Why the standard definition of creativity fails to capture the creative act

Dados Bibliográficos

ID6458481
AutoresAnna Abraham (0000-0003-4954-8205, University of Georgia, autor correspondente)
Ano2024
Volume35
Fascículo1
Páginas40-60
Data de publicação2024-10-29
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoTheory & Psychology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0959-3543 • E-ISSN: 1461-7447
EditoraSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/09593543241290232
OpenAlexW4403869961
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas10
Referências citadas90

The “standard definition” of creativity holds that a creative idea is one that is novel and useful. This judgement is customarily based on an external frame of reference as it is passed by people who are receiving the idea (the recipient). The internal frame of reference of the person who has generated the idea (the creator) is usually ignored. I make two cases in this paper. First, that employing external frames of reference in assessing creative products has been erroneously applied to understand the creative mind. Second, that any definition of creativity needs to be one that can be reasonably applied whether following an internal frame of reference of the creative experience or an external frame of reference of the creative product. With these aims in mind, I propose the following amendment to the definition of creativity: a creative idea is one that is both novel and satisfying

Cognitive psychology · Cognitive science · Creativity · Creativity technique · Epistemology · Sociology · Aesthetic Perception and Analysis · Creativity in Education and Neuroscience · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology