References

Dean Keith Simonton

doi:10.1017/CBO9781139165358.010

Adams, C. W. (1946). The age at which scientists do their best work. Isis, 36, 166–169Google Scholar PubMed

Adler, A. (1938). Social interest: A challenge to mankind (J. Linton & R. Vaughan, Trans.). London: Faber & Faber

Albert, R. S. (1971). Cognitive development and parental loss among the gifted, the exceptionally gifted and the creative. Psychological Reports, 29, 19–26CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Allison, P. D., Long, J. S., & Krauze, T. K. (1982). Cumulative advantage and inequality in science. American Sociological Review, 47, 615–625CrossRef Google Scholar

Allison, P. D., Price, D. S., Griffith, B. C., Moravcsik, M. J., & Stewart, J. A. (1976). Lotka's law: A problem in its interpretation and application. Social Studies of Science, 6, 269–276CrossRef Google Scholar

Allison, P. D., & Stewart, J. A. (1974). Productivity differences among scientists: Evidence for accumulative advantage. American Sociological Review, 39, 596–606CrossRef Google Scholar

Altus, W. D. (1966, January 7). Birth order and its sequelae. Science, 151, 44–48CrossRef Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997–1013CrossRef Google Scholar

American heritage electronic dictionary (3rd ed.). (1992). Boston: Houghton Mifflin

Andrews, F. M. (1979). Motivation, diversity, and the performance of research units. In F. M. Andrews (Ed.), Scientific productivity: The effectiveness of research groups in six countries (pp. 253–289). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press

Ansburg, P. I., & Hill, K. (2003). Creative and analytic thinkers differ in their use of attentional resources. Personality & Individual Differences, 34, 1141–1152CrossRef Google Scholar

Ashton, S. V., & Oppenheim, C. (1978). A method of predicting Nobel prizewinners in chemistry. Social Studies of Science, 8, 341–348CrossRef Google Scholar

Austin, J. H. (1978). Chase, chance, and creativity: The lucky art of novelty. New York: Columbia University Press

Baer, J. (1993). Creativity and divergent thinking: A task-specific approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum

Baer, J. (1994). Divergent thinking is not a general trait: A multidomain training experiment. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 35–46CrossRef Google Scholar

Baer, J. (1996). The effects of task-specific divergent-thinking training. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30, 183–187CrossRef Google Scholar

Bain, A. (1977). The senses and the intellect (D. N. Robinson, Ed.). Washington, DC: University Publications of America. (Original work published 1855.)

Barron, F. X. (1963). The needs for order and for disorder as motives in creative activity. In C. W. Taylor & F. X. Barron (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 153–160). New York: Wiley

Barron, F. X. (1969). Creative person and creative process. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston

Barron, F. X., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 439–476CrossRef Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., & Prinz, J. J. (1997). Mundane creativity in perceptual symbol systems. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, & J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 267–309). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association

Bayer, A. E., & Dutton, J. E. (1977). Career age and research — Professional activities of academic scientists: Tests of alternative non-linear models and some implications for higher education faculty policies. Journal of Higher Education, 48, 259–282Google Scholar

Bayer, A. E., & Folger, J. (1966). Some correlates of a citation measure of productivity in science. Sociology of Education, 39, 381–390CrossRef Google Scholar

Bell, E. T. (1937). Men of mathematics. New York: Simon & Schuster

Bell, E. T. (1951). Mathematics: Queen and servant of science. New York: McGraw Hill

Bernal, J. D. (1971). Science in history (4 vols., 3rd. ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Berry, C. (1981). The Nobel scientists and the origins of scientific achievement. British Journal of Sociology, 32, 381–391CrossRef Google Scholar

Berry, C. (1999). Religious traditions as contexts of historical creativity: Patterns of scientific and artistic achievement and their stability. Personality & Individual Differences, 26, 1125–1135CrossRef Google Scholar

Beveridge, W. I. B. (1957). The art of scientific investigation (3rd ed.). New York: Vintage

Blackburn, R. T., Behymer, C. E., & Hall, D. E. (1978). Correlates of faculty publications. Sociology of Education, 51, 132–141CrossRef Google Scholar

Bliss, W. D. (1970). Birth order of creative writers. Journal of Individual Psychology, 26, 200–202Google Scholar PubMed

Bloom, B. S. (1963). Report on creativity research by the examiner's office of the University of Chicago. In C. W. Taylor & F. X. Barron (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 251–264). New York: Wiley

Boden, M. A. (1991). The creative mind: Myths & mechanisms. New York: Basic Books

Boden, M. A. (1995). What is creativity? In M. A. Boden (Ed.), Dimensions of creativity (pp. 75–117). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Bohr, H. (1967). My father. In S. Rozental (Ed.), Niels Bohr: His life and work as seen by his friends and colleagues (pp. 325–335). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing

Boring, E. G. (1963). History, psychology, and science (R. I. Watson & D. T. Campbell, Eds.). New York: Wiley

Bowen, D. D., Perloff, R., & Jacoby, J. (1972). Improving manuscript evaluation procedures. American Psychologist, 27, 221–225CrossRef Google Scholar

Bowerman, W. G. (1947). Studies in genius. New York: Philosophical Library

Bowers, K. S., Farvolden, P., & Mermigis, L. (1995). Intuitive antecedents of;insight. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 27–51). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Bradshaw, G. F., Langley, P. W., & Simon, H. A. (1983). Studying scientific discovery by computer simulation. Science, 222, 971–975CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Bramwell, B. S. (1948). Galton's “Hereditary” and the three following generations since 1869. Eugenics Review, 39, 146–153Google Scholar PubMed

Brannigan, A. (1981). The social basis of scientific discoveries. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press

Brannigan, A., & Wanner, R. A. (1983a). Historical distributions of multiple discoveries and theories of scientific change. Social Studies of Science, 13, 417–435CrossRef Google Scholar

Brannigan, A., & Wanner, R. A. (1983b). Multiple discoveries in science: A test of the communication theory. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 8, 135–151CrossRef Google Scholar

Brimhall, D. R. (1922). Family resemblances among American Men of Science. American Naturalist, 56, 504–547CrossRef Google Scholar

Brimhall, D. R. (1923a). Family resemblances among American Men of Science. II. Degree of resemblance in comparison with the generality: Proportion of workers in each science and distribution of replies. American Naturalist, 57, 74–88CrossRef Google Scholar

Brimhall, D. R. (1923b). Family resemblances among American Men of Science. III. The influence of the nearness of kinship. American Naturalist, 57, 137–152CrossRef Google Scholar

Bringmann, W. G., & Balk, M. M. (1983). Wilhelm Wundt's publication record: A re-examination. Storia e Critica della Psichologia, 4, 61–86Google Scholar PubMed

Brown, F. (1968). Bereavement and lack of a parent in childhood. In E. Miller (Ed.), Foundations of child psychiatry (pp. 435–455). Oxford, England: Pergamon

