage of foreignness in innovation Extending the job design perspective on individual innovation: Exploring the effect of group reflexivity Management innovation and leadership: The moderating role of organizational size Making sense of a market information system for superior performance: The roles of organizational responsiveness and innovation strategy Asymmetric roles of business ties and political ties in product innovation Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation

Agypt, Rubin, Spivack Allen Althuizen, Wierenga, Rossiter Barbot, Lubart Batey, Chamorro-Premuzic, Furnham Beghetto Beghetto, Kaufman, Baxter

Brooks, Bradt, Eyre, Hunt, Dileo Carmeli, Reiter-Palmon, Ziv

Chen, Zhou Cheng, Kim, Hull

Cheng, Wang, Liu, Chen Cornoldi, Ficili, Giofre, Mammarella, Mirandola Cropley, Cropley Cubukcu, Cetintahra Curseu

Articles Published in Creativity Journals (n ⫽ 50) 2012 Thinking outside the clocks: The effect of layered-task time on the creative climate of meetings 2010 Complex spatial skills: The link between visualization and creativity 2010 The validity of two brief measures of creative ability 2012 Creative thinking in music: Its nature and assessment through musical exploratory behaviors 2010 Individual differences in ideational behavior: Can the big five and psychometric intelligence predict creativity scores? 2010 Intellectual hide-and-seek: Prospective teachers’ prior experiences with creativity suppression 2011 Answering the unexpected questions: Exploring the relationship between students’ creative self-efficacy and teacher ratings of creativity 2010 Creative approaches for reducing burnout in medical personnel 2010 Inclusive leadership and employee involvement in creative tasks in the workplace: The mediating role of psychological safety 2010 Creative writing strategies of young children: Evidence from a study of chinese emergent writing 2010 Comparisons of creative styles and personality types between American and Taiwanese college students and the relationship between creative potential and personality types 2010 Effects of association instruction on fourth graders’ poetic creativity in Taiwan 2011 Imaginative representation of two- and threedimensional matrices in children with nonverbal learning disabilities 2011 Creativity and lawbreaking 2010 Does analogical reasoning with visual clues affect novice and experienced design students’ creativity? 2010 Team creativity in Web site design: An empirical test of a systemic model


Journal Strategic Management Journal Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology Journal of Management Studies Industrial Marketing Management

Journal of Business Research Strategic Management Journal

Journal of Creative Behavior Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts Creativity Research Journal International Journal of Creativity & Problem-Solving Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts Arts in Psychotherapy Creativity Research Journal

Thinking Skills and Creativity Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts

Creativity Research Journal Imagination, Cognition and Personality Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal


14


Appendix (continued) Authors

Year

Article title

Dai, Tan, Marathe, Valtcheva, Pruzek, Shen

2012

Dollinger

2011

Durmysheva, Kozbelt

2010

Glaveanu, Lahlou

2012

Haller, Courvoisier, Cropley

2011

Hao

2010

Hoffmann, Russ

2012

Hu, Shi, Han, Wang, Adey

2010

Joy

2012

Kaufman, Baer, Agars, Loomis

2010

Keri

2011

Kharkhurin

2011

Kohn, Paulus, Korde

2011

Kousoulas

2010

Lau, Cheung

2010

Lee, Kim

2010

Lin

2010

Lin, Cho

2011

Machotka

2012

Mc Hugh, Gardstrom, Hiller, Brewer, Diestelkamp

2012

Mumford, Antes, Caughron, Connelly, Beeler

2010

Palmiero, Nakatani, Raver, Belardinelli, van Leeuwen

2010

Influences of social and educational environments on creativity during adolescence: Does SES matter? “Standardized minds” or individuality? Admissions tests and creativity revisited The creative approach questionnaire: Operationalizing Galenson’s finder-seeker typology in a non-expert sample Through the creator’s eyes: Using the subjective camera to study craft creativity Perhaps there is accounting for taste: Evaluating the creativity of products The effects of domain knowledge and instructional manipulation on creative idea generation Pretend play, creativity, and emotion regulation in children Creative scientific problem finding and its developmental trend Origins of originality: Innovation motivation and intelligence in poetry and comics Creativity stereotypes and the consensual assessment technique Solitary minds and social capital: Latent inhibition, general intellectual functions and social network size predict creative achievements The role of selective attention in bilingual creativity Conceptual combinations and subsequent creativity The interplay of creative behavior, divergent thinking, and knowledge base in students’ creative expression during learning activity Developmental trends of creativity: What twists of turn do boys and girls take at different grades? Relationships between bilingualism and adaptive creative style, innovative creative style, and creative strengths among Korean American students Drama and possibility thinking—Taiwanese pupils’ perspectives regarding creative pedagogy in drama Predicting creative problem-solving in math from a dynamic system model of creative problem solving ability Understanding aesthetic and creative processes: The complementarity of idiographic and nomothetic data The effect of pre-meal, vocal re-creative music therapy on nutritional intake of residents with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias: A pilot study Cross-field differences in creative problemsolving skills: A comparison of health, biological, and social sciences Abilities within and across visual and verbal domains: How specific is their influence on creativity?


Journal Creativity Research Journal Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts International Journal of Creativity & Problem-Solving Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal Journal of Creative Behavior Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts Creativity Research Journal Empirical Studies of the Arts Creativity Research Journal Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal

Thinking Skills and Creativity Creativity Research Journal Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts Music Therapy Perspectives

Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal

WHO CARES AND WHY

15



Authors

Year

Article title

Pool, Odell-Miller

2011

Qian, Plucker, Shen

2010

Randel, Jaussi, Wu

2011

Ranjan, Srinivasan Robledo, Hester, Peterson, Barrett, Day, Hougen, Mumford

2010 2012

Runco, Millar, Acar, Cramond

2010

Smogorzewska

2012

Torrents, Castaner, Dinosova, Anguera

2010

Wang, Zhang, Martocchio

2011

Windels

2011

Zampetakis

2010

Zampetakis, Bouranta, Moustakis

2010

Aggression in music therapy and its role in creativity with reference to personality disorder A model of Chinese adolescents’ creative personality When does being creative lead to being rated as creative? The moderating role of perceived probability of successfully bringing ideas to a supervisor’s attention Dissimilarity in creative categorization Errors and understanding: The effects of error-management training on creative problem-solving Torrance tests of creative thinking as predictors of personal and public achievement: A fifty-year follow-up Storyline and associations pyramid as methods of creativity enhancement: Comparison of effectiveness in 5-year-old children Discovering new ways of moving: Observational analysis of motor creativity while dancing contact improvisation and the influence of the partner Thinking outside of the box when the box is missing: Role ambiguity and its linkage to creativity What’s in a number? Minority status and implications for creative professionals Unfolding the measurement of the creative personality On the relationship between individual creativity and time management

Aljughaiman, Ayoub

Bakkenes, Vermunt, Wubbels

Barron, Walter, Martin, Schatz Bramwell, Reilly, Lilly, Kronish, Chennabathni Bulbul

Articles Published in Education Journals (n ⫽ 50) 2012 The effect of an enrichment program on developing analytical, creative, and practical abilities of elementary gifted students 2010 Teacher learning in the context of educational innovation: Learning activities and learning outcomes of experienced teachers 2010 Predictors of creative computing participation and profiles of experience in two Silicon Valley middle schools 2011 Creative teachers 2012

Carey, Matlay

2010

Cheng, Chen

2010

Cheung

2011

Developing a scale for innovation management at schools: A study of validity and reliability Creative disciplines education: A model for assessing ideas in entrepreneurship education? Developing and verifying a businesscreativity assessment tool: A nationwide study in Taiwan Creativity in advertising design education: An experimental study


Journal Arts in Psychotherapy Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal

Journal of Creative Behavior Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal Thinking Skills and Creativity

Journal of Creative Behavior

Creativity Research Journal Creativity Research Journal Journal of Creative Behavior Thinking Skills and Creativity

Journal for the Education of the Gifted

Learning and Instruction

Computers & Education Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri Education & Training Journal of Education for Business Instructional Science




