Applying multiple knowledge structures in creative thought: Effects on idea generation and problem-solving

Creativity Research Journal

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 137-154

  Hunter, Samuel T ^a   Bedell Avers, Katrina E ^b   Hunsicker, Chase M ^b   Mumford, Michael D ^b   Ligon, Gina S ^c  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

^c VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 45849107246     PISSN: 10400419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10400410802088779     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Amabile, T. M. (1988). From individual creativity to organizational innovation. In K. Gronhaug, & G. Kaufman (Eds.), Innovation: A cross-disciplinary perspective (pp. 139-165). Oslo 6, Norway: Norwegian University Press.
2. Baer, J. (2003). Evaluative thinking, creativity, and task specificity: Separating wheat from chaff is not the same as finding needle in haystacks. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Critical creative processes (pp. 129-152). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
3. Bansalou, L. W. (1993). Flexibility, structure, and linguistic vagary in concepts: Manifestations of a compositional system of perceptual symbols. In A. F. Collins, S. E. Gathercole, M. A. Conway, & P. E. Monnis (Eds.), Theories of memory (pp. 24-101). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Baughman, W. A., & Mumford, M. D. (1995). Process analytic models of creative capacities: Operations involved in the combination and reorganization process. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 37-62.
5. Bell, N. L., Matthews, T. D., Lassister, K. S., & Leverett, J. P. (2002). Validity of the Wonderlic Personnel Test as a measure of fluid or crystallized intelligence: Implications for career assessment. North American Journal of Psychology, 4, 113-120.
6. Berger, C. R., & Jordan, J. M. (1992). Planning sources, planning difficulty, and verbal fluency. Communication Monographs, 59, 130-148.
7. Berger, R. M., Guilford, J. P., & Christensen, P. R. (1957). A factor-analytic study of planning abilities. Psychological Monographs, 7(1), 1-31.
8. Boucher, L., & Dienes, Z. (2003). Two ways of learning associations. Cognitive Science, 27, 807-842.
9. Brophy, D. R. (1998). Understanding, measuring, and enhancing individual creative problem-solving efforts. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 123-150.
10. Butler, A. B., Scherer, L. L., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2003). Effects of solution elicitation aids and need for cognition on the generation of solutions to ill-structured problems. Creativity Research Journal, 15, 235-244.
11. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
12. Clement, J. (1988). Observed methods for generating analogies in scientific problem solving. Cognitive Science, 12, 563-586.
13. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 312-338). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
14. Davis, G. A. (1999). Creativity is forever. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.
15. Didierjean, A., & Nogry, S. (2004). Reducing structural-element salience on a source problem produces later success in analogical transfer: What role does source difficulty play? Memory and Cognition, 32, 1053-1064.
16. Dodrill, C., & Warner, M. H. (1988). Further studies of the Wonderlic Personnel Test as a brief measure of intelligence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 145-147.
17. Ericsson, K. A., & Charness, W. (1994). Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition. American Psychologist, 49, 725-747.
18. Estes, W. K. (1991). Cognitive architectures from the standpoint of an experimental psychologist. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 1-28.
19. Estes, Z., & Ward, J. B. (2002). The emergence of novel attributes in concept modification. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 149-156.
20. Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199-241). New York: Cambridge University Press.
22. Gruszka, A., & Necka, E. (2002). Priming and acceptance of close and remote associations by creative and less creative people. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 174-192.
23. Halford, G. S., Smith, S. B., Dickson, J. C., Mayberry, M. T., Kelly, M. E., Bain, J. D., & Stewart, J. E. M. (1995). Modeling the development of reasoning strategies: The roles of analogy, knowledge, and capacity. In T. J. Simon & G. S. Halford (Eds), Developing cognitive competence: New approaches to process modeling. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Hammond, K. J. (1990). Case-based planning: A framework for planning from experience. Cognitive Science, 14, 385-443.
25. Hershey, D. A., Walsh, D. A., Read, S. J., & Chulef, A. S. (1990). The effects of expertise on financial problem solving: Evidence for goal-directed problem solving scripts. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 46, 77-101.
26. Heydenbluth, C., & Hesse, F. W. (1996). Impact of superficial similarity in the application phase of analogical problem solving. American Journal of Psychology, 109, 37-57.
27. Howe, M. A., Davidson, J. W., & Sloboda, J. A. (1998). Innate talents: Reality of myth? Brain and Behavioral Sciences, 21, 399-442.
28. Hughes, T. P. (1989). American genesis: A history of the American genius for invention. New York: Penguin.
29. Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping. Psychological Review, 104, 427-466.
