跳去內容

創意

出自維基百科,自由嘅百科全書
(由創造力跳轉過嚟)
各種展示人類創意嘅活動:

創意粵拼cong3 ji3),又叫創造力粵拼cong3 zou6 lik6),指一個個體諗出又有用諗頭嘅能力,可以當係智能嘅重要一環[1][2]。呢種能力可以透過好多方法展現,舉幾個例說明:

呀噉。响廿一世紀初嘅認知科學上,創意研究相當受注目,有好多認知科學家都出於好奇想窺探人腦係用咗咩認知功能嚟產生新又有用嘅諗頭嘅,會建立一啲理論模型嚟描述創意涉及嘅認知過程[6];另一方面,管理等應用領域嘅工作者又有興趣想睇呢啲研究,意圖想運用呢啲知識,諗吓有冇方法能夠提高員工做嘢嗰陣創新嘅能力[7][8]

定義

[編輯]
2012 年有班細路喺度畫畫;佢個裏面發生咩事,令佢可以諗出一幅有創意嘅圖呢?
睇埋:認知諗頭創新

要研究創意,首先要定義「創意」呢隻詞;喺廿一世紀初嘅認知心理學上,創意俾人當係一種認知功能噉研究,而至於呢隻詞要點定義,有認知心理學家就喺 2003 年嗰陣撰文噉講[1]:p. 5 [註 1]

粵語翻譯:... 不過,喺對上嗰一個十年之內,我哋(研究創意嘅認知心理學工作者)似乎達到咗一個普遍嘅共識,覺得創意包括創造新、有用嘅產品。

一般認為,有用係創意嘅兩大重要特徵[2][6],想像:

  • 一嚿有用但唔新嘅嘢,定義上唔可以算係創意;
  • 一嚿新但冇用嘅嘢,都難以算得上係創意[9]
    • 想像家陣畫畫,一位創作人查實可以隨機噉產生一幅圖像出嚟,即係 foreach 畫布上嘅隨機揀隻色水填落去;喺絕大多數情況下,噉做係就係會產生一幅前所未有嘅圖像,但唔會產生咩令睇畫人鍾意(用途)嘅產品嘅-即係冇用
    • 想像家陣寫作,一位創作人查實可以隨機噉產生一段文字出嚟,即係將啲字逐隻逐隻噉打出嚟,當中每隻字都係完全隨機噉揀嘅;喺絕大多數情況下,噉做係就係會產生一段前所未有嘅字,但段字會完全語無倫次,更加唔好講話娛樂得到讀者(用途)-即係冇用
    • 抽象化啲噉講,創作嘅過程可以想像成一個人搜尋一個由「可能嘅產品」組成嘅空間,呢個空間當中絕大多數嘅產品都係冇用嘅,而創作人要由個空間嗰度搵一件有用嘅可能產品,再整件嘢出嚟;

淨係齋靠諗經已可知,創意必然會涉及多種嘅認知功能:做創作嘅個體要界定個問題、嘗試搵可能嘅答案、仲有係監察住自己件產品係咪達到自己目的... 呀噉,途中會用到思考解難決策等嘅多種認知功能[10]

值得一提嘅係,有啲學者仲主張要分清楚創意同創新[e 1]係兩個唔同嘅概念:佢哋強調創意淨係指「產生新同有用嘅諗頭」當中涉及嘅認知過程,而創新就係指實行呢啲諗頭,將諗頭轉化成行動最後整出一件成品;當一個人喺商業環境當中做呢啲嘢嗰陣,佢嘅表現會受到(例如)佢工作場所嘅設計影響-所以創新嘅概念吸引咗唔少管理學方面嘅學者注意[7][11]。呢篇文會跟返呢條對「創意」同「創新」嘅分界-篇文會集中講「產生新同有用嘅諗頭」當中涉及嘅認知過程。

創意大細

[編輯]
睇埋:天才發白日夢

創意唔一定要對世界有大影響。喺廿一世紀創意研究上,創意有得按「影響力有幾大」嚟分做四大種[註 2][12][13]

  • 創意[e 2]:泛指一啲對後世產生巨大影響嘅創意,甚至有全球性嘅影響力,例子包括愛因斯坦相對論莎士比亞劇作古典樂嘅好多首名、以及係達文西嘅著名油畫蒙娜麗莎》... 呀噉;呢種創意極之少見,而且有陣時可能仲要係原創人死咗之後先至得到賞識[14]
  • 創意[e 3]:泛指一啲細規模嘅創意,好似係一個普通人得閒貪得意畫幅畫俾朋友睇,佢哋唔會預自己嘅作品對後世產生咩影響,但可能對佢啲朋友同屋企人嚟講有特別嘅價值;呢種創意喺日常生活度隨處可見;
  • 有學者仲進一步提出所謂嘅專業創意[e 4]微型創意[e 5]
    • 專業創意係指一個展示嘅創意去到世界級水平(專業),例如一位作家成功寫出咗幾本暢銷書,但未肯定佢上唔上到去大創意嘅層次-大創意好多時都要喺原作者死咗之後先出名嘅,亦有大把創作品喺作者生前俾人覺得係大創意,但打後俾後世嘅人遺忘;據估計,就算係一個天資高嘅人,都要練最少 10 年嘅時間先可以達到專業創意嘅水平[15]
    • 微型創意係指一啲極微細、唔會產生出咩產物嘅創意,例如一個人喺日常生活當中思考嗰陣都有可能諗到一啲自己先前未諗過(但可能其他人諗過)嘅諗法同計仔,又或者係發白日夢嗰陣作出「如果當時噉做... 而家就會」噉嘅思考[16][17];呢類噉嘅諗頭同計仔對其他人嚟講未必有價值,但對個人嚟講可能有價值。

上述呢種分類法就係所謂嘅 4C 模型[12]

認知理論

[編輯]

「(創意係)由平常(認知)過程產生嘅唔平常結果。」[註 3][18]:p. 681

創意喺認知心理學上係一個大課題。就噉齋靠諗經已可以想像到,創意會涉及好多唔同嘅認知功能[19]

