The Importance of Domain-Specific Expertise in Creativity

REFERENCES

• Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997–1013. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview.
   Google Scholar
• Avitia, M. J., & Plucker, J. A. (2014). Teaching the foundations of the field: A content analysis of potential creativity texts. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 378–382. doi:10.1037/a0036760
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1991). Generality of creativity across performance domains. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 23–39. doi:10.1080/10400419109534371
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1993). Creativity and divergent thinking: A task-specific approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1994a). Divergent thinking is not a general trait: A multi-domain training experiment. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 35–46. doi:10.1080/10400419409534507
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1994b). Generality of creativity across performance domains: A replication. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 1217–1218. doi:10.2466/pms.1994.79.3.1217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1994c). Performance assessments of creativity: Do they have long-term stability? Roeper Review, 17, 7–11. doi:10.1080/02783199409553609
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1996). The effects of task-specific divergent-thinking training. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 30, 183–187. doi:10.1002/jocb.1996.30.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1997). Gender differences in the effects of anticipated evaluation on creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 25–31. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1001_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1998a). The case for domain specificity of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 173–177. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1102_7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1998b). Gender differences in the effects of extrinsic motivation on creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 32, 18–37. doi:10.1002/jocb.1998.32.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (2003). The impact of the core knowledge curriculum on creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 15, 297–300. doi:10.1080/10400419.2003.9651422
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (2009, August). Are the Torrance Tests still relevant in the 21st century? Invited address presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Boston, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (2010). Is creativity domain specific? In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 321–341). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (2011a). Four (more) arguments against the Torrance Tests. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts., 5, 316–317. doi:10.1037/a0025211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (2011b). How divergent thinking tests mislead us: Are the Torrance Tests still relevant in the 21st century? The Division 10 debate. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 309–313. doi:10.1037/a0025210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 16–29. doi:10.1002/jocb.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (in press). Domain specificity in creativity. San Diego, CA: Academic Press/Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The amusement park theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27, 158–163. doi:10.1080/02783190509554310
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J., Kaufman, J. C., & Gentile, C. A. (2004). Extension of the consensual assessment technique to nonparallel creative products. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 113–117. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1601_11
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J., & McKool, S. (2009). Assessing creativity using the consensual assessment. In C. Schreiner (Ed.), Handbook of assessment technologies, methods, and applications in higher education (pp. 65–77). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J., & McKool, S. S. (2014). The gold standard for assessing creativity. International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education, 3, 81–93. doi:10.4018/IJQAETE
   Google Scholar
• 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, 287–292. doi:10.1037/a0035727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bingham, W. C., Burke, H. R., & Murray, S. (1966). Raven’s progressive matrices: Construct validity. The Journal of Psychology, 62, 205–209. doi:10.1080/00223980.1966.10543785
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bronson, P., & Merryman, A. (2010). The creativity crisis. Newsweek, July 10.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, R. T. (1989). Creativity: What are we to measure? In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–32). New York, NY: Plenum.
   Google Scholar
• Carson, S. (2006, April). Creativity and mental illness. Invitational Panel Discussion at Yale’s Mind Matters Consortium, New Haven, CT.
