Book contents
- Rethinking Creativity
- Rethinking Creativity
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Analytic Thinking in Creativity
- Part III The Question of Extraordinary Thought Processes in Creativity
- Part IV The Psychometrics of Creativity
- Part V The Neuroscience of Creativity
- References
- Index
- References
References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 October 2020
Book contents
- Rethinking Creativity
- Rethinking Creativity
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Analytic Thinking in Creativity
- Part III The Question of Extraordinary Thought Processes in Creativity
- Part IV The Psychometrics of Creativity
- Part V The Neuroscience of Creativity
- References
- Index
- References
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Rethinking CreativityInside-the-Box Thinking as the Basis for Innovation, pp. 458 - 483Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
ABC News. (1999). The Deep Dive: One company’s secret weapon for innovation. Nightline program transcript, February 9, 1999. ciow.org/docs1/IDEO_Nightline.pdf, accessed July 10, 2019.Google Scholar
Abraham, A. (2018). The forest versus the trees: Creativity, cognition and imagination. In Jung, R. E. & Vartanian, O (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity (pp. 195–210). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Abuhamdeh, S., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2004). The artistic personality: A systems perspective. In Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L. & Singer, J. L. (eds.), Creativity: From Potential to Realization (pp. 31–42). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Acar, S., & Runco, M. R. (2014). Assessing associative distance among ideas elicited by tests of divergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal 26(2): 229–238.Google Scholar
Addis, D. R., Pan, L., Musicaro, R. & Schacter, D. L. (2014). Divergent thinking and constructing episodic simulations. Memory 24(1): 89–97.Google Scholar
Alloy, L. B., & Nusslock, R. (2019). Future directions for understanding adolescent bipolar spectrum disorders: A reward hypersensitivity perspective. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology 48(4): 669–683.Google Scholar
Altman, L. K. (1987). Who Goes First? The Story of Self-Experimentation in Medicine. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Amabile, T. M. (1979). Effects of external evaluation on artistic creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37(2): 221–233.Google Scholar
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. (2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior 36: 157–183.Google Scholar
Amabile, T. M., Goldfarb, P., & Brackfield, S. C. (1990). Social influences on creativity: Evaluation, coaction, and surveillance. Creativity Research Journal 3(1): 6–21.Google Scholar
Amabile, T. M., Hennessy, B. A., & Grossman, B. S. (1986). Social influences on creativity: The effects of contracted-for reward. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50(1): 14–23.Google Scholar
America’s Test Kitchen (eds.). (2006). 834 Kitchen Quick Tips: Techniques and Shortcuts for the Curious Cook. Brookline, MA: America’s Test Kitchen.Google Scholar
Andreasen, N. C. (1987). Creativity and mental illness: Prevalence rates in writers and their first-degree relatives. American Journal of Psychiatry 144(10): 1288–1292.Google ScholarPubMed
Ash, I. K., Cushen, P. J., & Wiley, J. (2009). Obstacles in investigating the role of restructuring in insightful problem solving. Journal of Problem Solving 2(2): 6–41.Google Scholar
Baas, M., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2008). A meta-analysis of 25 years of mood–creativity research: Hedonic tone, activation, or regulatory focus? Psychological Bulletin 134(6): 779–806. doi:10.1037/a0012815.Google Scholar
Baas, M., Nijstad, B. A., Boot, N. C., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2016). Mad genius revisited: Vulnerability to psychopathology, biobehavioral approach-avoidance, and creativity. Psychological Bulletin 142(6): 668–692. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000049.Google Scholar
Baer, J. (1993). Creativity and Divergent Thinking: A Task-Specific Approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Baer, J. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior 46(1): 16–29.Google Scholar
Baer, J. (2015). The importance of domain-specific expertise in creativity. Roeper Review 37(3): 165–178.Google Scholar
Baer, J., & McKool, S. S. (2014). The gold standard for assessing creativity. International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education 3(1): 81–93.Google Scholar
Baird, B., Smallwood, J., Mrazek, M. D., Kam, J. W. Y., Franklin, M. S., & Smallwood, J. W. (2012). Inspired by distraction: Mind wandering facilitates creative incubation. Psychological Science 23(10): 1117–1122.Google Scholar
Barron, F., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology 32: 439–476.Google Scholar
Barry, D. N., Barnes, G. R., Clark, I. A., & Maguire, E. A. (2019). The neural dynamics of novel scene imagery. The Journal of Neuroscience 39(22): 4375–4386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barzun, J. (1960). The cults of “research” and “creativity.” Harper’s Magazine, October, 69–74.Google Scholar
Bassok, M., & Novick, L. R. (2012). Problem solving. In Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning (pp. 413–432). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Batey, M., & Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, intelligence, and personality: A critical review of the scattered literature. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs 132(4): 355–429.Google Scholar
Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Kaufman, S. B., & Silvia, P. J. (2015). Default and executive network coupling supports creative idea production. Scientific Reports 5: 10,964. doi:10.1038/srep10964.Google Scholar
Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Silvia, P. J., & Schacter, D. L. (2016). Creative cognition and brain network dynamics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 20(2): 87–95. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.004.Google Scholar
Beaty, R. E., Kenett, Y. N., Christensen, A. P., Rosenberg, M. D., Benedek, M., Chen, Q., …, & Silvia, P. J. (2018). Robust prediction of individual creative ability from brain functional connectivity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 115(5): 1087–1092. doi:www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1713532115.Google Scholar
Beaty, R. E., Kenett, Y. K., Hass, R. W., & Schacter, D. L. (Unpublished). A fan effect for creative thought: Semantic richness facilitates idea quantity but constrains idea quality.Google Scholar
Beaty, R. E., Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2014). Does insight problem solving predict real-world creativity? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 8(3): 287–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaty, R., Seli, P., & Schacter, D. L. (2019). Network neuroscience of creative cognition: Mapping cognitive mechanisms and individual differences in the creative brain. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 27: 22–30. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.08.013.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beaty, R. E., & Silvia, P. J. (2012). Why do ideas get more creative across time? An executive interpretation of the serial order effect in divergent thinking tasks. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 6(4): 309–319.Google Scholar
Beaty, R. E., Silvia, P. J., Nusbaum, E. C., Jauk, E., & Benedek, M. (2014). The roles of associative and executive processes in creative cognition. Memory & Cognition 42(7): 1186–1197. PMID 24898118; doi:10.3758/s13421-014-0428-8.Google Scholar
Becker, G. (1978). The Mad Genius Controversy: A Study in the Sociology of Deviance. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Becker, G. (2001). The association of creativity and psychopathology: Its cultural-historical origins. Creativity Research Journal 13(1): 45–53.Google Scholar
Becker, G. (2014). A socio-historical overview of the creativity–pathology connection: From antiquity to contemporary times. In Kaufman, J. C. (ed.), Creativity and Mental Illness (pp. 3–24). Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Beda, Z., & Smith, S. M. (2018). Chasing red herrings: Memory of distractors causes fixation in creative problem solving. Memory & Cognition 46(5): 671–684.Google Scholar
Benedek, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2013). Revisiting Mednick’s model on creativity-related differences in associative hierarchies: Evidence for a common path to uncommon thought. The Journal of Creative Behavior 47(4): 273–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benedek, M., Jauk, E., Fink, A., Koschutnig, K., Reishofer, G., Ebner, F., & Neubauer, A. (2014). To create or to recall? Neural mechanisms underlying the generation of creative new ideas. NeuroImage 88(100): 125–133. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.021.Google Scholar
