Toward a broader conception of creativity: A case for "mini-c" creativity.

By R. Beghetto, James C. Kaufman. 2007

791 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Mechanical Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e7b90ed761f72a508dc68f360ac543f7ea8da069

How researchers see this paper

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Mechanical Engineering

Citations in the corpus

Do People Recognize the Four Cs? Examining Layperson Conceptions of Creativity (2013, methodology): “Additional work is needed to understand whether and how laypeople might benefit from viewing creativity across a broader spectrum (such as that proffered by the Four C Model of Creativity).”
Possibility thinking: culminative studies of an evidence-based concept driving creativity? (2013, neutral): “The PT work also seeks to explore what Beghetto and Kaufman (2007) call ‘mini-c’ creativity, in other words, the processes involved in personal meaning-construction at an everyday level.”
Creativity of Chinese and American Cultures: A Synthetic Analysis. (2013, background): “More recent theories of creativity include both types of creativity (Beghetto & Kaufman, 2007; Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009).”
Revenge of the “Neurds”: Characterizing Creative Thought in Terms of the Structure and Dynamics of Memory (2010, background): “In keeping with the view that everyone is creative (Beghetto & Kaufman, 2007 ; Gardner, 1993 ; Runco, 2004), the creative act that we analyze is not an earthshaking achievement, but a simple event in the life of an everyday person.”
Assessing creativity with self-report scales: A review and empirical evaluation. (2012, background): “Unlike most self-report scales, the CAQ aims to capture Pro-c or Big-C creativity ( Beghetto & Kaufman, 2007; Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009), so it focuses on significant, observable accomplishments.”
Theoretical and Pedagogical Perspectives on Orchestrating Creativity and Collaborative Learning. (2011, background): “Indeed, according to Moran (2010), creativity and learning should neither be set in opposition nor equated with each other, but are rather coordinated processes that have a symbiotic relationship (Beghetto & Kaufman, 2007; Moran, 2010).”
A Study on the Development of a Mathematics Creativity Scale. (2016, background): “Beghetto and Kaufman (2007) state that even though creativity is common in children, their creative potential regresses with aging.”
The Impact of Metacognitive Instruction on Creative Problem Solving (2015, background): “This continuum starts with novel and personally meaningful representations during knowledge acquisition that are filtered through background experience and are referred to as mini-c creativity (Beghetto & Kaufman, 2007).”
Creative Experience: A Non-Standard Definition of Creativity (2020, background): “Without denying the role and function of outcomes for our understanding of creativity (especially when considered through developmental lenses; e.g., Beghetto & Kaufman, 2007; Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009), we propose here a radical act of re-defining creativity that goes beyond any of the four P’s of…”
In Praise of Clark Kent: Creative Metacognition and the Importance of Teaching Kids When (Not) to Be Creative (2013, background): “The Goldilocks principle (Beghetto & Kaufman, 2007) can serve as a useful guideline for teachers—helping them keep in mind the importance of providing feedback that is not too harsh (stifling students’ motivation) or not harsh enough (little attention to any semblance to real-world standards).”
Teachers’ conceptions of student creativity in higher education (2017, background): “An alternative contribution is provided by Beghetto and Kaufman (2007).”
Ideational code‐switching: Walking the talk about supporting student creativity in the classroom (2007, background): “Because of the potential problem of focusing too much on productivity, creativity researchers have argued for an even more personally situated view of creativity (Cohen, 1989; Runco, 2004b) referred to as mini-c creativity (Beghetto & Kaufman, 2007).”