Creativity, Problem Solving, and Solution Set Sightedness: Radically Reformulating <scp>BVSR</scp>

Simonton, Dean Keith

doi:10.1002/jocb.004

Cited by 36 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 50 publications

(106 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Simonton (2012aSimonton ( , 2012b recently proposed a modification of the definition of creativity. His definition is a quantitative and multiplicative definition of creativity that includes three components.…”

Section: Creativitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The creative person in science.

Grosul¹,

Feist²

2014

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The psychological qualities of the creative person in general are gradually becoming more and more clear, and yet the psychological qualities of the creative scientists remain less clear. The current investigation examined the personality characteristics of the creative scientist in a sample of 145 academic physical, biological, and social scientists (33% women) from major research universities throughout the United States. Personality data were collected online through completion of the Big Five Inventory (John, Donahue, & Kentle, 1991) and the Psychoticism subscale of the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (Francis, Brown, & Philipchalk, 1992). Creativity was assessed using various publication and citation-based metrics from Web of Science, Science Citation Index, and Social Science Citation Index, including the h-index and the creativity index (Soler, 2007). An overall creativity index was created by log-transforming, standardizing, and summing the multiple productivity and impact measures. Results mostly confirmed the prediction that openness to experience and psychoticism would explain variance in scientific creativity once career age, gender, and area of science were statistically controlled for in a stepwise hierarchical regression model. These patterns of results confirm and extend previous research in the psychology of science and suggest that personality traits function to lower behavioral thresholds and make creative behavior in science more likely.Psychological science is at the point that it has come to understand more and more about the creative person and product in general. There are many reasons why some people are more creative than others: cognitive processes such as fiuency and fiexibility of thought; broadness and looseness of association; more balanced hetnispheric brain activity; latent inhibition and looser associations; affective qualities such as cyclothymia and sometimes negative and sometimes positive mood; and environmental conditions that encourage and foster intrinsic motivation and acceptance of failure (Amabile

show abstract

Section: Creativitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The creative person in science.

Grosul¹,

Feist²

2014

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Today the most well known proponent of BVSR is Dean Keith Simonton [110][111][112][113][114][115][116][117]. As Simonton [110, p. 310] puts it:…”

Section: An Evolutionary Framework For Creativity?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After referring to his theory for over a decade as the Darwinian theory of creativity, Simonton has recently backed away from a Darwinian conception of the creative process [117]. While still using the acronym BVSR, and he claims that his theory has been "radically reformulated" to show that "BVSR's explanatory value does not depend on any specious association with Darwin's theory of evolution".…”

Section: An Evolutionary Framework For Creativity?mentioning

confidence: 99%

An evolutionary framework for cultural change: Selectionism versus communal exchange

Gabora

2013

Physics of Life Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dawkins' replicator-based conception of evolution has led to widespread misapplication of selectionism across the social sciences because it does not address the paradox that inspired the theory of natural selection in the first place: how do organisms accumulate change when traits acquired over their lifetime are obliterated? This is addressed by von Neumann's concept of a self-replicating automaton (SRA). A SRA consists of a self-assembly code that is used in two distinct ways: (1) actively deciphered during development to construct a self-similar replicant, and (2) passively copied to the replicant to ensure that it can reproduce. Information that is acquired over a lifetime is not transmitted to offspring, whereas information that is inherited during copying is transmitted. In cultural evolution there is no mechanism for discarding acquired change. Acquired change can accumulate orders of magnitude faster than, and quickly overwhelm, inherited change due to differential replication of variants in response to selection. This prohibits a selectionist but not an evolutionary framework for culture and the creative processes that fuel it. The importance non-Darwinian processes in biological evolution is increasingly recognized. Recent work on the origin of life suggests that early life evolved through a non-Darwinian process referred to as communal exchange that does not involve a self-assembly code, and that natural selection emerged from this more haphazard, ancestral evolutionary process. It is proposed that communal exchange provides an evolutionary framework for culture that enables specification of cognitive features necessary for a (real or artificial) society to evolve culture. This is supported by a computational model of cultural evolution and a conceptual network based program for documenting material cultural history, and it is consistent with high levels of human cooperation. Evolutionary Framework Culture 3Keywords: creativity, cultural evolution, meme, natural selection, replicator, selfreplicating automaton Evolutionary Framework Culture 4 IntroductionLike organisms, elements of culture exhibit descent with modification; new ideas and artifacts build adaptively on previous ones. If it were possible to root the social and behavioral sciences in an evolutionary framework, they might achieve a unification comparable with Darwin's unification of the life sciences. Thus it is unsurprising that, dating back to Herbert Spencer's introduction of the notion of social Darwinism a few years after Darwin's Origin of Species, Darwinian thinking has been applied to a range of phenomena outside of biology, including creativity [14,111], neural copying and pruning [11,12,13,23,26], law [55], cosmology [118], computer-mediated communication [74], and perhaps most extensively, cultural and economic change [7,8,15,71,86,87,107,108]. Elements of culture build on one another cumulatively, as demonstrated even in laboratory settings [10]. Not only does culture accumulate over time, but it adapts, diversifies,...

show abstract

“…The theory that creativity in the mind of an individual is an evolutionary process was proposed by Donald Campbell [14], who claimed that we generate new ideas through 'blind' variation and selective retention (abbreviated BVSR). Today the most well known proponent of BVSR is Dean Keith Simonton [110][111][112][113][114][115][116][117]. As Simonton [110, p. 310] puts it:…”

Section: An Evolutionary Framework For Creativity?mentioning

confidence: 99%

WITHDRAWN: An evolutionary framework for culture and creativity: Selectionism versus communal exchange

Gabora

2012

Physics of Life Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Creativity, Problem Solving, and Solution Set Sightedness: Radically Reformulating BVSR

Cited by 36 publications

References 50 publications

The creative person in science.

The creative person in science.

An evolutionary framework for cultural change: Selectionism versus communal exchange

WITHDRAWN: An evolutionary framework for culture and creativity: Selectionism versus communal exchange

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About