Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 7
  • Print publication year: 2006
  • Online publication date: January 2010

6 - Alternative Knowledge Structures in Creative Thought: Schema, Associations, and Cases

Summary

A number of approaches might be used to understand how people think creatively. One might, for example, examine the performance characteristics associated with certain problem-solving tasks known to elicit creative thought (Mumford, 2002). One might try to identify the abilities people must posses if they are to solve creative problems (Sternberg & O'Hara, 1999). And, one might examine the errors people make as they work through problems calling for creative thought (Carlson & Gorman, 1992).

Although these alternative approaches all have value, process analysis remains the dominant approach in studies of creative thought (Brophy, 1998; Lubart, 2001). In process studies, an attempt is made to identify the major cognitive operations that occur as people work on the complex, novel, ill-defined tasks that call for creative thought and the production of original, albeit useful, products (Ghiselin, 1963; Mace & Ward, 2002; Ward, Smith, & Finke, 1999). The attraction of the process approach is because of both its generality and the framework provided for identifying the heuristics, or strategies, needed at each step in peoples' creative efforts.

Over the years, a number of models describing the processes involved in creative thought have been proposed (Dewey, 1910; Merrifield, Guilford, Christensen, & Frick, 1962; Parnes & Noller, 1972; Sternberg, 1985; Wallas, 1926). In a review of this literature, Mumford and his colleagues (Mumford, Mobley, Uhlman, Reiter-Palmon, & Doares, 1991; Mumford, Peterson, & Childs, 1999) identified eight core process that appeared to be involved in most real-world creative problem-solving efforts: (1) problem construction, (2) information gathering, (3) concept selection, (4) conceptual combination, (5) idea generation, (6) idea evaluation, (7) implementation planning, and (8) monitoring.

