Individual Differences in Creativity

Creators and Presses: The Person–Situation Interaction in Negative Creativity

“…A valence-based approach to creativity requires a systematic investigation of the four Ps (Rhodes, 1961) by incorporating and examining valence in each component (Kapoor, 2015;Kapoor & Khan, 2016, 2017. In a person-situation interactionist perspective (e.g., Fleeson & Noftle, 2008), creative behavior is the product of person variables, like personality, cognitive styles, and intention, and situation variables, like features of the context and task (Woodman & Schoenfeldt, 1989). In fact, Rhodes (1961, p. 307) noted the need for the four Ps to be examined "in unity" to provide a complete understanding of creative behavior.…”

“…In fact, Rhodes (1961, p. 307) noted the need for the four Ps to be examined "in unity" to provide a complete understanding of creative behavior. Woodman and Schoenfeldt (1989) introduced an interactionist model of individual creativity, where antecedent conditions (including past reinforcement history) interacted with person variables (including intentions, cognitive style, and personality), and situation variables (including contextual and social influences) to produce creative behavior. This approach trumps studying the Ps of creativity in isolation by contextualizing creativity and examining relationships between them (see also Gl aveanu, 2013Gl aveanu, , 2015).…”

Entrepreneurial Creativity as Discovery and Exploitation of Business Opportunities

“…Numerous studies show that the innovative activities of individuals produce changes in reality (Amabile 1988;Woodman and Schoenfeldt 1989;Puccio 1991). Creativity, manifesting itself in the form of unexpected, original and unique results, is a force that generates something that it better than what existed before.…”

“…When intrinsic motivation is replaced with external motivation, the joy of doing something for its own sake is substituted with an extrinsic motive, with a resulting decline in quality and creativity. Noteworthy though Amabile's findings may be, it must be borne in mind that, among the schools of creativity, the social psychological school suffers the distinction of being the least theoretically structured and sophisticated (Woodman and Schoenfeldt 1989). Nonetheless, it has demonstrated the value and impact of social aspects for the study of creativity, and that creativity can only be understood in context.…”

“…These influences are so powerful that creativity cannot be studied without an understanding of its context (Woodman and Schoenfeldt 1989). Csikszentmihalyi (1988) has noted that creativity does not occur in a vacuum, but has a domain in which it takes place, as well as a symbolic field, in which it belongs.…”