创造性“小c”和创造性“大C”的理论研究和进展
The Development and Theoretical Research of “Little-c” (Little-Creativity) and “Big-C” (Big-Creativity)
DOI: 10.12677/AP.2017.72027, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 2,302  浏览: 3,603 
作者: 田 芳, 曹贵康：西南大学心理学部，重庆；认知与人格教育部重点实验室，重庆
关键词: 创造性“小c”；创造性“大C”；常规教育；突出成就；
摘要: 创造性是人类生存进步的基础，对人们获得幸福和财富起着重要作用，根据所创造出来的产品对社会价值的作用，把创造性的研究分为Little-c (Little-creativity)和Big-C (Big-Creativity)。本文用两个实验研究证明传统的常规教育和创造性(Little-c和Big-C)之间的关系并不是线性的关系，而是一个复杂的关系。对于卓越者而言，他所受的常规教育和突出成就之间的关系是负相关，而对于创造者而言，所接受的常规教育和突出成就之间的关系看起来更像一个单峰函数，并且其峰值出现在其结束本科教育前的最后一年。因此研究表明传统的常规教育并不总是有利于创造性的发展，甚至在一些情况下可能会阻碍创造性的发展。
Abstract: Creativity is imperative to the progression of human civilization, prosperity, and well-being. Ac-cording to the social value of the creative product, creativity is divided into Little-c and Big-C. In this paper, two empirical investigations showed that the relationship between formal education and creativity (“Big-C” “Little-c”) is not a linear, but a complex one. For the leaders, their eminent achievement is negatively related to the formal education, whereas for the creators the relation-ship was best described as a single-peaked function, with the peak appearing somewhere in the last year of their undergraduate education. The results indicated that formal education cannot have a simple positive linear association with creativity, and under certain circumstances their association can become negative.
文章引用：田芳, 曹贵康 (2017). 创造性“小c”和创造性“大C”的理论研究和进展. 心理学进展, 7(2), 207-215. https://doi.org/10.12677/AP.2017.72027

参考文献

[1] 刘春雷, 王敏, 张庆林(2009). 创造性思维的脑机制. 心理科学进展, 17(1), 106-111.
[2] 汪安圣(1992). 认知心理学. 北京: 北京大学出版社.
[3] Bowers, K. S., Regehr, G., Balthazard, C., & Parker, K. (1990). Intuition in the Context of Discovery. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 72-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(90)90004-N
[4] Cattell, J. M. (1903). A Statistical Study of Eminent Men. Popular Science Monthly, 62, 359-377.
[5] Chakravarty, A. (2010). The Creative Brain-Revisiting Concepts. Medical hypotheses, 74, 606-612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.10.014
[6] Cox, C. (1926). The Early Mental Traits of Three Hundred Geniuses. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
[7] Cziko, G. A. (1995). Without Miracles: Universal Selection Theory and the Second Darwinian Revolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[8] Jung, R. E., Mead, B. S., Carrasco, J., & Flores, R. A. (2013). The Structure of Creative Cognition in the Human Brain. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 330. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00330
[9] Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond Big and Little: The Four C Model of Creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013688
[10] Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (2006). International Handbook of Creativity Research. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511818240
[11] Mandler, G. (1995). Origins and Consequences of Novelty. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The Creative Cognition Approach (pp. 9-25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[12] McCrae, R. R., & Greenberg, D. M. (2014). Openness to Experience. In D. K. Simonton (Ed.), The Wiley Handbook of Genius (pp. 222-243). Oxford: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118367377.ch12
[13] Murray, C. (2003). Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950. New York: HarperCollins.
[14] Richards, R. (2010). Everyday Creativity. In J. C. Kaufman, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (pp. 189-215). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511763205.013
[15] Root-Bernstein, R. S., Bernstein, M., & Garnier, H. (1995). Correlations between Avocations, Scientific Style, Work Habits, and Professional Impact of Scientists. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 115-137. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj0802_2
[16] Root-Bernstein, R., Allen, L., Beach, L., Bhadula, R., Fast, J., Hosey, C., & Weinlander, S. (2008). Arts Foster Scientific Success: Avocations of Nobel, National Academy, Royal Society, and Sigma Xi Members. Journal of the Psychology of Science and Technology, 1, 51-63. https://doi.org/10.1891/1939-7054.1.2.51
[17] Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The Standard Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 92-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
[18] Runco, M. A., Kaufman, J. C., Halladay, L. R., & Cole, J. C. (2010). Changes in Reputation and an Index of Genius, Eminence, and Creative Talent. Historical Methods, 43, 91-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/01615440903270273
[19] Seifert, C. M., Meyer, D. E., Davidson, N., Patalano, A. L., & Yaniv, I. (1995). Demystification of Cognitive Insight: Opportunistic Assimilation and the Prepared-Mind Perspective. In R. J. Sternberg, & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The Nature of Insight (pp. 65-124). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[20] Simonton, D. K. (1976). Biographical Determinants of Achieved Eminence: A Multivariate Approach to the Cox Data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 218-226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.33.2.218
[21] Simonton, D. K. (1984). Genius, Creativity, and Leadership: Historiometric Inquiries. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674424753
[22] Simonton, D. K. (1991). Latent-Variable Models of Posthumous Reputation: A Quest for Galton’s G. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 607-619. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.4.607
[23] Simonton, D. K. (1998). Fickle Fashion versus Immortal Fame: Transhistorical Assessments of Creative Products in the Opera House. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 198-210. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.198
[24] Simonton, D. K. (2002). Great Psychologists and Their Times: Scientific Insights into Psychology’s History. Washington DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10466-000
[25] Simonton, D. K. (2004). Thematic Content and Political Context in Shakespeare’s Dramatic Output, with Implications for Authorship and Chronology Controversies. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22, 201-213. https://doi.org/10.2190/EQDP-MK0K-DFCK-MA8F
[26] Simonton, D. K. (2012a). Creativity, Problem Solving, and Solution Set Sightedness: Radically Reformulating BVSR. Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 48-65. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.004
[27] Simonton, D. K. (2012b). Foresight, Insight, Oversight, and Hindsight in Scientific Discovery: How Sighted Were Galileo’s Telescopic Sightings? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 243-254.
[28] Simonton, D. K. (2012c). Taking the US Patent Office Creativity Criteria Seriously: A Quantitative Three-Criterion Definition and Its Implications. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 97-106.
[29] Simonton, D. K. (2013a). Creative thought as Blind Variation and Selective Retention: Why Sightedness Is Inversely Related to Creativity. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 33, 253-266. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030705
[30] Simonton, D. K. (2013b). What Is a Creative Idea? Little-C versus Big-C Creativity. In J. Chan, & K. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Creativity (pp. 69-83). Cheltenham Glos: Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857939814.00015
[31] Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in Creativity. American Psychologist, 51, 677-688. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.51.7.677
[32] Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., 张庆林, 赵玉芳(2002). 成功智力教学. 北京: 中国轻工业出版社.
[33] Weisberg, R. W. (2015a). Expertise, Nonobvious Creativity, and Ordinary Thinking in Edison and Others: Integrating Blindness and Sightedness. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9, 15-19. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000001
[34] Weisberg, R. W. (2015b). On the Usefulness of “Value” in the Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 27, 111-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2015.1030320
[35] Whipple, E. M. ( 2004). Eminence Revisited. History of Psychology, 7, 265-296. https://doi.org/10.1037/1093-4510.7.3.265