  • 記憶:創意好多時都涉及攞舊有嘅諗頭以新穎嘅方式結合(睇下面概念混成),所以創作者梗要記得舊諗頭同埋識諗返起呢啲諗頭[20],而事實係研究表明,記憶提取嘅過程有陣時會令一件記憶走樣,而呢點有可能引起新嘅諗頭[21]
  • 注意力:原則上,唔尋常嘅注意力規律(例如係個人傾向會留意一般人唔會留意嘅資訊)係創意嘅一個可能來源,而實證嘅研究表明,創意同好多注意力異常嘅狀態有相關
  • 想像:想像係指喺入面組合一啲唔能夠由周圍環境度感知到嘅資訊,例如「喺腦海入面想像一個蘋果嘅樣」表示個人唔靠周圍環境入面見到嘅蘋果嚟喺腦入面建立一幅影像;創意定義上就係諗出新嘅諗頭,新即係表示個諗頭代表嘅事物唔存在喺周圍環境入面,表示個人實係要喺腦入面想像個諗頭出嚟。

... 呀噉。

兩種思考

[編輯]

諗嘢嘅過程可以按「出發點係咪想要『諗出一個單一答案』」分做兩大種-聚斂型[e 6]擴散型[e 7][22]

  • 聚斂型思考係指一場諗嘢過程集中於諗出一個單一嘅答案嚟解答一條問題:喺呢種情況下,條問題有一個單一嘅「正確」答案,呢個答案係「最好最啱」嘅(或者最少諗嘢嗰個人係噉認為),而第啲答案冚唪唥都係「錯」-例子有典型測驗考試入面嗰啲選擇題噉,俾 A B C D 四個選擇,當中得一個選擇算係正確答案會攞到分;呢類思考睇重嘅係答問題嗰陣嘅速度同埋準確度,涉及個人運用熟識嘅技巧同提取啲用開嘅資訊,呢種思考方法通常都唔鼓勵創意,但喺日常生活當中好有用[23]
  • 擴散型思考就唔同,指場諗嘢過程會探索好多唔同嘅可能答案:喺呢種情況下,條問題冇咩單一「正確」答案(或者最少諗嘢嗰個人係噉認為),諗嘢嗰個人可以諗到多個唔同嘅答案,當中可能某啲答案會比較能夠有效噉解答條問題,但唔會話得一個係明顯正確答案;想像有個人俾人叫佢寫作寫篇短篇故仔出嚟,但唔指定個故仔實要係乜乜乜樣,有好多個可能嘅答案(只要寫得夠好)都能夠達到令人滿意嘅結果-可能係一個講人工智能科幻故仔又得、一個建基於希臘神話奇幻故仔又得、一個講吸血鬼恐怖故仔又得... 呀噉。如果畫做圖嘅話,就會好似下面幅圖噉,一個刺激(俾人要求佢諗答案)引致好多個唔同嘅可能答案[24]

亦都有心理學研究指,人同人之間喺聚斂型思考同擴散型思考上有個體差異-有啲人比較傾向用聚斂型思考,有啲人比較傾向用擴散型思考[25]。創意需要嘅係兩種思考方式之間嘅平衡-個人要能夠擴散式噉諗一大拃可能嘅諗頭出嚟,然後聚斂式噉搵出「呢啲諗頭當中邊個最掂」[26]

諗頭潛伏

[編輯]
創意好多時都涉及創作人突然諗到計仔,而呢個體驗成日俾人畫做「入面有個燈膽突然間著咗」。
内文:諗頭潛伏

諗頭潛伏[e 8]係認知心理學上嘅一個概念,指一個人喺嘗試解決一個問題嘅途中,將個問題暫時擺埋一邊先,同時佢個腦仲繼續無意識噉諗個問題嘅嘢,往往最後會帶嚟新嘅諗法:認知心理學家睇咗好似愛因斯坦噉俾人話係天才嘅人,分析呢啲天才點樣描述自己諗嘢嘅過程;認知心理學家發覺,天才嘅諗嘢過程好多時都係噉[27][28]

  1. 天才嘗試解個問題,但諗唔到解決方法,撞板;
  2. 天才跟住就將個問題擺埋一邊,走去做第啲嘢;
  3. 天才做做吓第啲嘢,腦入面突然出現一個之前未諗過嘅解決方法-諗到一個又新又有用(創意)嘅諗頭;
  4. 成功解決問題。

如果將上述嘅過程畫做圖,Y 軸做「問題解決嘅程度」(;數值愈高表示離「成功解決」愈接近),X 軸做時間;由呢條線度睇得出,天才初頭解唔到個問題(),跟住响「將個問題擺咗埋一邊」期間, 喺一段短時間內勁升,最後解決問題 [29][30]

好多認知心理學家都有就「突然出現一個諗頭打前,個腦到底發生咗咩事」作出假說元分析表示,「暫時將個問題擺埋一邊先」的確有助人諗新計嚟解難[30];有心理學家主張,「暫時放低個問題」有助一個人遺忘啲固有(不嬲用開)但無助於解決問題嘅諗頭(睇埋啟發法),而唔放低個問題只會搞到個人繼續嘥時間精神用啲固有方法;同時喺「做緊第啲嘢」嗰段期間個人嘅腦仲係無意識噉繼續思考緊嗰個問題,而且係用直覺嘅方式;於是啲人就打咗個比喻-喺「做緊第啲嘢」嗰段期間,個人嘅腦仲係暗中諗緊個問題,好似個諗頭「潛伏」緊噉[31][32]

概念混成

[編輯]
内文:概念混成

概念混成理論[e 9]係一套嘗試解釋「新計仔係點出現」嘅認知理論。根據呢套理論,無論係藝術科學工程,有用嘅新計仔(創意)其中一個最緊要嘅來源係所謂嘅概念混成過程-概念混成最基本上就係將唔同嘅概念結合組成新嘅概念。理論化啲噉講,概念混成嘅過程大致如下[33][34]

  • 想像人腦入面有個概念結合網絡[e 10],一個噉嘅網絡由四嚿元件[註 4]組成-
    • 兩個有某啲關係(例如係咁啱一齊出現)嘅 input 空間,Input space 1 同 Input space 2;
    • 一個通用空間[e 11],包含所有空間嘅共有結構;
    • 一個混成空間[e 12],由兩個 input 空間同通用空間嘅嘢結合成嘅諗頭。呢個新諗頭可能會有 input 唔具有嘅特性,例如由新諗頭度推想出嚟嘅內容,或者第啲類型嘅闡述
  • 舉個例說明,想像有一位外科醫生幫個病人開刀,呢位外科醫生技術唔掂搞到個病人死咗;跟住有個人為咗鬧呢位醫生打咗個比喻,話佢「似個屠夫多過似個外科醫生」[35]
    • 通用空間入面有「郁手做嘢嘅人」、「利器」同埋「有個個體俾人劏開,死咗」噉嘅多個概念;
    • Input space 1 係外科醫生(郁手做嘢嘅人)、手術刀(利器)同病人(俾人劏開,死咗);
    • Input space 2 係屠夫(郁手做嘢嘅人)、菜刀(利器)同牲畜(俾人劏開,死咗);
    • 混成空間將兩個概念溝埋一齊,最後出咗句攞嚟鬧嗰位醫生嘅比喻(一件細創意)。

