Creativity: Typologies, Dimensions And Phases Of The Creative Process
Creativity is a psychological phenomenon of great importance both at the individual and collective level. We need creativity when we seek to solve an everyday problem on an individual level and it is also useful to us, on a collective level, in science, art or technology.
Any advance of humanity has its origin in a creative idea In the same way, unfortunately, creativity has been present in most of the most despicable and aberrant situations in the history of humanity. For better and worse, creativity distinguishes us from the rest of the beings on this planet, being, perhaps, the most defining characteristic of humans.
Recommended article: “81 creative phrases to let your imagination fly”
Some integrative proposals for defining creativity
The main obstacle to studying creativity at a scientific level is reaching a consensus on a definition that pleases all those who investigate it from various disciplines. One of the most complete definitions that have been achieved so far is perhaps that of Vernon (1989): “Creativity is the person’s ability to produce new and original ideas, discoveries, restructurings, inventions or artistic objects, which are accepted by experts as valuable elements in the field of science, technology or art. Both originality and usefulness or value are properties of the creative product although these properties may vary over time.
With a rather abstract approach, some authors define it as “ability to produce new, original and appropriate ideas” (Sternberg and Lubart, 1991). Original would be understood as something that is relatively infrequent, although it is convenient to talk about degrees of originality, rather than seeing it as something absolute in the sense of “all or nothing.” As for something (idea or product) being appropriate, it is considered appropriate when its proposal solves a significant problem or represents a decisive intermediate step to achieve greater achievements. Utility is likewise a matter of degree.
Creativity as a set of dimensions
Other authors have tried to be more specific in their definitions, addressing creativity from four levels of analysis. This is what has traditionally been known as the 4 P’s of creativity
1. The Process
Creativity understood as a mental process (or set of processes) that results in the production of original and adaptive ideas. It is the perspective adopted by Cognitive Psychology, which has focused on studying different cognitive operations such as problem solving, imagination, intuition, the use of heuristics (mental strategies) and insight (spontaneous revelation).
Some theories that have addressed the different states of the creative process are inspired by Wallas’s (1926) initial proposal. Other authors have dedicated themselves to trying to identify the components of creative thinking, such is the case of the studies by Mumford and his colleagues (1991; 1997).
Creativity can be conceptualized as a characteristic of a product, a product being understood as a work of art, a scientific discovery or a technological invention, among others. Generally, a creative product is one that is considered original, that is, it manages to combine novelty, complexity and surprise. In addition, it is adaptive, which means that it is capable of solving some problem in the environment. Also, depending on the domain in which it is located, the creative product is related to characteristics such as beauty, truth, elegance and virtuosity (Runco, 1996).
3. Person (personality)
Here creativity is understood as a trait, or personality and/or intelligence profile characteristic of a specific person. It is an individual quality or capacity, which is why some individuals have more than others (Barron, 1969).
Individual creativity is one of the objects of study of differential psychology, from where several traits have been found that seem to coincide in creative people. Among others, there are: intrinsic motivation (not needing external incentives to create), breadth of interests (high curiosity in different domains), openness to experience (willingness to experiment and high tolerance for failure) and autonomy (Helson , 1972). Currently, personality is understood as one of the influences on creative behavior, and not something that completely explains such behavior (Feist and Barron, 2003).
4. The environment (place or press):
The environment or climate in which creativity emerges is decisive By combining certain elements of the situation, we manage to facilitate or block the creative process. Creativity usually appears when there are opportunities to explore, when the individual is given independence in his or her work and the environment encourages originality (Amabile, 1990).
Furthermore, the environment is key in the assessment of creativity because, ultimately, it will determine whether the product can be considered creative or not.
Interaction between creative elements
Evidently, These four elements of creativity are totally related in practice It is expected that a creative product will be generated by a creative person, applying creativity processes, in an environment conducive to the production of such a product and, probably, in an environment prepared for its evaluation. Recently, two new ones have been added to the 4 P’s, so now people usually talk about the 6 P’s of creativity . The fifth P corresponds to Persuasion (Simonton, 1990) and the sixth is Potential (Runco, 2003).
If we reformulate the question again, what is creativity?, we will obtain, as we have seen, several answers depending on where we focus: the person, the product, the process, the environment, persuasion or potentiality. Also, we could refer to the creativity of geniuses, to that of small children, or to that of any person in their daily life, without giving importance to their age or their genius.
To date, most definitions focus on three components or defining characteristics of the creative act: the originality of the idea, its quality and its fit, that is, how appropriate it is for what it aims to solve. Therefore, it can be said that a creative response is one that is, at the same time, new, appropriate and relevant.
Another alternative approach establishes differences between different levels of creativity, approaching it as a magnitude instead of considering it a set of fixed characteristics. The range of creativity magnitude would extend from minor or mundane creativity “Little-C” (more subjective) to greater creativity, mature creativity or eminence “Big-C” (more objective).
The first, the worldly creativity, refers to the everyday individual creativity that any of us uses to solve a problem It is part of human nature and is embodied in something new for the individual, or for his or her immediate environment, but it rarely has recognition or represents a notable value at a social level (Richards, 2007). It is a category of great interest in the analysis of factors influencing common creativity at the home level, at school or in the work environment (Cropley, 2011).
The second has to do with the actions and products of eminent individuals in some field They are those characters who show high performance and/or manage to transform a field of knowledge or society, for example: Charles Darwin, Newton, Mozart or Luther King.
Mini-c and Pro-c
If we consider the magnitude of creativity as something dichotomous (black or white), We will encounter the problem of not being able to identify nuances that occur between the Little-c and Big-C categories That is, talking about two types of creativity, mundane or eminent, does not represent the real distribution of the characteristic in the population because a range of possibilities extends between the two. To try to overcome the limitations of dichotomous categorization, Beghetto and Kaufman (2009) propose including two new categories, Mini-c and Pro-c, thus expanding to four the categories that would attempt to frame the phenomenon of creativity.
Mini-c creativity is the most subjective form of all types of creativity. It refers to the new knowledge that an individual acquires and how he internally interprets his personal experiences. In research, it is useful for understanding the personal and developmental aspects of creativity, helping to explain it in young children.
The Pro-c category represents a level of evolution and effort that begins in the Little-c but it falls short of being the Big-C, helping to understand the area that extends between the two. Creativity related to expertise corresponds to some professional area. It should be noted that not all professionals who are experts in an area achieve this type of creativity. Those who achieve it require approximately 10 years of preparation in their domain to become “experts.” To become Pro we will need to prepare a cocktail that contains high doses of knowledge, motivation and performance.
Although we can better cover the phenomenon of creativity with four categories, they are still insufficient to capture its complex nature. For this reason, some authors prefer to treat creativity as a continuum.
Cohen (2011) proposes his “continuum of adaptive creative behaviors.” This author considers the interaction between the person and the environment to be fundamental, from an adaptive perspective, to analyze creativity. Its continuum ranges from creativity in young children to the creativity of eminent adults, establishing seven levels or stages. It proposes some influential variables for the development of creativity along the continuum, such as: purpose, novelty, value, speed and structure.
The aforementioned works are nothing more than a brief sample of the effort made, especially since 1950, to define creativity from multiple spheres of knowledge, although here we have focused on works in the field of psychology.
Among all the disciplines we are establishing certain points of agreement when it comes to establishing what can be understood as creativity and what is not, although we are still on the path to deciphering the enigma and establishing some truth regarding this phenomenon, which will hardly come to pass. to be absolute, as is often the case with many other constructs in the field of social sciences, but which It will help us understand the world around us and our own inner world a little better
Feist, G.J., & Barron, F.X. (2003). Predicting creativity from early to late adulthood: Intellect, potential and personality. Journal of research in personality.
Helson, R. (1972). Personality of women with imaginative and artistic interests: The role of maculinity, originality, and other characteristics in their creativity. Journal of creative behavior.
Mumford, MD, Baughman, WA, Maher, MA, Costanza, DP, & Supinski, EP (1997). Process-based measures of creative problem solving skills: IV. Category combination. Creativity Research Journal.
Mumford, MD, Mobley, MI, Uhlman, CE, Reiter-Palmon, R., & Doares, L.M. (1991). Process analytical models of creative capabilities. Creativity Research Journal.
Richards, R. (2007). Everyday creativity and new views of human nature: Psychological, social, and spiritual perspectives. American Psychological Association. Washington, D.C.
Runco, M.A. (2003). Education for creative potential. Scandinavian Journal of Education.
Runco, M. A. (1996). Personal creativity: Definition and developmental issues. New Directions for Child development.
Simonton, D. K. (1990). History, chemistry, psychology, and genius: An intellectual autobiography of historiometry. In MA Runco, & RS Albert (Edits.), Theories of creativity. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Sternberg, R.J., & Lubart, T.I. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its development. Human Development, 34 (1).
Vernon, P. (1989). The nature-nurture problem in creativity. In JA Glober, RR Ronning, & CR Reynols (Edits.), Handbook of creativity. New York: Plenum.
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt Brace and World.