Brown, V. R., & Paulus, P. B. (2002). Making group brainstorming more effective: Recommendations from an associative memory perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 208–212CrossRef Google Scholar

Burt, C. (1943). Ability and income. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 12, 83–98CrossRef Google Scholar

Burt, C. (1963). Is intelligence distributed normally?British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 16, 175–190CrossRef Google Scholar

Busse, T. V., & Mansfield, R. S. (1984). Selected personality traits and achievement in male scientists. Journal of Psychology, 116, 117–131CrossRef Google Scholar

Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review, 67, 380–400CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Candolle, A. de (1873). Histoire des sciences et des savants depuis deux siècles. Genève: Georg

Cannon, W. B. (1940). The role of chance in discovery. Scientific Monthly, 50, 204–209Google Scholar

Carringer, D. C. (1974). Creative thinking abilities in Mexican youth. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 5, 492–504CrossRef Google Scholar

Carson, S., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2003). Decreased latent inhibition is associated with increased creative achievement in high-functioning individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 499–506CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Cassandro, V. J. (2001). Versatility, creative products, and the personality correlates of eminent creators. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Davis

Cattell, R. B., & Drevdahl, J. E. (1955). A comparison of the personality profile (16 P. F.) of eminent researchers with that of eminent teachers and administrators, and of the general population. British Journal of Psychology, 46, 248–261CrossRef Google Scholar

Chambers, J. A. (1964). Relating personality and biographical factors to scientific creativity. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 78 (7, Whole No. 584)CrossRef Google Scholar

Charlton, S., & Bakan, P. (1988–89). Cognitive complexity and creativity. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 8, 315–322CrossRef Google Scholar

Christensen, H., & Jacomb, P. A. (1992). The lifetime productivity of eminent Australian academics. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 7, 681–686CrossRef Google Scholar

Cicchetti, D. V. (1991). The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 119–186CrossRef Google Scholar

Clark, R. D., & Rice, G. A. (1982). Family constellations and eminence: The birth orders of Nobel Prize winners. Journal of Psychology, 110, 281–287CrossRef Google Scholar

Cohen, J. M., & Cohen, M. J. (Eds.). (1960). The Penguin dictionary of quotations. Baltimore: Penguin Books

Cole, J. R. (1987). Women in science. In D. N. Jackson & J. P. Rushton (Eds.), Scientific excellence: Origins and assessment (pp. 359–375). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications

Cole, J., & Cole, S. (1972, October 27). The Ortega hypothesis. Science, 178, 368–375CrossRef Google Scholar

Cole, S. (1979). Age and scientific performance. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 958–977CrossRef Google Scholar

Cole, S. (1983). The hierarchy of the sciences?American Journal of Sociology, 89, 111–139CrossRef Google Scholar

Cole, S., & Cole, J. R. (1967). Scientific output and recognition: A study in the operation of the reward system in science. American Sociological Review, 32, 377–390CrossRef Google Scholar

Cole, S., & Cole, J. R. (1973). Social stratification in science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Cole, S., Cole, J. R., & Simon, G. A. (1981). Chance and consensus in peer review. Science, 214, 881–886CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Comte, A. (1855). The positive philosophy of Auguste Comte (H. Martineau, Trans.). New York: Blanchard. (Original work published 1839–1842.)

Constant, E. W., II (1978). On the diversity of co-evolution of technological multiples: Steam turbines and Pelton water wheels. Social Studies of Science, 8, 183–210CrossRef Google Scholar

Corry, L., Renn, J., & Stachel, J. (1997, November 14). Belated decision in the Hilbert-Einstein priority dispute. Science, 278, 1270–1273CrossRef Google Scholar

Cox, C. (1926). The early mental traits of three hundred geniuses. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press

Crane, D. (1967). The gatekeepers of science: Some factors affecting the selection of articles for scientific journals. American Sociologist, 2, 195–201Google Scholar

Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671–684CrossRef Google Scholar

Cropper, W. H. (1970). The quantum physicists. New York: Oxford University Press

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). The domain of creativity. In M. A. Runco & R. S. Albert (Eds.), Theories of creativity (pp. 190–212). Newbury Park: Sage

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–338). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Daintith, J., Mitchell, S., & Tootill, E. (1981). A biographical encyclopedia of scientists (Vol. 1). New York: Facts on File

Darwin, F. (Ed.). (1958). The autobiography of Charles Darwin and selected letters. New York: Dover. (Original work published 1892.)

Davis, G. A. (1975). In frumious pursuit of the creative person. Journal of Creative Behavior, 9, 75–87CrossRef Google Scholar

Davis, R. A. (1987). Creativity in neurological publications. Neurosurgery, 20, 652–663CrossRef Google Scholar

Dennis, W. (1954a, September). Bibliographies of eminent scientists. Scientific Monthly, 79, 180–183Google Scholar

Dennis, W. (1954b). Productivity among American psychologists. American Psychologist, 9, 191–194CrossRef Google Scholar

Dennis, W. (1955, April). Variations in productivity among creative workers. Scientific Monthly, 80, 277–278Google Scholar

Dennis, W. (1966). Creative productivity between the ages of 20 and 80 years. Journal of Gerontology, 21, 1–8CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dennis, W., & Girden, E. (1954). Current scientific activities of psychologists as a function of age. Journal of Gerontology, 9, 175–178CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dewing, K., & Battye, G. (1971). Attention deployment and nonverbal fluency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 214–218CrossRef Google Scholar

Diamond, A. M. Jr. (1980). Age and the acceptance of cliometrics. Journal of Economic History, 40, 838–841CrossRef Google Scholar

Díaz de Chumaceiro, C. L. (1995). Serendipity or pseudoserendipity? Unexpected versus desired results. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29, 143–147CrossRef Google Scholar

Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509CrossRef Google Scholar

Dirac, P. A. M. (1963). The physicist's picture of nature. Scientific American, 208 (5), 45–53CrossRef Google Scholar

Downs, R. B. (1983). Books that changed the world (rev. ed.). New York: New American Library

Dryden, J. (1885). Epistle to Congreve. In W. Scott & G. Saintsbury (Eds.), The works of John Dryden (Vol. 11, pp. 57–60). Edinburgh: Paterson. (Original work published 1693)

Dugosh, K. L., Paulus, P. B., Roland, E. J., & Yang, H.-C. (2000). Cognitive stimulation in brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 722–735CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 365–396). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In T. B. Ward & S. M. Smith (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 461–493). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association

Eiduson, B. T. (1962). Scientists: Their psychological world. New York: Basic Books

Eisenman, R. (1964). Birth order and artistic creativity. Journal of Individual Psychology, 20, 183–185Google Scholar

Eisenstadt, J. M. (1978). Parental loss and genius. American Psychologist, 33, 211–223CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ellis, H. (1926). A study of British genius (rev. ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin

Ericsson, K. A. (1996). The acquisition of expert performance: An introduction to some of the issues. In K. A. Ericsson (Ed.), The road to expert performance: Empirical evidence from the arts and sciences, sports, and games (pp. 1–50). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Eysenck, H. J. (1993). Creativity and personality: Suggestions for a theory. Psychological Inquiry, 4, 147–178CrossRef Google Scholar

Eysenck, H. J. (1994). Creativity and personality: Word association, origence, and psychoticism. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 209–216CrossRef Google Scholar

Eysenck, H. J. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press

Faust, D. (1984). Limits of scientific reasoning. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press

Feist, G. J. (1993). A structural model of scientific eminence. Psychological Science, 4, 366–371CrossRef Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1994). Personality and working style predictors of integrative complexity: A study of scientists' thinking about research and teaching. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 474–484CrossRef Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1997). Quantity, quality, and depth of research as influences on scientific eminence: Is quantity most important?Creativity Research Journal, 10, 325–335CrossRef Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 290–309CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Feist, G. J., & Barron, F. X. (2003). Predicting creativity from early to late adulthood: Intellect, potential, and personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 62–88CrossRef Google Scholar

Feist, G. J., & Gorman, M. E. (1998). The psychology of science: Review and integration of a nascent discipline. Review of General Psychology, 2, 3–47CrossRef Google Scholar

Ferber, M. A. (1986). Citations: Are they an objective measure of scholarly merit?Signs, 11, 381–389CrossRef Google Scholar

Fernberger, S. W. (1946, August 23). Scientific publication as affected by war and politics. Science, 104, 175–177CrossRef Google Scholar

Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill

Fowler, R. G. (1987). Toward a quantitative theory of intellectual discovery (especially in physics). Journal of Scientific Exploration, 1, 11–20Google Scholar

Furumoto, L. (1989). The new history of psychology. In I. S. Cohen (Ed.), The G. Stanley Hall lecture series (Vol. 9, pp. 9–34). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association

Gabora, L. (2002). Cognitive mechanisms underlying the creative process. In T. Hewett & T. Kavanagh (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 126–133). United Kingdom: Loughborough UniversityCrossRef

Galton, F. (1869). Hereditary genius: An inquiry into its laws and consequences. London: Macmillan

Galton, F. (1874). English men of science: Their nature and nurture. London: Macmillan

Galton, F. (1972). Hereditary genius: An inquiry into its laws and consequences (2nd ed.). Gloucester, MA: Smith. (Original work published 1892.)

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: A theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books

Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gandhi. New York: Basic Books

Garfield, E. (1987). Mapping the world of science: Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? In D. N. Jackson & J. P. Rushton (Eds.), Scientific excellence: Origins and assessment (pp. 98–128). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications

Garvey, W. D., & Tomita, K. (1972). Continuity of productivity by scientists in the years 1968–1971. Science Studies, 2, 379–383CrossRef Google Scholar

Ghadirian, A.-M., Gregoire, P., & Kosmidis, H. (2001). Creativity and the evolution of psychopathologies. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 145–148CrossRef Google Scholar

Gholson, B., Shadish, Jr., W. R., Neimeyer, R. A., & Houts, A. C. (Eds.). (1989). The psychology of science: Contributions to metascience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Gibson, J., & Light, P. (1967). Intelligence among university scientists. Nature, 213, 441–443CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gieryn, T. F., & Hirsh, R. F. (1983). Marginality and innovation in science. Social Studies of Science, 13, 87–106CrossRef Google Scholar

Goertzel, M. G., Goertzel, V. & Goertzel, T. G. (1978). 300 eminent personalities: A psychosocial analysis of the famous. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Goertzel, V., & Goertzel, M. G. (1962). Cradles of eminence. Boston: Little, Brown

Goldberg, D. E. (1989). Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

Gooding, D. C. (1996). Scientific discovery as creative exploration: Faraday's experiments. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 189–205CrossRef Google Scholar

Gottfredson, S. D. (1978). Evaluating psychological research reports: Dimensions, reliability, and correlates of quality judgments. American Psychologist, 33, 920–934CrossRef Google Scholar

Gough, H. G. (1976). Studying creativity by means of word association tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 348–353CrossRef Google Scholar

Gough, H. G. (1979). A creative personality scale for the adjective check list. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1398–1405CrossRef Google Scholar

Greenwald, A. G., & Schuh, E. S. (1994). An ethnic bias in scientific citations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 623–639CrossRef Google Scholar

Gruber, H. E. (1974). Darwin on man: A psychological study of scientific creativity. New York: Dutton

Gruber, H. E. (1989). Networks of enterprise in creative scientific work. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish, Jr., R. A. Neimeyer, & A. C. Houts (Eds.), The psychology of science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 246–265). Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRef

Gruszka, A., & Necka, E. (2002). Priming and acceptance of close and remote associations by creative and less creative people. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 193–205CrossRef Google Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill

Hadamard, J. (1945). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press

Hagstrom, W. O. (1974). Competition in science. American Sociological Review, 39, 1–18CrossRef Google Scholar

Haight, F. A. (1967). Handbook of the Poisson distribution. New York: Wiley

Han, K. S. (2003). Domain-specificity of creativity in young children: How quantitative and qualitative data support it. Journal of Creative Behavior, 37, 117–142CrossRef Google Scholar

Hargens, L. L. (1978). Relations between work habits, research technologies, and eminence in science. Sociology of Work and Occupations, 5, 97–112CrossRef Google Scholar

Hargens, L. L., McCann, J. C., & Reskin, B. F. (1978). Productivity and reproductivity: Fertility and professional achievement among research scientists. Social Forces, 57, 154–163CrossRef Google Scholar

Hart, M. H. (1987). The 100: A ranking of the most influential persons in history. Secaucus, NJ: Citadel Press

Helmholtz, H. von (1898). An autobiographical sketch. In Popular lectures on scientific subjects, second series (E. Atkinson, Trans., pp. 266–291). New York: Longmans, Green

Helmholtz, H. von (1971). An autobiographical sketch. In R. Kahl (Ed.), Selected writings of Hermann von Helmholtz (pp. 466–478). Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press. (Original work published 1891.)

Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., Beane, W. E., Lucker, G. W., & Matthews, K. A. (1980). Making it in academic psychology: Demographic and personality correlates of attainment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 896–908CrossRef Google Scholar

Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., & Thorbecke, W. L. (1981). On the stability of productivity and recognition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7, 516–522CrossRef Google Scholar

Helson, R. (1980). The creative woman mathematician. In L. H. Fox, L. Brody, & D. Tobin (Eds.), Women and the mathematical mystique (pp. 23–54). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press

Helson, R., & Crutchfield, R. S. (1970). Mathematicians: The creative researcher and the average Ph.D.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 34, 250–257CrossRef Google Scholar

Hoffman, B. (1972). Albert Einstein: Creator and rebel. New York: Plume

Holland, J. (1975). Natural and artificial systems. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press

Holland, J. H. (1992). Genetic algorithms. Scientific American, 267 (1), 66–72CrossRef Google Scholar

Holton, G. (1971–72). On trying to understand the scientific genius. American Scholar, 41, 95–110Google Scholar

Holton, G. (1982). Toward a theory of scientific progress. In G. A. Almond, M. Chodorow, & R. H. Pearce (Eds.), Progress and its discontents (pp. 202–225). Berkeley: University of California Press

Hook, E. B. (2002). Prematurity in scientific discovery: On resistance and neglect. Berkeley: University of California Press

Horner, K. L., Rushton, J. P., & Vernon, P. A. (1986). Relation between aging and research productivity of academic psychologists. Psychology and Aging, 1, 319–324CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Horner, K. L., Murray, H. G., & Rushton, J. P. (1994). Aging and administration in academic psychologists. Social Behavior and Personality, 22, 343–346CrossRef Google Scholar

Horvitz, L. A. (2000). The quotable scientist: Words of wisdom from Charles Darwin, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman, Galileo, Marie Curie, and more. New York: McGraw-Hill

Huber, J. C. (1998a). Invention and inventivity as a special kind of creativity, with implications for general creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 32, 58–72CrossRef Google Scholar

Huber, J. C. (1998b). Invention and inventivity is a random, Poisson process: A potential guide to analysis of general creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 231–241CrossRef Google Scholar

Huber, J. C. (1999). Inventive productivity and the statistics of exceedances. Scientometrics, 45, 33–53CrossRef Google Scholar

Huber, J. C. (2000). A statistical analysis of special cases of creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 34, 203–225CrossRef Google Scholar

Huber, J. C. (2001). A new method for analyzing scientific productivity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52, 1089–1099CrossRef Google Scholar

Huber, J. C. (2002). A new model that generates Lotka's Law. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, 209–219CrossRef Google Scholar

Huber, J. C., & Wagner-Döbler, R. (2001a). Scientific production: A statistical analysis of authors in mathematical logic. Scientometrics, 50, 323–337CrossRef Google Scholar

Huber, J. C., & Wagner-Döbler, R. (2001b). Scientific production: A statistical analysis of authors in physics, 1800–1900. Scientometrics, 50, 437–453CrossRef Google Scholar

Hudson, L. (1958). Undergraduate academic record of Fellows of the Royal Society. Nature, 182, 1326CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Hudson, L. (1966). Contrary imaginations. Baltimore: Penguin

Hudson, L., & Jacot, B. (1986). The outsider in science. In C. Bagley & G. K. Verma (Eds.), Personality, cognition and values (pp. 3–23). London: MacmillanCrossRef

Hull, D. L., Tessner, P. D., & Diamond, A. M. (1978, November 17). Planck's principle: Do younger scientists accept new scientific ideas with greater alacrity than older scientists?Science, 202, 717–723CrossRef Google Scholar

Illingworth, R. S., & Illingworth, C. M. (1969). Lessons from childhood. Edinburgh: Livingston

James, W. (1880, October). Great men, great thoughts, and the environment. Atlantic Monthly, 46, 441–459Google Scholar

Jeans, J. (1942). Newton and the science of to-day. Nature, 150, 710–715CrossRef Google Scholar

Jevons, W. S. (1900). The principles of science: A treatise on logic and scientific method (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan. (Original work published 1877.)

Johnson, S. (1781). The lives of the most eminent English poets (Vol. 1). London: Bathurst et al

Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1993). Human and machine thinking. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Juda, A. (1949). The relationship between highest mental capacity and psychic abnormalities. American Journal of Psychiatry, 106, 296–307CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Jungk, R. (1958). Brighter than a thousand suns (J. Cleugh, Trans.). New York: Harcourt Brace

Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press

Kantorovich, A., & Ne'eman, Y. (1989). Serendipity as a source of evolutionary progress in science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 20, 505–529CrossRef Google Scholar

Kaplan, R. (Ed.). (2001). Science says: A collection of quotations on the history, meaning, and practice of science. New York: Freeman

Karlson, J. I. (1970). Genetic association of giftedness and creativity with schizophrenia. Hereditas, 66, 177–182CrossRef Google Scholar

Kasof, J. (1997). Creativity and breadth of attention. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 303–315CrossRef Google Scholar

King, L. A., McKee Walker, L., & Broyles, S. J. (1996). Creativity and the five-factor model. Journal of Research in Personaltiy, 30, 189–203CrossRef Google Scholar

Klahr, D. (2000). Exploring science: The cognition and development of discovery processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Klahr, D., & Simon, H. A. (1999). Studies of scientific creativity: Complementary approaches and convergent findings. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 524–543CrossRef Google Scholar

Koestler, A. (1964). The act of creation. New York: Macmillan

Köhler, W. (1925). The mentality of apes (E. Winter, Trans.). New York: Harcourt, Brace

Koza, J. R. (1992). Genetic programming: On the programming of computers by means of natural selection. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Koza, J. R. (1994). Genetic programming II: Automatic discovery of reusable programs. Cambridge: MIT Press

Koza, J. R., Bennett III, F. H., Andre, D., & Keane, M. A. (1999). Genetic programming III: Darwinian invention and problem solving. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann

Kroeber, A. L. (1917). The superorganic. American Anthropologist, 19, 163–214CrossRef Google Scholar

Kroeber, A. L. (1944). Configurations of culture growth. Berkeley: University of California Press

Kroeber, A. L. (1963). Anthropology: Culture patterns and processes. New York: Harbinger Book

Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The essential tension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Kulkarni, D., & Simon, H. A. (1988). The process of scientific discovery: The strategy of experimentation. Cognitive Science, 12, 139–175CrossRef Google Scholar

Kyvik, S. (1989). Productivity differences, fields of learning, and Lotka's law. Scientometrics, 15, 205–214CrossRef Google Scholar

Kyvik, S. (1990). Motherhood and scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 20, 149–160CrossRef Google Scholar

Lamb, D., & Easton, S. M. (1984). Multiple discovery. Avebury, England: Avebury

Lambert, W. E., Tucker, G. R., & d'Anglejan, A. (1973). Cognitive and attitudinal consequences of bilingual schooling: The St. Lambert project through grade five. Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 141–159CrossRef Google Scholar

Langley, P., Simon, H. A., Bradshaw, G. L., & Zythow, J. M. (1987). Scientific discovery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Lee, J. D., Vicente, K. J., Cassano, A., & Shearer, A. (2003). Can scientific impact be judged prospectively? A bibliometric test of Simonton's model of creative productivity. Scientometrics, 56, 223–232CrossRef Google Scholar

Lehman, H. C. (1953). Age and achievement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press

