References
Amabile, T. M.. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Considers the definition and assessment of creativity and presents a componential framework for conceptualizing this faculty. including domain-relevant skills, creativity-relevant skills, and task motivation as a set of necessary and sufficient components of creativity, the framework describes the way in which cognitive abilities, personality characteristics, and social factors might contribute to stages of the creative process. the discussion emphasizes the previously neglected social factors and highlights the contributions that a social psychology of creativity can make to a comprehensive view of creative performance. (99 ref) (psycinfo database record (c) 2009 apa, all rights reserved)”
Csikszentmihalyi, M.. (2006). Creativity – Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. Harper perennial
Show/hide publication abstract
“You have heard about how a musician loses herself in her music, how a painter becomes one with the process of painting. in work, sport, conversation or hobby, you have experienced, yourself, the suspension of time, the freedom of complete absorption in activity. this is ‘flow,’ an experience that is at once demanding and rewarding-an experience that mihaly csikszentmihalyi demonstrates is one of the most enjoyable and valuable experiences a person can have. the exhaustive case studies, controlled experiments and innumerable references to historical figures, philosophers and scientists through the ages prove csikszentmihalyi’s point that flow is a singularly productive and desirable state. but the implications for its application to society are what make the book revolutionary. the bestselling introduction to ‘flow’-a groundbreaking psychological theory that shows readers how to improve the quality of life. ‘the way to happiness lies not in mindless hedonism, but in mindful change.’-new york times book review”
AMABILE, T. M.. (2012). Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. Population studies
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1080/00324728.2012.683251
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“‘Creativity in context’ is an update of ‘the social psychology of creativity,’ a . . . text for researchers, students, and other interested readers. [this book] incorporates extensive new material, going far beyond the original to provide a comprehensive picture of how the motivation for creative behavior, and creativity itself, can be influenced by the social environment. teresa amabile describes new findings both from her own research and from the work of many others in the field, detailing not only the ways in which creativity can be killed by social-psychological influences, but also the ways in which it can be maintained and stimulated. amabile describes a greatly expanded set of methodologies for assessing creativity, and introduces a set of methodologies for assessing the social environment for creativity in nonexperimental studies. throughout, the book maintains a clear focus on a comprehensive view of creativity—how the social context can influence motivation and how motivation, in conjunction with personal skills and thinking styles, can lead to the expression of creative behavior within that context. (psycinfo database record (c) 2016 apa, all rights reserved)”
Amabile, T. M., & Pillemer, J.. (2012). Perspectives on the social psychology of creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1002/jocb.001
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Scholars began serious study into the social psychology of creativity about 25 years after the field of creativity research had taken root. over the past 35 years, examination of social and environmental influences on creativity has become increasingly vigorous, with broad implications for the psychology of human perfor-mance, and with applications to education, business, and beyond. in this article, we revisit the origins of the social psychology of creativity, trace its arc, and suggest directions for its future.”
Hennessey, B. A.. (2003). The social psychology of creativity. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1080/00313830308601
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Motivation plays a crucial role in the creative process. it is not enough to have unusually high levels of skill or a deep conceptual understanding. in order for students to reach their creative potential, they must approach a task with intrinsic motivation; they must engage in that task for the sheer pleasure and enjoyment of the activity itself rather than for some external goal. researchers and theorists now understand that there is a direct relation between the motivational orientation brought to a task and the likelihood of creativity at that task. and it is particular features of the school environment and students’ daily routine that in large part determine that motivation. the present paper outlines investigations revealing that the typical classroom is fraught with teaching practices and programme features that kill intrinsic motivation and creativity. research designed to immunise students against the negative effects of these damaging classroom elements is reviewed. the argument is made that the undermining of intrinsic motivation and creativity of performance may be largely driven by an affective, rather than a cognitive, mechanism, and recent cross-cultural data gathered in a non-western educational setting are reviewed.”
Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T.. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“The construct of creativity has a great deal to offer educational psychology. creativity appears to be an important component of problem-solving and other cognitive abilities, healthy social and emotional well-being, and scholastic and adult success. yet the study of creativity is not nearly as robust as one would expect, due in part to the preponderance of myths and stereotypes about creativity that collectively strangle most research efforts in this area. the root cause of these stereotypes is the lack of adequate precision in the definition of creativity. the body of the article is devoted to specific suggestions for conceptualizing and defining creativity to maximize its potential contributions to educational psychology.”
Glǎveanu, V. P.. (2010). Paradigms in the study of creativity: Introducing the perspective of cultural psychology. New Ideas in Psychology
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1016/j.newideapsych.2009.07.007
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“This article identifies three paradigms in creativity theory and research in psychology. the he-paradigm, focused on the solitary genius, has been followed, mainly after the 1950s, by the i-paradigm, equally individualistic in nature but attributing creativity to each and every individual. extending this view, the we-paradigm incorporates what became known as the social psychology of creativity. the cultural psychology of creativity builds upon this last theoretical approach while being critical of some of its assumptions. this relatively new perspective, using the conceptual and methodological framework of cultural psychology, investigates the sociocultural roots and dynamics of all our creative acts and employs a tetradic framework of self – community – new artifact – existing artifacts in its conceptualization of creativity. the theoretical basis of the cultural psychology approach is analyzed as well as some of its main implications for both the understanding and study of creativity. © 2009 elsevier ltd. all rights reserved.”
Lorenzen, M.. (2019). Creativity in context. In Creativity, Innovation and the Cultural Economy
Plain numerical DOI: 10.4324/9780203880012-4a
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“‘Creativity in context’ is an update of ‘the social psychology of creativity,’ a . . . text for researchers, students, and other interested readers. this book incorporates extensive new material, going far beyond the original to provide a comprehensive picture of how the motivation for creative behavior, and creativity itself, can be influenced by the social environment. teresa amabile describes new findings both from her own research and from the work of many others in the field, detailing not only the ways in which creativity can be killed by social-psychological influences, but also the ways in which it can be maintained and stimulated. amabile describes a greatly expanded set of methodologies for assessing creativity, and introduces a set of methodologies for assessing the social environment for creativity in nonexperimental studies. throughout, the book maintains a clear focus on a comprehensive view of creativityhow the social context can influence motivation and how motivation, in conjunction with personal skills and thinking styles, can lead to the expression of creative behavior within that context. (psycinfo database record (c) 2009 apa, all rights reserved)”
Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B.. (1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00173.x
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Creativity is becoming a topic of ever‐increasing interest to organizational managers. thus, there is a need for a greater understanding of the dynamics between the personal and contextual factors responsible for creative performance in work settings. in particular, there is a need to identify the role of leadership for creativity. until now, creativity studies have examined leadership and employee characteristics from a single‐domain perspective. data from 191 r&d employees of a large chemical company were used to test a multidomain, interactionist creativity model of employee characteristics, leader characteristics, and leader‐member exchange (lmx). results suggest that employee intrinsic motivation and cognitive style, lmx, the interactions between employee intrinsic motivation and leader intrinsic motivation, and between lmx and employee cognitive style relate to employee creative performance as measured by supervisor ratings, invention disclosure forms, or research reports. implications for practicing managers and research on leadership and creativity are discussed.”
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A.. (2009). Beyond Big and Little: The Four C Model of Creativity. Review of General Psychology
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1037/a0013688
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Most investigations of creativity tend to take one of two directions: everyday creativity (also called ‘little-c’), which can be found in nearly all people, and eminent creativity (also called ‘big-c’), which is reserved for the great. in this paper, the authors propose a four c model of creativity that expands this dichotomy. specifically, the authors add the idea of ‘mini-c,’ creativity inherent in the learning process, and pro-c, the developmental and effortful progression beyond little-c that represents professional-level expertise in any creative area. the authors include different transitions and gradations of these four dimensions of creativity, and then discuss advantages and examples of the four c model. © 2009 american psychological association.”