References
Adams, R. J., & Ericsson, A. E. (2000). Introduction to cognitive processes of expert pilots. Human Performance in Extreme Environments, 5, 44–62.
Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Antonietti, A. (1946). Source processing influences on analogical problem-solving. Journal of General Psychology, 123, 249–259.
Barsalou, L. W. (1993). Flexibility, structure, and linguistic vagary in concepts: Manifestations of a compositional system of perceptual symbols. In Collins, A. F., Gathercole, S. E., Conway, M. A., & Monnis, P. E. (Eds.), Theories of memory (pp. 24–101). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Basadur, M., Runco, M. A., & Vega, L. A. (2000). Understanding how creative thinking skills, attitudes, and behaviors work together: A causal process model. Journal of Creative Behavior, 34, 77–100.
Baughman, W. A., & Mumford, M. D. (1995). Process analytic models of creative capacities: Operations involved in the combination and reorganization process. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 37–62.
Berger, C. R., & Jordan, J. M. (1992). Planning sources, planning difficulty, and verbal fluency. Communication Monographs, 59, 130–148.
Brophy, D. R. (1998). Understanding, measuring, and enhancing individual creative problem-solving efforts. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 123–150.
Catrambone, R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1989). Overcoming contextual limitations on problem-solving transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 1147–1156.
Carlson, W. B., & Gorman, M. E. (1992). A cognitive framework to understand technological creativity: Bell, Edison, and the Telephone. In Weber, R. J. & Perkins, D. N. (Eds.), Inventive minds: Creativity in technology (pp. 48–79). New York: Oxford University Press.
Chi, M. T. H., Bassock, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanation: How students study and use examples to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182.
Clement, J. (1988). Observed methods for generating analogies in scientific problem-solving. Cognitive Science, 12, 563–586.
Coney, S., & Serna, P. (1995). Creative thinking from an information processing perspective: A new approach to Merrick's Theory of Associative Hierarchies. Journal of Creative Behavior, 24, 109–133.
Csikzentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–338). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: Houghton.
Ericsson, K. A., & Charness, N. (1994). Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition. American Psychologist, 49, 725–747.
Estes, W. K. (1991). Cognitive architectures from the standpoint of an experimental psychologist. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 1–28.
Estes, Z., & Ward, J. B. (2002). The emergence of novel attributes in concept modification. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 149–156.
Feist, G. J., & Gorman, M. E. (1998). The psychology of science: Review and integration of a nascent discipline. Review of General Psychology, 2, 3–47.
Feldman, D. H. (1999). The development of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 169–188). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fiedler, F. E., & Garcia, J. E. (1987). New approaches to effective leadership: Cognitive resources and organizational performances. New York: Wiley.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Getzels, J. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding in art. New York: Wiley.
Ghiselin, B. (1963). Ultimate criteria for two levels of creativity. In Taylor, C. W. & Barron, F. (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 30–43). New York: Wiley.
Gruszka, A., & Necka, E. (2002). Priming and acceptance of close and remote associations by creative and less creative people. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 174–192.
Hammond, K. J. (1990). Case-based planning: A framework for planning from experience. Cognitive Science, 14, 385–443.
Hershey, D. A., Walsh, D. A., Read, S. J., & Chulef, A. S. (1990). Effects of expertise on financial problem-solving: Evidence for goal-directed, problem-solving scripts. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 46, 77–101.
Holyoak, K. J., & Kroger, J. K. (1996). Forms of reasoning: Insight into prefrontal functions. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 106, 253–263.
Howe, M. A., Davidson, J. W., & Sloboda, J. A. (1998). Innate talents: Reality of myth? Brain and Behavioral Sciences, 21, 399–442.
Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping. Psychological Review, 104, 427–466.
Hydenbluth, C., & Hesse, F. W. (1996). Impact of superficial similarity in the application phase of analogical problem-solving. American Journal of Psychology, 109, 37–57.
Jani, N., & Levine, D. S. (2000). A neural network theory of propositional analogy-making. Neural Networks, 13, 149–183.
Keane, M. (1987). On retrieving analogies when solving problems. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39, 29–41.
Kolodner, J. L. (1993). Case-based reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman.
Kolodner, J. L., & Simpson, R. L. (1989). The mediator: Analysis of an early case-based problem-solver. Cognitive Science, 13, 507–549.
Koplinka, L., Brandan, R., & Lemmon, A. (1988). Case-based reasoning for continuous control. In Kolodner, J. L. (Ed.) Proceedings: Workshop on case-based reasoning (pp. 116–136). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman.
Kubose, T. T., Holyoak, K. J., & Hummel, J. E. (2002). The role of textual coherence in incremental analogical mapping. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 407–435.
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lonergan, D. C., Scott, G. M., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). Evaluative aspects of creative thought: Effects of idea appraisal and revision standards. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 231–246.
Lubart, T. I. (2001). Models of the creative process: Past, present, and future. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 295–308.
Mace, M. A., & Ward, T. (2002). Modeling the creative process: A grounded theory analysis of creativity in the domain of art making. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 163–178.
Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 3, 220–232.
Merrifield, P. R., Guilford, J. P., Christensen, P. R., & Frick, J. W. (1962). The role of intellectual factors in problem-solving. Psychological Monographs, 76, 1–21.
Mumford, M. D. (2002). Social innovation: Ten cases from Benjamin Franklin. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 253–266.
Mumford, M. D., Baughman, W. A., Supinski, E. P., & Maher, M. A. (1996). Process-based measures of creative problem-solving skills. Part II: Information encoding. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 77–88.