Lehman, H. C. (1947). The exponential increase of man's cultural output. Social Forces, 25, 281–290CrossRef Google Scholar

Lehman, H. C. (1958, May 23). The chemist's most creative years. Science, 127, 1213–1222CrossRef Google Scholar

Lehman, H. C., & Witty, P. A. (1931). Scientific eminence and church membership. Scientific Monthly, 33, 544–549Google Scholar

Levin, S. G., & Stephan, P. E. (1989). Age and research productivity of academic scientists. Research in Higher Education, 30, 531–549CrossRef Google Scholar

Levin, S. G., & Stephan, P. E. (1991). Research productivity over the life cycle: Evidence for academic scientists. American Economic Review, 81, 114–132Google Scholar

Levin, S. G., & Stephan, P. E. (1999, August 20). Are the foreign born a source of strength for U.S. science?Science, 285, 1213–1214CrossRef Google Scholar

Lindsey, D. (1988). Assessing precision in the manuscript review process: A little better than a dice roll. Scientometrics, 14, 75–82CrossRef Google Scholar

Long, J. S. (1992). Measures of sex differences in scientific productivity. Social Forces, 71, 159–178CrossRef Google Scholar

Lopez, E. C., Esquivel, G. B., & Houtz, J. C. (1993). The creative skills of culturally and linguistically diverse gifted students. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 401–412CrossRef Google Scholar

Lotka, A. J. (1926). The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 16, 317–323Google Scholar

Ludwig, A. M. (1992). Creative achievement and psychopathology: Comparison among professions. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 46, 330–356CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ludwig, A. M. (1995). The price of greatness: Resolving the creativity and madness controversy. New York: Guilford Press

Ludwig, A. M. (1998). Method and madness in the arts and sciences. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 93–101CrossRef Google Scholar

Mach, E. (1896, January). On the part played by accident in invention and discovery. Monist, 6, 161–175CrossRef Google Scholar

MacKinnon, D. W., & Hall, W. B. (1972). Intelligence and creativity. Proceedings of the XVIIth International Congress of Applied Psychology, Liege, Belgium (Vol. 2, 1883–1888). Brussels: EDITEST

Mandler, G. (1995). Origins and consequences of novelty. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 9–25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Manis, J. G. (1951). Some academic influences upon publication productivity. Social Forces, 29, 267–272CrossRef Google Scholar

Mansfield, R. S., & Busse, T. V. (1981). The psychology of creativity and discovery: Scientists and their work. Chicago: Nelson-Hall

Marsh, H. W., & Ball, S. (1989). The peer review process used to evaluate manuscripts submitted to academic journals: Interjudgmental reliability. Journal of Experimental Education, 57, 151–169CrossRef Google Scholar

Martindale, C. (1989). Personality, situation, and creativity. In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 211–232). New York: Plenum PressCrossRef

Martindale, C. (1990). The clockwork muse: The predictability of artistic styles. New York: Basic Books

Martindale, C. (1995). Creativity and connectionism. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 249–268). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Martindale, C., Brewer, W. F., Helson, R., Rosenberg, S., Simonton, D. K., Keeley, A., Leigh, J., & Ohtsuka, K. (1988). Structure, theme, style, and reader response in Hungarian and American short stories. In C. Martindale (Ed.), Psychological approaches to the study of literary narratives (pp. 267–289). Hamburg: Buske

McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1258–1265CrossRef Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. (1997). Conceptions and correlates of openness to experience. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality. (pp. 825–847). San Diego, CA: Academic PressCrossRef

McCurdy, H. G. (1960). The childhood pattern of genius. Horizon, 2, 33–38Google Scholar

McReynolds, P. (1971). Reliability of ratings of research papers. American Psychologist, 26, 400–401CrossRef Google Scholar

Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Mendelsohn, G. A. (1976). Associative and attentional processes in creative performance. Journal of Personality, 44, 341–369CrossRef Google Scholar

Mendelsohn, G. A. & Griswold, B. B. (1966). Assessed creative potential, vocabulary level, and sex as predictors of the use of incidental cues in verbal problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 423–431CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Merton, R. K. (1961a). The role of genius in scientific advance. New Scientist, 12, 306–308Google Scholar

Merton, R. K. (1961b). Singletons and multiples in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 105, 470–486Google Scholar

Merton, R. K. (1968, January 5). The Matthew effect in science. Science, 159, 56–63CrossRef Google Scholar

Miles, C. C., & Wolfe, L. S. (1936). Childhood physical and mental health records of historical geniuses. Psychological Monographs, 47, 390–400CrossRef Google Scholar

Miller, A. I. (2000). Insights of genius: imagery and creativity in science and art. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Molina, E. C. (1942). Poisson's exponential binomial limit. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand

Moulin, L. (1955). The Nobel Prizes for the sciences from 1901–1950: An essay in sociological analysis. British Journal of Sociology, 6, 246–263CrossRef Google Scholar

Mullins, C. J. (1963). Prediction of creativity in a sample of research scientists. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-10 (2), 52–57CrossRef Google Scholar

Mumford, M. D., Marks, M. A., Connelly, M. S., Zaccaro, S. J., & Johnson, T. F. (1998). Domain based scoring of divergent thinking tests: Validation evidence in an occupational sample. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 151–164CrossRef Google Scholar

Myers, C. R. (1970). Journal citations and scientific eminence in contemporary psychology. American Psychologist, 25, 1041–1048CrossRef Google Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. (1985). Originality of word associations as a function of majority vs. minority influence. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 277–282CrossRef Google Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. (1987). Minority influence, divergent thinking and detection of correct solutions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 788–799CrossRef Google Scholar

Nemeth, C. J., & Wachtler, J. (1983). Creative problem solving as a result of majority vs. minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 45–55CrossRef Google Scholar

Newell, A., Shaw, J. C., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Elements of a theory of human problem solving. Psychological Review, 65, 151–166CrossRef Google Scholar

Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231–259CrossRef Google Scholar

Ochse, R. (1989). A new look at primary process thinking and its relation to inspiration. New Ideas in Psychology, 7, 315–330CrossRef Google Scholar

Ogburn, W. K., & Thomas, D. (1922). Are inventions inevitable? A note on social evolution. Political Science Quarterly, 37, 83–93CrossRef Google Scholar

Olby, R. (1979). Mendel no Mendelian?History of Science, 17, 53–72CrossRef Google Scholar

Oromaner, M. (1977). Professional age and the reception of sociological publications: A test of the Zuckerman-Merton hypothesis. Social Studies of Science, 7, 381–388CrossRef Google Scholar

Ortega y Gasset, J. (1957). The revolt of the masses (M. Adams, Trans.). New York: Norton. (Original work published 1932.)

