How can computers be partners in the creative process: Classification and commentary on the Special Issue

By Todd Lubart. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud., 2005

394 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Mechanical Engineering, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d480220da4a9df0448549b4470288578853f223e

How researchers see this paper

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

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Brian P. Bailey
2. Justin D. Weisz

In Mechanical Engineering

1. Michael J. Muller

In Social Psychology

1. Kunwar Yashraj Singh
2. Michael J. Muller
3. Brian P. Bailey
4. Brian Magerko
5. Justin D. Weisz
6. Lisa Li
7. Chih-Pin Hsiao
8. Nicholas Mark Davis

Citations in the corpus

• Design Principles for Generative AI Applications (2024, background): “…category (a) would disappear (e.g. due to technological improvements), category (b) would remain and imperfection would still be a critical design issue. for real user needs like explainability [44, 166], and understanding the role of the AI in the co-creative process [37, 57, 106, 123, 148, 161].”
• Getting inspired!: understanding how and why examples are used in creative design practice (2009, background): “Thus, a combination of both random and semi-random example searching is useful in generating novel ideas when one becomes fixed on a specific idea [12].”
• Empirically Studying Participatory Sense-Making in Abstract Drawing with a Co-Creative Cognitive Agent (2016, background): “Computers can support human users in their creative process in a variety of ways, including acting as a nanny, coach, pen-pal, and colleague [26].”