Best, J. B. (1987). The subgoal heuristic and its effect on internal representations. Journal of General Psychology 114(4): 383–391.Google Scholar
Bilalić, M., McLeod, P., & Gobet, F. (2008). Inflexibility of experts – reality or myth? Quantifying the Einstellung effect in chess masters. Cognitive Psychology 56(2): 73–102.Google Scholar
Bloom, H. (2002). Genius: A Mosaic of One Hundred Exemplary Creative Minds. New York: Warner Books.Google Scholar
Bourne, L. E., Ekstrand, B. R., & Dominowski, R. L. (1971). The Psychology of Thinking. New York: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Bowden, E. M., & Grunewald, K. (2018). Whose insight is it anyway? In Vallée-Tourangeau, F (ed.), Insight: On the Origins of New Ideas (pp. 28–50). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Buckner, R. L. (2012). The serendipitous discovery of the brain’s default network. Neuroimage 62(2): 1137–1145. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.10.035.Google Scholar
Byron, K., & Khazanchi, S. (2012). Rewards and creative performance: A meta-analytic test of theoretically derived hypotheses. Psychological Bulletin 138(4): 809–830.Google Scholar
Cai, D. J., Mednick, S. A., Harrison, E. M., Kanady, J. C., & Mednick, S. C. (2009). REM, not incubation, improves creativity by priming associative networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106: 10,130–10,134. PMID 19506253; doi:10.1073/pnas.0900271106.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review 67: 380–400.Google Scholar
Campbell, K. L., Madore, K. P., Benoit, R. G., Thakral, P. P., & Schacter, D. L. (2018). Increased hippocampus to ventromedial prefrontal connectivity during the construction of episodic future events. Hippocampus 28(2): 76–80.Google Scholar
Carrroll, J. B. (1993). Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-Analytic Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carson, S. H. (2014). Cognitive disinhibition, creativity, and psychopathology. In Simonton, D. K. (ed.), The Wiley Handbook of Genius (pp. 198–221). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, S. H. (2018). Creativity and psychopathology: A relationship of shared neurocognitive vulnerabilities. In Vartanian, O & Jung, R. E. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity (pp. 136–159). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Catrambone, R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1989). Overcoming contextual limitations on problem-solving transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 15: 1147–1156.Google Scholar
Ceulemans, C. (2010). The reputation of Baroque composers 1790–2000. Empirical Studies of the Arts 28(2): 223–242. doi:https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.28.2.g.Google Scholar
Chan, J., & Schunn, C. D. (2015). The importance of iteration in creative conceptual combination. Cognition 145: 104–115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chan, J., Dow, S. P., & Schunn, C. D. (2015). Do the best design ideas (really) come from conceptually distant sources of inspiration? Design Studies 36: 31–58.Google Scholar
Chase, W. G., & Ericsson, K. A. (1982). Skill and working memory. In Bower, G. H. (ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 16, pp. 1–58). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973a). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology 4: 55–81.Google Scholar
Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973b). The mind’s eye in chess. In Chase, W. G. (ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 215–281). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Chein, J. M., & Weisberg, R. W. (2014). Working memory and insight in verbal problems: Analysis of compound remote associates. Memory and Cognition 42: 67–83.Google Scholar
Chein, J. M., Weisberg, R. W., Streeter, N. L., & Kwok, S. (2010). Working memory and insight in the 9-Dot Problem. Memory and Cognition 38(7): 883–892.Google Scholar
Chi, R. P., & Snyder, A. W. (2011). Facilitate insight by non-invasive brain stimulation. PLoS ONE 6(2): e16655. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016655.Google Scholar
Chi, R. P., & Snyder, A. W. (2012). Brain stimulation enables the solution of an inherently difficult problem. Neuroscience Letters 515(2012): 121–124. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2012.03.012.Google Scholar
Chipp, H. B. (1988). Picasso’s “Guernica”: History, Transformations, Meanings. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and pre-inventive structure: The case of engineering design. Memory & Cognition 35(1): 29–38.Google Scholar
Chrysikou, E. G. (2018). The costs and benefits of cognitive control for creativity. In Vartanian, O & Jung, R. E. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity (pp. 299–317). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chrysikou, E. G. (2019). Creativity in and out of (cognitive) control. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 27: 94–99.Google Scholar
Chrysikou, E. G., Berryhill, M. E., Bikson, M., & Coslett, H. B. (2017). Revisiting the effectiveness of transcranial direct current brain stimulation for cognition: Evidence, challenges, and open questions (Editorial). Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 11: 448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chrysikou, E. G., Hamilton, R. H., Coslett, H. B., Datta, A., Bikson, M., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2013). Non-invasive transcranial direct current stimulation over the left prefrontal cortex facilitates cognitive flexibility in tool use. Cognitive Neuroscience 4: 81–89.Google Scholar
Chrysikou, E. G., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2011). Dissociable brains states linked to common and creative object use. Human Brain Mapping 32: 665–675.Google Scholar
Chuderski, A., & Jastrzębski, J. (2018). Much ado about aha!: Insight problem solving is strongly related to working memory capacity and reasoning ability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 147(2): 257–281. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000378.Google Scholar
Cinan, S., Özen, G., & Hampshire, A. (2013). Confirmatory factor analysis on separability of planning and insight constructs. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 25(1): 7–23. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2012.729035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conti, R., Coon, H., & Amabile, T. M. (1996). Evidence to support the componential model of creativity: Secondary analyses of three studies. Creativity Research Journal 9: 385–389.Google Scholar
Cope, D. (2014). Experiments in Musical Intelligence. Middleton, WI: A-R Editions, Inc.Google Scholar
Cramond, B., Matthews-Morgan, J., Bandalos, D., & Zuo, L. (2005). A report on the 40-year follow-up of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Alive and well in the new millennium. Gifted Child Quarterly 49: 283–291.Google Scholar
Cranford, E. A., & Moss, J. (2012). Is insight always the same? A protocol analysis of insight in compound remote associate problems. The Journal of Problem Solving 4: 128–153.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (ed.), The Nature of Creativity: Current Psychological Perspectives (pp. 325–339). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). The systems model of creativity and its applications. In Simonton, D. K. (ed.), The Wiley Handbook of Genius (pp. 533–545). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Sawyer, K. (1995). Creative insight: The social dimension of a solitary moment. In Steinberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (eds.) The Nature of Insight (pp. 329–361). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cushen, P.J., & Wiley, J. (2018). Both attentional control and the ability to make remote associations aid spontaneous analogical transfer. Memory & Cognition 46(8): 1398–1412. doi:https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-018-0845-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Danek, A. H. (2018). Magic tricks, sudden restructuring and the Aha! experience: A new model of non-monotonic problem solving. In Vallée-Tourangeau, F (ed.), Insight: On the Origins of New Ideas (pp. 51–78). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Danek, A. H., & Salvi, C. (2018). Moment of truth: Why Aha! experiences are correct. The Journal of Creative Behavior.Google Scholar
Danek, A. H., Williams, J., & Wiley, J. (2018). Closing the gap: Connecting sudden representational change to the subjective Aha! experience in insightful problem solving. Psychological Research 84(1): 1–9. doi:https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-018-0845-1.Google Scholar
Davidson, J. E. (1995). The suddenness of insight. In Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (eds.). The Nature of Insight (pp. 125–155). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
DeCaro, M. S. (2018). When does higher working memory capacity help or hinder insight problem solving? In Vallée-Tourangeau, F (ed.), Insight: On the Origins of New Ideas (pp. 51–78). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Depue, R. A., & Iacono, W. G. (1989). Neurobehavioral aspects of affective disorders. Annual Review of Psychology 40: 457–492.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93: 880–896.Google Scholar