Over, R. (1981). Affiliations of psychologists elected to the National Academy of Sciences. American Psychologist, 36, 744–752CrossRef Google Scholar

Over, R. (1982). Research productivity and impact of male and female psychologists. American Psychologist, 37, 24–31CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Over, R. (1988). Does scholarly impact decline with age?Scientometrics, 13, 215–223CrossRef Google Scholar

Over, R. (1989). Age and scholarly impact. Psychology and Aging, 4, 222–225CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Over, R. (1990). The scholarly impact of articles published by men and women in psychology journals. Scientometrics, 18, 71–80CrossRef Google Scholar

Patinkin, D. (1983). Multiple discoveries and the central message. American Journal of Sociology, 89, 306–323CrossRef Google Scholar

Perkins, D. N. (1981). The mind's best work. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Perkins, D. N. (2000). The eureka effect: The art and logic of breakthrough thinking. New York: Norton

Peters, D. P., & Ceci, S. J. (1982). Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 5, 187–255CrossRef Google Scholar

Peterson, J. B., & Carson, S. (2000). Latent inhibition and openness to experience in a high-achieving student population. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 323–332CrossRef Google Scholar

Peterson, J. B., Smith, K. W., & Carson, S. (2002). Openness and extraversion are associated with reduced latent inhibition: Replication and commentary. Personality & Individual Differences, 33, 1137–1147CrossRef Google Scholar

Petty, R. E., Fleming, M. A., & Fabrigar, L. R. (1999). The review process at PSPB: Correlates of interreviewer agreement and manuscript acceptance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 188–203CrossRef Google Scholar

Planck, M. (1949). Scientific autobiography and other papers (F. Gaynor, Trans.). New York: Philosophical Library

Platt, W., & Baker, R. A. (1931). The relation of the scientific “hunch” to research. Journal of Chemical Education, 8, 1969–2002CrossRef Google Scholar

Platz, A. (1965). Psychology of the scientist: Ⅺ. Lotka's law and research visibility. Psychological Reports, 16, 566–568CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Platz, A., & Blakelock, E. (1960). Productivity of American psychologists: Quantity versus quality. American Psychologist, 15, 310–312CrossRef Google Scholar

Poincaré, H. (1921). The foundations of science: Science and hypothesis, the value of science, science and method (G. B. Halstead, Trans.). New York: Science Press

Popper, K. (1959). The logic of discovery. New York: Basic Books

Post, F. (1994). Creativity and psychopathology: A study of 291 world-famous men. British Journal of Psychiatry, 165, 22–34CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Price, D. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press

Price, D. (1965, July 9). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149, 510–515CrossRef Google Scholar

Price, D. (1978). Ups and downs in the pulse of science and technology. In J. Gaston (Ed.), The sociology of science (pp. 162–171). San Francisco: Jossey-BassCrossRef

Proctor, R. A. (1993). Computer stimulated associations. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 391–400CrossRef Google Scholar

Rainoff, T. J. (1929). Wave-like fluctuations of creative productivity in the development of West-European physics in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Isis, 12, 287–319CrossRef Google Scholar

Raskin, E. A. (1936). Comparison of scientific and literary ability: A biographical study of eminent scientists and men of letters of the nineteenth century. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 31, 20–35CrossRef Google Scholar

Reber, A. S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: An essay on the cognitive unconscious. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press

Redner, S. (1998). How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution. European Physical Journal B, 4, 131–134CrossRef Google Scholar

Reichenbach, H. (1938). Experience and prediction: an analysis of the foundations and the structure of knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Roberts, R. M. (1989). Serendipity: Accidental discoveries in science. New York: Wiley

Roe, A. (1953). The making of a scientist. New York: Dodd, Mead

Roe, A. (1965, October 15). Changes in scientific activities with age. Science, 150, 113–118CrossRef Google Scholar

Roe, A. (1972, May 26). Patterns of productivity of scientists. Science, 176, 940–941CrossRef Google Scholar

Rodgers, R. C., & Maranto, C. L. (1989). Causal models of publishing productivity in psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 636–649CrossRef Google Scholar

Root-Bernstein, R. S., Bernstein, M., & Garnier, H. (1993). Identification of scientists making long-term, high-impact contributions, with notes on their methods of working. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 329–343CrossRef Google Scholar

Root-Bernstein, R. S., Bernstein, M., & Garnier, H. (1995). Correlations between avocations, scientific style, work habits, and professional impact of scientists. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 115–137CrossRef Google Scholar

Rothenberg, A. (1983). Psychopathology and creative cognition: A comparison of hospitalized patients, Nobel laureates, and controls. Archives of General Psychiatry, 40, 937–942CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Rothenberg, A. (1986). Artistic creation as stimulated by superimposed versus combined-composite visual images. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 370–381CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Rothenberg, A. (1987). Einstein, Bohr, and creative thinking in science. History of Science, 25, 147–166CrossRef Google Scholar

Rothenberg, A. (1996). The Janusian process in scientific creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 207–231CrossRef Google Scholar

Rubinstein, G. (1999). Authoritarianism and its relation to creativity: A comparative study among students of design, behavioural sciences and law. Personality & Individual Differences, 34, 695–705CrossRef Google Scholar

Rushton, J. P. (1990). Creativity, intelligence, and psychoticism. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1291–1298CrossRef Google Scholar

Rushton, J. P. (2000). Individual differences and scientific productivity. In R. D. Goffin & E. Helmes (Eds.), Problems and solutions in human assessment: Honoring Douglas N. Jackson at seventy (pp. 173–194). New York: Kluwer AcademicCrossRef

Scarr, S., & Weber, B. L. R. (1978). The reliability of reviews for the American Psychologist. American Psychologist, 33, 935CrossRef Google Scholar

Schaefer, C. E., & Anastasi, A. (1968). A biographical inventory for identifying creativity in adolescent boys. Journal of Applied Psychology, 58, 42–48CrossRef Google Scholar

Schachter, S. (1963). Birth order, eminence, and higher education. American Sociological Review, 28, 757–768CrossRef Google Scholar

Schlipp, P. A. (Ed.). (1951). Albert Einstein: Philosopher-scientist. New York: Harper

Schmookler, J. (1966). Invention and economic growth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Schneider, J. (1937). The cultural situation as a condition for the achievement of fame. American Sociological Review, 2, 480–491CrossRef Google Scholar

Schooler, J. W., & Melcher, J. (1995). The ineffability of insight. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 97–133). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Schubert, D. S. P., Wagner, M. E., & Schubert, H. J. P. (1977). Family constellation and creativity: Firstborn predominance among classical music composers. Journal of Psychology, 95, 147–149CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Scott, W. A. (1974). Interreferee agreement on some characteristics of manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. American Psychologist, 29, 698–702CrossRef Google Scholar

Seelig, C. (1958). Albert Einstein: A documentary biography (M. Savill, Trans.). London: Staples Press

Segal, S. M., Busse, T. V., & Mansfield, R. S. (1980). The relationship of scientific creativity in the biological sciences to predoctoral accomplishments and experiences. American Educational Research Journal, 17, 491–502CrossRef Google Scholar

Seifert, C. M., Meyer, D. E., Davidson, N., Patalano, A. L., & Yaniv, I. (1995). Demystification of cognitive insight: Opportunistic assimilation and the prepared-mind perspective. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 65–124). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Shadish, W. R., Jr. (1989). The perception and evaluation of quality in science. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish, Jr., R. A. Neimeyer, & A. C. Houts (Eds.), The psychology of science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 383–426). Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRef

Shapiro, G. (1986). A skeleton in the darkroom: Stories of serendipity in science. San Francisco: Harper & Row

Shockley, W. (1957). On the statistics of individual variations of productivity in research laboratories. Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, 45, 279–290Google Scholar

Shrager, J., & Langley, P. (Eds.). (1990). Computational models of scientific discovery and theory formation. San Mateo, CA: Kaufmann

Silverman, S. M. (1974). Parental loss and scientists. Science Studies, 4, 259–264CrossRef Google Scholar

Simon, H. A. (1955). On a class of skew distribution functions. Biometrika, 42, 425–440CrossRef Google Scholar

Simon, H. A. (1973). Does scientific discovery have a logic?Philosophy of Science, 40, 471–480CrossRef Google Scholar

Simon, H. A. (1986). What we know about the creative process. In R. L. Kuhn (Ed.), Frontiers in creative and innovative management (pp. 3–20). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger

Simon, R. J. (1974). The work habits of eminent scientists. Sociology of Work and Occupations, 1, 327–335CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1975). Sociocultural context of individual creativity: A transhistorical time-series analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 1119–1133CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Simonton, D. K. (1976a). Biographical determinants of achieved eminence: A multivariate approach to the Cox data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 218–226CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1976b). Do Sorokin's data support his theory?: A study of generational fluctuations in philosophical beliefs. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 15, 187–198CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1976c). Philosophical eminence, beliefs, and zeitgeist: An individual-generational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 630–640CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1976d). The sociopolitical context of philosophical beliefs: A trans historical causal analysis. Social Forces, 54, 513–523CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1977). Creative productivity, age, and stress: A biographical time-series analysis of 10 classical composers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 791–804CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Simonton, D. K. (1978). Independent discovery in science and technology: A closer look at the Poisson distribution. Social Studies of Science, 8, 521–532CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1979). Multiple discovery and invention: Zeitgeist, genius, or chance?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1603–1616CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1980a). Intuition and analysis: A predictive and explanatory model. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 102, 3–60Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1980b). Techno-scientific activity and war: A yearly time-series analysis, 1500–1903 A.D.Scientometrics, 2, 251–255CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1980c). Thematic fame and melodic originality in classical music: A multivariate computer-content analysis. Journal of Personality, 48, 206–219CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1980d). Thematic fame, melodic originality, and musical zeitgeist: A biographical and transhistorical content analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 972–983CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1983). Formal education, eminence, and dogmatism: The curvilinear relationship. Journal of Creative Behavior, 17, 149–162CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1984a). Artistic creativity and interpersonal relationships across and within generations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1273–1286CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1984b). Creative productivity and age: A mathematical model based on a two-step cognitive process. Developmental Review, 4, 77–111CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1984c). Genius, creativity, and leadership: Historiometric inquiries. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press

Simonton, D. K. (1984d). Is the marginality effect all that marginal?Social Studies of Science, 14, 621–622CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1984e). Scientific eminence historical and contemporary: A measurement assessment. Scientometrics, 6, 169–182CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1985). Quality, quantity, and age: The careers of 10 distinguished psychologists. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 21, 241–254CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1986a). Biographical typicality, eminence, and achievement style. Journal of Creative Behavior, 20, 14–22CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1986b). Multiple discovery: Some Monte Carlo simulations and Gedanken experiments. Scientometrics, 9, 269–280CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1986c). Multiples, Poisson distributions, and chance: An analysis of the Brannigan-Wanner model. Scientometrics, 9, 127–137CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1986d). Stochastic models of multiple discovery. Czechoslovak Journal of Physics, B 36, 138–141CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1987). Multiples, chance, genius, creativity, and zeitgeist. In D. N. Jackson & J. P. Rushton (Eds.), Scientific excellence: Origins and assessment (pp. 98–128). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications

Simonton, D. K. (1988a). Age and outstanding achievement: What do we know after a century of research?Psychological Bulletin, 104, 251–267CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1988b). Scientific genius: A psychology of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Simonton, D. K. (1989a). Age and creative productivity: Nonlinear estimation of an information-processing model. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 29, 23–37CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1989b). The chance-configuration theory of scientific creativity. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish, Jr., R. A. Neimeyer, & A. C. Houts (Eds.), The psychology of science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 170–213). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Simonton, D. K. (1989c). Shakespeare's sonnets: A case of and for single-case historiometry. Journal of Personality, 57, 695–721CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1990). Lexical choices and aesthetic success: A computer content analysis of 154 Shakespeare sonnets. Computers and the Humanities, 24, 251–264Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1991a). Career landmarks in science: Individual differences and interdisciplinary contrasts. Developmental Psychology, 27, 119–130CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1991b). Latent-variable models of posthumous reputation: A quest for Galton's G. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 607–619CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1992a). Leaders of American psychology, 1879–1967: Career development, creative output, and professional achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 5–17CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1992b). The social context of career success and course for 2,026 scientists and inventors. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 452–463CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1994). Greatness: Who makes history and why. New York: Guilford Press

Simonton, D. K. (1995). Foresight in insight? A Darwinian answer. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 465–494). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Simonton, D. K. (1997a). Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks. Psychological Review, 104, 66–89CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1997b). Foreign influence and national achievement: The impact of open milieus on Japanese civilization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 86–94CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (1999a). Creativity and genius. In L. A. Pervin & O. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality theory and research (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press

Simonton, D. K. (1999b). Matthew effects. In M. A. Runco & S. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 2, pp. 185–192). San Diego: Academic Press

Simonton, D. K. (1999c). Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity. New York: Oxford University Press

Simonton, D. K. (1999d). Talent and its development: An emergenic and epigenetic model. Psychological Review, 106, 435–457CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2000a). Creativity: Cognitive, developmental, personal, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55, 151–158CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2000b). Methodological and theoretical orientation and the long-term disciplinary impact of 54 eminent psychologists. Review of General Psychology, 4, 1–13CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2002). Great psychologists and their times: Scientific insights into psychology's history. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association

Simonton, D. K. (2003a). Creativity as variation and selection: Some critical constraints. In M. Runco (Ed.), Critical creative processes (pp. 3–18). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press

Simonton, D. K. (2003b). Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: The integration of product, process, and person perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 475–494CrossRef Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2004). Psychology's status as a scientific discipline: Its empirical placement within an implicit hierarchy of the sciences. Review of General Psychology, 7Google Scholar