概念混成理論指出,噉嘅過程係創意以至文化演變嘅一大源頭:好多時人响諗嘢嗰陣,都會(例如)發覺某啲已知嘅概念之間有某啲共通點,跟住佢哋嘅腦會做概念混成,砌出新嘅諗頭-簡單嘅有好似上述例子噉嘅話語或者比喻;如是者,隨住一個文化內部嘅諗頭互相碰撞,就會係噉產生新嘅諗頭[註 5]。進階嘅概念混成理論仲有講到「唔同嘅概念可以透過多種唔同方式嚟混成」噉嘅諗法,可以用嚟解釋唔同型式嘅概念結合現象[34][36]

個體差異

[編輯]
睇埋:心理測量

創意量度

[編輯]

喺廿一世紀,對創意嘅研究屬心理學-尤其係認知心理學-嘅範疇,認知心理學家會用各種方法嚟量度創意(量度係科學方法嘅必要一環),然後再做統計分析睇吓創意會受咩因素影響,簡單例子有用心理測量設計、攞嚟量度創意嘅心理測驗[37],或者一啲標準化嘅測試用嚟量度一件產品嘅創意[38],再用統計相關睇吓「創意值」同啲咩變數有啦掕[37][39]

不過就算到咗 2020 年代,「創意要點量度」喺心理學上依然係一條幾有爭議性嘅問題[40]

  • 創意商數[e 13]係預想中一啲由標準化測驗嗰度得出、用嚟量度創意嘅數值:認知心理學係科學,就要跟科學方法做嘢,所以要求研究者一定要用客觀嘅方法量度研究緊嘅變數;喺廿一世紀初嘅認知心理學界,智商測驗[e 14]係其中一種最出名嘅量度架生,簡化噉講智商測驗係要受試者答一拃反映智能嘅問題,睇吓每位受試者喺拃問題上嘅得分同平均得分爭幾遠-如果話一位受試者智商 係 100 分,即係話佢嘅得分啱啱好等如平均值,而如果話一位受試者智商係 130 分,意思就係話佢嘅得分啱啱比平均高兩個標準差咁多;有人主張,創意可以同樣噉用「喺多種用途實驗等嘅測驗上嘅得分,同平均爭幾遠」嚟得出一個商數-呢個商數就係創意商數[37][41]
  • 响創意研究上,其中一種最出名嘅量度方法係所謂嘅多種用途實驗[e 15],做法如下:搵 n 個受試者返嚟,逐個逐個叫佢哋去實驗室度;到咗實驗室,就俾一件物體(例如一嚿磚頭)個受試者,要佢喺限時之內諗吓件物體有咩可能嘅功能,例如一嚿磚頭除咗可以攞嚟起建築物之外,仲可以攞嚟做武器,或者砸住張等張紙唔會俾吹走;受試者講完佢諗到嗰啲用途之後,研究者就會搵一套標準化嘅方案嚟評估「創意有幾高」,包括[42][43]
The puzzle
The solution
好似九點謎題[e 17]噉嘅洞察力測驗亦都成日俾人攞嚟展示「喺個盒以外諗嘢」或者創意。九點謎題係噉嘅:家陣有九點(左圖),受試者要用支一嘢畫四條直線將九點連埋一齊,途中支筆唔可以離開張紙,而且支筆唔可以畫同一條線多過一次;右圖係九點謎題嘅答案-事實表明,廿世紀嘅受試者好多時都諗住「啲線一定要喺嗰九點成嘅隱形正方形裏面」(),諗唔到呢個簡單嘅答案[47]

同智能

[編輯]

「創意係智能喺度開心緊。」[註 6][48]

由廿世紀初以嚟,心理學家一路都好關注「智能同創意之間有咩啦掕」呢條問題[49][50]。喺廿一世紀初嘅認知科學上,「智能」呢隻詞大致上可以定義做「一個個體感知同推斷資訊、將呢啲資訊儲起同化為知識、並且用知識適應環境嘅能力」[51];原則上,創意係解決某啲問題嗰陣必要用到嘅一種資訊處理能力,所以理應會同智能有正相關,而事實係廿世紀尾至廿一世紀初好多份研究都表明,創意(用多種唔同方法量度)同智商-尤其係唔使靠知識嚟展示嘅智能-有顯著嘅正相關[39][52],當中啲統計相關數值由 .20 左右[53][54]至去到成 .50 左右嘅都有[53]

對於「智能同創意之間具體係成咩關係」,廿一世紀初認知科學主要有以下呢啲觀點[55]

  • 觀點 1 -創意係智能嘅其中一環:廿一世紀初最常見嘅觀點;喺呢種觀點下,智能(想像下圖個 )由多件因素(下圖嗰拃 )組成,圖入面嘅箭咀係「箭咀前嗰件因素主宰箭咀後嗰件因素」,精確啲噉講係-
    ... 呀噉(啲 函數);
  • 觀點 2 -智能係創意嘅其中一環:呢種觀點係將觀點 1 掉返轉,主張智能係創意嘅其中一個因素-創意並唔係一種單一嘅認知功能,而係涉及咗多種唔同嘅功能,包括係產生新諗頭嘅能力、辨識唔同諗頭「邊個啱用啲」嘅能力... 呀噉,而智能就主宰咗創意要用到嘅其中一啲功能,所以算係創意嘅一環[58][59]
  • 觀點 3 -智能係創意嘅其中一個必要條件:有啲研究者主張,要展示出創意,個人嘅智能必需有返咁上下高先至得,智能唔夠高(過唔到門檻值[e 18])嘅話,個人嘅創意就展現唔到出嚟,但當一個人嘅智能過咗門檻值,智能就唔會再點影響佢嘅創意展現[50];事實係有實證嘅研究發現,智商(一個反映智能嘅數值)同創意之間嘅關係會受制於「智商有幾高」-有好幾份研究都發現,喺一般人當中,智商同創意之間有幾強嘅正相關,相關喺 .20 至 .50(算係幾強)左右,但喺資優(IQ ≥ 130)嘅人當中兩者嘅相關會去到 0(冇相關)咁滯[註 7][53]

... 等等。

同性格

[編輯]