Authors

Year

Article title

Cheung

2011

Cho, Lin

2011

Chong, Lee

2012

Coskun

2011

de Barros, Primi, Miguel, Almeida, Oliveira

2010

de Pablo Redondo, Arias, Garcia, Sanz

2011

Duan, He, Feng, Li, Fu

2010

Ebenezer, Columbus, Kaya, Zhang, Ebenezer

2012

Ebenezer, Kaya, Ebenezer

2011

Eckhoff

2011

Eyadat, Eyadat

2010

Gilbert

2012

Heinonen, Hytti, Stenholm

2011

Howe, Bruno

2010

Hsiao, Chang

2011

Kelly, Kneipp

2009

Kim, Kim

2010

Lee, Hsieh, Hsu

2011

Leng, Ali, bt. Mahmud, Baki

2010

Leong

2010

Effects of hierarchical versus sequential structuring of teaching content on creativity in Chinese writing Influence of family processes, motivation, and beliefs about intelligence on creative problem solving of scientifically talented individuals Developing a pedagogical-technical framework to improve creative writing The effects of group size, memory instruction, and session length on the creative performance in electronic brainstorming groups Metaphor creation: A measure of creativity or intelligence? Network of educational investigation: Teaching innovation A study on e-learning take-up intention from an innovation adoption perspective: A case in China One science teacher’s professional development experience: A case study exploring changes in students’ perceptions of their fluency with innovative technologies Engaging students in environmental research projects: Perceptions of fluency with innovative technologies and levels of scientific inquiry abilities Creativity in the early childhood classroom: Perspectives of preservice teachers Instructional technology and creativity among university students: The missing link From chalk and talk to walking the walk: Facilitating dynamic learning contexts for entrepreneurship students in fast-tracking innovations The role of creativity in opportunity search and business idea creation Sibling pretend play in early and middle childhood: The role of creativity and maternal context The role of organizational learning in transformational leadership and organizational innovation Reading for pleasure and creativity among college students The effects of mathematical modeling on creative production ability and selfdirected learning attitude Adding innovation diffusion theory to the technology acceptance model: Supporting employees’ intentions to use e-learning systems Computer games development experience and appreciative learning approach for creative process enhancement Creativity and assessment in Chinese arts education: Perspectives of Hong Kong students


Journal Instructional Science Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education Educational Technology Research and Development Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri European Journal of Education and Psychology World Journal on Educational Technology Computers & Education Journal of Science Education and Technology

Journal of Research in Science Teaching Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education World Journal on Educational Technology Education & Training

Education & Training Early Education and Development Asia Pacific Education Review College Student Journal Asia Pacific Education Review Journal of Education Technology & Society Computers & Education Research Studies in Music Education

WHO CARES AND WHY

17



Authors

Year

Article title

Levav-Waynberg, Leikin

2012

Liu, Lin, Jian, Liou

2012

Loogma, Kruusvall, Umarik

2012

Meirink, Imants, Meijer, Verloop

2010

Moolenaar, Daly, Sleegers

2010

Moolenaar, Sleegers, Daly

2011

Moran

2010

Narayan, Whicker, McGann

2012

Newton

2010

Olawale, Adeniyi, Olubela

2010

Ottestad

2010

Park

2012

Ruhe, Boudreau

2011

Sanchez, Hernandez, Martin-Brufau, Mendez, Corbalan, Limiñana

2010

Shawareb

2011

Temizkan

2011

Toyoshima, Fukui, Kuda

2011

Whitworth

2012

Wiseman, Anderson

2012

Yang, Cheng

2010

Yeh, Huang, Yeh

2011

The role of multiple solution tasks in developing knowledge and creativity in geometry The dynamics of motivation and learning strategy in a creativity-supporting learning environment in higher education E-learning as innovation: Exploring innovativeness of the VET teachers’ community in Estonia Teacher learning and collaboration in innovative teams Occupying the principal position: Examining relationships between transformational leadership, social network position, and schools’ innovative climate Ties with potential: Social network structure and innovative climate in Dutch schools Changing the world: Tolerance and creativity aspirations among American youth An innovative process for faculty development in residency training Assessing the creativity of scientific explanations in elementary science: An insider-outsider view of intuitive assessment in the hypothesis space Creativity fostering behaviour as an index of productivity and capacity building among lecturers in selected universities in Ogun and Oyo States Innovative pedagogical practice with ICT in three Nordic countries—Differences and similarities The effects of principal’s leadership style on support for innovation: Evidence from Korean vocational high school change Curricular innovation in an undergraduate medical program: What is “appropriate” assessment? The relationship between optimism, creativity and psychological symptoms in university students The effects of computer use on creative thinking among kindergarten children in Jordan The effect of creative writing activities on the story writing skill Piano playing reduces stress more than other creative art activities Invisible success: Problems with the grand technological innovation in higher education ICT-integrated education and national innovation systems in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries Creativity of student information system projects: From the perspective of network embeddedness Knowledge management in blended learning: Effects on professional development in creativity instruction


