REPOZYTORIUM UNIWERSYTETU
W BIAŁYMSTOKU
UwB

  1. Repozytorium Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
  2. Czasopisma naukowe / Journals
  3. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications
  4. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 2017, Vol. 4, Issue 2

Szukanie zaawansowane
  • Zespoły i Kolekcje


  • Zaloguj się
  • Zarejestruj się
  • Mój RUB
  • FAQ
  • Polityka
  • Regulamin
  • DOI
  • Instrukcja
  • Aspekty prawne
  • Open Access
  • Archiwum


  • Kontakt
  • O Dspace
  • Strona Biblioteki
  • Strona Uczelni



    • Proszę używać tego identyfikatora do cytowań lub wstaw link do tej pozycji: http://hdl.handle.net/11320/19882
    Pełny rekord metadanych
    Pole DCWartośćJęzyk
    dc.contributor.authorRački, Željko-
    dc.date.accessioned2026-03-19T12:20:17Z-
    dc.date.available2026-03-19T12:20:17Z-
    dc.date.issued2017-
    dc.identifier.citationCreativity. Theories – Research – Applications, Vol. 4, Issue 2, 2017, pp. 218-237pl
    dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11320/19882-
    dc.description.abstractThe aim of this study was to explore the education expert and non-expert consensually rated nature of creativity operationalized as observable behaviour. When operationalized as observable behaviour akin to concrete educational objectives accessible to being taught, is creativity a construct valid both internationally and over time, and what are its distinguishing features? A representative sample of concretely stated behaviours descriptive of creativity displayed by children and adolescents was evaluated with high convergent validity by educational psychologists, specialists in gifted education, university students of teacher studies, and mathematics teachers (N = 208) on the level of creativity, and ten additional behaviour features. The results of the canonical correlation analysis suggest internationally and temporally stable and an educationally viable bridge between general creativity construct operationalization and measurement on the one hand, and the domain-specificity of creative behaviours and their features on the other. By viewing the general creativity construct as a meta-theoretical heuristic, and focusing on one group of domain-specific consensually rated creative behaviours and their progressive nature as educational objectives, the findings of this study are discussed in the context of general and gifted education.pl
    dc.language.isoenpl
    dc.publisherUniversity of Białystokpl
    dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Licensepl
    dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/pl
    dc.subjectCreative behaviourpl
    dc.subjectEducational objectivespl
    dc.subjectCreative-productive giftednesspl
    dc.subjectDomain specificitypl
    dc.titleCreativity as Educational Objectives: From a Meta-theoretical Heuristic to Domain-specific Creative Behaviourspl
    dc.typeArticlepl
    dc.rights.holder© 2017 Željko Rački, published by University of Białystok.pl
    dc.rights.holderThis work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.pl
    dc.identifier.doi10.1515/ctra-2017-0012-
    dc.description.Emailzracki@foozos.hrpl
    dc.description.AffiliationJosip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Croatiapl
    dc.description.referencesAmabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to "The Social Psychology of Creativity." Boulder, CO, US: Westview Press Inc.pl
    dc.description.referencesAmerican Psychological Association, Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education. (2015). Top 20 principles from psychology for preK-12 teaching and learning. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/schools/cpse/top-twenty-principles.pdfpl
    dc.description.referencesAnderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, USA: Addison-Wesley Longman.pl
    dc.description.referencesAngleitner, A., & Demtröder, A. I. (1988). Acts and dispositions: A reconsideration of the Act frequency approach. European Journal of Personality, 2, 121-141. doi:10.1002/per.2410020207pl
    dc.description.referencesBaer, J. (1998). The case for domain-specificity of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 173-177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1102_7pl
    dc.description.referencesBaer, J. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 16-29. doi: 10.1002/jocb.002pl
    dc.description.referencesBaer, J. (2013). Teaching for Creativity: Domains and Divergent Thinking, Intrinsic Motivation, and Evaluation. In M. B. Gregerson, J. C. Kaufman, & H. T. Snyder (Eds.), Teaching Creatively and Teaching Creativity (pp. 175-181). New York: Springer.pl
    dc.description.referencesBaer, J., Kaufman, J. C., & Gentile, C. (2004). Extension of the consensual assessment technique to nonparallel creative products. Creativity Research Journal, 16(1), 113-117. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1601_11pl
    dc.description.referencesBeghetto, R. A. & Plucker, J. A. (2016). Revisiting the relationship among schooling, learning, and creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity and reasoning in cognitive development. New York: Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesBloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, Handbook 1, Cognitive domain (Ed.). London: Longmans, Green and Co Ltd.pl
    dc.description.referencesBuss, D. M., & Craik, K. H. (1983). The Act Frequency approach to personality. Psychological Review, 90(2), 105-126. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.90.2.105pl
    dc.description.referencesCarson, S., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Reliability, validity, and factor structure of the Creative Achievement Questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 17(1), 37-50. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1701_4pl
    dc.description.referencesConti, R., Coon, H., & Amabile, T. M. (1996). Evidence to support the componential model of creativity: Secondary analyses of three studies. Creativity Research Journal, 9(4), 385-389. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj0904_9pl
    dc.description.referencesCropley, A. J. (1994). Creative intelligence: A concept of "true" giftedness. European Journal for High Ability, 5(1), 6-23. doi:10.1080/0937445940050102pl
    dc.description.referencesCsikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Collins.pl
    dc.description.referencesFunder, D. C. (1987). Errors and mistakes: Evaluating the accuracy of social judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 101(1), 75-90. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.101.1.75pl
    dc.description.referencesGajda, A., Karwowski, M., & Beghetto, R. A. (2016, August 18). Creativity and Academic Achievement: A meta-Analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/edu0000133pl
    dc.description.referencesGlăveanu, V. P. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: The Five A's framework. Review of General Psychology, 17(1), 69-81. doi:10.1037/a0029528pl
    dc.description.referencesGlăveanu, V. P. (2014). The psychology of creativity: A critical reading. Creativity. Theories - Research - Applications, 1, 10-32. doi:10.15290/ctra.2014.01.01.02pl
    dc.description.referencesHan, K. (2003). Domain-specificity of creativity in young children: How quantitative and qualitative data support it. Journal of Creative Behavior, 37(2), 117-142. doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.2003.tb00829.xpl
    dc.description.referencesIvcevic, Z. (2007). Artistic and everyday creativity: An act-frequency approach. Journal of Creative Behavior, 41, 271-290. doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.2007.tb01074.xpl
    dc.description.referencesIvcevic, Z. (2009). Creativity map: Toward the next generation of theories of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 3(1), 17-21. doi:10.1037/a0014918pl
    dc.description.referencesIvcevic, Z., & Brackett, M. A. (2015). Predicting creativity: Interactive effects of openness to experience and emotion regulation ability. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(4), 480-487. doi:10.1037/a0039826pl
    dc.description.referencesJussim, L., Eccles, J., & Madon, S. (1996). Social perception, social stereotypes, and teacher expectations: accuracy and the quest for the powerful self-fulfilling prophecy. Advances in experimental social psychology, 29, 281-388. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601 (08)60240-3pl
    dc.description.referencesJussim, L., Harber, K. D., Crawford, J. T., Cain, T. R., & Cohen, F. (2005). Social reality makes the social mind: Self-fullling prophecy, stereotypes, bias, and accuracy. Interaction Studies, 6(1), 85-102. doi:10.1075/is.6.1.07juspl
    dc.description.referencesKarwowski, M. (2015). Notes on Creative Potential and Its Measurement. Creativity. Theories - Research - Applications, 2(1), 4-16. doi:10.1515/ctra-2015-0001pl
    dc.description.referencesKarwowski, M., Kaufman, J. C., Lebuda, I., Szumski, G., & Firkowska-Mankiewicz, A. (2017). Intelligence in childhood and creative achievements in middle-age: The necessary condition approach. Intelligence, 64, 36-44. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2017.07.001pl
    dc.description.referencesKaufman, J. C. (2012). Counting the Muses: Development of the Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scales (K-DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 298-308. doi:10.1037/a0029751pl
    dc.description.referencesKaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2004). Sure, I’m Creative-But Not in Mathematics!: Self-Reported Creativity in Diverse Domains. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22(2), 143-155. doi:10.2190/26HQ-VHE8-GTLN-BJJMpl
    dc.description.referencesKaufman, J. C., Plucker, J. A., & Russell, C. M. (2012). Identifying and asessing creativity as a component of giftedness. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(1), 60-73. doi:10.1177/0734282911428196pl
    dc.description.referencesKim, K. H. (2008). Meta-analyses of the relationship of creative achievement to both IQ and divergent thinking test scores. Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(2), 106-130. doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01290.xpl
    dc.description.referencesLindqvist, G. (2003). Vygotsky's theory of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 15(2&3), 245-251. doi:10.1207/S15326934CRJ152&3_14pl
    dc.description.referencesMilgram, R. M. (2003). Challenging out-of-school activities as a predictor of creative accomplishments in art, drama, dance and social leadership. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(3), 305-315. doi:10.1080/00313830308599pl
    dc.description.referencesMilgram, R. M., & Livne, N. L. (2005). Creativity as a general and a domain-specific ability: The domain of mathematics as an exemplar. In J.C. Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.pl
    dc.description.referencesMumford, M. D., & Norris, D. G. (1999). Heuristics. In M. A. Runco, & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity, Vol. 1 (pp. 807-813). San Diego: Academic Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesPlucker, J., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83-96. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1pl
    dc.description.referencesRački, Ž. (2015a). Domain, Gender and Age Differences in the Creative Behavior of Children. Društvena istraživanja, 24(4), 467-485. doi:10.5559/di.24.4.01pl
    dc.description.referencesRački, Ž. (2015b). Effects of the educationists' implicit theories of creativity on its evaluation by means of the Idiosyncratic Creativity Contents Constellations. Suvremena psihologija, 18(2), 145-158.pl
    dc.description.referencesRački, Ž., Bakota, L., & Flegar, Ž. (2015). Word knowledge as predictive of linguistic creative behaviors. Review of psychology, 22(1-2), 11-18.pl
    dc.description.referencesRenzulli, J. S. (1978). What Makes Giftedness? Reexamining a Definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60(3), 180-184, 261. doi:10.1177/003172171109200821pl
