Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-ph5wq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-19T07:55:51.331Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Reasoning and Personal Creativity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 January 2010

Mark A. Runco
Affiliation:
Department of Child and Adolescent Studies, California State University at Fullerton, Fullerton, California, and, The Norwegian School of Education and Business, Administration Bergen, Norway
James C. Kaufman
Affiliation:
California State University, San Bernardino
John Baer
Affiliation:
Rider University, New Jersey
Get access

Summary

Creative things are always original. Originality is not sufficient to guarantee creativity, for some original things are worthless, unattractive, or otherwise uncreative. It is a one-way relationship: creative things are always original, but original things are not always creative. The fact that originality is not sufficient for creativity indicates that creativity involves something in addition to originality. Usually that additional element is defined as a kind of usefulness, appropriateness, or fit (e.g., Runco & Charles, 1993). When the task at hand requires problem solving, creativity leads to a solution that is both original and effective. Bruner (1962) described that part of creativity that is not accounted for by originality as effective surprise. When the task is not a kind of problem, creativity leads to original and aesthetically pleasing results rather than a solution per se. Whatever term we use, this additional element of creativity is important for the present purposes because it requires reasoning. It is reasoning that insures that original things are effective and aesthetically appealing.

In that light, all creative performances depend on reasoning. It is unlike the reasoning that is involved in other cognitive activities, but similar to it – after all, all reasoning is reasoning. There is some sort of commonality. In fact, it is possible to model reasoning in such as way as to capture both creative and noncreative cognition. The differences between creative and noncreative reasoning are easily built into the model. Such a model is described late in this chapter.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abra, J. (1989). Changes in creativity. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 28, 106–126.Google ScholarPubMed
Anderson, (1980). Cognitive algebra.
Anderson, N. H. (1980). Information integration theory in developmental psychology. In Wilkening, F., Beden, J., & Trabasso, T. (Eds.), Information integration by children (pp. 1–45). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Baron, J. (1988). Thinking and deciding. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barron, F. (1998). No rootless flower. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Bennis, W., & Biderman, P. W. (1997). Organizing genius: The secret of creative collaboration. New York: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Brower, R. (1999). Crime and creativity. In Runco, M. A. & Pritzker, S. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 443–448). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bruner, J. (1962). The conditions of creativity. In Bruner, J. (Ed.), On knowing: Essays for the left hand. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cambell, D. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention. Psychological Bulletin.Google Scholar
Charles, R., & Runco, M. A. (2000). Developmental trends in the evaluative and divergent thinking of children. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 415–435.Google Scholar
Chown, S. M. (1961). Age and the rigidities. Journal of Gerontology, 16, 353–362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Getzels, J. W. (1971). Discovery-oriented behavior and the originality of creative products: A study with artists. Journal of Perspective Social Psychology, 19: 47–52.Google ScholarPubMed
Dawes, R. (1979). The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. American-Psychologist, 34, 571–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dudek, S. Z., Strobel, M., & Runco, M. A. (1994). Cumulative and proximal influences of the social environment on creative potential. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 154, 487–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenman, R. (1994). Creativity in prisoners: Conduct disorders and Psychotics. Creativity Research Journal.Google Scholar
Eisenman, R. (1995). Contemporary social issues: Drugs, crime, creativity, and education. Ashland, OH: Book Masters.Google Scholar
Fraser, S. (2005, February 13). A lettered numbers man [Review of R. Parker's John Kenneth Galbraith: His life, his politics, his economics], Los Angeles Time Review of Books, p. R8.
Getzels, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Gruber, H. E. (1981). On the relation between ‘a ha’ experiences and the construction of ideas. History of Science, 19, 41–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guilford, J. P. (1968). Creativity, intelligence, and their educational implications. San Diego, CA: EDITS/Robert Knapp.Google Scholar
Helson, R. (1999). Longitudinal study of creative personality in women. Creativity Reearch Journal, 12, 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kasof, J. (1995). Explaining creativity: The attributional perspective. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 311–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohlberg, L. (1987). The development of moral judgment and moral action. In Kohlberg, L. (Ed.), Child psychology and childhood education: A cognitive developmental view. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Langer, E., Hatem, M., Joss, J., & Howell, M. (1989). Conditional teaching and mindful learning: The role of uncertainty in education. Creativity Research Journal, 2, 139–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lines, Rune, & Gr⊘⊘nhaug, K. (in press). Rational processes vs. creative contexts in strategy formation. Unpublished manuscript, Norwegian School of Economics.Google Scholar
March, J. G. (1971). The technology of foolishness. Sivil⊘⊘konomen, 18(4): 4–12.Google Scholar