Dietrich, A. (2004). The cognitive neuroscience of creativity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 11(6): 1011–1026.Google Scholar
Dietrich, A. (2014). The mythconception of the mad genius. Frontiers of Psychology 5, Article 79. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00079.Google Scholar
Dietrich, A. (2018). Types of creativity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 11(6): 1011–1026. doi:https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1517-7.Google Scholar
Dietrich, A., & Kanso, R. (2010). A review of EEG, ERP, and neuroimaging studies of creativity and insight. Psychological Bulletin 136(5): 822–848. doi:10.1037/a0019749.Google Scholar
Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big-5. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 73: 1246–1256.Google Scholar
Dijksterhuis, A., & Meurs, T. (2006). Where creativity resides: The generative power of unconscious thought. Consciousness and Cognition 15: 135–146.Google Scholar
Dijksterhuis, A., & Strick, M. (2016). A case for thinking without consciousness. Perspectives on Psychological Science 11(1): 117–132. doi:10.1177/1745691615615317.Google Scholar
Dodds, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (2012). Incubation in problem solving and creativity. In Runco, M. A. (ed.), The Creativity Research Handbook, Volume 3 (pp. 251–284). New York: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (eds.), The Nature of Insight (pp. 365–395). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dunbar, K. (2001). The analogical paradox: Why analogy is so easy in naturalistic settings, yet so difficult in the psychological laboratory. In Gentner, D, Holyoak, K. J., & Kokinov, B (eds.), Analogy: Perspectives from Cognitive Science (pp. 313–334). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dunbar, K., & Blanchette, I. (2001). The in vivo/in vitro approach to cognition: The case of analogy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5(8): 334–339.Google Scholar
Duncker, K. (1945). On problem-solving. Psychological Monographs 68(5): whole no. 270.Google Scholar
Edwards, B. J., Williams, J. J., Gentner, D., & Lombrozo, T. (2014). Effects of comparison and explanation on analogical transfer. In Bello, P, Guarini, M, McShane, M, & Scassellati, B (eds.), Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Red Hook, NY: Curran.Google Scholar
Eisenberger, R. & Byron, K. (2011). Rewards and creativity. In Runco, M. A. & Pritzker, S. R. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity, 2nd ed., Vol. 2 (pp. 313–318). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elgammal, A., & Saleh, B. (2015). Quantifying creativity in art networks. In Toivonen, H, Colton, S, Cook, M, & Ventura, D (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Computational Creativity, pp. 39–46. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.Google Scholar
Engle, R. (2018). Working memory and executive attention: A revisit. Perspectives on Psychological Science 13(2): 190–193. doi:10.1177/1745691617720478.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A. (1999). Creative expertise as superior reproducible performance: Innovative and flexible aspects of expert performance. Psychological Inquiry 10: 329–333.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In Ericsson, K. A., Charness, N, Feltovich, P, & Hoffman, R. R. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (pp. 683–704). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., Chase, W. G., & Falloon, S. (1980). Acquisition of a memory skill. Science 208: 1181–1182.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., Hoffman, R. R., Kozbelt, A., & Williams, A. M. (eds.) (2018). Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review 100: 363–406.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Pool, R. (2016). Peak: Secrets from the New Science of Expertise. New York: Eamon Dolan Books/Houghton Mifflin & Harcourt.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1996). Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Erlin, M. & Tatlock, L. (2014). Distant Readings: Topologies of German Culture in the Long Nineteenth Century. Rochester, NY: Camden House.Google Scholar
Everett, W. (2001). The Beatles as Musicians. The Quarry Men through Rubber Soul. New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1993). Creativity and personality: Suggestions for a theory. Psychological Inquiry 4: 147–178.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1995). Genius: The Natural History of Creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fatović-Ferenčić, S., & Banić, M. (2011). No acid, no ulcer: Dragutin (Carl) Schwarz (1868–1917), the man ahead of his time. Digestive Diseases 29(5): 507–510. doi:10.1159/000334384.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J. (1993). A structural model of scientific eminence. Psychological Science 4: 366–371.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review 2(4): 290–309.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J. (1999). The influence of personality on artistic and scientific creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (ed.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 273–296). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J. (2017). Personality, behavioral thresholds, and the creative scientist. In Feist, G. J., Reiter-Palmon, R, & Kaufman, J. C. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity and Personality Research (pp. 64–83). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J. (2018). Creativity and the Big Two model of personality: plasticity and stability. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 27: 31–35.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J. & Barron, F. (2003). Predicting creativity from early to late adulthood: Intellect, potential, and personality. Journal of Research in Personality 37: 62–88.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Kaufman, J. C. (2017). The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity and Personality Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Flanagan, D., & Dixon, S. (2013). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities. In Reynolds, C. R., Vannest, K. J., & Fletcher-Janzen, E (eds.), Encyclopedia of Special Education. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Fleck, J. I., & Weisberg, R. W. (2004). The use of verbal protocols as data: An analysis of insight in the candle problem. Memory & Cognition 32: 990–1006.Google Scholar
Fleck, J. S., & Weisberg, R. W. (2013). Insight versus analysis: Evidence for diverse methods in problem solving. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 25: 436–463.Google Scholar
Foer, J. (2011). Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Forbus, K. D., Ferguson, R. W., Lovett, A., & Gentner, D. (2017). Extending SME to handle large-scale cognitive modeling. Cognitive Science 41: 1152–1201. doi:10.1111/cogs.12377.Google Scholar
Fox, K. C. R., & Beaty, R. E. (2019). Mind-wandering as creative thinking: neural, psychological, and theoretical considerations. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 27: 123–130.Google Scholar
Friedel, R., & Israel, P. (1986). Edison’s Electric Light: Biography of an Invention. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frensch, P. A., & Sternberg, R. J. (1989). Expertise and intelligent thinking: When is it worse to know better? In Sternberg, R. J. (ed.), Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, Vol. 5 (pp. 157–188). Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Fürst, G., & Lubart, T. (2017). An integrative approach to the creative personality: Beyond the Big Five paradigm. In Feist, G. J., Reiter-Palmon, R, & Kaufman, J. C. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity and Personality Research (pp. 140–164). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fürst, G., Ghisletta, P., & Lubart, T. (2014). Toward an integrative model of creativity and personality: Theoretical suggestions and preliminary empirical testing. The Journal of Creative Behavior 50(2): 87–108. doi:10.1002/jocb.71.Google Scholar
Gable, S. L., Hopper, E. A., & Schooler, J. W. (2019). When the Muses strike: Creative ideas of physicists and writers routinely occur during mind wandering. Psychological Science 30(3): 396–404. doi:10.1177/0956797618820626.Google Scholar
Gagné, F. (2009). Debating Giftedness: Pronat vs. Antinat. In Shavinina, L. V. (ed.), International Handbook on Giftedness (pp. 155–204). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Gagné, F. (2015). From genes to talent: The DMGT/CMTD perspective. Revista de Educación 368: 12–37.Google Scholar
Galton, F. (1979 [1869]). Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry into Its Laws and Consequences. London: Friedmann.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., & Maravilla, F. (2018). Analogical reasoning. In Ball, L. J. & Thompson, V. A. (eds.), International Handbook of Thinking & Reasoning (pp. 186–203). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Forbus, K. D. (2009). Reviving inert knowledge: Analogical abstraction supports relational retrieval of past events. Cognitive Science 33: 1343–1382. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01070.x.Google Scholar