   Google Scholar
• Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). The mind’s eye in chess. In W. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 215–281). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. (1978). Knowledge structures and memory development. In R. S. Siegler (Ed.), Children’s thinking: What develops (pp. 75–96). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Conti, R., Collins, M. A., & Picariello, M. L. (2001). The impact of competition on intrinsic motivation and creativity: Considering gender, gender segregation and gender role orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 1273–1289. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00217-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conti, R., Coon, H., & Amabile, T. M. (1996). Evidence to support the componential model of creativity: Secondary analyses of three studies. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 385–389. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj0904_9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cramond, B., Matthews-Morgan, J., Bandalos, D., & Zuo, L. (2005). A report on the 40-year follow-up of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Alive and well in the new millennium. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 283–291. doi:10.1177/001698620504900402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives (pp. 325–339). New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: The psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
   Google Scholar
• Dow, G. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2004). Teaching students to solve insight problems: Evidence for domain specificity in creativity training. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 389–398. doi:10.1080/10400410409534550
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunning, D. (2012). Self-insight: Roadblocks and detours on the path to knowing thyself. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 83–87. doi:10.1111/cdir.2003.12.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenberger, R., & Cameron, J. (1996). Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth? American Psychologist, 51, 1153–1166. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.11.1153
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Incremental effects of reward on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 728–741. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.4.728
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenberger, R., & Shanock, L. (2003). Rewards, intrinsic motivation, and creativity: A case study of conceptual and methodological isolation. Creativity Research Journal, 15, 121–130. doi:10.1080/10400419.2003.9651404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 290–309. doi:10.1207/pspr.1998.2.issue-4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Furnham, A., & Marks, J. (2013). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the recent literature. Psychology, 4, 717–728. doi:10.4236/psych.2013.49102
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, H., & Davis, K. (2013). The app generation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gruber, H. E., & Davis, S. N. (1988). Inching our way up Mt. Olympus: The evolving-systems approach to creative thinking. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp. 243–270). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Han, K.-S. (2003). Domain-specificity of creativity in young children: How quantitative and qualitative data support it. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 37, 117–142. doi:10.1002/jocb.2003.37.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han, K.-S., & Marvin, C. (2002). Multiple creativities? Investigating domain-specificity of creativity in young children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 98–109. doi:10.1177/001698620204600203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hennessey, B. A. (1994). The consensual assessment technique: An examination of the relationship between ratings of product and process creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 193–208. doi:10.1080/10400419409534524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hocevar, D. (1981). Measurement of creativity: Review and critique. Journal of Personality Assessment, 45, 450–464. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4505_1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivcevic, Z. (2007). Artistic and everyday creativity: An act-frequency approach. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 41, 271–290. doi:10.1002/jocb.2007.41.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C. (2001a). Genius, lunatics, and poets: Mental illness in prize-winning authors. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 20, 305–314. doi:10.2190/M3W0-AT3T-GTLE-0L9G
   Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C. (2001b). The Sylvia Plath effect: Mental illness in eminent creative writers. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 35, 37–50. doi:10.1002/jocb.2001.35.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2002). I bask in dreams of suicide: Mental illness, poetry, and women. Review of General Psychology, 6, 271–286. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.6.3.271
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2005). The amusement park theory of creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse (pp. 321–328). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Cole, J. C., & Sexton, J. D. (2008). A comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the consensual assessment technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 171–178. doi:10.1080/10400410802059929
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Cropley, D., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Sinnett, S. (2013). Furious activity vs. understanding: How much expertise is needed to evaluate creative work? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7, 332–340. doi:10.1037/a0034809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., & Gentile, C. A. (2004). Differences in gender and ethnicity as measured by ratings of three writing tasks. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 38, 56–69. doi:10.1002/jocb.2004.38.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., & Skidmore, L. E. (2013). Young and old, novice and expert: How we evaluate creative art can reflect practice or talent. In S. B. Kaufman (Ed.), The complexity of greatness: Beyond talent or practice (pp. 71–82). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Beghetto, R. A., & Baer, J. (2010). Finding young Paul Robesons: The search for creative polymaths. In D. D. Preiss & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Innovations in educational psychology: Perspectives on learning, teaching, and human development (pp. 141–162). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Beghetto, R. A., Baer, J., & Ivcevic, Z. (2010). Creativity polymathy: What Benjamin Franklin can teach your kindergartener. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 380–387.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Cole, J. C., & Baer, J. (2009). The construct of creativity: Structural model for self-reported creativity ratings. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 43, 119–134. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)2162-6057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Evans, M. L., & Baer, J. (2010). The American Idol effect: Are students good judges of their creativity across domains? Empirical Studies of the Arts, 28, 3–17. doi:10.2190/EM.28.1.b
   Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Gentile, C. A., & Baer, J. (2005). Do gifted student writers and creative writing experts rate creativity the same way? Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 260–265. doi:10.1177/001698620504900307
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kern, R. R., Bordieri, J. E., & Taylor, D. W. (1993). A comparison of Raven’s standard progressive matrices with the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Revised for individuals receiving rehabilitation services. Vocational Evaluation and Work Adjustment Bulletin, 26, 53–56.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, K. H. (2009, August). Are the Torrance Tests still relevant in the 21st century? Invited address presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Boston, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, K. H. (2011a). The APA 2009 Division 10 debate: Are the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking still relevant in the 21st century? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 302–308. doi:10.1037/a0021917
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, K. H. (2011b). Proven reliability and validity of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 314–315. doi:10.1037/a0021916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kruger, J. (1999). Lake Wobegon be gone! The “below-average effect” and the egocentric nature of comparative ability judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 221–232. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.221
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer, R. E. (1996). Problem solving: Teaching and assessing. In E. De Corte & F. Weinert (Eds.), International encyclopedia of developmental and instructional psychology (pp. 555–558). Oxford, England: Elsevier Science Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, R. E. (2002). The promise of educational psychology, Volume II: Teaching for meaningful learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Merrotsy, P. (2013). Tolerance of ambiguity: A trait of the creative personality? Creativity Research Journal, 25, 232–237. doi:10.1080/10400419.2013.783762
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michael, W. B., & Wright, C. R. (1989). Psychometric issues in the assessment of creativity. In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 33–52). New York, NY: Plenum.
