Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation, 2nd ed.

By R. Sawyer. 2012

356 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d0787748e89c76e4487629b23031c5692a27ff80

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Rewriting the Language of Creativity: The Five A's Framework (2013, background): “Increasingly since the 1980s and 1990s, the influence of sociocultural psychology began to be felt and a shift started to take place from naturalism, person-centered, univariate, and positivistic research paradigms to social understandings, dynamic conceptions of creative cognition, and systems-orie”
Personal and environmental factors affecting teachers’ creativity-fostering practices in Hong Kong (2014, background): “observed that schools seem to be the very places that can limit student creativity rather than support it (Morgan & Forster, 1999; Sawyer, 2012).”
Extending Sociocultural Theory to Group Creativity (2012, background): “Several theorists and empirical researchers have begun moving in this direction (Cole and Engestrom 2007; Greeno 2006; Nercessian 2005; Sawyer 2011), although they rarely clarify the ways that their work is in tension with process ontology and inseparability claims.”
Mapping the Landscape of Creativity Support Tools in HCI (2019, methodology): “Among numerous creative process models (for an overview, see [147, p. 89]), Amabile’s [4–6] ‘componential theory of creativity’ has had a strong impact on the creativity research community.”
The Social Brain, Language, and Goal-Directed Collective Thinking: A Social Conception of Cognition and Its Implications for Understanding How We Think, Teach, and Learn (2013, background): “Several studies take a sociocultural theoretical perspective, in which culturally framed ways of communicating and the use of cultural tools are considered important (Miell & Littleton, 2004; Paulus & Nijstad, 2003; Sawyer, 2012; Sawyer & DeZutter, 2009).”
Creativity and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis (2017, background): “These findings align with longstanding assertions of scholars who have described creativity and learning as representing interrelated phenomena (e.g., Beghetto, 2016a; Guilford, 1967; Piaget, 1962, 1981; Sawyer, 2012; Vygotsky, 1967/2004).”
Implicit Theories of Creative Ideas: How Culture Guides Creativity Assessments (2016, background): “It refers to integrating functions, features, or other aspects that are typically distinct (as in the “individualist definition” of creativity in Sawyer, 2012).”
Creativity and Well‐being: A Meta‐analysis (2020, background): “Some researchers challenged the mad-genius hypothesis and considered it a myth (Kaufman, 2014; Sawyer, 2012), and some others questioned the methodological quality of the presented empirical evidence (Dietrich, 2014; Rothenberg, 1990; Schlesinger, 2009).”
Musical creativity and the embodied mind (2018, background): “As a result, conceptions of creativity have changed over the centuries and vary across cultural and social contexts (Mpofu, Myambo, Mogaji, Mashego, & Khaleefa, 2006; Niu, 2006; Niu & Sternberg, 2006; Preiser, 2006; Preiss & Strasser, 2006; Sawyer, 2012).”
Factors explaining the learning of generic skills: a study of university students’ experiences (2018, background): “The first of these represents creativity in general, and the second represents creativity on a more concrete level, specifically, on the level of action (see Sawyer 2012).”
A Call to Action: The Challenges of Creative Teaching and Learning (2015, background): “Torrance also developed several different curricular units to teach creativity, with the goal of helping students to increase their scores on the TTCT, such as the Future Problem Solving Program (Torrance, Bruch, & Torrance, 1976).”
Creative Learning: A Fresh Look (2016, background): “The assertion that domain knowledge is necessary for creativity is one of the most broadly endorsed views in the field of creativity studies (see Ericsson, 1996; Gardner, 1993; Sawyer, 2012).”