Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T11:59:37.053Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

17 - Attitude Change as the Precursor to Creativity Enhancement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Jonathan A. Plucker  and
Gayle T. Dow
Edited by
Ronald A. Beghetto  and
James C. Kaufman
Jonathan A. Plucker
Affiliation:
Indiana University, USA
Gayle T. Dow
Affiliation:
Christopher Newport University, USA
Ronald A. Beghetto
Affiliation:
University of Oregon
James C. Kaufman
Affiliation:
California State University, San Bernardino
Get access

Summary

ATTITUDE CHANGE AS THE PRECURSOR TO CREATIVITY ENHANCEMENT

Schemas develop from interconnections of ideas and grow into complex, organized mental structures of information (Anderson, 1977; Piaget, 1926). The growth of schemata may occur over a series of experiences and often become engrained in our implicit cognitive processing. Although schema development may be flexible, it is very difficult to completely change them, even in light of contradictory evidence (see Palmer, 1981; Wheatley & Wegner, 2001). This causes particular concern among educational psychologists because many schemata may be inaccurate or based on partially incorrect information. The result can be a mental framework firmly rooted in misinformation.

Creativity is not immune from inaccurate schema representations. Creativity, which is defined as “the interaction among aptitude, process, and environment by which an individual or group produces a perceptible product that is both novel and useful as defined within a social context” (Plucker, Beghetto, & Dow, 2004, p. 90, emphasis in original), is plagued by implicit myths that, in our view, have led to inaccurate schemata on a mass scale.

These schemata are problematic because there appears to be no shortage of areas in which creativity can be applied constructively to improve people's lives and, perhaps more important, areas in which people can use creativity to improve their own lives. However, few educators address divergent thinking, creativity, and innovation in primary, secondary, or postsecondary education, areas that are generally considered to be ripe for helping students develop schema.

Type
Chapter
Information
Nurturing Creativity in the Classroom , pp. 362 - 379
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

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

Albert, M. A. and Runco, R. S. (1990). Theories of creativity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Alpaugh, P. K., Parham, I. A., Cole, K. D., & Birren, J. E. (1982). Creativity in adulthood and old age: An exploratory study. Educational Gerontology, 8, 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. (1977). The notion of schemata and the educational enterprise: General discussion of the conference. In Anderson, R. C., Spiro, R. J., and Montague, W. E. (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Baer, J. (1997). Gender differences in the effects of anticipated evaluation on creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baer, J. (1998). Gender differences in the effects of extrinsic motivation on creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 32, 18–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barron, F. (1969). Creative person and creative process. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Blicbau, A. S., & Steiner, J. M. (1998). Fostering creativity through engineering projects. European Journal of Engineering Education, 23, 55–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, V. E., & Boone, R. K. (1998). Enhancing the experience of community: Creativity in group work. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 23, 388–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, S., Peterson, J. B. & Higgins, D. M. (2003). Latent inhibition and creative achievement in a high-achieving normative population. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 499–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dacey, J. S., & Lennon, K. H. (1998). Understanding creativity: The interplay of biological psychological and social factors. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Davis, G. A. (1999). Creativity is forever (4th ed., revised). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.Google Scholar
Davis, G. A., & Subkoviak, M. J. (1978). Multidimensional analysis of a personality-based test of creative potential. Journal of Educational Measurement, 12, 37–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennis, W. (1966). Creative productivity between the ages of 20 and 80 years. Journal of Gerontology, 21, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diakidoy, I. N., & Phtiaka, H. (2001). Teachers' beliefs about creativity. In Nagel, S. (Ed.), The handbook of policy creativity: Creativity from diverse perspectives (Vol. 3, pp. 12–32). Huntington, NY: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Diehle, M., & Stroebe, W. (1986). Productivity loss in brainstorming: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domino, G. (1970). Identification of potentially creative persons from the Adjective Check List. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35, 48–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dow, G. T. & Mayer, R. E. (2004). Teaching students to solve insight problems. Evidence for domain specificity in training. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 389–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B. & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research and applications. Cambridge MA: Bradford/MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fontenot, N. A. (1993). Effects of training in creativity and creative problem finding upon business people. The Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Halloran, J. D. (1967). Attitude formation and change. London: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
Halpern, D. F. (1996). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1988). The conditions of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives (pp. 11–38). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Innamorato, G. (1998). Creativity in the development of scientific giftedness: Educational implications. Roeper Review, 21, 54–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaksen, S. G. (1987). Introduction: An orientation to the frontiers of creativity research. In Isaksen, S. G. (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research (pp. 1–26). Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C. (2001). The Sylvia Plath effect: Mental illness in eminent creative writers. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 35(1), 37–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2005). The amusement park theory of creativity. In Kaufman, J. C. & Baer, J. (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse (pp. 321–328). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
King, B. J., & Pope, B. (1999). Creativity as a factor in psychological assessment and healthy psychological functioning. Journal of Personality Assessment, 72, 200–207.Google Scholar
Kurtzberg, T. R. (1998). Creative thinking cognitive aptitude and integrative joint gain: A study of negotiator creativity, Creativity Research Journal, 11, 283–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehman, H. C. (1953). Age and achievement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lindauer, M. S. (1993). The old-age style and its artists. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 11, 135–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livingston, J. A. (1999). Something old and something new: Love, creativity and the enduring relationship. Bulletin of the Menniger Clinic, 63, 40–52.Google ScholarPubMed
Malekoff, A. (1987). The preadolescent prerogative: Creative blends of discussion and activity in group treatment. Social Work with Groups, 10(4), 61–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, J. M., & Zanna, M. P. (1993). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 117–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olton, R. M., & Johnson, D. M. (1976). Mechanisms of incubation in creative problem. American Journal of Psychology, 89, 617–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osborn, A. (1963). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem-solving (3rd ed.). New York: Charles Scribner and Sons.Google Scholar
Paige, R, Hickok, E., & Neuman, S. (2002). No child left behind: A desktop reference. Jessup, MD: Education Publications Center, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
Palmer, W. S. (1981). Research: Reading theories and research: A search for similarities, The English Journal, 70(8), 63–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parnes, S. J. (1962). Can creativity be increased? In Parnes, S. J. & Harding, H. F. (Eds.), A source book for creative thinking (pp. 185–191). New York: Scribner's Publishing.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1926). The language and thought of the child. New York: Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar
Plucker, J., & Beghetto, R. (2004). Why creativity is domain general, why it looks domain specific, and why the distinction does not matter. In Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., & Singer, J. L. (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 153–167). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plucker, J. A., & Beghetto, R. A. (2003). Why not be creative when we enhance creativity? In Borland, J. H. (Ed.), Rethinking gifted education. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn't creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potential, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plucker, J. A., & Dana, R. Q. (1999). Drugs and creativity. In Runco, M. A. & Pritzker, S. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 1, pp. 607–611). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Plucker, J., & Runco, M. (1999). Deviance. In Runco, M. A. & Pritzker, S. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 541–545). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Poe, E. A. (1996). Tales of mystery and imagination. Consett, UK: Wordsworth Classics.Google Scholar
Poe, E. A. (2005). Tales of mystery and imagination. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyryt, M. C. (1999). Effectiveness of training children's divergent thinking: A meta-analytic review. In Fishkin, A. S., Cramond, B., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (Eds.), Investigating creativity in youth: Research and methods (pp. 351–365). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Rickards, T. (1999). Brainstorming. In Runco, M. A. & Pritzker, S. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 219–227). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Russ, S. (1993). Affect and creativity: The role of affect and play in the creative process. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Simonton, D. K. (1999). Creativity from a historiometric perspective. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 116–133). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (Eds.), (1995). The creative cognition approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Stein, M. I. (1974). Stimulating creativity. Individual procedures. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1992). Buy low and sell high: An investment approach to creativity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–15). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thornburg, T. (1991). Group size and member diversity influence on creative performance. Journal of Creative Behavior, 25, 324–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52, 591–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1972a). Can we teach children to think creatively?The Journal of Creative Behavior, 6, 114–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1972b). Career patterns and peak creative achievements of creative high school students 12 years later. Gifted Child Quarterly, 16, 75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1987). Recent trends in teaching children and adults to think creatively. In Isaksen, S. G. (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research: Beyond the basics (pp. 204–215). Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.Google Scholar
Treffinger, D. J., Isaksen, S. G., & Dorval, B. K. (1996). Creative problem solving: An overview. In Runco, M. A. (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 223–235). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J. (1997). Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, R., & Crocker, J. (1983). Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 961–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westberg, K. L. (1996). The effects of teaching students how to invent. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30, 249–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheatley, T., & Wegner, D. M. (2001). Psychology of automaticity of action. In Smelser, N. J. & Baltes, P. B. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences, (pp. 991–993). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, W. M., & Yang, L. T. (1999). Organizational creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 373–391). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zelinger, J. (1990). Charting the creative process. British Journal of Projective Psychology, 35, 78–96.

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.

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.

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.

Available formats
×