Journal Journal of Mathematical Behavior TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology Computers & Education Cambridge Journal of Education Educational Administration Quarterly

Teachers College Record High Ability Studies Teaching and Learning in Medicine Research in Science & Technological Education Educational Research and Reviews

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Asia Pacific Education Review Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology Journal of Instructional Psychology Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri International Journal of Music Education Computers & Education Computers & Education Computers & Education Computers & Education


18 Appendix (continued) Authors Zhu, Zhang

Al-Ali


Baas, De Dreu, Nijstad Badzakova-Trajkov, Haberling, Corballis Baird, Smallwood, Mrazek, Kam Batey, Furnham, Safiullina Becan, Knight, Flynn Carbon, Schoormans Chang, Huang, Choi Chermahini, Hommel

Chua, Morris, Mor De Caroli, Sagone Diliello, Houghton, Dawley Ellamil, Dobson, Beeman, Christoff Farh, Lee, Farh Gino, Ariely Goncalo, Flynn, Kim Grilli, McFarland Gupta, Jang, Mednick, Huber Hoever, van Knippenberg, van Ginkel, Barkema Holm-Hadulla, Roussel, Hofmann Hu, Ou, Chiou, Lin

Year

Article title

2011

Thinking styles and conceptions of creativity among university students

Articles Published in Other Psychology Journals (n ⫽ 50) 2010 Predictive relationship of prejudice with creative activities, emotional intelligence, and linguistic intelligence among commercial institute students 2011 Creative production by angry people peaks early on, decreases over time, and is relatively unstructured 2011 Magical ideation, creativity, handedness, and cerebral asymmetries: A combined behavioural and fMRI study 2012 Inspired by distraction: Mind wandering facilitates creative incubation 2010 Intelligence, general knowledge and personality as predictors of creativity 2012 Innovation adoption as facilitated by a change-oriented workplace 2012 Rigidity rather than age as a limiting factor in the appreciation of innovative design 2012 Is task autonomy beneficial for creativity? Prior task experience self-control as boundary conditions 2010 The (b)link between creativity and dopamine: Spontaneous eye blink rates predict and dissociate divergent and convergent thinking 2012 Collaborating across cultures: Cultural metacognition and affect-based trust in creative collaboration 2009 Creative thinking and Big Five factors of personality measured in Italian school children 2011 Narrowing the creativity gap: The moderating effects of perceived support for creativity 2012 Evaluative and generative modes of thought during the creative process 2010 Task conflict and team creativity: A question of how much and when 2012 The dark side of creativity: Original thinkers can be more dishonest 2010 Are two narcissists better than one? The link between narcissism, perceived creativity, and creative performance 2011 Imagine that: Self-imagination improves prospective memory in memory-impaired individuals with neurological damage 2012 The road not taken: Creative solutions require avoidance of high-frequency responses 2012 Fostering team creativity: Perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential 2010 Depression and creativity: The case of the German poet, scientist and statesman J. W. v. Goethe 2012 Effects of social exchange and trust in knowledge sharing and service innovation


Journal Educational Psychology

Indian Journal of Community Psychology Journal of Experimental Social Psychology Neuropsychologia Psychological Science Learning and Individual Differences Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment Swiss Journal of Psychology Social Behavior and Personality Cognition

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Psychological Reports Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied NeuroImage Journal of Applied Psychology Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin Neuropsychological Rehabilitation Psychological Science Journal of Applied Psychology Journal of Affective Disorders Social Behavior and Personality