心理學家亦都相當關注「性格同創意之間有咩啦掕」呢條問題。性格泛指一啲描述人嘅行為認知或者情緒嘅變數,會喺個體之間有差異,又會喺個體內部穩定,例如如果話一個人外向鍾意講嘢,意思即係話佢平均講嘢嘅量傾向高過其他人(個體間差異),而且佢响多數時間都會講嘢講得多(個體內穩定)[60];一個特質[e 19]係一個可以喺人同人之間有差異嘅心理行為變數[61]。根據廿一世紀初嘅心理學知識,以下呢啲性格特質同創意有明顯嘅相關[62][63]

  • 經驗開放度[e 20]:經驗開放度係五大性格特質之一,大致上反映緊一個人有幾鍾意享受唔同嘅體驗;經驗開放度高嘅人傾向會鍾意藝術而且充滿好奇心,鍾意走去試好多唔同嘅體驗,亦都有可能會因為貪新鮮而走去做出一啲冒險嘅行為,例如係貪新鮮走去吸毒[64];一般認為,有創意嘅人會傾向經驗開放度比較高(正相關),呢點經已受到多份研究加埋元分析嘅支撐[65][66]
  • 衝動[e 21]同相關嘅特質:衝動係一種性格特質,大致上係指個人做嘢唔諗後果,傾向唔睇重長遠利益[67];呢啲人亦都傾向容易對已經感受過嘅刺激覺得,想去追求新刺激(可以睇埋感覺追求嘅嘢)-即係例如一隻電子遊戲,一個衝動程度低嘅人可能要打隻遊戲打足成個月先開始覺得悶,但一個衝動程度高嘅人可能打咗一個禮拜經已開始覺悶想要有新嘅遊戲玩;因為衝動嘅人傾向想要係噉感受新嘅嘢,所以俾人覺得理應同創意有正相關,而呢點受到唔少個別研究[68]以至元分析[65]支撐。

... 等等。

創意管理

[編輯]
一個人做做吓嘢喺度;有唔少管理學者都指出,適量嘅玩能夠有效噉提高員工嘅創意[69]
内文:創新管理

創新管理[e 22]管理上嘅一樣工作,指管理者做出各種嘅措施-例如係改變份工嘅設計或者工作場所嘅安排噉,嚟左右一個組織入面嘅創新,通常係想令到啲員工做起創新相關工作(例如係設計新嘅產品)嗰陣效率表現有咁高得咁高;創意係創新嘅必要一環,所以呢啲領域嘅工作者成日都會參考上述啲心理學研究,想靠呢啲知識度吓有咩方法可以提升員工嘅創意[7][70]

根據廿一世紀初嘅主流觀點,想提高員工嘅創意,主要需要諗三大因素[70][71]

  1. 專家知識:喺創意嘅過程當中,創作者齋係諗咗個諗頭出嚟係唔夠嘅,仲要識得批判個諗頭,分析個諗頭係咪行得通,呢個過程梗會要求個創作者對自己做緊嘅嘢有返咁上下專家知識(包括講唔出、落手做嘅知識[72])-例如想像家陣有位建築師要做建築設計,佢諗咗個嶄新嘅設計方案出嚟,跟住仲需要考慮埋「棟建築物噉設計法會唔會穩陣噉企到喺度」噉嘅問題,而呢個過程要求佢一定要對建築工程相關知識有返咁上下熟。
  2. 諗嘢技巧:人同人之間喺諗嘢嘅方式上可以有差異,好似係上面提到,有啲人比較傾向用聚斂型思考,成日覺得條條問題都有一個所謂嘅「正確答案」,而呢種噉嘅諗嘢方式俾人指係會阻礙一個人嘅創意,令佢唔會主動噉去諗多個唔同方法去解決一條問題[25];有唔少管理方面嘅工作者都會嘗試由呢點入手,喺諗嘢方式上提點啲員工。
  3. 動機,尤其係內在動機[e 23]:人做嘢嘅動機可以分做外在內在兩大類;外在動機係指個人做一樣嘢係為咗想要攞到某啲回報(例如),一冇咗嗰樣回報就唔會再想做嗰樣嘢,例如冇錢冇人迫嘅話就唔開工;而內在動機就係指個人做一樣嘢係因為覺得樣嘢過癮或者「有意義」,就算冇回報都會照做,例如一位老師覺得教書好有意義,就算冇糧出冇人迫佢,佢都肯用自己工餘時間幫啲學生補習;一般認為,內在動機係最能夠激發創意嘅[73]

呢三大因素好多時都相輔相成-一個人有動機做嘢,佢就會日積月累噉學到更多嘅知識,而一個人知識增加又有可能令佢學識更多唔同嘅諗嘢方式(可以睇吓後設認知相關嘅嘢),一個人嘅諗嘢方式又有可能會影響返佢嘅動機轉頭-例如一個人成日都諗住做嘢係要搵一個正確答案嚟搵錢嘅人,內在動機應該唔會好高[74][75]

有咗呢樣知識,管理者可以用好多方法嚟提升員工嘅創意,而提升創意嘅手法就係所謂嘅創意技巧[e 24][註 8]:舉個簡單例子,心理學研究已知,高嘅自主性[e 25]指一個人覺得自己對做緊嗰樣嘢有幾多自由可以揀想做嘅方法)能夠有效噉提升一個人嘅內在動機[76];而建基於呢點,管理者可以俾員工做彈性工時嘅安排-即係淨係要求員工定時交貨,由得佢哋喺一日咩時間做都得,唔使一定要喺邊段邊段時間之內個人喺辦公室,等員工有更高嘅自主性;除此之外,腦力激盪法[e 26]係另一種成日用嘅創意技巧,指一班人圍埋一齊係噉諗同講啲諗頭出嚟,然後最後大家一齊評價啲諗頭[77][78]-大家交流自己嘅專家知識同諗嘢方式。實證嘅研究指,呢類噉嘅手法的確能夠或多或少噉提高員工嘅創新能力[79]

創意限制

[編輯]
内文:創意限制

創意限制[e 27]係有關提升創意嘅一個概念,指一位管理者特登對員工(或者係老師學生)設下一啲限制-包括時間限制、材料限制、或者限住佢哋唔准用某啲方法呀噉,並且想用呢樣嘢嚟提升創意。對於「創意限制係能夠有效噉提升創意」呢個觀點,學界同商界係有人支持又有人反對嘅[80][81]