George, T., & Wiley, J. (2018). Breaking past the surface: Analogical transfer as creative insight. In Vallée-Tourangeau, F (ed.), Insight: On the Origin of New Ideas (pp. 143–168). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Getzels, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The Creative Vision: A Longitudinal Study of Problem Finding in Art. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology 12: 306–355.Google Scholar
Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology 15: 1–38.Google Scholar
Gilhooly, K. J. (2016). Incubation and intuition in creative problem solving. Frontiers in Psychology 7. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01076.Google Scholar
Gilhooly, K. J., & Fioratou, E. (2009). Executive functions in insight versus non-insight problem solving: An individual differences approach. Thinking & Reasoning 15(4): 355–376Google Scholar
Gilhooly, K., Fioratou, E., Anthony, S., & Wynn, V. (2007). Divergent thinking: Strategies and executive involvement in generating novel uses for familiar objects. British Journal of Psychology 98(4): 611–625.Google Scholar
Gilhooly, K., & Murphy, P. (2005). Differentiating insight from non-insight problems. Thinking and Reasoning 11: 279–302.Google Scholar
Gilhooly, K. J., & Webb, M. E. (2018). Working memory in insight problem solving. In Vallée-Tourangeau, F (ed.), Insight: On the Origins of New Ideas (pp. 105–119). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginsburgh, V., & Weyers, S. (2006). Persistence and fashion in art Italian Renaissance from Vasari to Berenson and beyond. Poetics 34: 24–44.Google Scholar
Ginsburgh, V., & Weyers, S. (2010). On the formation of canons: The dynamics of art history. Empirical Studies of the Arts 28(1): 37–72.Google Scholar
Ginsburgh, V., & Weyers, S. (2014). Evaluating excellence in the arts. In Simonton, D. K. (ed.), The Wiley Handbook of Genius (pp. 509–532). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Glucksberg, S., & Weisberg, R. (1966). Verbal behavior and problem solving: Some effects of labeling in a functional fixedness task. Journal of Experimental Psychology 71: 659–664.Google Scholar
Gobet, F., & Ereku, M. H. (2014). Checkmate to deliberate practice: The case of Magnus Carlsen. Frontiers in Psychology 5, Article 878.Google Scholar
Goodwin, F. K., & Jamison, K. R. (1990). Manic-Depressive Illness. New York, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grosul, M., & Feist, G. J. (2014). The creative person in science. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 8(1): 30–43. doi:10.1037/a0034828.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin 53: 267–293. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0040755.Google Scholar
Hadamard, J. (1945). The Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. Z., Macnamara, B. N., Campitelli, G., Ullén, F., & Mosing, M. A. (2016). Beyond born versus made: A new look at expertise. In Ross, B. H. (ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Vol. 64 (pp. 1–55). London: Elsevier Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hass, R. (2017). Semantic search during divergent thinking. Cognition 166: 344–357. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.05.039.Google Scholar
Hass, R. W., & Beaty, R. E. (2018). Use or consequences: Probing the cognitive difference between two measures of divergent thinking. Frontiers in Psychology 9. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02327.Google Scholar
Hass, R. W., & Weisberg, R. W. (2009). Career development in two seminal American songwriters: A test of the equal-odds rule. Creativity Research Journal 21: 183–190.Google Scholar
Hass, R. W., Weisberg, R. W., & Choi, J. (2010). Quantitative case-studies in musical composition: The development of creativity in popular-songwriting teams. Psychology of Music 38(4): 463–480.Google Scholar
Hassabis, D., Kumaran, D., Vann, S. D., & Maguire, E. A. (2007). Patients with hippocampal amnesia cannot imagine new experiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A. 104(5): 1726–1731.Google Scholar
Hayes, J. R. (1989). Cognitive processes in creativity. In Glover, J. A., Ronning, R. R., & Reynolds, C. R. (eds.). Handbook of Creativity (pp. 135–145). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Hedne, M. R., Norman, E., & Metcalfe, J. (2016). Intuitive feelings of warmth and confidence in insight and noninsight problem solving of magic tricks. Frontiers in Psychology 7, Article 1314. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01314.Google Scholar
Hélie, S., & Sun, R. (2010). Incubation, insight, and creative problem solving: A unified theory and a connectionist model. Psychological Review 117(3): 994–1024. doi:10.1037/a0019532.Google Scholar
Helson, R. (1999). A longitudinal study of creative personality in women. Creativity Research Journal 12: 89–101.Google Scholar
Hofstadter, D., & Sander, E. (2013). Surfaces and Essences: Analogy as the Fuel and Fire of Thinking. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Hoicka, E., Mowat, R., Kirkwood, J., Kerr, T., & Carberry, M. (2016). One-year-olds think creatively, just like their parents. Child Development 87(4): 1099–1105. doi:10.1111/cdev.12531.Google Scholar
Holyoak, K. J. (2012). Analogy and relational reasoning. In Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning (pp. 234–259). New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Horn, A. (1966). Jackson Pollock: The hollow and the bump. Carleton Miscellany 7: 80–87.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L., & Cattell, R. B. (1966). Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology 57: 253–270.Google Scholar
Howe, M. J. A., Davidson, J. W., & Sloboda, J. A. (1998). Innate talents: Reality or myth? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21: 399–442.Google Scholar
Hsu, N. S., Novick, J. M., & Jaeggi, S. M. (2014). The development and malleability of executive control abilities. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 8: 221. doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00221.Google Scholar
Isen, A. M. (2008). Some ways in which positive affect influences decision making and problem solving. In Lewis, M, Haviland-Jones, J. M., & Barrett, L. F. (eds.), Handbook of Emotions (pp. 548–573). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Isen, A.M., & Daubman, K.A. (1984). The influence of affect on categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 47: 1206–1217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isen, A. M., Daubman, K. A., & Nowicki, G. P. (1987). Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52: 1122–1131.Google Scholar
Jamison, K. R. (1989). Mood disorders and patterns of creativity in British writers and artists. Psychiatry 52: 125–134.Google Scholar
Jamison, K. (1993). Touched with Fire: Manic-Depressive Illness and the Artistic Temperament. New York: Free Press/Macmillan.Google Scholar
Jarosz, A. F., Colflesh, G. J. H., & Wiley, J. (2012). Uncorking the muse: Alcohol intoxication facilitates creative problem solving. Consciousness & Cognition 21: 487–493. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2012.01.002.Google Scholar
Jauk, E., Benedek, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2014). The road to creative achievement: A latent variable model of ability and personality predictors. European Journal of Personality 28(1): 95–105. doi:10.1002/per.1941.Google Scholar
Jauk, E., Benedek, M., Dunst, B., & Neubauer, A. C. (2013). The relationship between intelligence and creativity: New support for the threshold hypothesis by means of empirical breakpoint detection. Intelligence 41(4): 212–221.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. L., Sandrow, D., Meyer, B., Winters, R., Miller, I., Keitner, G., & Solomon, D. (2000). Increases in manic symptoms following life events involving goal-attainment. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 109: 721–727.Google Scholar
Joy, S. (2004). Innovation motivation: The need to be different. Creativity Research Journal 16(2–3): 313–329.Google Scholar
Joy, S. (2017). Innovation motivation: A social learning model of originality. In Feist, G. J., Reiter-Palmon, R, & Kaufman, J. C. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Creativity and Personality Research (pp. 214–234). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Joy, S., & Hicks, S. (2004). The need to be different: Primary trait structure and impact on projective drawings. Creativity Research Journal 16(2–3): 330–339.Google Scholar
Jung, R. E., Mead, B. S., Carrasco, J., & Flores, R. A. (2013). The structure of creative cognition in the human brain. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7, Article 330. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00330.Google Scholar