Meehl, P. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Meehl, P. E. (1960). The cognitive activity of the clinician. American Psychologist, 1960, 15, 19–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norlander, T., & Gustafson, R. (1997). Effects of alcohol on picture drawing during the verification phase of the creative process. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 355–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget's theory. In Mussen, P. H. (Ed.), Carmichael's handbook of child psychology (3rd ed., pp. 703–732). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1976). To understand is to invent. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1981). Foreword. In Gruber's, H.Darwin on man: A psychological study of scientific creativity. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Renzulli, J. (1978). What makes giftedness? Re-examining a defintion. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–184.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, A. (1990). Creativity, mental health, and alcoholism. Creativity Research Journal, 3, 179–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenblatt, E., & Winner, E. (1988). The art of children's drawings. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 22, 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubenson, D. L., & Runco, M. A. (1992). The psychoeconomic approach to creativity. New Ideas in Psychology, 10, 131–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubenson, D. L., & Runco, M. A. (1995). The psychoeconomic view of creative work in groups and organizations. Creativity and Innovation Management, 4, 232–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runco, M. A. (1995). Insight for creativity, expression for impact. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 377–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runco, M. A. (1996). Personal creativity: Definition and developmental issues. New Directions for Child Development, 72, 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runco, M. A. (1999a). Divergent thinking. In Runco, M. A. & Steven, Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 577–582). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A. (1999b). The forth-grade slump. In Runco, M. A. & Steven, Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 743–744). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A. (1999c). Misjudgment of creativity. In Runco, M. A. & Steven, Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 235–240). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A. (1999d). Tactics and strategies for creativity. In Runco, M. A. & Steven, Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 611–615). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A. (2001). Foreward: The intersection of creativity and culture. In Kwang, N. A., Why Asians are less creative than westerners. Singapore: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A. (Ed.). (2002). Critical creative processes. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A. (2004). Everyone is creative. In Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., & Singer, J. L. (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 21–30). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runco, M. A. (2005). Motivation, competence, and creativity. In Elliott, A. & Dweck, C. (Eds.), Handbook of achievement motivation and competence (pp. 609–623). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., & Albert, R. S. (1986). The threshold hypothesis regarding creativity and intelligence: An empirical test with gifted and nongifted children. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 11, 212–218.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., & Charles, R. (1993). Judgments of originality and appropriateness as predictors of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 15, 537–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runco, M. A., & Charles, R. (1997). Developmental trends in creativity. In Runco, M. A. (Ed.), Creativity research handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 113–150). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., Lubart, T., & Getz, I. (in press). Creativity from the economic perspective. In Runco, M. A. (Ed.), Creativity research handbook (vol. 3). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., & Sakamoto, S. O. (1996). Optimization as a guiding principle in research on creative problem solving. In Helstrup, T., Kaufmann, G., & Teigen, K. H. (Eds.), Problem solving and cognitive processes: Essays in honor of Kjell Raaheim (pp. 119–144). Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget Vigmostad & Bjorke.
Schutz, A. (1943), The problem of rationality in the social world. Economica, 10.Google Scholar
Singh, S. (2005, February 13). What a long, strange trip it would be [Review of M. Kaku's Parallel worlds: A journey through creative, higher dimensions, and the future of the cosmos]. Los Angeles Times Review of Books, p. R8.
Smith G. J. W. (1999). Perceptgenesis. In Runco, M. A. & Pritzker, S. R. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 347–354). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Suler, J. R. (1980). Primary process thinking and creativity. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 144–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1968). A longitudinal examination of the fourth-grade slump in creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 12, 195–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1995). Why fly? Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Twain, M. (1999). Adventures of Tom Sawyer. New York: Scholastic. (Originally published 1876)Google Scholar
Wallace, D. B. (1991). The genesis and microgenesis of sudden insight in the creation of literature. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar
Weeks, D., & James, J. (1995). Eccentrics. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Reasoning and Personal Creativity
    • By Mark A. Runco, Department of Child and Adolescent Studies, California State University at Fullerton, Fullerton, California, and, The Norwegian School of Education and Business, Administration Bergen, Norway
  • Edited by James C. Kaufman, California State University, San Bernardino, John Baer, Rider University, New Jersey
  • Book: Creativity and Reason in Cognitive Development
  • Online publication: 19 January 2010
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606915.007
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Reasoning and Personal Creativity
    • By Mark A. Runco, Department of Child and Adolescent Studies, California State University at Fullerton, Fullerton, California, and, The Norwegian School of Education and Business, Administration Bergen, Norway
  • Edited by James C. Kaufman, California State University, San Bernardino, John Baer, Rider University, New Jersey
  • Book: Creativity and Reason in Cognitive Development
  • Online publication: 19 January 2010
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606915.007
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Reasoning and Personal Creativity
    • By Mark A. Runco, Department of Child and Adolescent Studies, California State University at Fullerton, Fullerton, California, and, The Norwegian School of Education and Business, Administration Bergen, Norway
  • Edited by James C. Kaufman, California State University, San Bernardino, John Baer, Rider University, New Jersey
  • Book: Creativity and Reason in Cognitive Development
  • Online publication: 19 January 2010
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606915.007
Available formats
×