Glǎveanu, V. P.. (2010). Principles for a cultural psychology of creativity. Culture and Psychology
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1177/1354067X10361394
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“This article focuses on a novel theoretical paradigm emerging in the study of human creativity: the cultural-psychological approach. it starts by differentiating between the long past of individualistic accounts of creativity (the lonely genius) and the short history of psychological understandings (the creative individual). the social and the cross-cultural psychology of creativity are both considered, together with their advantages and current limitations. creativity is generally conceptualized as a process of artifact generation and five broad principles for a cultural psychology of creativity are presented. in clarifying the nature of creativity, a special consideration is given to the relationship between individuals, creativity, and culture. finally, the role of the community in fostering and assessing creativity is suggested as a more realistic solution to the individual—society debate.”
Sawyer, R. K.. (2006). Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation. Creativity
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1037/1931-3896.1.1.47
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Explaining creativity is an accessible introduction to the latest scientific research on creativity. the book summarizes and integrates a broad range of research in psychology and related scientific fields. in the last 40 years, psychologists, anthropologists, and sociologists have devoted increased attention to creativity; we now know more about creativity than at any point in history. explaining creativity considers not only arts like painting and writing, but also science, stage performance, business innovation, and creativity in everyday life. sawyer’s approach is interdisciplinary. in addition to examining psychological studies on creativity, he draws on anthropologists’ research on creativity in non-western cultures, sociologists’ research on the situations, contexts, and networks of creative activity, and cognitive neuroscientists’ studies of the brain. he moves beyond the individual to consider the social and cultural contexts of creativity, including the role of collaboration in the creative process.”
Creativity, Psychology and the History of Science. (2005). Creativity, Psychology and the History of Science
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1007/1-4020-3509-8
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Predicting the binding mode of flexible polypeptides to proteins is an important task that falls outside the domain of applicability of most small molecule and protein−protein docking tools. here, we test the small molecule flexible ligand docking program glide on a set of 19 non-α-helical peptides and systematically improve pose prediction accuracy by enhancing glide sampling for flexible polypeptides. in addition, scoring of the poses was improved by post-processing with physics-based implicit solvent mm- gbsa calculations. using the best rmsd among the top 10 scoring poses as a metric, the success rate (rmsd ≤ 2.0 å for the interface backbone atoms) increased from 21% with default glide sp settings to 58% with the enhanced peptide sampling and scoring protocol in the case of redocking to the native protein structure. this approaches the accuracy of the recently developed rosetta flexpepdock method (63% success for these 19 peptides) while being over 100 times faster. cross-docking was performed for a subset of cases where an unbound receptor structure was available, and in that case, 40% of peptides were docked successfully. we analyze the results and find that the optimized polypeptide protocol is most accurate for extended peptides of limited size and number of formal charges, defining a domain of applicability for this approach.”
Brouillette, S., & Brouillette, S.. (2014). The Psychology of Creativity. In Literature and the Creative Economy
Plain numerical DOI: 10.11126/stanford/9780804789486.003.0004
DOI URL
directSciHub download
Show/hide publication abstract
“Predicting the binding mode of flexible polypeptides to proteins is an important task that falls outside the domain of applicability of most small molecule and protein−protein docking tools. here, we test the small molecule flexible ligand docking program glide on a set of 19 non-α-helical peptides and systematically improve pose prediction accuracy by enhancing glide sampling for flexible polypeptides. in addition, scoring of the poses was improved by post-processing with physics-based implicit solvent mm- gbsa calculations. using the best rmsd among the top 10 scoring poses as a metric, the success rate (rmsd ≤ 2.0 å for the interface backbone atoms) increased from 21% with default glide sp settings to 58% with the enhanced peptide sampling and scoring protocol in the case of redocking to the native protein structure. this approaches the accuracy of the recently developed rosetta flexpepdock method (63% success for these 19 peptides) while being over 100 times faster. cross-docking was performed for a subset of cases where an unbound receptor structure was available, and in that case, 40% of peptides were docked successfully. we analyze the results and find that the optimized polypeptide protocol is most accurate for extended peptides of limited size and number of formal charges, defining a domain of applicability for this approach.”