Jung, R. E., & Vartanian, O. (eds.). (2018). Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kaiser, D. (2005). Drawing Theories Apart: The Dispersion of Feynman Diagrams in Postwar Physics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1951 [1892]). Critique of Judgment, trans. J. H. Bernard. New York: Hafner Publishing.Google Scholar
Kaplan, C. A., & Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight. Cognitive Psychology 22: 374–419.Google Scholar
Karwowski, M., & Lebuda, I. (2016). The big five, the huge two, and creative self-beliefs: Ameta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 10(2): 214–232. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aca0000035.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C. (2001). The Sylvia Plath effect: Mental illness in eminent creative writers. Journal of Creative Behavior 35: 37–50.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C. (2003). The cost of the muse: Poets die young. Death Studies 27: 813–822.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The Four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology 13: 1–12.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.). (2010). Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, S. B., & Gregoire, C. (2015). Wired to Create: Unraveling the Mysteries of the Creative Mind. New York: Perigee.Google Scholar
Kaufman, S. B., Quilty, L. C., Grazioplene, R. G., Hirsh, J. B., Gray, J. R., Peterson, J. B., & DeYoung, C. G. (2015). Openness to experience and intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Personality 84: 248–258.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, G., & Kaufmann, A. (2014). When good is bad and bad is good: Mood, bipolarity, and creativity. In Kaufman, J (ed.), Creativity and Mental Illness (pp. 205–235). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139128902.014.Google Scholar
Keane, M. (1987). On retrieving analogues when solving problems. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A 39(1): 29–41.Google Scholar
Kell, H. J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2013). Who rises to the top? Early indicators. Psychological Science 24(5): 648–659.Google Scholar
Kenett, Y. N., & Austerweil, J. L. (2016). Examining search processes in low and high creative individuals with random walks. In Papafragou, A, Grodner, D, Mirman, D, & Trueswell, J. C. (eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 313–318). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Kenett, Y. N., Beaty, R. E., Silvia, P. J., Anaki, D., & Faust, M. (2016). Structure and flexibility: Investigating the relation between the structure of the mental lexicon, fluid intelligence, and creative achievement. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 10: 377–388.Google Scholar
Kershaw, T. C., & Ohlsson, S. (2004). Multiple causes of difficulty in insight: The case of the nine-dot problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition 30: 3–13.Google Scholar
Kershaw, T. C., Flynn, C. K., & Gordon, L. T. (2013). Multiple paths to transfer and constraint relaxation in insight problem solving. Thinking & Reasoning 19(1): 96–136.Google Scholar
Kim, K. H. (2005). Can only intelligent people be creative? A meta-analysis. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education 16: 57–66.Google Scholar
Kim, K. H. (2008). Meta-analyses of the relationship of creative achievement to both IQ and divergent thinking test scores. Journal of Creative Behavior 42: 106–130.Google Scholar
Kim, K. H. (2016). The Creativity Challenge: How We Can Recapture American Innovation. New York: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
Kim, K. H. (2017). The Torrance Tests of creative thinking – figural or verbal: which one should we use? Creativity: Theories-Research-Applications 4(2): 302–321.Google Scholar
King, L. A., Walker, L. M., & Broyles, S. J. (1996). Creativity and the five-factor model. Journal of Research in Personality 30: 189–203.Google Scholar
King, R. (2006). The Judgment of Paris: The Revolutionary Decade That Gave the World Impressionism. New York: Walker Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Kinney, D. K., & Richards, R. (2014). Creativity as “compensatory advantage”: Bipolar and schizophrenic liability, the inverted-U hypothesis, and practical implications. In Kaufman, J. C. (ed.), Creativity and Mental Illness (pp. 295–317). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Klahr, D., & Simon, H. A. (1999). Studies of scientific discovery: Complementary approaches and convergent findings. Psychological Bulletin 125: 524–543.Google Scholar
Klinger, E. (1999). Thought flow: Properties and mechanisms underlying shifts in content. In Singer, J. A. & Salovey, P (eds.), At Play in the Fields of Consciousness: Essays in Honor of Jerome L. Singer (pp. 29–50). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., Haider, H., & Rhenius, D. (1999). Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 25: 1534–1556.Google Scholar
Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., & Raney, G. (2001). An eye movement study of insight problem solving. Memory & Cognition 29: 1000–1009.Google Scholar
Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2014). The cognitive neuroscience of insight. Annual Review of Psychology 65: 71–93.Google Scholar
Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2015). The Eureka Factor: Aha Moments, Creative Insight, and the Brain. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A. (2004). Reexamining the equal-odds rule in classical composers. In Frois, J. P., Andrade, P, & Marques, J. F. (eds.), Art and Science: Proceedings of the XVIII Congress of the International Association of Empirical Aesthetics (pp. 540–543). Lisbon, Portugal: IAEA.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A. (2005). Factors affecting aesthetic success and improvement in creativity: A case study of the musical genres of Mozart. Psychology of Music 33: 235–255.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A. (2008). A quantitative analysis of Beethoven as self-critic: Implications for psychological theories of musical creativity. Psychology of Music 35: 147–172.Google Scholar
Kraepelin, E. (1921). Manic-Depressive Insanity and Paranoia. London: Churchill Livingstone.Google Scholar
Kretz, D. R., & Krawczyk, D. C. (2014). Expert analogy use in a naturalistic setting. Frontiers in Psychology 5: 1333. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01333.Google Scholar
Kris, E. (1952). Psychoanalytic Explorations in Art. New York: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kurtz, K. J., & Loewenstein, J. (2007). Converging on a new role for analogy in problem solving and retrieval: When two problems are better than one. Memory & Cognition 35(2): 334–341.Google Scholar
Kyaga, S. (2014). Creativity and Mental Illness: The Mad Genius in Question. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kyaga, S. (2018). A heated debate: Time to address the underpinnings of the association between creativity and psychopathology? In Jung, R. E. & Vartanian, O (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity (pp. 114–135). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316556238.008.Google Scholar
Kyaga, S., Landen, M., Boman, M., Hultman, C. M., Langstrom, N., & Lichtenstein, P. (2013). Mental illness, suicide and creativity: 40-year prospective total population study. Journal of Psychiatric Research 47: 83–90.Google Scholar
Kyaga, S., Lichtenstein, P., Boman, M., Hultman, C., Langstrom, N., & Landen, M. (2011). Creativity and mental disorder: Family study of 300,000 people with severe mental disorder. British Journal of Psychiatry 199: 373–379.Google Scholar
Kyllonen, P., & Kell, H. (2017). What is fluid intelligence? Can it be improved? In Rosén, M, Yang Hansen, K, & Wolff, U (eds.), Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment: Cognitive Abilities and Educational Outcomes: A Festschrift in Honour of Jan-Eric Gustafsson (pp. 15–37). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-43473-5_2.Google Scholar
Landmann, N., Kuhn, M., Maier, J. G., Feige, B., Spiegelhalder, K., Riemann, D., & Niussen, C. (2016). Sleep strengthens but does not reorganize memory traces in a verbal creativity task. Sleep 39(3): 705–713. doi:10.5665/sleep.5556.Google Scholar
Laramée, F. D. (2018). Introduction to stylometry with Python. The Programming Historian 7. https://programminghistorian.org/en/lessons/introduction-to-stylometry-with-python, accessed August 3, 2018.Google Scholar
Lee, C. S., & Therriault, D. J. (2013). The cognitive underpinnings of creative thought: A latent variable analysis exploring the roles of intelligence and working memory in three creative thinking processes. Intelligence 41: 306–320.Google Scholar
LePort, A. K., Mattfeld, A.T., Dickinson-Anson, H., Fallon, J. H., Stark, C. E., Kruggel, F., Cahill, L., & McGaugh, J. L. (2012). Behavioral and neuroanatomical investigation of highly superior autobiographical memory (HSAM). Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 98(1): 78–92. doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2012.05.002.Google Scholar
Lewisohn, M. (2013). The Beatles – All These Years: Volume 1: Tune In. New York: Crown Archetype.Google Scholar