Mumford, M. D., Baughman, W. A., Threlfall, K. V., Supinski, E. P., & Costanza, D. P. (1996). Process-based measures of creative problem-solving skills. Part I: Problem construction. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 63–76.
Mumford, M. D., Connelly, M. S., & Gaddis, B. (2003). How creative leaders think: Experimental findings and cases. Leadership Quarterly, 14, 411–432.
Mumford, M. D., Mobley, M. I., Uhlman, C. E., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Doares, C. (1991). Process-analytic models of creative capabilities. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 91–122.
Mumford, M. D., Peterson, N. G., & Childs, R. A. (1999). Basic and cross-functional skills: Taxonomies, measures, and findings in assessing job skill requirements. In Peterson, N. G., Mumford, M. D., Boaman, U. C., Jeanrenet, P. R., & Fleishman, E. A. (Eds.), An occupational informational system for the 21st century: The development of O∗NET (pp. 49–70). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Mumford, M. D., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Redmond, M. R. (1994). Problem construction and cognition: Applying problem representations in ill-defined domains. In Runco, M. A. (Ed.), Problem finding, problem-solving, and creativity (pp. 3–39). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Mumford, M. D., Schultz, R. A., & Doorn, J. R. (2001). Performance in planning: Processes, requirements, and errors. Review of General Psychology, 5, 213–240.
Mumford, M. D., Supinski, E. P., Baughman, W. A., Costanza, D. P., & Threlfall, K. V. (1997). Process-based measures of creative problem-solving skills. Part V: Overall prediction. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 77–85.
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175–220.
Noice, H. (1991). The role of explanations and plan recognition in the learning of theatrical scripts. Cognitive Science, 15, 425–460.
Okuda, S. M., Runco, M. A., & Berger, D. E. (1991). Creativity and the finding and solving of real-world problems. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 9, 145–153.
Oliver, K. (2001). Developing and refining mental models in open-ended learning environments: A case study. ETR & D, 49, 5–32.
Parnes, S. J., & Noller, R. B. (1972). Applied creativity: The creative studies project: Part results of a two year program. Journal of Creative Behavior, 6, 164–186.
Patalano, A. L., & Seifert, C. M. (1997). Opportunistic planning: Being reminded of pending goals. Cognitive Psychology, 34, 1–36.
Phye, G. D. (1990). Inductive problem-solving: Schema inducement and memory-based transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 826–831.
Poliastro, E. (1995). Creative intuition: An integrative review. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 99–113.
Radvansky, G. A. (1994). Mental systems, representation, and process. In Williams, C. E. (Ed.), Associated systems theory: A systematic approach to cognitive representations of persons (pp. 982–204). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Read, S. J. (1987). Constructing causal scenarios: A knowledge structure approach to causal reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 288–302.
Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 219–325.
Reber, A. S. (1992). An evolutionary context for the cognitive unconscious. Philosophical Psychology, 5, 33–51.
Reber, A. S., Kassin, S. M., Lewis, S., & Cantor, L. W. (1980). On the relation between implicit and explicit modes in the learning of a complex rule structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 492–502.
Reber, P. J., Knowlton, B., & Squire, L. R. (1996). Dissociable properties of memory systems: Differences in the flexibility of declarative and nondeclarative knowledge. Behavioral Neuroscience, 110, 861–871.
Reeves, L. M., & Weisberg, R. W. (1994). The role of content and abstract information in analogical transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 381–400.
Rostan, S. M. (1994). Problem finding, problem-solving, and cognitive controls: An empirical investigation of critically acclaimed productivity. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 92–110.
Rothenberg, A. (1987). To error is human: The role of error in creativity and psychotherapy. In Schwarz, D. P., Sacksteder, J. L., & Aksbane, Y. (Eds.), Attachment and the Therapeutic Process: Essays in Honor of Otto Allen Will, Jr. (pp. 155–181). Madison, CT: International Universities Press.
Rothenberg, A. (1994). Studies in the creative process: An empirical investigation. In Massing, J. M. & Bornstein, R. F. (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on object relations theory (pp. 145–245). New York: Wiley.
Scott, G. M., Lonergan, D. C., & Mumford, M. D. (in press). Conceptual combination: Alternate knowledge structures, alternative heuristics. Creativity Research Journal.
Seifert, C. M., Hammond, K. J., Johnson, H. M., Converse, T. M., McDougal, T. F., & Vanderstoep, S. W. (1994). Case-based learning: Predictive features in indexing. Archive Learning, 16, 37–56.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). A three facet model of creativity: In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives (pp. 124–147). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Horvath, J. A. (1998). Cognitive conceptions of expertise and their relations to giftedness. Freidman, R. C. & Rodgers, K. B. (Eds.), Talent in context: Historical and social perspectives on giftedness (pp. 177–191). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sternberg, R. J., & O'Hara, L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 251–272). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vincent, A. S., Decker, B. P., & Mumford, M. D. (2002). Divergent thinking, intelligence, and expertise: A test of alternative models. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 163–178.
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt-Brace.
Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Finke, R. A. (1999). Creative cognition. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 189–212). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ward, T. B., Patterson, M. J., & Sifonis, C. M. (2004). The role of specificity and abstraction in creative idea generation. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 1–10.
Weisburg, R. W. (1999). Creativity and knowledge: A challenge to theory. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 226–250). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Xiao, Y., Milgram, P., & Doyle, D. J. (1997). Planning behavior and its functional role in interactions with complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 27, 313–325.
Zook, K. B. (1991). Effects of analogical processes on learning and misrepresentation. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 41–71.