  • 支持方嘅主要論點係噉:人做嘢嗰陣通常都係會用習慣用開嘅方法-覺得用開掂,就會一路係噉用住(睇埋啟發法等嘅概念),所以如果想啲員工用吓新方法嚟做嘢諗嘢(創意嘅必要條件),就實要令啲既有嘅做嘢方法行唔通,啲員工先會有動力去搵新方法做嘢諗嘢,所以設下限制係能夠提升創意嘅[82][83]
  • 反對方嘅主要論點就係噉:人要展現創意,就實要有空間俾佢哋自由噉探索;人要有動機探索,就需要覺得自己唔受即時嘅威脅(可以睇吓嘅概念)[84],所以如果想啲員工能夠自主噉探索唔同嘅做嘢諗嘢方法,就需要俾佢哋有充裕嘅資源(包括時間同材料等),如果唔係佢哋就會進入防守狀態,唔敢亂咁試新嘢[85]

亦都有啲人提出比較中庸嘅觀點,認為現實嘅情況係複雜嘅,「創意限制對創意有利定有害」視乎情況-創意限制喺某啲情況下對創意有利,喺另一啲情況下對創意有害。到咗 2020 年代,學界同商界都仲係喺度研究緊呢條問題,未有一致嘅共識[86][87]

一個覺得做嘢壓力好大嘅人;反對創意限制嘅觀點:「如果有個人覺得自己可能就嚟連份工都冇埋,佢仲敢唔敢試新嘢?」

概念史

[編輯]
一件古希臘雕塑描繪繆思;古希臘嘅人相信繆思會將神聖知識賜俾人[88]
睇埋:心靈哲學

遠古時期

[編輯]
睇埋:繆思

遠古文明-包括古希臘古華夏古印度在內-嘅人好多時都冇「創意」呢一個概念[89]

  • 公元前公元後頭嗰五個世紀,的確有少量嘅文獻有提及「創意」或者類似嘅諗法,例如春秋時期齊國名書《考工記》入面就有提過「知者創物,巧者述之守之」噉嘅諗法-意思係指「有智慧嘅人創造事物,而技術了得嘅人跟住先人嘅思路嚟整嘢同維持呢啲傳統」[90][91]
  • 另一方面,又有唔少古文明哲學家主張,藝術上嘅創作係發現(搵出啲可能性)而唔係發明-好似係古希臘人噉,佢哋嘅語言裏面似乎並冇創作或者創造噉嘅字,頂櫳係有製造嘅字-會用 poiein 呢隻字嚟指好似跟住個整嚿嘢出嚟噉「整出」或者樂曲等嘅作品,而好多古希臘人相信,好似畫畫雕塑等嘅活動涉及嘅,係繆思[e 28]一班掌管文學同藝術等領域嘅女神)將諗頭由眾神嗰度帶俾創作人,而唔係由創作人自己諗啲諗頭出嚟嘅[88]。例如著名嘅古希臘哲學家柏拉圖[e 29]就喺佢嘅名書《理想國》入面講過類似噉嘅嘢[92]
粵語翻譯:我哋會唔會描述一位畫家,話佢整咗某啲嘢出嚟?當然唔會,佢只不過係喺度模仿。

歷史學家指,就算係到咗歐洲中世紀開始基督教化嘅時期,歐洲人好多時都仲係冇「創意」嘅概念-佢哋主流係認為「創造係上帝專有嘅能力」,人類頂嗮櫳淨係有得由上帝度得到靈感,再跟住啲靈感整嚿作品出嚟[93]

中世紀後

[編輯]

啟蒙時期[e 30] 18 世紀)係歐洲人思想上出現大變革嘅一個時期。喺呢個時期,人文主義盛行:啲人開始唔再好似中世紀嗰時噉,一味淨係以上帝同教會做所有嘢嘅中心,而係開始睇重同個體,亦都出現咗「創造唔係上帝獨有嘅能力,而係人都可以有嘅」噉嘅諗法,可以話係現代「創意」概念嘅開端;由啲歷史文獻度可知,到咗 18 世紀啲哲學家經已有喺研究心靈哲學嗰陣,作出「有創意嘅諗頭點樣喺人嘅心靈度出現」噉嘅討論-表示佢哋腦入面有咗「人可以創造啲嘢出嚟」嘅觀念[94][95]

現代嘅創意概念可以追溯到去 19 世紀後半橛至廿世紀初:當時心理學開始成形,而心理測量之父法蘭西斯·高爾頓[e 31] 1822 - 1911)經已有喺度研究智能嘅概念同埋提出「創意係天才嘅其中一種重要能力」噉嘅諗法;同期嘅第啲科學家亦都有對創意作出理論性質嘅討論;到咗 1920 年代,創意經已係心理學家成日提起嘅一個概念[96];而到咗 1950 年代,心理學界經已出現咗「創意係指創造出新同有用嘅諗頭」呢一個對創意嘅定義[2]-現代嘅創意概念正式成咗形。到咗廿世紀尾,創意已經成為咗心理學同多個相關社科領域上嘅一個大課題,仲吸引咗唔少學者開辦專門嘅學術期刊,用嚟刊登創意相關嘅科研

除咗好似心理學等嘅社科之外,人工智能(AI)又有咗運算創意[e 32]嘅子領域:AI 係研究點樣令機械展現出好似人噉嘅智能嘅領域,做法通常係寫一啲模仿人類認知功能嘅電腦程式;因為創意俾人認為係智能嘅重要一環,廿世紀尾嘅 AI 界就有咗「想教 AI 展示出好似人噉嘅創意」嘅諗頭,想 AI 識得寫作作曲畫畫-呢啲研究就組成咗所謂嘅運算創意研究[97];呢啲研究喺 2010 年代已經取得咗初步嘅成功-喺 2018 年,試過有人成功寫出能夠自己創作出圖像嘅 AI 程式,而且隻程式創作嘅畫仲以超過 400,000 美金嘅高價賣出[98]

心理相關

[編輯]

神經相關

[編輯]

文化相關

[編輯]

拉雜相關

[編輯]

文獻

[編輯]
  • Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity (PDF). Review of general psychology, 13(1), 1-12,呢篇理論性質嘅文講到,創意研究可以分做 Big-CLittle-C,仲提出咗 Pro-CMini-C 嘅諗法。
  • MacDonald, R., Byrne, C., & Carlton, L. (2006). Creativity and flow in musical composition: An empirical investigation. Psychology of Music, 34(3), 292-306,呢篇文研究咗學緊作曲音樂學生,提到心流同創意成正相關。
  • Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity (PDF). Creativity research journal, 24(1), 92-96,呢篇文講到「新同有用」呢個定義係喺 1950 年代出現嘅。

講心理測量嘅文獻:

講性格相關嘅文獻:

