Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T06:16:24.678Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Creative Cognition

from Cognitive Underpinnings of Creativity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2019

By
Thomas B. Ward  and
Yuliya Kolomyts
Edited by
James C. Kaufman  and
Robert J. Sternberg
James C. Kaufman
Affiliation:
University of Connecticut
Robert J. Sternberg
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

This chapter examines creativity from the perspective of the creative cognition approach. That approach views the generation of novel and useful ideas as being the result of applying basic cognitive processes to existing knowledge structures. Processes considered include the retrieval of information at various levels of abstraction, the priming of information from recent exposure to ideas, conceptual combination, and analogical thought. The chapter traces work from several modes of inquiry, including laboratory studies using specialist and nonspecialist samples, anecdotal/historical accounts, and in vivo studies of high-level creative professionals to converge on a cognitive perspective on creativity.

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity , pp. 175 - 199
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to “The social psychology of creativity.” Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Amabile, T. M. (1983). Social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashcraft, M. H. (1978). Property norms for typical and atypical items from 17 categories: A description and discussion. Memory and Cognition, 6(3), 227–232. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barlowe, W. D. & Summers, I. (1979). Barlowe’s guide to extraterrestrials. New York: Workman Publishing.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (1983). Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition, 11, 211–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barsalou, L. W. (1991). Deriving categories to achieve goals. In Bower, G. H. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 27, pp. 1–64). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Basadur, M. (1994). Managing the creative process in organizations. In Runco, M.A. (ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 237–268). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Basalla, G. (1988). The evolution of technology. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Silvia, P. J., & Schacter, D. L. (2016). Creative cognition and brain network dynamics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becker, A. H. & Ward, T. B. (1991). Children’s use of shape in extending novel labels to animate objects: Identity versus postural change. Cognitive Development, 6, 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bredart, S., Ward, T. B., & Marczewski, P. (1998). Structured imagination of novel creatures’ faces. American Journal of Psychology, 111, 607–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browne, B. A. & Cruse, D. F. (1988). The incubation effect: Illusion or illumination? Human Performance, 1(3), 177–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cacciari, C., Levorato, M. C., & Cicogna, P. (1997). Imagination at work: Conceptual and linguistic creativity in children. In Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J. (eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 145–177). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardoso, C. & Badke-Schaub, P. (2011). The influence of different pictorial representations during idea generation. Journal of Creative Behavior, 45(2), 130–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2011.tb01092.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, J., Fu, K., Schunn, C., Cagan, J., Wood, K., & Kotovsky, K. (2011). On the benefits and pitfalls of analogies for innovative design: Ideation performance based on analogical distance, commonness, and modality of examples. Journal of Mechanical Design, 133, 081004. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4004396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, J. & Schunn, C. (2015a). The impact of analogies on creative concept generation: Lessons from an in vivo study in engineering design. Cognitive Science, 39, 126–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, J. & Schunn, C. (2015b). The importance of iteration in creative conceptual combination. Cognition, 145, 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.08.008CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheng, P., Mugge, R., & Schoormans, J. P. (2014). A new strategy to reduce design fixation: Presenting partial photographs to designers. Design Studies, 35(4), 374–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2014.02.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, B.T. & Schunn, C.D. (2005). Spontaneous access and analogical incubation effects. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, B.T. & Schunn, C.D. (2007). The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and pre-inventive structure: The case of engineering design. Memory and Cognition, 35, 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chrysikou, E. G. & Weisberg, R. W. (2005). Following the wrong footsteps: Fixation effects of pictorial examples in a design problem-solving task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(5), 1134–1148.Google Scholar
Chua, R. Y. J., Yannig, , & Lemoine, J. F. (2014). The impact of culture on creativity: How cultural tightness and cultural distance affect global innovation crowdsourcing work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60, 189–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockbain, J., Vertolli, M. O., & Davies, J. (2014). Creative imagination is stable across technological media: The spore creature creator versus pencil and paper. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 48(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cropley, A. J. (1999). Creativity and cognition: Producing effective novelty. Roeper Review, 21(4), 253–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cropley, D. & Cropley, A. (2010). Functional creativity: “Products” and the generation of effective novelty. In Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.). The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 301–317), New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crouch, T. D. (1992). Why Wilbur and Orville? Some thoughts on the Wright brothers and the process of invention. In Weber, R. J. & Perkins, D. N. (eds.), Inventive minds (pp. 80–92), London: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–335). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Getzels, J. W. (1971). Discovery-oriented behavior and the originality of creative products: A study with artists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 19, 47–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dahl, D. & Moreau, P. (2002). The influence and value of analogical thinking during new product ideation. Journal of Marketing Research, 39, 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Cruz, H. (2013). Religious concepts as structured imagination. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 23(1), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2013.735495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Cruz, H. & De Smedt, J. (2010). Science as structured imagination. Journal of Creative Behavior, 44, 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodds, R. A., Smith, S. M., & Ward, T. B. (2002). The use of environmental clues during incubation. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 287–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodds, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (2003). A review of the experimental literature on incubation in problem solving and creativity. In Runco, M. A. (ed.), Creativity research handbook (Vol. 3). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Donaldson, S. R. (1992). The real story (Afterword). New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J. (eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 461–494). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estes, Z. & Ward, T. B. (2002). The emergence of novel attributes in concept modification. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldhusen, J. F. (1995). Creativity: A knowledge base, metacognitive skills, and personality factors. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29(4), 255–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldhusen, J. F. (2002). Creativity: The knowledge base and children. High Ability Studies, 13(2), 179–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finke, R. A. (1990). Creative imagery: Discoveries and inventions in visualization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Frensch, P. A. & Sternberg, R. J. (1989). Expertise and intelligent thinking: When is it worse to know better? In Sternberg, R. J. (ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 5, pp. 157–188). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Friedel, R. D., Israel, P., & Finn, B. S. (1986). Edison’s electric light: Biography of an invention. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155–170.Google Scholar
Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In Vosniadou, S. & Ortony, A. (eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., Brem, S., Ferguson, R., Wolff, P., Markman, A. B., & Forbus, K. (1997). Analogy and creativity in the works of Johannes Kepler. In Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J. (eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 403–460). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D., Holyoak, K., & Kokinov, B. (2001). The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D. & Toupin, C. (1986). Systematicity and surface similarity in the development of analogy. Cognitive Science, 10, 277–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, T., Wiley, J., Koppel, R. H., & Storm, B. C. (2017). Constraining or constructive? The effects of examples on idea novelty. The Journal of Creative Behavior, https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Getzels, J. W. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding in art. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Gick, M. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 306–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gick, M. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaveanu, V. P. (2010). Principles for a cultural psychology of creativity. Culture and Psychology, 16, 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, G. & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Gremlins in my head: Predicting stage fright in elite actors. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 32, 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, W. (1961). Synectics: The development of creative capacity. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Graf, P., Shimamura, A. P., & Squire, L. R. (1985). Priming across modalities and priming across category levels: Extending the domain of preserved function in amnesia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 386–396.Google ScholarPubMed
Hampton, J. A. (1979). Polymorphous concepts in semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(4), 441–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90246-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampton, J. A. (1997). Emergent attributes in combined concepts. In Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J. (eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 83–110). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hastie, R., Schroeder, C., & Weber, R. (1990). Creating complex social conjunction categories from simple categories. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 28, 242–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holyoak, K. & Thagard, P. (1995). Mental leaps: Analogy in creative thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Howard-Jones, P. A., Blakemore, S., Samuel, E. A., Summers, I. R., & Claxton, G. (2005). Semantic divergence and creative story generation: An fMRI investigation. Cognitive Brain Research, 25(1), 240–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2005.05.013CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jansson, D. G. & Smith, S. M. (1991). Design fixation. Design Studies, 12, 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1990). Constraints on representational change: Evidence from children’s drawing. Cognition, 34, 57–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaufman, A. B. & Kaufman, J. C. (2015). Animal creativity and innovation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C. & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The Four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., Haider, H., & Rhenius, D. (1999). Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1534–1555. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.6.1534Google Scholar
Kohn, N. W., Paulus, P. B., & Korde, R. M. (2011). Conceptual combinations and subsequent creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 23, 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.595659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohn, N. & Smith, S. M. (2009). Partly versus completely out of your mind: Effects of incubation and distraction on resolving fixation. Journal of Creative Behavior, 43, 102–118. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01309.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, Z., Miller, D. T., & Claire, T. (1990). Combining social concepts: The role of causal reasoning. Cognitive Science, 14, 551–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, B., Smith, L. B., & Jones, S. S. (1988). The importance of shape in early lexical learning. Cognitive Development, 3(3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-2014(88)90014-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, J. D. & Lehr, D. P. (2004). Conformity to experimenter-provided examples: Will people use an unusual feature? Journal of Creative Behavior, 38, 180–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, J. D. & Leynes, P.A. (2004). Manipulations that disrupt the generative stage decrease conformity to examples: Evidence from two paradigms. Memory, 12, 90–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubart, T. (2010). Cross-cultural perspectives on creativity. In Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.). The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 265–278), New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubart, T. I. & Sternberg, R. J. (1995). An investment approach to creativity. In Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 269–302). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marsh, R. L., Landau, J. D., & Hicks, J. L. (1996). How examples may (and may not) constrain creativity. Memory and Cognition, 24, 669–680.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marsh, R. L., Ward, T. B., & Landau, J. D. (1999). The inadvertent use of prior knowledge in a generative cognitive task. Memory and Cognition, 27, 94–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1258–1265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mobley, M. I., Doares, L. M., & Mumford, M. D. (1992). Process analytic models of creative capacities: Evidence for the combination and reorganization process. Creativity Research Journal, 5, 125–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreau, C. P. & Dahl, D. W. (2005). Designing the solution: The impact of constraints on consumers’ creativity, Journal of Consumer Research, 32(1), 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, R. G., McCarthy, S. W., & Molony, J. M. (2017). The experience of insight follows incubation in the compound remote associates task. Journal of Creative Behavior, 51, 180–187. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mumford, M. D. & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity Syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Mobley, M. I., Uhlman, C. E., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Doares, L. M. (1991). Process analytic models of creative thought. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 91–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Redmond, M. R. (1994). Problem construction and cognition: Applying problem representations in ill-defined problems. In Runco, M. A. (ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 3–39). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Niu, W. & Sternberg, R. J. (2001). Cultural influences on artistic creativity and its evaluation. International Journal of Psychology, 36, 225–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okada, T. & Ishibashi, K. (2016). Imitation, inspiration, and creation: Cognitive process of creative drawing by copying others’ artworks. Cognitive Science, https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perkins, D. N. (1997). Creativity’s camel: The role of analogy in invention. In Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J. (eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 523–538). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10227-019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purcell, A. T. & Gero, J. S. (1996). Design and other types of fixation. Design Studies, 17, 363–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roskos-Ewoldsen, B., Intons-Peterson, M. J., & Anderson, R. A. (eds.). (1993). Imagery, creativity, and discovery: A cognitive perspective, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers (North-Holland).Google Scholar
Rothenberg, A. (1979). The emerging goddess. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, A. & Sobel, R. S. (1980). Creation of literary metaphors as stimulated by superimposed versus separated visual images. Journal of Mental Imagery, 4, 79–91.Google Scholar
Rubin, D. C. & Kontis, T. C. (1983). A schema for common cents. Memory and Cognition, 11, 335–341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Runco, M. A. & Chand, I. (1994). Conclusions concerning problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. In Runco, M. A. (ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 217–290). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A. & Chand, I. (1995). Cognition and creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 243–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seifert, C. M., Meyer, D. E., Davidson, N., Patalano, A. L., & Yaniv, I. (1994). Demystification of cognitive insight: Opportunistic assimilation and the prepared-mind perspective. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 65–124). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seifert, C. M. & Patalano, A. L. (2001). Opportunism in memory: Preparing for chance encounters. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(6), 198–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silvia, P. J., Kaufman, J. C., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Wigert, B. (2011). Cantankerous creativity: Honesty–humility, agreeableness, and the HEXACO structure of creative achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(5), 687–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (1997). Creativity in personality, developmental, and social psychology: Any links with cognitive psychology. In Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J. (eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 309–324). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. M. (1995a). Fixation, incubation, and insight in memory and creative thinking. In Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (eds.), The creative cognition approach (135–156). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S. M. (1995b). Getting into and out of mental ruts: A theory of fixation, incubation, and insight. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 229–250). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S. M. & Blankenship, S. E. (1989). Incubation effects. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 27, 311–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. M. & Blankenship, S. E. (1991). Incubation and the persistence of fixation in problem solving. American Journal of Psychology, 104, 61–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, S. M., Gerkens, D. R., & Angello, G. (2017). Alternating incubation effects in the generation of category exemplars. Journal of Creative Behavior, 51, 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (1995). The creative cognition approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Schumacher, J. S. (1993). Constraining effects of examples in a creative generation task. Memory and Cognition, 21, 837–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sobel, R. S. & Rothenberg, A. (1980). Artistic creation as stimulated by superimposed versus separated visual images. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 953–961.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sternberg, R. J. (1988). A three-facet model of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives (pp. 125–147). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. (1995). Defying the crowd. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51, 677–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tennie, C., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Ratcheting up the ratchet: On the evolution of cumulative culture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364, 2405–2415. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0052CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thagard, P. (1984). Conceptual combination and scientific discovery. In Asquith, P. & Kitcher, P. (eds.), PSA, 1, East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Tourangeau, R. & Rips, L. (1991). Interpreting and evaluating metaphors. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 452–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tourangeau, R. & Sternberg, R. J. (1981). Aptness in metaphor. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 27–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tourangeau, R. & Sternberg, R. J. (1982). Understanding and appreciating metaphors. Cognition, 11, 203–244.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Treffinger, D. J., Isaksen, S. G., & Dorval, K. B. (1994). Creative problem solving: An overview. In Runco, M.A. (ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 223–236). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Tversky, B. & Hemenway, K. (1984). Objects, parts, and categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113(2), 169–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.113.2.169CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt Brace and Company.Google Scholar
Ward, T. B. (1994). Structured imagination: The role of conceptual structure in exemplar generation. Cognitive Psychology, 27, 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T. B. (1995). What’s old about new ideas? In Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 157–178). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ward, T. B. (2001). Creative cognition, conceptual combination and the creative writing of Stephen R. Donaldson. American Psychologist, 56, 350–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T. B. (2008). The role of domain knowledge in creative generation. Learning and Individual Differences, 18(4), 363–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T. B. (2015). Content, collaboration and creativity in virtual worlds. In Green, G. & Kaufman, J. (eds.). Video Games and Creativity. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ward, T. B. (2018). Creativity as a continuum. In Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.), The nature of human creativity (pp. 335–350). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T. B., Dodds, R. A., Saunders, K. N., & Sifonis, C. M. (2000). Attribute centrality and imaginative thought. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1387–1397.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ward, T. B., Finke, R. A., & Smith, S. M. (1995). Creativity and the mind: Discovering the genius within. New York: Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-3330-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T. B., Patterson, M. J. & Sifonis, C. (2004). The role of specificity and abstraction in creative idea generation. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T. B., Patterson, M. J., Sifonis, C. M., Dodds, R. A., & Saunders, K. N. (2002). The role of graded category structure in imaginative thought. Memory and Cognition, 30, 199–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ward, T. B., Saunders, K. N., & Dodds, R. A. (1999). Creative cognition in gifted adolescents. Roeper Review, 21, 260–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T. B. & Sifonis, S. M. (1997). Task demands and generative thinking: What changes and what remains the same? Journal of Creative Behavior, 31, 245–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T. B. & Sonneborn, M. S. (2009). Creative expression in virtual environments: Imitation, imagination and individualized collaboration. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 3, 211–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T. B. & Wickes, K. N. S. (2009). Stable and dynamic properties of graded category structure in imaginative thought. Creativity Research Journal, 21, 15–23. https://doi-org.libdata.lib.ua.edu/10.1080/10400410802633376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (1995). Case studies of creative thinking: Reproduction versus restructuring in the real world. In Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 53–72). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (2006 ). Creativity: Understanding innovation in problem solving, science, invention, and the arts. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
White, J. H. (1978). The American railroad passenger car. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Wilkenfeld, M. J. & Ward, T. B. (2001). Similarity and emergence in conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yi, X., Hu, W., Scheithauer, H., & Niu, W. (2013). Cultural and bilingual influences on artistic creativity performances: Comparison of German and Chinese students. Creativity Research Journal, 25(1), 97–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2013.752260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yi, X., Plucker, J. A., & Guo, J. (2015). Modeling influences on divergent thinking and artistic creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 16, 1662–1668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2015.02.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Youmans, R. J. (2011). The effects of physical prototyping and group work on the reduction of design fixation. Design Studies, 32(2), 115–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2010.08.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, L., Proctor, R. W., & Salvendy, G. (2011). Fostering creativity in product and service development: Validation in the domain of information technology. Human Factors, 53(3), 245–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720811409219CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.2 AAA

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

The HTML of this chapter complies with version 2.2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), offering more comprehensive accessibility measures for a broad range of users and attains the highest (AAA) level of WCAG compliance, optimising the user experience by meeting the most extensive accessibility guidelines.

Content Navigation

Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.

Reading Order & Textual Equivalents

Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.

Visual Accessibility

Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×