Journal of Creative Behavior最新文献

Creativity researchers are increasingly interested in understanding when, how, and for whom creativity can be beneficial. Previous reviews have demonstrated that creativity research largely ignores the study of its impact on factors that promote health, and well-being among populations of adults. It is unclear, in fact, whether this gap in research also extends to creativity research among young children. This paper addresses this issue. Early childhood is a crucial stage for the cognitive development of young children who remain highly sensitive to stress, and adversity. It is therefore essential to identify and promote factors that are beneficial to early childhood resilience, thereby contributing to documenting more of the effects of creative activities on positive outcomes. This paper presents a review with a bibliometric analysis of 1000 randomly selected articles from the Web of Science, without bias towards any specific peer-reviewed journal. The analysis of 454 included articles shows that approximately 80% of the included studies focus on creativity as an outcome (replicating previous findings with a larger sample), with only 3.78% investigating creative activities as predictors among young children. In this small percentage, most of the studies addressed creative activities in young children related to resilience outcomes.

This qualitative study explored the relationship between creativity, time, age, and the literary world among 16 award-winning Israeli writers in the second half of their lives. Based on data collected through in-depth interviews with the participants, the findings indicate that the writers' creativity in the second half of life was linked to Preservation, Growth, and Decline, leading to four interrelated dimensions: (a) preserving youth through creativity, (b) enhancing creativity over time, (c) navigating creativity, acclaim, and ageism, and (d) managing creativity amidst a changing world. The study found that the writers' creativity was enhanced over time, as they gained experience and developed their skills. However, some writers experienced a decline in stamina or their ability to write long novels. The study also found that the writers' experiences of acceptance from the literary world and the audience changed over time. Some writers continued to receive acclaim and attention, while others experienced ageism and a decline in the audience's interest in their work.

Conspiracy theories (CTs) are spectacular narratives, widely spread, that pose societal threats. We test whether CTs might be linguistically creative products, which would facilitate their transmission and thereby account for their widespread popularity. We analyzed nominal compounds (e.g., mind control, carbon dioxide; N = 1,713,568) from a large corpus of conspiracist and mainstream texts matched by topic. In conspiracist texts, compounds showed greater originality, divergence, and sophistication, but they were used with lower frequency and were more often repeated in different contexts. This pattern suggests a creative aspect in the generation of compounds, coupled with rigidity in their use. We interpret these findings as an effect of loosely defined conceptual boundaries among conspiracist writers, in conjunction with social functions like status or group signaling. Our findings not only contribute to the discourse on creativity in CTs but also provide insights into the communicative advantage of CTs.

Dance is a multifaceted creative act that has been used to communicate emotions throughout human evolution. Despite this history, there has been no empirical exploration of components of dance that allow it to communicate emotion. We address this with a mixed methods study in which a quantitative study with dance viewers builds upon qualitative findings with dance artists. Qualitative analysis revealed proposed components of dance responsible for emotion communication are narrative content, social interaction, emotion portrayal intent, and textural quality of movement. These elements were then manipulated using dance video stimuli to quantitatively test viewers' emotion perception accuracy. Results revealed emotion portrayal intent (i.e., expression intent in dance creation) is an important factor for viewers to accurately perceive emotion, regardless of narrative content. While prior studies have focused on the perceiver's role in emotion perception from dance, this is the first study to demonstrate emotions are perceived from dance based on intent during dance creation. Findings highlight the nuanced structure of emotion communication in dance, for which we pose a theoretical framework. Together, dance holds possibilities for studying distinct mechanisms for creative communication that may be important for the study of generalized affect communication outside of creative arts contexts.

Previous research has focused on understanding when, why, and how sex differences in creativity occur, as results vary across samples, measures, and methodologies. In the current study we investigated sex differences in creativity among 984 high achieving adolescents in three expertise areas: Sciences, Arts, and Sports. Eight creativity indicators were analyzed: Alternative uses task (AUT) fluency; creative self-efficacy (CSE); intraindividual strengths (difference between CSE and AUT Fluency); five self-reported creativity scales: Self/everyday, scholarly, performance, mechanical/scientific, artistic. The results showed negligible sex differences ($��n_p^2�$ = .01), with females performing better in AUT Fluency and males self-rating their CSE higher. No sex differences were found in self/everyday, scholarly and performance creativity. Males self-rated their mechanical/scientific creativity ($��n_p^2�$ = .06) higher than females; while females self-rated their artistic creativity ($��n_p^2�$ = .02) higher in comparison to males. Our results extend the existing literature by finding negligible sex differences in adolescent expert groups. However, some stereotypical differences emerged, for example, females with Sciences expertise rated their mechanical/scientific creativity lower than males with and even without Sciences expertise. Results call for further investigation into the links between sex differences, expertise, and specific creativity domains.

The Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS) is a self-reported rating scale that measures creative behaviors in five areas. Despite the vast amount of research on the scale, the internal consistency reliability of K-DOCS scores have not been examined. Specifically, there is no study on the overall reliability coefficients, the variation in the reliability of scores, and reliability induction. In the present study, reliability generalization meta-analyses were conducted to address these issues. The sample consisted of 56 studies that produced 60 Cronbach's alpha coefficients in total. The pooled alpha values were estimated to be .904 (total scale), .825 (Self/Everyday subscale), .858 (Scholarly subscale), .887 (Performance subscale), .867 (Scientific subscale), and .861 (Artistic subscale). The moderator analyses showed that the reliability estimates of K-DOCS total scores and Self/Everyday subscale scores did not differ with respect to any of the moderator variables. On the other hand, certain variables affected the alpha coefficients for Scholarly (educational level, SD of the age, and mean age), Performance (continent, educational level, ethnicity, Caucasian percentage, SD of the age, and mean age), Scientific (language, test version, continent, country, ethnicity, SD of the age, and mean age), and Artistic (continent, language, country, mean age, and total mean score) subscale scores. Finally, the reliability induction rate was 39.62%, and there were no statistically significant differences between the inducing and reporting studies with respect to the continuous variables (mean of the total score, means and SDs of the sample age, and percentages of female and Caucasian). Our findings indicate that the K-DOCS provides highly reliable scores. However, certain variables contribute to systematic errors in Scholarly, Performance, Scientific, and Artistic subscale scores. Hence, scores on these subscales should be interpreted with caution. Due to a high amount of variation in the reliability coefficients, reliability induction is not advised for the K-DOCS.