little-c versus big-c creativity...creativity comparisons personal versus consensual creativity...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
![Page 2: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Little-c creativity, Big-C Creativity
Formal Definitions and Implications
![Page 3: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
What is creativity?
![Page 4: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
The Problem:
Can research on creativity be productive without consensus on what it entails?
In particular, what is a “creative idea”?
Can we really study creative talent or its development without knowing what counts as a creative idea?
After all, the product, person, and process perspectives on creativity all depend on what counts as a creative idea
![Page 5: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Past reviews and discussions
Plucker, Beghetto, & Dow (2004)
Runco & Jaeger (2012)
Simonton (2012)
Piffer (2012)
![Page 6: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Four critical questions:
What are the assessment criteria?
How are the assessments scaled?
How are the assessments integrated?
Who makes the assessments?
![Page 7: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
What are the assessment criteria?
Two-criterion definitions
Some variation on
novel or original, and
useful, adaptive, or functional
But I would argue that “novelty” conflates “originality” with “surprise”
If we split the concept into two, then we get a three-criterion definition: originality, utility, and surprise
![Page 8: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
What are the assessment criteria?
Three-criterion definitions
US Patent Office:
new, useful, and nonobvious
Boden (2004):
novel, valuable, and surprising
Amabile (1996):
novel
appropriate, useful, correct, or valuable
heuristic rather than algorithmic
![Page 9: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
How are the assessments scaled?
Qualitative? Yes/No?
Quantitative? Numbers?
Ordinal? Ranks?
Interval? Continuous?
Ratio? Zero point?
Proportion or probability? 0-1?
My preference for latter
![Page 10: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
How are the assessments integrated?
Additive?
Multiplicative?
Why the latter > former
The reinvented wheel?
The bank safe made out of soap bubbles?
![Page 11: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Who makes the assessments?
The individual?
“little-c creativity”
“P-creative” (Boden, 2004)
The field?
“Big-Creativity”
“H-creative” (Boden, 2004)
Hence, need for individual- and field-level definitions
![Page 12: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Individual-level definition
Given k ideas x1, x2, x3, … xi, … xk, how do we gauge their creativity?
Three parameters:
personal probability pi,
where 0 ≤ pi ≤ 1
personal utility ui,
where 0 ≤ ui ≤ 1
personal obviousness vi,
where 0 ≤ vi ≤ 1
![Page 13: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Individual-level definition
N.B.: pi =0 only when idea xi is not initially available to the individual without entering an “incubation period”
An serendipitous priming stimulus initiates the “spreading activation” that eventually yields pi >0
Hence, a eureka or aha! experience
![Page 14: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Individual-level definition
Derived parameters
personal originality (1 - pi),
where 0 ≤ (1 - pi) ≤ 1
personal surprisingness (1 - vi),
where 0 ≤ (1 - vi) ≤ 1
Therefore, personal creativity
ci = (1 - pi)ui(1 - vi),
where 0 ≤ ci ≤ 1
literally “little-c” creativity
![Page 15: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Individual-level definition
Two significant implications
First – Whereas in the
Additive model personal creativity has normal distribution, in the
Multiplicative model personal creativity has skewed distribution … as in …
![Page 16: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
![Page 17: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
versus
![Page 18: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
![Page 19: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Individual-level definition
Two significant implications
Second –
The necessity for BVSR creativity,
i.e., blind variation and selective retention (Campbell, 1960; Simonton, 1985-2013)
That is, ideas that are highly sighted cannot be creative whereas highly blind ideas can vary greatly in creativity, requiring a selection-retention procedure to winnow out the wheat from the chaff
To demonstrate …
![Page 20: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Individual-level definition
Two significant implications
Second –
The sightedness of xi is given by
si = piuivi, where 0 ≤ si ≤ 1
i.e., an idea is highly sighted to the degree that it is highly probable, highly useful, and highly probable because it is already known to be highly useful
The sightedness of the entire set of k ideas is given by S = 1/n Σ si, where 0 ≤ S ≤ 1
![Page 21: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Individual-level definition
Two significant implications
Second –
Hence, it follows that
the blindness of xi is given by bi = 1 – si
and the blindness of the entire set of k ideas is given by B = 1 – S.
Concentrating on single ideas, note that
as bi → 0, ci → 0; but that
as bi → 1, then max-ci → 1 but σc2 → 1
viz. the following scatter plot …
![Page 22: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Sightedness
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Cre
ativity
![Page 23: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Now time to switch to
Big-C Creativity
![Page 24: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Field-level definition
Csikszentmihályi’s (1990) systems perspective Domain “the parameters of the cultural
symbol system” (p. 190)
Field “individuals who know the domain’s grammar of rules and are more or less loosely organized to act as gatekeepers to it” (p. 201) Field size = n (including the individual),
where 250 ≤ n ≤ 600 (Wray, 2010)
![Page 25: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Field-level definition
If Mj identifies the jth field member:
Pi = 1/n Σ pji, = consensual probability
Ui = 1/n Σ uji, = consensual utility
Vi = 1/n Σ vji, = consensual obviousness; and
Ci = 1/n Σ cji, = consensual creativity,
or literally its “Big-C” creativity
where all values are positive decimals ranging from 0 to 1
![Page 26: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Field-level definition
Yet given that the consensual parameters are averages we must define the following variances:
σ2(p) = 1/n Σ (pji - Pi)2,
σ2(u) = 1/n Σ (uji - Ui)2,
σ2(v) = 1/n Σ (vji - Vi)2, and
σ2(c) = 1/n Σ (cji - Ci)2
where all variances range from 0 to 1
![Page 27: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Field-level definition
Hence, crucial distinction among
High-consensus fields where
σ2(p) ≈ σ2(u) ≈ σ2(v) ≈ σ2(c) ≈ 0,
Medium-consensus fields where
σ2(p) ≈ σ2(u) ≈ σ2(v) ≈ σ2(c) ≈ .5, and
Low-consensus fields where
σ2(p) ≈ σ2(u) ≈ σ2(v) ≈ σ2(c) ≈ 1
To illustrate, in the sciences …
![Page 28: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
![Page 29: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Field-level definition
Hence, crucial distinction between
High-consensus fields where
σ2(p) ≈ σ2(u) ≈ σ2(v) ≈ σ2(c) ≈ 0,
Medium-consensus fields where
σ2(p) ≈ σ2(u) ≈ σ2(v) ≈ σ2(c) ≈ .5, and
Low-consensus fields where
σ2(p) ≈ σ2(u) ≈ σ2(v) ≈ σ2(c) ≈ 1
These variances are absolutely critical in calibrating the relation between little-c and Big-C creativity!
![Page 30: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Individual-fieldcreativity comparisons
Assume idea xi was created by individual M1
Hence, the contrast is between c1i
and Ci
Although the latter includes the former, any part-whole bias shrinks as n increases or as σ2(c) decreases
![Page 31: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Individual-fieldcreativity comparisons
Creativity evaluations in high- versus low-consensus fields
High-consensus fields
Pi ≈ p1i, Ui ≈ u1i, Vi ≈ v1i, and Ci ≈ c1i
“neglected genius” extremely rare
![Page 32: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Individual-fieldcreativity comparisons
Creativity evaluations in high- versus low-consensus fields
Low-consensus fields
Case 1: Ci > c1i (“attributed talents”)
Case 2: Ci < c1i (“neglected geniuses”)
Case 3: Ci ≈ c1i
Individual M1 “typical” of field
Ci ≈ c1i does not imply that Pi ≈ p1i, Ui ≈ u1i, and Vi ≈ v1i except when Ci ≈ c1i ≈ 1
![Page 33: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Individual-fieldcreativity comparisons
Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields
As σ2(c) → 1, then a large proportion of the field would arrive at the value cji = 0 (j ≠ 1)
Moreover, increased difficulty of calibrating the transition from “little-c” to “Big-C” creativity
e.g., the CAQ (Carson, Peterson, & Higgins, 2005):
![Page 34: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
![Page 35: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
![Page 36: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Two Implications
First –
Big-C creativity is not just a simple quantitative extension of little-c creativity, but represents a distinct set of field assessments that may or may not dovetail with those operating at the individual level
![Page 37: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
little-c
little-c
little-c Big-C
Big-C
Big-C
Extremely High Consensus
Extremely Low Consensus
Moderate Consensus
![Page 38: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Two Implications
Second –
Creative talent and its development must differ for
high-consensus versus low-consensus fields, and
little-c versus Big-C creativity
Or stated more visually …
![Page 39: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
![Page 40: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
ALBERT EINSTEIN
vs
Robert Einstein
![Page 41: Little-c versus Big-C Creativity...creativity comparisons Personal versus consensual creativity measurement in low-consensus fields As σ2(c) →1, then a large proportion of the field](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081522/5f2cdb8719755213065910c9/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)