Search

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.

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.

Self-report scales have become the most widely used instruments to capture people's self-perception of creativity. Previous studies, however, provided only a limited insight into the psychometric properties of such measures. This paper reports an extensive item response theory (IRT) analysis of the Short Scale of Creative Self (SSCS): one of the most frequently used scales of creative self-concept. Based on samples from 14 studies (overall N > 26,000), we report IRT parameters of creative self-efficacy and creative personal identity scales' items. We examined whether the scores obtained in the SSCS depend on the length of the response scale (5-versus-7-point Likert scales) and whether latent scores are comparable across different data collection methods (online, paper-and-pencil, phone), age, and gender. The results confirmed the two-factor structure of the SSCS, good psychometric properties of its items, as well as invariance regarding response scales, age, gender, and method of data collection. At the same time, the items (and consequently--scales) were easy in the psychometrical sense, thus providing much more reliable scores among individuals who scored low or medium in creative self-concept. Longer (7-point) and shorter (5-point) Likert scales performed similarly, with some psychometric arguments favoring fewer points on the scale. Gender differences were negligible (Cohen's d between 0.00 and 0.01). We discuss potential ways of further improvement and development of the SSCS.

The present study explored the public conceptualization of creativity on Twitter through co-listed hashtags associated with #creativity in a million tweets. Exploratory Graph Analysis was used to identify a network of semantic clusters, and a pre-trained language model yielded the sentiment of the underlying tweets. The semantic clusters reflect well-known everyday creative domains focused on visual and digital arts, storytelling, and handicraft. Other clusters paid tribute to the role of mind-sets, teams, and imagination, feature business and innovation, and stress the importance of creativity for mental health. In addition, we compared the resulting network to one of #innovation, which had a higher prevalence of technological clusters relating to areas of digital transformation. Both networks are vastly positive, suggesting that the exhibition of potential and success outweighs tweeting about obstacles and failure. Our study provides a bottom-up socio-cultural snapshot of lay conceptualizations of creativity, highlighting commonalities and differences with theorized conceptualizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although personality is vital for creative achievement, little is known about the personality profiles of eminent creators from different domains. The role personality plays in being recognized and acclaimed by public opinion is even more overlooked. In our study, we performed linguistic analyses of postaward interviews on a large sample (N = 225) of Nobel Prize laureates (1957–2019) in art (literature) and science (chemistry, economic sciences, medicine, and physics) to infer creators' personalities. We examined (a) between-domain differences in personality and (b) the links between personality and professional (space devoted to laureates in Encyclopedia Britannica) and popular (the number of language versions of Wikipedia profiles) recognition. When compared to scientists, writers were more open, introvert, and neurotic and less conscientious. While personality was not related to the space devoted to laureates in Encyclopedia Britannica, the number of Wikipedia language versions was not only much higher for writers than for scientists but also positively linked with writers' Openness and Extraversion and negatively linked with their Agreeableness. We discuss the results in light of between-domain differences in personality and in light of the mechanisms of creative people gaining recognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]