   Google Scholar
• Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T. J, Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., … Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51, 77–101. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.77
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niu, W. (2007). Individual and environmental influences on Chinese student creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 41, 151–175. doi:10.1002/jocb.2007.41.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niu, W., & Sternberg, R. J. (2001). Cultural influences on artistic creativity and its evaluation. International Journal of Psychology, 36, 225–241. doi:10.1080/00207590143000036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A. (1998). Beware of simple conclusions: The case for content generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 179–182. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1102_8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A. (1999). Is the proof in the pudding? Reanalyses of Torrance’s (1958 to present) longitudinal data. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 103–114. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1202_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretz, J. E., & McCollum, V. A. (2014). Self-perceptions of creativity do not always reflect actual creative performance. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 227–236. doi:10.1037/a0035597
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiter-Palmon, R., Robinson, E., Kaufman, J., & Santo, J. (2012). Evaluation of self-perceptions of creativity: Is it a useful criterion? Creativity Research Journal, 24, 107–114. doi:10.1080/10400419.2012.676980
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ripple, R. E. (1999). Teaching creativity. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 2, pp. 629–638). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, L. H., & Lin, H. (1984). A meta-analysis of long-term creativity training programs. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 18, 11–22. doi:10.1002/jocb.1984.18.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runco, M. A. (1987). The generality of creative performance in gifted and nongifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31, 121–125. doi:10.1177/001698628703100306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runco, M. A. (1989). The creativity of children’s art. Child Study Journal, 19, 177–190.
   Google Scholar
• Runco, M. A. (2004). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 657–687. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141502
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruscio, J., Whitney, D. M., & Amabile, T. M. (1998). Looking inside the fishbowl of creativity: Verbal and behavioral predictors of creative performance. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 243–263. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1103_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawyer, K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 361–388. doi:10.1080/10400410409534549
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silvia, P. J., Wigert, B., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Assessing creativity with self-report scales: A review and empirical evaluation. The Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 19–34. doi:10.1037/a0024071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonton, D. K. (1988). Age and outstanding achievement: What do we know after a century of research? Psychological Bulletin, 104, 251–267. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.104.2.251
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonton, D. K. (2010). So you want to become a creative genius? You must be crazy! In D. Cropley, J. Kaufmann, A. Cropley, & M. Runco (Eds.), The dark side of creativity (pp. 218–234). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Singley, M. K., & Anderson, J. R. (1989). The transfer of cognitive skill. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd. Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thorndike, E. L. (1906). Principles of teaching. New York: Lemket and Buechner.
   Google Scholar
• Torrance, E. P. (1972). Predictive validity of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 6, 236–262. doi:10.1002/jocb.1972.6.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torrance, E. P., & Presbury, J. (1984). The criteria of success used in 242 recent experimental studies of creativity. Creative Child & Adult Quarterly, 9, 238–243.
   Google Scholar
• Vincent, K. R., & Cox, J. A. (1974). A re-evaluation of Raven’s standard progressive matrices. The Journal of Psychology, 88, 299–303. doi:10.1080/00223980.1974.9915740
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinstein, E. C., Clark, Z., DiBartolomeo, D. J., & Davis, K. (2014). A decline in creativity? It depends on the domain. Creativity Research Journal, 26, 174–184. doi:10.1080/10400419.2014.901082
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weisberg, R. W. (1999). Creativity and knowledge: A challenge to theories. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 226–250). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zell, E., & Krizan, Z. (2014). Do people have insight into their abilities? A metasynthesis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 111–125. doi:10.1177/1745691613518075
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar