过程与产品导向视角下的场域独立认知风格与创造力&系统综述

Q1 Social Sciences Creativity Studies Pub Date : 2022-08-18 DOI:10.3846/cs.2022.15988
Marco Giancola, Massimiliano Palmiero, Simonetta D'Amico
{"title":"过程与产品导向视角下的场域独立认知风格与创造力&系统综述","authors":"Marco Giancola, Massimiliano Palmiero, Simonetta D'Amico","doi":"10.3846/cs.2022.15988","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Creativity is a multifaceted construct that can be defined both in terms of process (e.g.,divergent thinking) and product (e.g., a poem). Across years, it has been related to different cognitive and personality variables, including cognitive styles. The current systematic review aimed to summarize the literature on the relationships between field dependence–independence and creativity, considering both the creative process and creative production approaches. We selected eight studies using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses rules. Findings revealed that a consistent number of studies focused on creative process mainly in terms of divergent thinking instead of convergent thinking, also providing misleading results. Additionally, only two studies focused on creative production, showing that field independents were more creative than field dependents. Given the contradictory results and the paucity of studies, we concluded that the association between field dependence–independence and creativity needs to be further investigated by more accurate empirical explorations. Limitations and future research directions are discussed.","PeriodicalId":38085,"journal":{"name":"Creativity Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"FIELD DEPENDENT–INDEPENDENT COGNITIVE STYLE AND CREATIVITY FROM THE PROCESS AND PRODUCT-ORIENTED APPROACHES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW\",\"authors\":\"Marco Giancola, Massimiliano Palmiero, Simonetta D'Amico\",\"doi\":\"10.3846/cs.2022.15988\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Creativity is a multifaceted construct that can be defined both in terms of process (e.g.,divergent thinking) and product (e.g., a poem). Across years, it has been related to different cognitive and personality variables, including cognitive styles. The current systematic review aimed to summarize the literature on the relationships between field dependence–independence and creativity, considering both the creative process and creative production approaches. We selected eight studies using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses rules. Findings revealed that a consistent number of studies focused on creative process mainly in terms of divergent thinking instead of convergent thinking, also providing misleading results. Additionally, only two studies focused on creative production, showing that field independents were more creative than field dependents. Given the contradictory results and the paucity of studies, we concluded that the association between field dependence–independence and creativity needs to be further investigated by more accurate empirical explorations. Limitations and future research directions are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38085,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Creativity Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Creativity Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2022.15988\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Creativity Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2022.15988","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

创造力是一种多方面的结构,既可以从过程(如发散思维)的角度定义,也可以从产品(如诗歌)的角度来定义。多年来,它与不同的认知和人格变量有关,包括认知风格。目前的系统综述旨在总结关于领域依赖性、独立性和创造性之间关系的文献,同时考虑创造性过程和创造性生产方法。我们选择了八项使用系统评价首选报告项目和荟萃分析规则的研究。研究结果表明,大量研究主要从发散思维而非趋同思维的角度关注创造性过程,也提供了误导性的结果。此外,只有两项研究关注创造性生产,表明独立领域的人比依赖领域的人更有创造力。鉴于相互矛盾的结果和研究的匮乏,我们得出结论,需要通过更准确的实证探索来进一步研究领域依赖性、独立性和创造力之间的联系。讨论了研究的局限性和未来的研究方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
FIELD DEPENDENT–INDEPENDENT COGNITIVE STYLE AND CREATIVITY FROM THE PROCESS AND PRODUCT-ORIENTED APPROACHES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Creativity is a multifaceted construct that can be defined both in terms of process (e.g.,divergent thinking) and product (e.g., a poem). Across years, it has been related to different cognitive and personality variables, including cognitive styles. The current systematic review aimed to summarize the literature on the relationships between field dependence–independence and creativity, considering both the creative process and creative production approaches. We selected eight studies using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses rules. Findings revealed that a consistent number of studies focused on creative process mainly in terms of divergent thinking instead of convergent thinking, also providing misleading results. Additionally, only two studies focused on creative production, showing that field independents were more creative than field dependents. Given the contradictory results and the paucity of studies, we concluded that the association between field dependence–independence and creativity needs to be further investigated by more accurate empirical explorations. Limitations and future research directions are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Creativity Studies
Creativity Studies Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Creativity Studies accepts original research articles with a focus on communication within the creative society. The journal welcomes contributions from scholars from diverse disciplines such as philosophy, sociology, history, political, communication and information sciences. Creativity Studies also publishes survey papers and descriptions of academic events in this area. The journal issues will be organized around different issues on creativity.
期刊最新文献
FOSTERING A LINK BETWEEN CREATIVITY AND CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE: ESSENTIAL FACTORS FOR ADVANCING INNOVATIONS IN FOOD INDUSTRY PADMARAJAN’S CREATIVE ILLUSTRATION OF MASCULINITIES THE INFLUENCE OF CREATIVE AND INNOVATIVE LOYALTY PROGRAMS’ FEATURES ON CUSTOMERS’ ATTITUDINAL, CONATIVE, AND BEHAVIOURAL LOYALTY THE ROLE OF COMMUNICATION AND CREATIVITY IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SUSTAINABILITY AND SUSTAINABLE INNOVATIONS UPCYCLING FOR REPURPOSING WASTE INTO CREATIVE PRODUCTS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1