The Psychology of Creativity

2014 ◽  
pp. 56-82
Science ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 225 (4665) ◽  
pp. 918-919 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. CSIKSZENTMIHALYI

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacek Gralewski

AbstractThis text is devoted to a discussion of current achievements in the psychology of creativity, as well as to the further development of the field. It is concerned with a criticism of former and current theses in the field of the psychology of creativity discussed by Glăveanu (2014). The arguments presented indicate that, despite Glăveanu’s (2014) proposition, the psychology of creativity is not in crisis. It is pointed out that the difference in views between supporters of the social psychology approach to creativity and psychology researchers oriented towards the study of creative potential on how to conduct creativity research, stems from a concentration on different levels of creativity, and not necessarily from an ineffective theory of creativity. As a consequence of these different perceptions of creativity at its particular levels, determining the prime standard of creative potential is not sufficient to understand the social conditioning of creative activity and the social assessment of creativity, and vice versa.


Author(s):  
ZBIGNIEW PIETRASIŃSKI

Interpreting ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ildikó Horváth

The objective of this paper is to examine how the findings of psychological research concerning creativity can be explored within the framework of interpreting studies. I will begin by reviewing the literature on the psychology of creativity, followed by the presentation and analysis of an empirical survey. Finally, I will suggest that creativity in interpreting can be examined on three levels, depending on the aspect we are focusing on: (1) the products; (2) mental processes; or (3) the behaviour of the interpreter. In the first case, the primary object is the product, while in the second and third, it is the process. What makes interpreting a special area of study in terms of creativity is not only the creative nature of the mental processes involved, but also, and perhaps even primarily, the creativity required of interpreters in terms of their professional behaviour in a communicational situation, where they are present but in which they are not natural participants.


Author(s):  
Lucie Clements ◽  
Rebecca Weber

Creativity is commonly recognized as a complex phenomenon; one which entails a range of debates around definition, process and product, domain specificity, cross-discipline generalisability, and appropriate testing measures. The psychology of creativity appears to find a fitting home in dance science, a field concerned with understanding and enhancing dancers' health and performance. Yet dance psychology has been predominated by research which focuses on the mental processes underpinning optimal skill execution and technical performance. This paper outlines an argument for a greater focus on the creative demands of dance within dance science, highlighting some the challenges of, and barriers to, research in the psychology of creativity in dance, before making a number of recommendations to encourage the growth of this important research area.


1995 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-139
Author(s):  
John C. Houtz ◽  
Damon Krug

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-37
Author(s):  
Beth A. Hennessey

AbstractIn this commentary, I applaud Glăveanu’s attempts to shake things up and introduce some much-needed disruption into the study of creativity. Glăveanu is a “ big thinker” and he is correct to worry about the growing fragmentation of the field. I share his concern that the so-called “ social psychology of creativity” really isn’t all that social. Most researchers and theorists continue to decontextualize creativity, giving little attention to the cultural and environmental factors that contribute to creativity of performance. Yet Glăveanu also presents some arguments with which I disagree. Most striking is his apparent misunderstanding of the purpose and functioning of the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT). In addition, I am less surprised than is Glăveanu about the current state of our field. The same narrowing of research questions plagues every branch of the study of psychology. However, the tides may be changing. At the forefront of a reform movement are a number of creativity theorists and journal editors. My own hope is that as researchers are given license to expand their work to include a wide variety of experimental designs, methodologies and contexts, they will adopt as their core mission the promotion of the growth of creativity at the individual, group, societal and multi-cultural levels.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document