Li, J., Yao, L., Hendriks, E., & Wang, J. Z. (2012). Rhythmic brushstrokes distinguish van Gogh from his contemporaries: Findings via automated brushstroke extraction. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 34(6): 1159–1176.Google Scholar
Llano, M. T., Colton, S., Hepworth, R., & Gow, J. (2016). Automated fictional ideation via knowledge base manipulation. Cognitive Computation 8: 153–174.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, J. (2010). How one’s hook is baited matters for catching an analogy. In Ross, B (ed.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Volume 53 (pp. 149–182). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Lowenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Gentner, D. (2003). Analogical learning in negotiation teams: Comparing cases promotes learning and transfer. Academy of Management Learning and Education 2: 119–128.Google Scholar
Lubart, T. I., & Getz, I. (1997). Emotion, metaphor, and the creative process. Creativity Research Journal 10: 285–301.Google Scholar
Lubart, T. I., & Sternberg, R. J. (1995). An investment approach to creativity: Theory and data. In Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (eds.), The Creative Cognition Approach (pp. 269–302). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ludwig, A. M. (1998). Method and madness in the arts and sciences. Creativity Research Journal 11: 93–101.Google Scholar
Lung, C.-T., & Dominowski, R. L. (1985). Effects of strategy instructions and practice on nine-dot problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 11(4): 804–811. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.11.1-4.804.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R. (1968). The Mind of a Mnemonist: A Little Book about a Vast Memory. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
MacGregor, J. N., Ormerod, T. C., & Chronicle, E. P. (2001). Information processing and insight: A process model of performance on the nine-dot and related problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 27: 176–201.Google Scholar
Mackinnon, D. W. (1962). The personality correlates of creativity: A study of American architects. In Nielsen, G. S. (ed.), Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Applied Psychology (pp. 11–39). Copenhagen, Denmark: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Macnamara, B. N., Hambrick, D. Z., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). Deliberate practice and performance in music, games, sports, education, and professions: A meta-analysis. Psychological Science 25(8): 1608–1618. doi:10.1177/0956797614535810.Google Scholar
Madore, K. P., Addis, D. R., & Schacter, D. L. (2015). Creativity and memory: Effects of an episodic-specificity induction on divergent thinking. Psychological Science 26(9): 1461–1468.Google Scholar
Madore, K. P., Jing, H. G., & Schacter, D. L. (2019). Selective effects of specificity inductions on episodic details: evidence for an event construction account. Memory 27(2): 250–260.Google Scholar
Maguire, E. A., & Mullally, S. L. (2013). The hippocampus: A manifesto for change. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 142(4): 1180–1189Google Scholar
Maguire, E. A., Woollett, K., & Spiers, H. J. (2006). London taxi drivers and bus drivers: A structural MRI and neuropsychological analysis. Hippocampus 16: 1091–1101.Google Scholar
Mandler, J. M., & Mandler, G. (eds.) (1964). Thinking: From Association to Gestalt. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Marshall, B. J. (2002). The discovery that helicobacter pylori, a spiral bacterium, caused peptic ulcer disease. In Marshall, B (ed.), Helicobacter Pioneers (pp. 165–202). Singapore: Blackwell Science Asia.Google Scholar
Marshall, B. J., & Warren, J. R. (1984). Unidentified curved bacilli in the stomach of patients with gastric and peptic ulceration. The Lancet 323(8390): 1311–1315.Google Scholar
Martindale, C. (1989). Personality, situation, and creativity. In Glover, J. A., Ronning, R. R., & Reynolds, C. R. (eds.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 211–228). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
McDermott, J. F. (2000). Emily Dickinson’s “nervous prostration” and its possible relationship to her work. The Emily Dickinson Journal 9: 71–86.Google Scholar
McDermott, J. F. (2001). Emily Dickinson revisited: A study of periodicity in her work. American Journal of Psychiatry 158: 686–690.Google Scholar
Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review 69: 220–232.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. (1986). Premonitions of insight predict impending error. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 12: 623–634.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J., & Wiebe, D. (1987). Intuition in insight and non-insight problem solving. Memory & Cognition 15: 238–246.Google Scholar
Miller, A. I. (1996). Insights of Genius: Imagery and Creativity in Science and Art. New York: Copernicus, an Imprint of Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Mullally, S. L., & Maguire, E. A. (2014). Memory, imagination, and predicting the future: A common brain mechanism? The Neuroscientist 20(3): 220–234.Google Scholar
Murray, P. (1989a). Poetic genius and its classical origins. In Murray, P (ed.), Genius: The History of an Idea (pp. 9–31). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Murray, C. (2003). Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Newell, A., Shaw, C., & Simon, H. A. (1962). The processes of creative thinking. In Gruber, H. E., Terrell, G, & Wertheimer, M (eds.), Contemporary Approaches to Creative Thinking (pp. 153–189). New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2011). Are intelligence and creativity really so different? Fluid intelligence, executive processes, and strategy use in divergent thinking. Intelligence 39: 36–45.Google Scholar
Nusbaum, E. C., Silvia, P. J., & Beaty, R. E. (2014). Ready, set, create: What instructing people to “be creative” reveals about the meaning and mechanisms of divergent thinking. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 8(4): 423–432.Google Scholar
Ochse, R. (1990). Before the Gates of Excellence: The Determinants of Creative Genius. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ohlsson, S. (1992). Information-processing explanations of insight and related phenomena. In Keane, M. T. & Gilhooly, K. J. (eds.), Advances in the Psychology of Thinking, Vol. 1 (pp. 1–44). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Ohlsson, S. (2011). Deep Learning: How the Mind Overrides Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ohlsson, S. (2018). The dialectic between routine and creative cognition. In Vallée-Tourangeau, F (ed.), Insight: On the Origins of New Ideas (pp. 8–27). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Öllinger, M., Jones, G., & Knoblich, G. (2014). The dynamics of search, impasse, and representational change provide a coherent explanation of difficulty in the nine-dot problem. Psychological Research 78: 266–275.Google Scholar
Olton, R. M. (1979). Experimental studies of incubation: Searching for the elusive. Journal of Creative Behavior 13: 9–22.Google Scholar
Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Problem Solving, 3rd rev. ed. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
Palmer, E. D. (1954). Investigation of the gastric mucosa spirochetes of the human. Gastroenterology 27(2): 218–220.Google Scholar
Pariser, D. (1987). The juvenile drawings of Klee, Toulouse-Lautrec, and Picasso. Visual Arts Research 13: 53–67.Google Scholar
Park, G., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2008). Ability differences among people who have commensurate degrees matter for scientific creativity. Psychological Science 19(10): 957–961.Google Scholar
Perkins, D. N. (2000). The Eureka Effect: The Art and Logic of Breakthrough Thinking. New York: Norton.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: 323–332.Google Scholar
Petroski, H. (1998). Invention by Design: How Engineers Get from Thought to Thing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Plucker, J. (1999). Is the proof in the pudding? Reanalyses of Torrance’s (1958 to present) longitudinal study data. Creativity Research Journal 12: 103–114.Google Scholar
Post, F. (1994). Creativity and psychopathology: A study of 291 world-famous men. The British Journal of Psychiatry 165: 22–34. doi:10.1192/bjp.165.1.22.Google Scholar
Ramey, C. H., & Weisberg, R. W. (2004). The “poetical activity” of Emily Dickinson: A further test of the hypothesis that affective disorders foster creativity. Creativity Research Journal 16: 173–185.Google Scholar
Reeves, L. M., & Weisberg, R. W. (1994). Models of analogical transfer in problem solving. Psychological Bulletin 116: 381–400.Google Scholar
Reverberi, C., Toraldo, A., D’Agostini, S., & Skrap, M. (2005). Better without (lateral) frontal cortex? Insight problems solved by frontal patients. Brain 128: 2882–2890.Google Scholar
Richards, R., Kinney, D. K., Benet, M., & Marzel, A. P. C. (1988). Assessing everyday creativity: Characteristics of the Lifetime Creativity Scales and validation with three large samples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54: 476–485.Google Scholar
