Search

This project examines the patterns of creative self-regulation across several creative domains as measured by the Inventory of Creative Activities Achievements. It will explore the psychometric properties of the recently developed and validated Creative Self-Regulation Questionnaire (CSR-Q) (see Zielinska et al., 2020).

We intend to investigate whether people prompted to use self-regulatory mechanisms (experimental group) while performing a creative task achieve better, i.e., more creative, results than people who are not prompted to do so (control group). Specific self-regulatory processes targeted in this study has been already found important for an effective realization of creative projects (Zielińska et al., 2020) yet the existing evidence requires further investigation based on more robust study designs.

International study on creativity myths

Myths about creativity and neuroscience keep contributing to their vague public conception despite growing scientific understanding of these complex areas. This study examined the prevalence of known creativity and neuroscience myths across six culturally diverse countries and explored why some people believe in them more than others. Results revealed persistent, widespread biases in the public conception of creativity and neuroscience, such as attributing creative achievements to spontaneity and chance rather than persistence and expertise or approving the facilitating effects of learning styles. Firmer belief in creativity myths was related to lower education, stronger reliance on undependable sources, and personality traits reflecting the willingness to accept questionable notions and to rely on opinions of others. Believing in myths was also related to endorsing facts, reflecting a tendency to support scientific-sounding statements. The findings highlight the need for better communication of evidence-based knowledge.

The role of metacognition in creative thinking is beyond doubt, but, so far, most research has focused on just one metacognitive subcomponent – monitoring, especially idea evaluation. Less is known about the role of metacognitive knowledge and control. Here, we present an extended theoretical conceptualization of creative metacognition that distinguishes metacognitive processes associated with pre-task, during-task, and post-task phases, followed by an empirical examination of this process-oriented approach based on an online study (N = 425). We examine effects of creative knowledge, monitoring (metacognitive feelings and discernment of others’ ideas), and control on creative performance and explore relationships with surface (creative self-concept) and core personality characteristics (openness, narcissism). Our findings indicate the involvement of various predicted metacognitive processes in creative ideation and thereby provide initial empirical support for the proposed model of creative metacognition.

In this chapter we reflect on a particular way of studying immensely high complexity, such as creativity, by investigating extraordinary achievers. The basis of our reflections are two empirical studies, one conducted in the area of haute cuisine, through interviewing top chefs, and the second conducted in the area of science, thorough interviewing Nobel Laureates. We explore why we feel that studying such extraordinary individuals can be more fruitful for better understanding creativity than trying to achieve an artificially manufactured sample that provides insights about the creative potential of the average individual. We outline the problems we see with the notion of representative samples from both conceptual as well as feasibility perspectives and offer an argument for studying the extraordinary instead.