Literature DB >> 12848217

Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: the integration of product, person, and process perspectives.

Dean Keith Simonton1.   

Abstract

Psychologists have primarily investigated scientific creativity from 2 contrasting in vitro perspectives: correlational studies of the creative person and experimental studies of the creative process. Here the same phenomenon is scrutinized using a 3rd, in vivo perspective, namely, the actual creative products that emerge from individual scientific careers and communities of creative scientists. This behavioral analysis supports the inference that scientific creativity constitutes a form of constrained stochastic behavior. That is, it can be accurately modeled as a quasi-random combinatorial process. Key findings from both correlational and experimental research traditions corroborate this conclusion. The author closes the article by arguing that all 3 perspectives--regarding the product, person, and process--must be integrated into a unified view of scientific creativity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12848217     DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.475

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Bull        ISSN: 0033-2909            Impact factor:   17.737


  32 in total

Review 1.  The limits of brain determinacy.

Authors:  Peter G H Clarke
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  The creative cliff illusion.

Authors:  Brian J Lucas; Loran F Nordgren
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Postdocs' lab engagement predicts trajectories of PhD students' skill development.

Authors:  David F Feldon; Kaylee Litson; Soojeong Jeong; Jennifer M Blaney; Jina Kang; Candace Miller; Kimberly Griffin; Josipa Roksa
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  The cognitive neuroscience of creativity.

Authors:  Arne Dietrich
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-12

Review 5.  Human creativity, evolutionary algorithms, and predictive representations: The mechanics of thought trials.

Authors:  Arne Dietrich; Hilde Haider
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-08

6.  Interdisciplinarity and impact: distinct effects of variety, balance, and disparity.

Authors:  Jian Wang; Bart Thijs; Wolfgang Glänzel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-05-22       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Biochemical support for the "threshold" theory of creativity: a magnetic resonance spectroscopy study.

Authors:  Rex E Jung; Charles Gasparovic; Robert S Chavez; Ranee A Flores; Shirley M Smith; Arvind Caprihan; Ronald A Yeo
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-04-22       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Measuring novelty in science with word embedding.

Authors:  Sotaro Shibayama; Deyun Yin; Kuniko Matsumoto
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Sometimes the impact factor outshines the H index.

Authors:  Johannes Hönekopp; Janet Kleber
Journal:  Retrovirology       Date:  2008-10-06       Impact factor: 4.602

10.  The scientific study of inspiration in the creative process: challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Victoria C Oleynick; Todd M Thrash; Michael C LeFew; Emil G Moldovan; Paul D Kieffaber
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.