Richardson, J. (with McCully, M) (1991). A Life of Picasso. Vol. 1: 1881–1906. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Richland, L. E., Holyoak, K. J., & Stigler, J. W. (2004). Analogy generation in eighth grade mathematics classrooms. Cognition and Instruction 22: 37–60.Google Scholar
Richter, I. (ed.). (1952). The Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ritter, S. M., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2014). Creativity – the unconscious foundations of the incubation period. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8: 215. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00215.Google Scholar
Roberts, R. P., & Addis, D. R. (2018). A common mode of processing governing divergent thinking and future imagination. In Vartanian, O & Jung, R. E. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity (pp. 211–230). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, A. G., & Stern, S. (1997). Corporate Creativity: How Innovation and Improvement Actually Happen. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.Google Scholar
Rocke, A. J. (2010). Image and Reality: Kekulé, Kopp, and the Scientific Imagination. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1991). Essentials of Behavioral Research: Methods and Data Analysis, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, A. (1989). The Emerging Goddess: The Creative Process in Art, Science, and Other Fields. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, A. (1990). Creativity and Madness: New Findings and Old Stereotypes. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Rubenson, D. L., & Runco, M. A. (1992). The psychoeconomic approach to creativity. New Ideas in Psychology 10: 131–147.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A. (2011). Tests of creativity. In Runco, M. A. & Pritzker, S (eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity, 2nd ed. (pp. 423–426). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., & Acar, S. (2012). Divergent thinking as an indicator of creative potential. Creativity Research Journal 24(1): 66–75.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal 21: 92–96.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., Millar, G., Acar, S., & Cramond, B. (2010). Torrance tests of creative thinking as predictors of personal and public achievement: A fifty-year follow-up. Creativity Research Journal 22(4): 361–368.Google Scholar
Ruscio, J., Whitney, D., & Amabile, T. M. (1998). Looking inside the fishbowl of creativity: verbal and behavioral predictors of creative performance. Creativity Research Journal 11: 243–263.Google Scholar
Sadler-Smith, E. (2015). Wallas’ four-stage model of the creative process: More than meets the eye? Creativity Research Journal 27(4): 342–352.Google Scholar
Sass, L. A. (2001). Schizophrenia, modernism, and the “creative imagination”: On creativity and psychopathology. Creativity Research Journal 13: 55–74.Google Scholar
Schaller, M. (1997). The psychological consequences of fame: Three tests of the self-consciousness hypothesis. Journal of Personality 65(2): 291–309.Google Scholar
Schlesinger, J. (2009). Creative mythconceptions: A closer look at the evidence for the “mad genius” hypothesis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 3(2): 62–72.Google Scholar
Schlesinger, J. (2012). The Insanity Hoax: Exposing the Myth of the Mad Genius. Ardsley-on-Hudson, NY: Shrinktunes Media.Google Scholar
Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. (2012). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. In Flanagan, D & Harrison, P (eds.), Contemporary Intellectual Assessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues, 3rd ed. (pp. 99–144). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Schönauer, M., Brodt, S., Pöhlchen, D., Breßmer, A., Danek, A. H., & Gais, S. (2018). Sleep does not promote solving classical insight problems and magic tricks. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 12, Article ID 72.Google Scholar
Schou, M. (1979). Artistic productivity and lithium prophylaxis in manic-depressive illness. The British Journal of Psychiatry 135: 97–103.Google Scholar
Schuldberg, D. (2001). Six subclinical “spectrum” traits in “normal creativity.” Creativity Research Journal 13: 5–16.Google Scholar
Schwarz, N. (1990). Feelings as information: Informational and motivational functions of affective states. In Higgins, E. T. & Sorrentino, R. M. (eds.), Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior, Vol. 2 (pp. 527–561). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (2003). Mood as information: 20 years later. Psychological Inquiry 14: 296–303.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 Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (eds.), The Nature of Insight (pp. 65–124). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Shaw, E. D., Mann, J. J., Stokes, P. E., & Manevitz, A. Z. (1986). Effects of lithium carbonate on associative productivity and idiosyncrasy in bipolar outpatients. The American Journal of Psychiatry 143(9): 1166–1169.Google Scholar
Silvia, P. J. (2008). Another look at creativity and intelligence: Exploring higher-order models and probable confounds. Personality and Individual Differences 44: 1012–1021.Google Scholar
Silvia, P. J. (2015). Intelligence and creativity are pretty similar after all. Educational Psychology Review 27: 599–606.Google Scholar
Silvia, P. J., & Beaty, R. E. (2012). Making creative metaphors: The importance of fluid intelligence for creative thought. Intelligence 40: 343–351.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1986). The information-processing explanation of Gestalt phenomena. Computers in Human Behavior 2: 241–255.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (1984). Genius, Creativity, and Leadership: Historiometric Inquiries. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (1988). Creativity, leadership, and chance. In Sternberg, R. J. (ed.), The Nature of Creativity: Current Psychological Perspectives (pp. 386–426). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (1995). Foresight in insight? A Darwinian answer. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (eds.), The Nature of Insight (pp. 465–494). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (1999). Origins of Genius: Darwinian Perspectives on Creativity. New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (2011). Exceptional talent and genius. In Chamorro-Premuzic, T, Stumm, S & Furnham, A (eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Individual Differences (pp. 635–655). New York: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (2016). Creativity, automaticity, irrationality, fortuity, fantasy, and other contingencies: An eightfold response typology. Review of General Psychology 20: 194–204.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (2017). Creative genius and psychopathology: Creativity as positive and negative personality. In Feist, G. J., Reiter-Palmon, R & Kaufman, J. C. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Creativity and Personality Research (pp. 235–250). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (2018). Creative ideas and the creative process: Good news and bad news for the neuroscience of creativity. In Jung, R. E. & Vartanian, O (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity (pp. 9–18). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sio, U. N., & Ormerod, T. C. (2009). Does incubation enhance problem solving? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin 135(1): 94–120.Google Scholar
Slater, E., & Mayer, A. (1959). Contributions to a pathography of the musicians: I. Robert Schumann. Confinia Psychiatrica 2: 65–94.Google Scholar
Sloboda, J. A., Davidson, J. W., Howe, M. J. A., & Moore, D. G. (1996). The role of practice in the development of performing musicians. British Journal of Psychology 87(2): 287–309.Google Scholar
Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2015). The science of mind wandering: Empirically navigating the stream of consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology 66: 487–518.Google Scholar
Smith, S. M. (1995). Getting into and out of mental ruts: A theory of fixation, incubation, and insight. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (eds.), The Nature of Insight (pp. 121–149). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Smith, K. A., Huber, D. E., & Vul, E. (2013). Multiply-constrained semantic search in the Remote Associates Test. Cognition 128(1): 64–75.Google Scholar
Soler, J. M. (2007). A rational indicator of scientific creativity. Journal of Informetrics 1(2): 123–130.Google Scholar
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017a). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 113: 117–143.Google Scholar
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017b). Short and extra-short forms of the Big Five Inventory–2: The BFI-2-S and BFI- 2-XS. Journal of Research in Personality 68: 69–81.Google Scholar
Speck, R. M, Weisberg, R. W., & Fleisher, L. A. (2015). Varying goals and approaches of innovation centers in academic health systems: a semistructured qualitative study. Academic Medicine 90(8): 1132–1136.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Costs of expertise. In Ericsson, K. A. (ed.), The Road to Excellence: The Acquisition of Expert Performance in the Arts and Sciences, Sports, and Games (pp. 347–354). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Darwinian creativity as a conventional religious faith. Psychological Inquiry 10(4): 357–359.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2018). A triangular theory of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 12(1): 50–67.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (1982). The mind of the puzzler. Psychology Today 16 (June): 37–44.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Bridges, S. L. (2014). Varieties of genius. In Simonton, D. K. (ed.), Handbook of Genius (pp. 185–197). Chichester: Wiley–Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (eds.). (1995). The Nature of Insight. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2002). The Creativity Conundrum: A Propulsion Model of Kinds of Creative Contributions. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist 51: 677–688.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. L. (2017). Creativity and mood disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science 12(6): 1040–1076. doi:10.1177/1745691617699653.Google Scholar
Thagard, P. (1999). How Scientists Explain Disease. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Thrakal, P. P., Madore, K. P., & Schacter, D. L. (2017). A role for the left angular gyrus in episodic simulation and memory. The Journal of Neuroscience 37(34): 8142–8149. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1319-17.2017.Google Scholar
Toker, F. (2003). Fallingwater Rising: Frank Lloyd Wright, E. J. Kaufmann, and America’s Most Extraordinary House. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1981). Predicting the creativity of elementary school children (1958–80) – and the teacher who “made a difference.” Gifted Child Quarterly 25(2): 55–62. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628102500203.Google Scholar
Treffert, D. A. (2011). Islands of Genius: The Bountiful Mind of the Autistic, Acquired, and Sudden Savant. London and New York: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Google Scholar
Trench, M., & Mervino, R. A. (2015). The role of surface similarity in analogical retrieval: Bridging the gap between the naturalistic and the experimental traditions. Cognitive Science 39: 1292–1319.Google Scholar
Ullén, F., Hambrick, D. Z., & Mosing, M. A. (2016). Rethinking expertise: A multifactorial gene–environment interaction model of expert performance. Psychological Bulletin 142(4): 427–446.Google Scholar
Underwood, T., Bamman, D., & Lee, S. (2018). The transformation of gender in English-language fiction. Cultural Analytics (February 13). doi:https://doi.org/10.22148/16.019.Google Scholar
Vallée-Tourangeau, F. (ed.). (2018). Insight: On the Origins of New Ideas. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vartanian, O. (2018). Openness to Experience: Insights from Personality Neuroscience. In Vartanian, O & Jung, R. E. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity (pp. 464–475). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Vartanian, O., & Jung, R. E. (eds.). (2018). The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Volle, E. (2018). Associative and controlled cognition in divergent thinking: Theoretical, experimental, neuroimaging evidence, and new directions. In Jung, R. E. & Vartanian, O (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity (pp. 333–362). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wallach, M., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of Thinking in Young Children: A Study of the Creativity–Intelligence Distinction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Ward, T. B. (1995). What’s old about new ideas? In Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B. & Finke, R. A. (eds.), The Creative Cognition Approach (pp. 157–178). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ward, T. B. (2018). Creativity as a continuum. In Sternberg, R. J. & Kaufman, J. C. (eds.), The Nature of Human Creativity (pp. 335–350). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Warren, J. R., & Marshall, B. J. (1983). Unidentified curved bacilli on gastric epithelium in active gastritis. The Lancet 321(8336): 1273–1275.Google Scholar
Watson, J. B. (1930). Behaviorism (revised edition). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Watson, J. D. (1968). The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar
Weinberger, A. B., Green, A., & Chrysikou, E. G. (2017). Using transcranial direct current stimulation to enhance creative cognition: Interactions between task, polarity, and stimulation site. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 11: 246.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (1994). Genius and madness? A quasi-experimental test of the hypothesis that manic-depression increases creativity. Psychological Science 5: 361–367.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (2004). On structure in the creative process: a quantitative case-study of the creation of Picasso’s Guernica. Empirical Studies in the Arts 22: 23–54.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Creativity: Understanding Innovation in Problem Solving, Science, Invention, and the Arts. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (2013).On the “demystification” of insight: A critique of neuroimaging studies of insight. Creativity Research Journal 25: 1–14.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (2014). Case studies of genius: Ordinary thinking, extraordinary outcomes. In Simonton, D. K. (ed.), The Wiley Handbook of Genius (pp. 139–165). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (2015). On the usefulness of value in the definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal 27(2): 111–124.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (2018a). Expertise and structured imagination in creative thinking: Reconsideration of an old question. In Ericsson, K. A. et al. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance, 2nd ed. (pp. 812–834). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (2018b). Insight, problem solving, and creativity: An integration of findings. In Vallée-Tourangeau, F (ed.), Insight: On the Origins of New Ideas (pp. 191–215). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W. (2018c). Response to Harrington on the definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal 30(4): 461–465.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W., & Alba, J. W. (1981). An examination of the alleged role of “fixation” in the solution of several “insight” problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 110: 169–192.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W., & Reeves, L. M. (2013). Cognition: From Memory to Creativity. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley Publishers.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W., Speck, R. M., & Fleisher, L. A. (2014). Fostering innovation in medicine: A conceptual framework for medical centers. Healthcare 2: 90–93. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hjdsi.2013.09.007.Google Scholar
Weisberg, R. W., & Suls, J. M. (1973). An information-processing model of Duncker’s candle problem. Cognitive Psychology 4: 255–276.Google Scholar
Wertheimer, M. (1982). Productive Thinking (enlarged ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The Aims of Education and Other Essays. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Wiley, J. (1998). Expertise as mental set: the effects of domain knowledge in creative problem solving. Memory & Cognition 26: 716–730.Google Scholar
Wiley, J., & Jarosz, A. F. (2012). Working memory capacity, attentional focus, and problem solving. Current Directions in Psychological Science 21(4): 258–262.Google Scholar
Winner, E. (1996). The rage to master: The decisive role of talent in the visual arts. In Ericsson, K. A. (ed.), The Road to Excellence: The Acquisition of Expert Performance in the Arts and Sciences, Sports, and Games (pp. 271–301). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Winner, E. (2014). Child prodigies and adult genius: A weak link. In Simonton, D. K. (ed.), Handbook of Genius (pp. 297–320). Chichester: Wiley–Blackwell.Google Scholar
Woollett, K., & Maguire, E. A. (2011). Acquiring “the knowledge” of London’s layout drives structural brain changes. Current Biology 21: 2109–2114.Google Scholar
Wordsworth, W. (1899 [1802]). Lyrical Ballads with Pastoral and Other Poems, 3rd ed. London: T. N. Longman and Rees.Google Scholar
Zabelina, D. (2018). Creativity and attention. In Jung, R. E. & Vartanian, O (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity (pp. 161–179). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zhang, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (2011). Revisiting the investment theory of creativity. Creativity Research Journal 23(3): 229–238.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, R. (2010). The Universe in a Mirror: The Saga of the Hubble Space Telescope and the Visionaries Who Built It. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar