创造力的领域特殊性:概念和测量
Domain Specificity of Creativity: Conception and Measurement

作者: 涂翠平 , 樊富珉 :清华大学心理学系,北京;

关键词: 创造力领域特殊性同感评估标准化测验自我报告Creativity Domain Specificity Consensus Assessment Technique Standardized Tests Self-Report

摘要:
上个世纪90年代研究者就创造力的领域一般性和特殊性展开激烈争鸣,标志着创造力的研究从领域一般性深入到具体的表现领域。创造力的领域特殊性成为创造力研究中的重要取向。测量重点也从发散思维测验过渡到对不同领域创造性表现的测量。由于创造力的复杂性,如何测量成为研究进展中的重要问题。本研究从创造力领域特殊性的概念出发,对同感评估、标准化测验和自我报告这三类创造力的领域测量进行评析。最后,对该领域的测量提出展望。

Abstract: The fierce debate on the domain generality and specificity of creativity in 90s of the last century represents that the creative research has already expanded from general to specific performance areas. The study on domain specificity of creativity has become an important research orientation. The focus of measure also transfers from divergent thinking to creative performance across various domains. Because of the complexity of creativity, how to measure is an important question in the progress of research. The study begins with the concept of domain specificity of creativity, and reviews three types of creativity assessment (Consensus Assessment Technique, standardized measurement and self-report measure). Finally, the future prospect of measurement in this field is put forward.

文章引用: 涂翠平 , 樊富珉 (2015) 创造力的领域特殊性:概念和测量。 心理学进展, 5, 648-656. doi: 10.12677/AP.2015.511084

参考文献

[1] 胡卫平, 胡耀岗, 韩琴(2006). 青少年语文创造力的发展研究. 心理发展与教育, 3, 69-74.

[2] 胡卫平, 万湘涛, 于兰(2011). 儿童青少年技术创造力的发展. 心理研究, 4(2), 24-28.

[3] 吕凯(2014). 创造性人格的领域性及其对教育的启示. 黑龙江高教研究, 1, 144-146.

[4] 吉海峡, 谷传华(2011). 创造性的领域特殊性与领域一般性的争论. 心理学进展, 1(2), 91-95.

[5] 商卫星, 熊哲宏(2007). 进化心理学关于心理模块的领域特殊性思想. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 25(1), 56-61.

[6] 申继亮, 胡卫平, 林崇德(2002). 青少年科学创造力测验的编制.心理发展与教育, 4, 76-81.

[7] 叶玉珠(2004). 科技创造力测验的发展与常模建立. 测验学刊, 51(2), 127-162.

[8] 周林, 查子秀, 施建农(1995). 5、7年级儿童的图形创造性思维(FGA)测验的比较研究──中德技术创造力跨文化研究结果之一. 心理发展与教育, 1, 19-23.

[9] Agnoli, S., Corazza, G. E., & Runco, M. (2014). Measuring Creativity through a Multi-Sided Measurement Approach within Scientific and Artistic Domains. First Annual International Creativity Collaborative, Athens, Georgia.

[10] Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social Psychology of Creativity: A Consensual Assessment Technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997-1013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997

[11] Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview.

[12] Baer, J. (1994). Divergent Thinking Is Not a General Trait: A Multi-Domain Training Experiment. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 35-46.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419409534507

[13] Baer, J. (1996). The Effects of Task-Specific Divergent-Thinking Training. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30, 183-187.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1996.tb00767.x

[14] Baer, J. (1998). The Case for Domain Specificity of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 173-177.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1102_7

[15] Baer, J, Kaufman, J. C., & Gentile, C. A. (2004). Extension of the Consensual Assessment Technique to Nonparallel Creative Products. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 113-117.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1601_11

[16] Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Bridging Generality and Specificity: The Amusement Park Theoretical (APT) Model of Creativity. Roeper Review, 27, 158-163.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783190509554310

[17] Baer, J. (2008). Divergent Thinking Tests Have Problems, But This Is Not the Solution. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2, 89-92.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.89

[18] Baer, J. (2012). Domain Specificity and the Limits of Creativity Theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 16-29.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jocb.002

[19] Balka, D. S. (1974). The Development of an Instrument to Measure Creative Ability in Mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts International, 36, 98.

[20] Carson, S., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Reliability, Validity, and Factor Structure of the Creativity Achievement Questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 37-50.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1701_4

[21] Carson, S. (2006). Creativity and Mental Illness. Invitational Panel Discussion Hosted by Yale’s Mind Matters Consortium, New Haven, CT.

[22] Conti, R., Coon, H., & Amabile, T. M. (1996). Evidence to Support the Componential Model of Creativity: Secondary Analyses of Three Studies. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 385-389.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj0904_9

[23] Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1994). Origins of Domain Specificity: The Evolution of Functional Organization. In L. A. Hirschfeld, & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the Mind (pp. 116). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511752902.005

[24] Chen, C., Himsel, A., Kasof, J., Greenberger, E., & Dmitrieva, J. (2006). Boundless Creativity: Evidence for the Domain Generality of Individual Differences in Creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 40, 179-199.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2006.tb01272.x

[25] Cropley, D. H., & Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Measuring Functional Creativity: Non-Expert Raters and the Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 119-137.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jocb.9

[26] Dow, G. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2004). Teaching Students to Solve Insight Problems: Evidence for Domain Specificity in Creativity Training. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 389-398.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400410409534550

[27] Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Incremental Effects of Reward on Creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 728-741.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.4.728

[28] Feist, G. J. (2004). The Evolved Fluid Specificity of Human Cre-ative Talent. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko, & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From Potential to Realization (pp. 57-82). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10692-005

[29] Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

[30] Han, K. (2003). Do-main-Specificity of Creativity in Young Children: How Quantitative and Qualitative Data Support It. Journal of Creative Behavior, 37, 117-142.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2003.tb00829.x

[31] Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2004). Sure, I’m Creative—But Not in Math! Self-Reported Creativity in Diverse Domains. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22, 143-155.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/26HQ-VHE8-GTLN-BJJM

[32] Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2004). The Amuse-ment Park Theoretical (APT) Model of Creativity. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving, 14, 15-25.

[33] Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Cole, J. C., & Sexton, J. D. (2008). A Comparison of Expert and Nonexpert Raters Using the Consensual Assessment Technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 171-178.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400410802059929

[34] Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., & Cole, J. C. (2009). Expertise, Do-mains, and the Consensual Assessment Technique. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 43, 223-233.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01316.x

[35] Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Counting the Muses: Development of the Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 298-308.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029751

[36] Kim, K. H. (2006). Can We Trust Creativity Tests? A Review of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT). Creativity Research Journal, 18, 3-14.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_2

[37] Kim, K. H. (2008). Meta-Analyses of the Relationship of Creative Achievement to Both IQ and Divergent Thinking Test Scores. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 42, 106-130.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01290.x

[38] Lee, K. S., Hwang, D. J., & Seo, J. J. (2003). A Devel-opment of the Test for Mathematical Creative Problem Solving Ability. Journal of the Korea Society of Mathematical Education Series D: Research in Mathematical Education, 7, 163-189.

[39] Mann, E. L. (2009). The Search for Mathe-matical Creativity: Identifying Creative Potential in Middle School Students. Creativity Research Journal, 21, 338-348.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400410903297402

[40] Plucker, J. A. (1998). Beware of Simple Conclusions: The Case for the Content Generality of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 179-182.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1102_8

[41] Plucker, J. A., & Beghetto, R. A. (2004). Why Creativity Is Domain General, Why It Looks Domain Specific, and Why the Distinction Does Not Matter. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko, & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From Potential to Realization (pp. 153-167). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10692-009

[42] Plucker, J., & Zabelina, D. (2009). Creativity and Interdisciplinary: One Creativity or Many Creativities? ZDM, 41, 5-11.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0155-3

[43] Runco, M. A. (2008). Commentary: Divergent Thinking Is Not Synonymous with Creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2, 93-96.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.93

[44] Torrance, E. P. (1998). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-Technical Manual: Figural (Streamlined) Forms A & B. Scholastic Testing Service.

[45] Ward, T. B. (1994). Structured Imagination: The Role of Conceptual Structure in Exemplar Generation. Cognitive Psychology, 27, 1-40.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1994.1010

[46] Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Modes of Expertise in Creative Thinking: Evidence from Case Studies. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (pp. 761-787). New York: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816796.042

[47] Zeng, L., Proctor, R. W., & Salvendy, G. (2011). Can Tra-ditional Divergent Thinking Tests Be Trusted in Measuring and Predicting Real-World Creativity? Creativity Research Journal, 23, 24-37.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.545713

分享
Top