    dc.description.referencesRenzulli, J. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model of creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg, & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 53-92). New York: Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesRoot-Bernstein, R. S., & Root-Bernstein, M. (2004). Artistic scientists and scientific artists: The link between polymathy and creativity. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko, & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 127-151). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.pl
    dc.description.referencesRunco, M. A. (2015). A Commentary on the Social Perspective on Creativity. Creativity. Theories - Research - Applications, 2(1), 21-31. doi:10.1515/ctra-2015-0003pl
    dc.description.referencesRunco, M. A., & Bahleda, M. D. (1986). Implicit theories of artistic, scientific, and everyday creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 20(2), 93-98. doi:10.1002/j.21626057.1986.tb00423.xpl
    dc.description.referencesRunco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The Standard Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92-96. doi:10.1080/10400419.2012.650092pl
    dc.description.referencesRuss, S. W. (1993). Affect and creativity: The role of affect and play in the creative process. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.pl
    dc.description.referencesRuss, S. W. (2003). Play and creativity: developmental issues. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(3), 291-303. doi:10.1080/00313830308594pl
    dc.description.referencesRuss, S. W. (2013). Pretend play in childhood: Foundation of adult creativity. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.pl
    dc.description.referencesSilvia, P. J. (2008). Another look at creativity and intelligence: Exploring higher-order models and probable confounds. Personality and Individual Differences, 4, 1012-1021. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.027pl
    dc.description.referencesSilvia, P. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2009). Is creativity domain-specific? Latent class models of creative accomplishments and creative self-descriptions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(3), 139-148. doi:10.1037/a0014940pl
    dc.description.referencesSimonton, D. K. (2000). Creative development as acquired expertise: Theoretical issues and an empirical test. Developmental Review, 20, 283-318. doi:10.1006/drev.1999.0504pl
    dc.description.referencesSimonton, D. K. (2003). Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: The integration of product, person, and process perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4), 475-494. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.475pl
    dc.description.referencesSriraman, B. (2005). Are giftedness and creativity synonyms in mathematics? The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(1), 20-36. doi:10.4219/jsge-2005-389pl
    dc.description.referencesSternberg, R. J. (2001). Giftedness as Developing Expertise: A theory of the interface between high abilities and achieved excellence. High Ability Studies, 12(2), 159-179. doi:10.1080/13598130120084311pl
    dc.description.referencesSternberg, R. J., & O'Hara, L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 251-272). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesSubotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3-54. doi:10.1177/1529100611418056pl
    dc.description.referencesSubotnik, R. F., & Jarvin, L. (2005). Beyond expertise: conceptions of giftedness as great performance. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 343-357). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesTorrance, E. P. (1995). Insights about creativity: Questioned, rejected, ridiculed, ignored. Educational Psychology Review, 7(3), 313-. doi:10.1007/BF02213376pl
    dc.description.referencesVygotsky, L. S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology [English translation], 42(1), 7-97.pl
    dc.description.referencesWai, J. (2014). Experts are born, then made: Combining prospective and retrospective longitudinal data shows that cognitive ability matters. Intelligence, 45, 74-80. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2013.08.009pl
    dc.description.referencesWai, J., & Rindermann, H. (2017). What goes into high educational and occupational achievement? Education, brains, hard work, networks, and other factors. High Ability Studies, 28(1), 127-145. doi:10.1080/13598139.2017.1302874pl
    dc.description.referencesWai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2005). Creativity and occupational accomplishments among intellectually precocious youth: An age 13 to age 33 longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3), 484-492. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.3.484pl
    dc.description.referencesWeisberg, R. W. (1999). Creativity and knowledge: A challenge to theories. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 226-250). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesWinner, E. (2000). The origins and ends of giftedness. American Psychologist, 55(1), 159-169. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.55.1.159pl
    dc.description.referencesZiegler, A. (2005). The Actiotope Model of Giftedness. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 411-436). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesZiegler, A., & Heller, K. A. (2000). Conceptions of giftedness: A meta-theoretical perspective. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Mönks, R. Sternberg, & R. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 3-22). Oxford, England: Pergamon.pl
    dc.identifier.eissn2354-0036-
    dc.description.volume4pl
    dc.description.issue2pl
    dc.description.firstpage218pl
    dc.description.lastpage237pl
    dc.identifier.citation2Creativity. Theories – Research – Applicationspl
    Występuje w kolekcji(ach):Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 2017, Vol. 4, Issue 2

    Pliki w tej pozycji:
    Plik Opis RozmiarFormat 
    Creativity_4_2_2017_Z_Racki_Creativity_as_Educational_Objectives_From_a_Meta_theoretical_Heuristic.pdf1,1 MBAdobe PDFOtwórz
    Pokaż uproszczony widok rekordu Zobacz statystyki


    Pozycja ta dostępna jest na podstawie licencji Licencja Creative Commons CCL Creative Commons