  • Beaty, R. E., Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2014). Does insight problem solving predict real-world creativity?. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(3), 287,呢場實驗話洞察力似乎唔會影響創意,但兩者都同流動智能以及經驗開放度正相關
  • Feist, G. J. (1998). "A meta-analysis of the impact of personality on scientific and artistic creativity". Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2 (4): 290-309.
  • Helson, R. (1996). In search of the creative personality (PDF). Creativity Research Journal, 9(4), 295-306.
  • Kipper, D. A., Green, D. J., & Prorak, A. (2010). The relationship among spontaneity, impulsivity, and creativity. Journal of Creativity in Mental Health, 5(1), 39-53,呢份研究指創意同衝動以及感覺追求成正相關。

講神經相關嘅文獻:

講創意提升嘅文獻:

註釋

[編輯]
  1. 英文原文:"... Over the course of the last decade, however, we seem to have reached a general agreement that creativity involves the production of novel, useful products."
  2. 理論化啲噉講,一件創意「有幾大」係連續嘅-一件創意可以(例如)身處喺細同專業之間。
  3. 英文原文:"(Creativity is) the extraordinary result of ordinary processes."
  4. 每嚿元件被指可以想像成神經網絡嘅某一橛。
  5. 事實係有好多重大嘅創意都係將舊諗頭結合而成嘅,例子可以睇吓數碼鬅客結合科幻犯罪小說橋段芭蕾舞曲融入打前歐洲民俗舞曲節奏特性,或者係粵畫派結合國畫印象派... 呀噉。
  6. 英文原文:"Creativity is intelligence having fun."
  7. 不過都有研究搵唔到噉嘅效應。
  8. 創意技巧唔淨只局限喺管理教育方面嘅工作者都會用呢啲技巧培育學生嘅創意。

引咗

[編輯]

篇文用咗嘅行話或者專有名詞英文(或者其他外語)名如下:

  1. innovation
  2. big-Creativity,big-C
  3. little-Creativity,little-C
  4. pro-C
  5. mini-C
  6. convergent
  7. divergent
  8. incubation
  9. conceptual blending theory
  10. conceptual integration network
  11. Generic space
  12. Blended space
  13. creativity quotient,CQ
  14. IQ test
  15. Alternate Uses Task,AUT
  16. Torrance Test
  17. nine dots puzzle
  18. threshold
  19. trait
  20. openness to experience
  21. impulsivity
  22. innovation management
  23. intrinsic motivation
  24. creativity techniques
  25. autonomy
  26. brain-storming
  27. creative limitation
  28. 拉丁文:Muses
  29. 希臘文:Πλάτων
  30. Age of Enlightenment
  31. Francis Galton
  32. computational creativity

篇文引用咗以下呢啲文獻網頁

  1. 1.0 1.1 Mumford, M. D. (2003). "Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research". Creativity Research Journal. 15 (2-3): 107-120.
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity (PDF). Creativity research journal, 24(1), 92-96.
  3. Simonton, D. K. (2004). Creativity in science: Chance, logic, genius, and zeitgeist. Cambridge University Press.
  4. Cropley, D. H. (2016). Creativity in engineering. In Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking (pp. 155-173). Springer, Singapore.
  5. Vass, E. (2007). Exploring processes of collaborative creativity - The role of emotions in children's joint creative writing. Thinking skills and Creativity, 2(2), 107-117.
  6. 6.0 6.1 Sternberg, Robert J. (2011). "Creativity". Cognitive Psychology (6 ed.). Cengage Learning. p. 479.
  7. 7.0 7.1 7.2 Amabile, Teresa M.; Pratt, Michael G. (2016). "The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning". Research in Organizational Behavior. 36: 157-183.
  8. Goffin, K., & Mitchell, R. (2016). Innovation management: effective strategy and implementation. Macmillan International Higher Education.
  9. Meusburger, Peter (2009). "Milieus of Creativity: The Role of Places, Environments and Spatial Contexts". In Meusburger, P.; Funke, J.; Wunder, E. (eds.). Milieus of Creativity: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Spatiality of Creativity. Springer.
  10. Torrance, Paul. "Verbal Tests. Forms A and B-Figural Tests, Forms A and B.". The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Norms-Technical Manual Research Edition. Princeton, New Jersey: Personnel Press. p. 6.
  11. Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation (4th ed.). Paris/Luxembourg: OECD/Eurostat. 2018. p. 44.
  12. 12.0 12.1 Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity (PDF). Review of general psychology, 13(1), 1-12.
  13. Anders Ericsson, K., Roring, R. W., & Nandagopal, K. (2007). Giftedness and evidence for reproducibly superior performance: An account based on the expert performance framework. High ability studies, 18(1), 3-56.
  14. Smith, J. K. (in press). Trouble in River City. A review of The Last Word: The Best Commentary and Controversy in American Education (Eds. of Education Week, Eds.). PsycCRITIQUES.
  15. Martindale, C. (1990). The clockwork muse: The predictability of artistic change. New York: Basic Books.
  16. Markman, K. Klein, W. & Suhr, E. (eds) (2009). Handbook of mental simulation and the human imagination. Hove, Psychology Press.
  17. Byrne, R. M. J. (2005). The Rational Imagination: How People Create Counterfactual Alternatives to Reality. MIT Press.
  18. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American psychologist, 51(7), 677.
  19. Benedek, M., & Fink, A. (2019). Toward a neurocognitive framework of creative cognition: The role of memory, attention, and cognitive control. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 27, 116-122.
  20. Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retentions in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological review, 67(6), 380.
  21. Gabora, L., & Ranjan, A. (2013). How insight emerges in a distributed, content-addressable memory. Neuroscience of creativity, 19-44.
  22. Colzato, L. S., Szapora, A., & Hommel, B. (2012). Meditate to create: the impact of focused-attention and open-monitoring training on convergent and divergent thinking. Frontiers in psychology, 116.
  23. Cropley, Arthur (2006). "In Praise of Convergent Thinking". Creativity Research Journal. 18 (3): 391-404.
  24. Lieberman, J. Nina (1965-12-01). "Playfulness and Divergent Thinking: An Investigation of their Relationship at the Kindergarten Level". The Journal of Genetic Psychology. 107 (2): 219-224.
  25. 25.0 25.1 Bijvoet-van Den Berg, S., & Hoicka, E. (2014). Individual differences and age-related changes in divergent thinking in toddlers and preschoolers. Developmental psychology, 50(6), 1629.
  26. Basadur, M. (1995). Optimal ideation-evaluation ratios. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 63-75.
  27. Ghiselin, B. (1985). The creative process: A symposium. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  28. Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. London: Cape.
  29. Christensen, T. Bo (2005). Creative Cognition: Analogy and Incubation (PDF). Department of Psychology, University of Aarhus, Denmark
  30. 30.0 30.1 Sio, U. N., & Ormerod, T. C. (2009). Does incubation enhance problem solving? A meta-analytic review (PDF). Psychological bulletin, 135(1), 94.
  31. Smith, Steven M. (1995). "Fixation, Incubation, and Insight in Memory and Creative Thinking". In Steven M. Smith; Thomas B. Ward; Ronald A. Finke (eds.). The Creative Cognition Approach. MIT Press.
  32. Ward, T. (2003). "Creativity". In Nagel, L. (ed.). Encyclopaedia of Cognition. New York: Macmillan.
  33. Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2003). Conceptual blending, form and meaning. Recherches en communication, 19, 57-86.
  34. 34.0 34.1 Conceptual Blending 互聯網檔案館歸檔,歸檔日期2022年1月20號,. (PDF). Entry for The Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (Gilles Fauconnier).
  35. Grady J. E. et al. Blending and Metaphor 互聯網檔案館歸檔,歸檔日期2022年2月22號,..
  36. Ritchie, L. David (2004). "Lost in "conceptual space": Metaphors of conceptual integration". Metaphor and Symbol. 19: 31-50.
  37. 37.0 37.1 37.2 Silvia, P. J., Wigert, B., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Assessing creativity with self-report scales: A review and empirical evaluation (PDF). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(1), 19.
  38. Amabile, T. M. ( 1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997-1013.
  39. 39.0 39.1 Beaty, R. E., Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2014). Does insight problem solving predict real-world creativity?. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(3), 287.
  40. Fürst, G., & Grin, F. (2018). A comprehensive method for the measurement of everyday creativity (PDF). Thinking Skills and Creativity, 28, 84-97.
  41. Snyder, Allan (2004). "The creativity quotient: An objective scoring of ideational fluency". Creativity Research Journal. 16 (4): 415-419.
  42. 42.0 42.1 "The Alternative Uses Test". Creative Huddle.
  43. 43.0 43.1 Alhashim, A. G., & Marshall, M. (2020, January). WIP: Assessing Creativity of Alternative Uses Task Responses: A Detailed Procedure (PDF). In ASEE annual conference.
  44. Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Personnel Press.
  45. Forster, E. A., & Dunbar, K. N. (2009). Creativity evaluation through latent semantic analysis (PDF). In Proceedings of the 31st Annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 602-607).
  46. Harbinson, J., & Haarman, H. (2014). Automated scoring of originality using semantic representations (PDF). In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol. 36, No. 36).
  47. Adair, John (2007). The art of creative thinking how to be innovative and develop great ideas. London Philadelphia: Kogan Page. p. 127.
  48. Who Said Creativity Is Intelligence Having Fun?. Medium.
  49. Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P. W. (1962). Creativity and intelligence: Explorations with gifted students. New York: Wiley.
  50. 50.0 50.1 Barron, F. (1963). Creativity and psychological health. Princeton: D. Van Nostrand Company.
  51. Gottfredson, Linda S. (1997). "Mainstream Science on Intelligence (editorial)" (PDF). Intelligence. 24: 13-23.
  52. Sligh, A. C., Conners, F. A., & Roskos‐Ewoldsen, B. E. V. E. R. L. Y. (2005). Relation of creativity to fluid and crystallized intelligence (PDF). The Journal of Creative Behavior, 39(2), 123-136.
  53. 53.0 53.1 53.2 Fuchs-Beauchamp, K. D.; Karnes, M. B.; Johnson, L. J. (1993). "Creativity and intelligence in preschoolers". Gifted Child Quarterly. 37 (3): 113-117.
  54. Cho, S. H.; Nijenhuis, J. T.; van Vianen, N. E. M.; Kim, H.-B.; Lee, K. H. (2010). "The relationship between diverse components of intelligence and creativity". Journal of Creative Behavior. 44 (2): 125-137.
  55. Sternberg, R. J., & O’Hara, L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 251-272). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
  56. Kaufman, J. C.; Kaufman, S. B.; Lichtenberger, E. O. (2011). "Finding creativity on intelligence tests via divergent production". Canadian Journal of School Psychology. 26 (2): 83-106.
  57. Silvia, P. J.; Beaty, R. E.; Nusbaum, E. C. (2013). "Verbal fluency and creativity: General and specific contributions of broad retrieval ability (Gr) factors to divergent thinking". Intelligence. 41 (5): 328-340.
  58. Sternberg, R. J.; Lubart, T. I. (1991). "An investment theory of creativity and its development". Human Development. 34: 1-32.
  59. Baer, J.; Kaufman, J. C. (2005). "Bridging generality and specificity: The Amusement Park Theoretical (APT) Model of creativity". Roeper Review. 27 (3): 158-163.
  60. Beckmann, N., & Wood, R. E. (2017). Dynamic personality science. Integrating between-person stability and within-person change (PDF). Frontiers in psychology, 8, 1486.
  61. Oshio, A., Taku, K., Hirano, M., & Saeed, G. (2018). Resilience and Big Five personality traits: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 127, 54-60.
  62. Martinsen, Ø. L. (2011). The creative personality: A synthesis and development of the creative person profile. Creativity Research Journal, 23(3), 185-202.
  63. Oleynick, V. C., DeYoung, C. G., Hyde, E., Kaufman, S. B., Beaty, R. E., & Silvia, P. J. (2017). Openness/intellect: The core of the creative personality. In G. J. Feist, R. Reiter-Palmon, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity and personality research (pp. 9-27). Cambridge University Press.
  64. Ambridge B. (2014). Psy-Q: You know your IQ - now test your psychological intelligence. Profile. p. 11.
  65. 65.0 65.1 Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of the impact of personality on scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and social psychology review, 2(4), 90-309.
  66. Batey, M.; Furnham, A. (2006). "Creativity, intelligence and personality: A critical review of the scattered literature". Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs. 132 (4): 355-429.
  67. Dickman, Scott J. (1990). "Functional and dysfunctional impulsivity: Personality and cognitive correlates". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 58 (1): 95-102.
  68. Kipper, D. A., Green, D. J., & Prorak, A. (2010). The relationship among spontaneity, impulsivity, and creativity. Journal of Creativity in Mental Health, 5(1), 39-53.
  69. West, Samuel E., Eva Hoff, and Ingegerd Carlsson. "Play and Productivity: Enhancing the Creative Climate at Workplace Meetings with Play Cues" American Journal of Play 9.1 (2016): 71-86.
  70. 70.0 70.1 Amabile, T. M. (1998). "How to kill creativity 互聯網檔案館歸檔,歸檔日期2021年7月9號,.". Harvard Business Review. 76 (5): 76-87, 186.
  71. Sullivan, Ceri; Harper, Grame, eds. (2009). Authors at Work: The Creative Environment. DS Brewer/The English Association.
  72. Nonaka, I. (1991). "The Knowledge-Creating Company". Harvard Business Review. 69 (6): 96-104.
  73. Amabile, Teresa M. (1996). Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. Routledge.
  74. Woodman, R. W.; Sawyer, J. E.; Griffin, R. W. (1993). "Toward a theory of organizational creativity". Academy of Management Review. 18 (2): 293-321.
  75. Paulus, P. B.; Dzindolet, M. (2008). "Social influence, creativity and innovation". Social Influence. 3 (4): 228-247.
  76. Gariety, Bonnie Sue; Shaffer, Sherrill (2001). "Wage Differentials Associated with Flextime". Monthly Labor Review. 124 (3): 68-75.
  77. Paletz, S. B.; Schunn, C. D. (2010). "A social‐cognitive framework of multidisciplinary team innovation". Topics in Cognitive Science. 2 (1): 73-95.
  78. Parker, Jeanette; Begnaud, Lucy (2004). Developing Creative Leadership. Portsmouth, NH: Teacher Ideas Press. p. 20.
  79. Li, Jin; Gardner, Howard (1993). "How Domains Constrain Creativity". American Behavioral Scientist. 37 (1): 94-101.
  80. Hoegl, Martin; Gibbert, Michael; Mazursky, David (2008). "Financial constraints in innovation projects: When is less more?". Research Policy. 37 (8): 1382-1391.
  81. Moreau, C. Page; Dahl, Darren W. (2005). "Designing the Solution: The Impact of Constraints on Consumers' Creativity". Journal of Consumer Research. 32 (1): 13-22.
  82. Ward, T.B. (1994). "Structured Imagination: the Role of Category Structure in Exemplar Generation". Cognitive Psychology. 27 (1): 1-40.
  83. Stokes, Patricia D. (2007). "Using constraints to generate and sustain novelty". Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 1 (2): 107-113.
  84. Kalyar, M. N., Saeed, M., Usta, A., & Shafique, I. (2020). Workplace cyberbullying and creativity: examining the roles of psychological distress and psychological capital. Management Research Review.
  85. Amabile, Teresa M.; Conti, Regina; Coon, Heather; Lazenby, Jeffrey; Herron, Michael (1996). "Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity". Academy of Management Journal. 39 (5): 1154-1184.
  86. Weiss, Matthias; Hoegl, Martin; Gibbert, Michael (2011). "Making Virtue of Necessity: The Role of Team Climate for Innovation in Resource-Constrained Innovation Projects". Journal of Product Innovation Management. 28 (s1): 196-207.
  87. Weiss, Matthias; Hoegl, Martin; Gibbert, Michael (2017). "How Does Material Resource Adequacy Affect Innovation Project Performance? A Meta-Analysis". Journal of Product Innovation Management. 34 (6): 842-863.
  88. 88.0 88.1 A. B. Cook (1914), Zeus: A Study in Ancient Religion, Vol. I, p. 104, Cambridge University Press.
  89. Władysław Tatarkiewicz, A History of Six Ideas: an Essay in Aesthetics, p. 244.
  90. 《考工記》
  91. Wenren, Jun (2013). Ancient Chinese Encyclopedia of Technology: Translation and Annotation of the 'Kaogong Ji' (The Artificers Record). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
  92. Plato, The Republic, Book X,英文譯版:"Will we say, of a painter, that he makes something? Certainly not, he merely imitates."
  93. Dacey, John (1999). "Concepts of Creativity: A history". In Mark A. Runco; Steven R. Pritzer (eds.). Encyclopedia of Creativity, Vol. 1.
  94. Niu, Weihua; Sternberg, Robert J. (2006). "The Philosophical Roots of Western and Eastern Conceptions of Creativity". Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology. 26 (1-2): 18-38.
  95. Albert, R. S.; Runco, M. A. (1999). "A History of Research on Creativity". In Sternberg, R. J. (ed.). Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press. p. 6.
  96. Hargreaves, H. L. (1927). "The faculty of imagination: An enquiry concerning the existence of a general faculty, or group factor, of imagination". British Journal of Psychology. Monograph Supplement 3: 1-74.
  97. Colton, S., & Wiggins, G. A. (2012, August). Computational creativity: The final frontier?. In Ecai (Vol. 12, pp. 21-26).
  98. Cohn, Gabe (2018-10-25). "AI Art at Christie's Sells for $432,500". The New York Times. Retrieved 29 October 2018.
  99. 99.0 99.1 The Neuroscience of Flow and Creativity 互聯網檔案館歸檔,歸檔日期2022年3月9號,.. BrainFirst.
  100. Schutte, N. S., & Malouff, J. M. (2020). Connections between curiosity, flow and creativity (PDF). Personality and Individual Differences, 152, 109555.
  101. Flaherty, A. W. (2005). Frontotemporal and dopaminergic control of idea generation and creative drive (PDF). Journal of Comparative Neurology, 493(1), 147-153.
  102. Chrysikou, E. G., & Thompson‐Schill, S. L. (2011). Dissociable brain states linked to common and creative object use (PDF). Human brain mapping, 32(4), 665-675.
  103. Chi, R. P., & Snyder, A. W. (2011). Facilitate insight by non-invasive brain stimulation (PDF). PloS one, 6(2), e16655.
  104. Mayseless, N., Eran, A., & Shamay-Tsoory, S. G. (2015). Generating original ideas: The neural underpinning of originality (PDF). Neuroimage, 116, 232-239.
  105. Wagner U.; Gais S.; Haider H.; Verleger R.; Born J. (2004). "Sleep inspires insight 互聯網檔案館歸檔,歸檔日期2021年7月21號,." (PDF). Nature. 427 (6972): 352-5.
  106. Cai, D. J., Mednick, S. A., Harrison, E. M., Kanady, J. C., & Mednick, S. C. (2009). REM, not incubation, improves creativity by priming associative networks 互聯網檔案館歸檔,歸檔日期2022年2月28號,. (PDF). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(25), 10130-10134.
  107. Fink, A., & Benedek, M. (2014). EEG alpha power and creative ideation. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 44, 111-123.

[編輯]