WHO CARES AND WHY

19



Authors

Year

Article title

Imran, Anis-ul-Haque

2011

Kanngiesser, Gjersoe, Hood

2010

Kaur, Singh

2010

Khan, Aslam, Riaz

2012

Lee, Kim

2011

Lee, Therriault, Linderhom

2012

Limiñana Gras, Bordoy, Ballesta, Berna

2010

Liu, Shih, Ma

2011

MacPherson, Kelly

2011

Madjar, Greenberg, Chen

2011

Majumdar, Ray

2011

Mammarella, Altamura, Padalino, Petito, Fairfield, Bellomo Martins, Shalley

2010 2011

McCaffery

2012

Meyer, Lynn

2011

Nijstad, De Dreu, Rietzschel, Baas

2010

Nusbaum, Silvia

2011

Putwain, Kearsley, Symes

2012

Rockwell, Boutelle, Trunko, Jacobs, Kaye

2011

Rossmann, Fink

2010

Mediating effect of organizational climate between transformational leadership and innovative work behaviour The effect of creative labor on propertyownership transfer by preschool children and adults Impact of school climate on psychological hardiness among creative Indian adolescents Leadership styles as predictors of innovative work behavior Can speaking more languages enhance your creativity? Relationship between bilingualism and creative potential among Korean American students with multicultural link On the cognitive benefits of cultural experience: Exploring the relationship between studying abroad and creative thinking Creativity, intellectual abilities and response styles: Implications for academic performance in the secondary school Are children with Asperger syndrome creative in divergent thinking and feeling? A brief report Creativity and positive schizotypy influence the conflict between science and religion Factors for radical creativity, incremental creativity, and routine, noncreative performance Transformational leadership and innovative work behaviour False memories in schizophrenia? An imagination inflation study Creativity in virtual work: Effects of demographic differences Innovation relies on the obscure: A key to overcoming the classic problem of functional fixedness Responding to hypnotic and nonhypnotic suggestions: Performance standards, imaginative suggestibility, and response expectancies The dual pathway to creativity model: Creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence Are intelligence and creativity really so different? Fluid intelligence, executive processes, and strategy use in divergent thinking Do creativity self-beliefs predict literacy achievement and motivation? An innovative short-term, intensive, familybased treatment for adolescent anorexia nervosa: Case series Do creative people use shorter associative pathways?


Journal Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research Psychological Science International Journal of Child and Adolescent Health Pakistan Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology Personality and Individual Differences

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Anales de Psicologia Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders Personality and Individual Differences Journal of Applied Psychology Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology Psychiatry Research Small Group Research Psychological Science International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis European Review of Social Psychology Intelligence

Learning and Individual Differences European Eating Disorders Review Personality and Individual Differences




Authors

Year

Article title

Rutter, Kroger, Stark, Schweckendiek, Windmann, Hermann, Abraham

2012

Rybakowski, Klonowska

2011

Sharman, Calacouris

2010

Silvia, Kaufman, Reiter-Palmon, Wigert

2011

Soeiro-de-Souza, Dias, Bio, Post, Moreno

2011

Sprenger, Lappe-Osthege, Talamo, Gais, Kimmig, Helmchen

2010

Can clouds dance? Neural correlates of passive conceptual expansion using a metaphor processing task: Implications for creative cognition Bipolar mood disorder, creativity and schizotypy: An experimental study Do people’s motives influence their susceptibility to imagination inflation? Cantankerous creativity: Honesty--Humility, Agreeableness, and the HEXACO structure of creative achievement Creativity and executive function across manic, mixed and depressive episodes in bipolar I disorder Eye movements during REM sleep and imagination of visual scenes

Walker, Bigelow, LePak, Singer

2011

Yang, Wan, Chiou

2010

Zeman, Della Sala, Torrens, Gountouna, McGonigle, Logie

2010

Demonstrating the process of community innovation: The Indian country methamphetamine initiative Dialectical thinking and creativity among young adults: A postformal operations perspective Loss of imagery phenomenology with intact visuo-spatial task performance: A case of ‘blind imagination’

Journal Brain and Cognition

Psychopathology Experimental Psychology Personality and Individual Differences Journal of Affective Disorders NeuroReport: For Rapid Communication of Neuroscience Research Journal of Psychoactive Drugs Psychological Reports Neuropsychologia

Received April 5, 2015 Revision received August 31, 2015 Accepted September 15, 2015 䡲