30. Kolodner, J. L. (1997). Educational implications of analogy: A view from case-based reasoning. American Psychologist, 52, 57-66.
31. Kolodner, J. L., & Simpson, R. L. (1989). The mediator: Analysis of an early case-based problem-solver. Cognitive Science, 13, 507-549.
32. Kubose, T. T., Holyoak, K. J., & Hummel, J. E. (2002). The role of textual coherence in incremental analogical mapping. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 407-435.
33. McKelvie, S. J., (1989). The Wonderlic Personnel Test: Reliability and validity in an academic setting. Psychological Reports, 65, 161-162.
34. Mednick, M. T., Mednick, S. A., & Jung, C. C. (1964). Continual association as a function of level of creativity and type of verbal stimulus. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69, 511-515.
35. Merrifield, P. R., Guilford, J. P., Christensen, P. R., & Frick, J. W. (1962). The role of intellectual factors in problem solving. Psychological Monographs, 76, 1-21.
36. Mumford, M. D., Bedell, K. E., & Hunter, S. T. (2008). Planning for innovation: A multi-level perspective. In M. D. Mumford, S. T. Hunter, & K. E. Bedell (Eds.), Research in Multi-level Issues (Vol. VII, pp. 17-34). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
37. Mumford, M. D., Blair, C., & Marcy, R. T. (2007). Alternative knowledge structures in creative thought: Schema, associations, and cases. In J. Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), The Relationship Between Creativity, Knowledge, and Reason. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
38. Mumford, M. D., Blair, C., Dailey, L., Leritz, L. E. & Osburn, H. K. (2006). Errors in creative thought? Cognitive biases in a complex processing. Journal of Creative Behavior, 40, 75-109.
39. Phye, G. D. (1990). Inductive problem solving: Schema inducement and memory-based transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 826-831.
40. Radvansky, G. A. (1994). Mental systems, representation, and process. In C. E. Williams (Ed.), Associated systems theory: A systematic approach to cognitive representations of persons (pp. 982-204). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 219-325.
42. Reber, A. S. (1992). An evolutionary context for the cognitive unconscious. Philosophical Psychology, 5, 33-51.
43. Reber, A. S., Kassin, S. M., Lewis, S., & Cantor, L. W. (1980). On the relation between implicit and explicit modes in the learning of a complex rule structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 492-502.
44. Redmond, M. R., Mumford, M. D., & Teach, R. J. (1993). Putting creativity to work: Leader influences on subordinate creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55, 120-151.
45. Reiter-Palmon, R., Mumford, M. D., & Threlfall, K. V. (1998). Solving everyday problems creatively: The role of problem construction and personality type. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 187-198.
46. Reeves, L. M., & Weisberg, R. W. (1994). The role of content and abstract information in analogical transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 381-400.
47. Rich, J. D., & Weisberg, R. W. (2004). Creating all in the family: A case study in creative thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 247-259.
48. Runco, M. A., & Sakamoto, S. O. (1999). Experimental studies of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 62-92). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
49. Sakamoto, Y., & Love, B. C. (2004). Schematic influences on category learning and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 133, 534-553.
50. Scott, G. M. (2002). Conceptual combination: Alternative knowledge structures, alternative heuristics. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Oklahoma.
51. Scott, G. M., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A meta-analysis. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 361-388.
52. Scott, G. M., Lonergan, D. C., & Mumford, M. D. (2005). Contractual combination: Alternative knowledge structures, alternative heuristics. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 21-36.
53. Spalazzi, L. (2001). A survey on case-based planning. Artificial Intelligence Review, 16, 3-36.
54. Sternberg, R. J. (1989). Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 5). Hillsdale, NJ.: Erlbaum.
55. Vincent, A. H., Decker, B. P., & Mumford, M. D. (2002). Divergent thinking, intelligence, and expertise: A test of alternative models. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 163-178.
56. Ward, T. B., Patterson, M. J., & Sifonis, C. M. (2004). The role of specificity and abstraction in creative idea generation. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 1-9.
57. Weisberg, (1999). Creativity and knowledge: A challenge to theories. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 226-250). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
58. Weisberg, R. W. (2004). On structure in the creative process: A quantitative case-study of the creation of Picasso's Guernica. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22, 23-54.
59. Wisniewski, E. J. (1996). Construal and similarity in conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 434-453.
60. Wonderlic, E. F. (1992). Manual for the Wonderlic Personnel Test and Scholastic Level Exam II. Wonderlic Personnel Test. Inc.
61. Xiao, Y., Milgram, P., & Doyle, D. J. (1997). Planning behavior and its functional role in interactions with complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 27, 313-325.