Journal of Creative Behavior最新文献

Cross-cultural studies on creativity, mainly focusing on the creative potential aspect (e.g., divergent thinking), are emerging in recent years. However, the creative self-belief (e.g., creative self-efficacy) aspect of creativity is under-researched cross-culturally. Moreover, studies that address the measurement invariance of creativity assessments to ensure the measures' sound psychometric properties cross-culturally are rare. Thus, we aimed to address (a) the measurement invariance and (b) the mean comparisons of divergent thinking and creative self-efficacy between American and Chinese adults in two studies. Study 1 investigated four divergent thinking (DT) tests (Line Meanings, Uses, Instances, and Consequences) between American (n = 341) and Chinese (n = 345) college students. Multi-group confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) for fluency-supported scalar invariance based on a three-factor model (removing one Instances item) and those on originality-supported partial scalar invariance (freeing Uses intercepts) based on a three-factor model. American respondents exhibited higher latent means on fluency and originality compared to their Chinese counterparts. Study 2 investigated a creative self-efficacy (CSE) scale between American (n = 302) and Chinese (n = 316) college students. Multi-group CFA supported scalar invariance based on a one-factor model (removing one item). Latent mean comparisons showed no difference in CSE across the two groups.

Domain-specificity is a topic of debate within the field of creativity. To shed light on this issue, we conducted a meta-analysis of cross-domain correlations based on the Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS). To evaluate the model fit of one general factor versus two factors that encompass the primary K-DOCS subscales (Scholarly, Everyday, Artistic, Scientific, and Performance), we employed the one-stage meta-analytic structural equation modeling (OSMASEM) approach. Poor fit of these models would provide evidence of domain-specificity, as the proposed models would not outperform the independence model. Our analysis included 45 correlation matrices from 30 studies, with a total sample size of 31,136 participants. The results provided support for a general domain of creativity, as well as a two-factor solution consisting of Arts and Sciences factors. Among the subscales, the highest correlation was found between the Artistic and Performance domains (r = .478), while the smallest correlation was observed between the Everyday and Scientific domains (r = .178). Furthermore, moderator analyses incorporating age and gender revealed that the Scientific and Everyday subscales exhibited a stronger factor load in older participants compared to younger participants. Implications are discussed for research and practice.

The present study examines two self-regulation traits, grit and curiosity, in predicting creative achievement in an adult sample (N = 522). Grit has been related to achievement in various domains, and although prior empirical work failed to find associations with everyday creative activities in adolescent and young adult samples, theoretically it is relevant to long-term creative achievement (which requires persistence). Curiosity supports creative achievement through positive judgments of novelty and an intrinsic motivation to approach instead of avoid uncertainty, and both novelty and uncertainty are central to the creative process. Results showed that the perseverance dimension of grit positively predicted creative achievement, whereas the consistency of interests dimension was negatively related to creative achievement. Additionally, five curiosity dimensions predicted creative achievement above grit. In particular, thrill seeking predicted creative achievement in both art and science; deprivation sensitivity positively predicted creative achievement in art. Our research suggests that, instead of a narrow focus on consistency of interest, creative achievement benefits from curiosity.

Recent developments in computerized scoring via semantic distance have provided automated assessments of verbal creativity. Here, we extend past work, applying computational linguistic approaches to characterize salient features of creative text. We hypothesize that, in addition to semantic diversity, the degree to which a story includes perceptual details, thus transporting the reader to another time and place, would be predictive of creativity. Additionally, we explore the use of generative language models to supplement human data collection and examine the extent to which machine-generated stories can mimic human creativity. We collect 600 short stories from human participants and GPT-3, subsequently randomized and assessed on their creative quality. Results indicate that the presence of perceptual details, in conjunction with semantic diversity, is highly predictive of creativity. These results were replicated in an independent sample of stories (n = 120) generated by GPT-4. We do not observe a significant difference between human and AI-generated stories in terms of creativity ratings, and we also observe positive correlations between human and AI assessments of creativity. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Creative problem-solving skills are essential for navigating complex, non-routine challenges, enabling individuals to create unique goals, execute innovative procedures and generate original outcomes. While the link between metacognitive skills and the creativity of outcomes was established only recently, further exploration is required to understand their interplay in complex problem-solving. This explanatory sequential mixed-methods study investigated the role of metacognition in solving two ill-defined problem-solving tasks: an experimental Product Improvement Task and an ecologically valid semestral essay. Seventeen undergraduates performed tasks and provided monitoring judgments. Based on the originality of outcomes and accuracy of judgments, three clusters of students were identified: skilled and unaware students underestimating high performance, unskilled and unaware overestimating low performance, and unskilled but aware accurately monitoring low performance. Subsequent in-depth interviews investigated the essay writing process of each cluster. Skilled students effectively utilized metacognitive knowledge, created a unique problem representation, and gathered and synthesized new information to develop essay drafts that were debugged and evaluated. Unskilled and unaware students exhibited deficits in strategy knowledge and had poor metacognitive skills. Unskilled but aware students exhibited low self-efficacy and motivation to perform. These findings emphasize the need for targeted metacognitive and motivational interventions for different clusters of students.