Skinner, B. F. (1959). A case study in scientific method. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science (Vol. 2, pp. 359–379). New York: McGraw-Hill

Smith, W. J., Albright, L. W., & Glennon, J. R. (1961). The prediction of research competence and creativity from personal history. Journal of Applied Psychology, 45, 59–62CrossRef Google Scholar

Sobel, R. S., & Rothenberg, A. (1980). Artistic creation as stimulated by superimposed versus separated visual images. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 953–961CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Sorokin, P. A. (1969). Society, culture, and personality. New York: Cooper Square. (Original work published 1947)

Stavridou, A., & Furnham, A. (1996). The relationship between psychoticism, trait-creativity and the attentional mechanism of cognitive inhibition. Personality & Individual Differences, 21, 143–153CrossRef Google Scholar

Stent, G. S. (1972). Prematurity and uniqueness in scientific discovery. Scientific American, 227, 84–93CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Sternberg, R. J. (1989). Computational models of scientific discovery: Do they compute? [Review of Scientific discovery: Computational explorations of the creative process] Contemporary Psychology, 34, 895–897CrossRef Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (1998). A propulsion model of types of creative contributions. Review of General Psychology, 3, 83–100CrossRef Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (2004). WICS: A theory of wisdom, intelligence, and creativity synthesized. New York: Cambridge University Press

Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (1995). The nature of insight. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Sternberg, R. J., & Gordeeva, T. (1996). The anatomy of impact: What makes an article influential?Psychological Science, 7, 69–75CrossRef Google Scholar

Stewart, J. A. (1983). Achievement and ascriptive processes in the recognition of scientific articles. Social Forces, 62, 166–189CrossRef Google Scholar

Stumpf, H. (1995). Scientific creativity: A short overview. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 225–241CrossRef Google Scholar

Suedfeld, P. (1985). APA presidential addresses: The relation of integrative complexity to historical, professional, and personal factors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 848–852CrossRef Google Scholar

Suedfeld, P., & Coren, S. (1992). Cognitive correlates of conceptual complexity. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 1193–1199CrossRef Google Scholar

Suler, J. R. (1980). Primary process thinking and creativity. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 144–165CrossRef Google Scholar

Sulloway, F. J. (1996). Born to rebel: Birth order, family dynamics, and creative lives. New York: Pantheon

Taylor, D. W. (1963). Variables related to creativity and productivity among men in two research laboratories. In C. W. Taylor & F. X. Barron (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 228–250). New York: Wiley

Taylor, M. S., Locke, E. A., Lee, C., & Gist, M. E. (1984). Type A behavior and faculty research productivity: What are the mechanisms?Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 402–418CrossRef Google Scholar

Terman, L. M. (1954). Scientists and nonscientists in a group of 800 gifted men. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 68 (7, Whole No. 378), 1–44CrossRef Google Scholar

Thagard, P. (1992). Conceptual revolutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press

Tweney, R. D. (1989). Fields of enterprise: On Michael Faraday's thought. In D. B. Wallace & H. E. Gruber (Eds.), Creative people at work: Twelve cognitive case studies (pp. 90–106). New York: Oxford University Press

Tweney, R. D. (1990). Five questions for computationalists. In J. Shrager & P. Langley (Eds.), Computational models of scientific discovery and theory information (pp. 471–484). San Mateo, CA: Kaufmann

Tweney, R. D., Doherty, M. E., & Mynatt, C. R. (Eds.). (1981). On scientific thinking. New York: Columbia University Press

Zelst, R. H., & Kerr, W. A. (1951). Some correlates of technical and scientific productivity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46, 470–475CrossRef Google Scholar

Visher, S. S. (1947, Autumn). Starred scientists: A study of their ages. American Scientist, 35, 543, 570, 572, 574, 576, 578, 580Google Scholar

Wagman, M. (2000). Scientific discovery processes in humans and computers: Theory and research in psychology and artificial intelligence. Westport, CT: Praeger

Walberg, H. J., Rasher, S. P., & Parkerson, J. (1980). Childhood and eminence. Journal of Creative Behavior, 13, 225–231CrossRef Google Scholar

Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace

Wan, W. W. N., & Chiu, C.-Y. (2002). Effects of novel conceptual combination on creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 36, 227–240CrossRef Google Scholar

Wechsler, J. (Ed.). (1978). On aesthetics in science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Weisberg, R. W. (1992). Creativity: Beyond the myth of genius. New York: Freeman

Weller, A. C. (2001). Editorial peer review: Its strengths and weaknesses. Medford, NJ: Information Today

Wertheimer, M. (1982). Productive thinking (M. Wertheimer, Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1945.)

Whaples, R. (1991). A quantitative history of the Journal of Economic History and the cliometric revolution. Journal of Economic History, 51, 289–301CrossRef Google Scholar

White, L. (1949). The science of culture. New York: Farrar, Straus

White, K. G., & White, M. J. (1978). On the relation between productivity and impact. Australian Psychologist, 13, 369–374CrossRef Google Scholar

Wilson, T. D., DePaulo, B. M., Mook, D. G., & Klaaren, K. J. (1993). Scientists' evaluations of research: The biasing effects of the importance of the topic. Psychological Science, 4, 322–325CrossRef Google Scholar

Wolff, W. M. (1970). A study of criteria for journal manuscripts. American Psychologist, 25, 636–639CrossRef Google Scholar

Wolff, W. M. (1973). Publication problems in psychology and an explicit evaluation schema for manuscripts. American Psychologist, 28, 257–261CrossRef Google Scholar

Woodward, W. R. (1974). Scientific genius and loss of a parent. Science Studies, 4, 265–277CrossRef Google Scholar

Wuthrich, V., & Bates, T. C. (2001). Schizotypy and latent inhibition: Non-linear linkage between psychometric and cognitive markers. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 783–798CrossRef Google Scholar

Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science: Career processes and outcomes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Yuasa, M. (1974). The shifting center of scientific activity in the West: From the sixteenth to the twentieth century. In. N. Shigeru, D. L. Swain, & Y. Eri (Eds.), Science and society in modern Japan (pp. 81–103). Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press

Zajonc, R. B. (1976, April 16). Family configuration and intelligence. Science, 192, 227–235CrossRef Google Scholar

Zhao, H. (1984). An intelligence constant of scientific work. Scientometrics, 6, 9–17Google Scholar

Zhao, H., & Jiang, G. (1985). Shifting of world's scientific center and scientist's social ages. Scientometrics, 8, 59–80Google Scholar

Zuckerman, H. (1977). Scientific elite. New York: Free Press

Zuckerman, H., Cole, J. R., & Bruer, J. T. (Eds.). (1991). The outer circle: Women in the scientific community. New York: Norton

Zusne, L. (1976). Age and achievement in psychology: The harmonic mean as a model. American Psychologist, 31, 805–807CrossRef Google Scholar