REPOZYTORIUM UNIWERSYTETU
W BIAŁYMSTOKU
UwB

  1. Repozytorium Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
  2. Czasopisma naukowe / Journals
  3. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications
  4. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 2022, Vol. 9, 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/11320/20143
    Pełny rekord metadanych
    Pole DCWartośćJęzyk
    dc.contributor.authorPorto, Marina-
    dc.contributor.authorRomo, Manuela-
    dc.date.accessioned2026-04-22T06:37:24Z-
    dc.date.available2026-04-22T06:37:24Z-
    dc.date.issued2022-
    dc.identifier.citationCreativity. Theories – Research – Applications, Vol. 9, Issue 2, 2022, pp. 119-137pl
    dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11320/20143-
    dc.description.abstractThis study aims to explore the two less frequently researched pillars of the systems theory of creativity: domain and field, through a gender lens. Twenty-five award-winning women from different domains were interviewed. Their responses were examined using grounded theory. Results show four categories associated to domain: (1) access, including family incentive, interest in childhood, and late start; (2) relationship, reflected in high level of engagement, positive feelings, priority in life, and crisis; (3) gender barriers, encompassing family impact, financial limitations, discrimination, and being part of a minority; and (4) extra-domain, described in background and interests in other areas. Four additional categories were identified in relation to the field: (a) 10 years to gain recognition, (b) unclear criteria, (c) men hold the power, and (d) denial of gender barriers. The importance of fostering appealing domains that motivate women is discussed, along with the need for openness to interdisciplinarity and nonlinear careers. Masculinisation of the fields is problematised as an obstacle for the development and recognition of women. The personal discrimination denial paradox, in spite of accounts of the gender barriers experienced, is questioned.pl
    dc.language.isoenpl
    dc.publisherUniversity of Białystokpl
    dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Licensepl
    dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/pl
    dc.subjectBig creativitypl
    dc.subjectcreativitypl
    dc.subjectdomainpl
    dc.subjectfieldpl
    dc.subjectgenderpl
    dc.subjectwomanpl
    dc.titleThe Generative Force of the Domain and the Field: Contributions of Highly Creative Womenpl
    dc.typeArticlepl
    dc.rights.holder© 2023 Marina Porto, Manuela Romo, published by University of Białystokpl
    dc.rights.holderThis work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Licensepl
    dc.identifier.doi10.2478/ctra-2022-0014-
    dc.description.EmailManuela Romo: manuela.romo@uam.espl
    dc.description.AffiliationMarina Porto - Department of Basic Psychology, Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid, Spainpl
    dc.description.AffiliationManuela Romo - Department of Basic Psychology, Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid, Spainpl
    dc.description.referencesAcademy Museum. (n.d.). Academy museum Óscar timeline. AcademyMuseum.org. Retrieved January 25, 2022, from https://oscars.academymuseum.org/timelines/oscars-firstspl
    dc.description.referencesAcker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, and bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4(2), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124390004002002pl
    dc.description.referencesAmabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context. Westview Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesAyalon, L. (2014). Perceived age, gender, and racial/ethnic discrimination in Europe: Results from the European Social Survey. Educational Gerontology, 40(7), 499–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601 277.2013.845490pl
    dc.description.referencesBaer, J., & Kaufman, J.C. (2008). Gender differences in creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(2), 75-105. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01289.xpl
    dc.description.referencesBonham, K.S., & Stefan, M.I. (2017). Women are underrepresented in computational biology: An analysis of the scholarly literature in biology, computer science and computational biology. PLOS Computational Biology, 13(10), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005134pl
    dc.description.referencesCaleo, S., & Heilman, M. (2014). Is this a man’s world? Obstacles to women’s success in male-typed domains. In R.J. Burke & D. Major (Eds.), Gender in organizations: Are men allies or adversaries to women’s career advancement? (pp. 217–233). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781955703.00019pl
    dc.description.referencesCech, E.A., & Blair-Loy, M. (2010). Perceiving glass ceilings? Meritocratic versus structural explanations of gender inequality among women in science and technology. Social Problems, 57(3), 371–397. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2010.57.3.371pl
    dc.description.referencesCidlinská, K. (2019). How not to scare off women: Different needs of female early-stage researchers in STEM and SSH fields and the implications for support measures. Higher Education, 78, 365–388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0347-xpl
    dc.description.referencesClarke, V., & Braun, V. (2019). Feminist qualitative methods and methodologies in psychology: A review and reflection. Psychology of Women and Equalities Section Review, 2(1), 13–28. https://uwe-repository.worktribe.com/output/854611pl
    dc.description.referencesCohen, P.N., & Huffman, M.L. (2007). Working for the woman? Female managers and the gender wage gap. American Sociological Review, 72(5), 681–704. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200502pl
    dc.description.referencesCrosby, F. (1984). The denial of personal discrimination. American Behavioral Scientist, 27(3), 371–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/000276484027003008pl
    dc.description.referencesCrosby, F. (2017). Sex discrimination, personal denial, and collateral damage. Social Justice Research, 30(1), 89–105. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-017-0279-0pl
    dc.description.referencesCsikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp. 325–339). Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesCsikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. Harper Collins.pl
    dc.description.referencesCsikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). The systems model of creativity. The collected works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Springerpl
    dc.description.referencesDung, S.K., López, A., Barragan, E.L., Reyes, R.J., Thu, R., Castellanos, E., Catalan, F., Huerta-Sánchez, E., & Rohlfs, R.V. (2019). Illuminating women’s hidden contribution to historical theoretical population genetics. Genetics, 211(2), 363–366. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.118.301277pl
    dc.description.referencesEysenck, H.J. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity. Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesFiorini, R.A. (2018). Transdisciplinary education for deep learning, creativity and innovation. Eruditio, 2(4), 123–146. http://worldacademy.org/eruditio/volume-2/issue-4/article/transdisciplinary-education-deep-learning-creativity-and-innovationpl
    dc.description.referencesGrönlund, A., & Öun, I. (2018). In search of family-friendly careers? Professional strategies, work conditions and gender differences in work–family conflict. Community, Work & Family, 21(1), 87–105. http://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2017.1375460pl
    dc.description.referencesHuang, J., Gates, A., Sinatra, R., & Barabasi, A. (2020). Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(9) 4609-4616. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1914221117pl
    dc.description.referencesIsen, A.M., & Reeve, J. (2005). The influence of positive affect on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: Facilitating enjoyment of play responsible work behavior, and self-control. Motivation and Emotion, 29, 295–323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9019-8pl
    dc.description.referencesKaufman, J.C., & Beghetto, R.A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013688pl
    dc.description.referencesKaufman, J., Glăveanu, V.P., & Baer, J. (2017). The Cambridge handbook of creativity across domains. Cambridge Press. http://doi.org/10.1017/9781316274385pl
    dc.description.referencesKleven, H., Landais, C., Posch, J., Steinhauer, A., & Zweimüller, J. (2019). Child penalties across countries: Evidence and explanations. AEA Papers and Proceedings, 109, 122–126. http://doi.org/10.1257/pandp.20191078pl
    dc.description.referencesKronborg, L. (2010). What contributes to talent development in eminent women? Gifted and Talented International, 25(2), 11–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2010.11673567pl
    dc.description.referencesKronborg, L. (2021). Eminent women were once gifted girls: How to transform gifted potential into eminent talents. In R.J. Sternberg & D. Ambrose (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness and talent (1st ed., pp. 215–233). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56869-6_13pl
    dc.description.referencesLerner, M.J. (1981). The justice motive in human relations. In M.J. Lerner & S.C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior: Critical issues in social justice. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0429-4_2pl
    dc.description.referencesLinková, M. (2017). Excellence and its others: Gendered notions of what it takes to succeed in science. In M. Vohlídalová & M. Linková (Eds.), Gender and neoliberalism in Czech academia (pp. 159–197). Slon.pl
    dc.description.referencesList, K., Hartford, W., & Renzulli, J. (1991). Creative women’s developmental patterns thorough age thirty five. Gifted Education International, 7(3), 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1177/026142949100700303pl
    dc.description.referencesNakano, T.C., Oliveira, K.S., & Zaia, P. (2021). Gender differences in creativity: A systematic literature review. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 37, Article 372116. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102.3772e372116pl
    dc.description.referencesNapier, J.L., Suppes, A., & Bettinsoli, M.L. (2020). Denial of gender discrimination is associated with better subjective well-being among women: A system justification account. Eur J Soc Psychol, 50(6), 1191–1209. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2702pl
    dc.description.referencesNobel Prize. (n.d.). Nobel Prize facts. NobelPrize.org. Retrieved January 25, 2022, from https://www.nobel-prize.org/prizes/facts/nobel-prize-factspl
    dc.description.referencesPiirto, J. (1991). Why are there so few? Creative women: Visual artists, mathematicians, musicians. Roeper Review, 13(3), 142–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199109553340pl
    dc.description.referencesPorto, M.M., & Romo, M.S. (2021). Caracteristicas personales de mujeres altamente creativas: Una revisión sistemática. Revista Ibero-Americana de Criatividade e Inovação, 2(4), 241–255. https://recriai.emnuvens.com.br/revista/article/view/59pl
    dc.description.referencesPrado, R.M., Alencar, E.M.L.S., & Fleith, D.S. (2016). Diferenças de gênero em criatividade: Análise das pesquisas brasileiras. Boletim de Psicologia, 66(144), 113–124. http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script = sci_arttext&pid = S0006-59432016000100010&lng = pt&tlng = ptpl
    dc.description.referencesPrado, R.M., & Fleith, D.S. (2020). Mulheres talentosas no Brasil: Trajetórias e desafios profissionais na sociedade contemporânea. Psicologia em Estudo, 25, Article 46906. https://doi.org/10.4025/psicolestud.v25i0.46906pl
    dc.description.referencesReal Academia Española. (n.d.). Académicos de número. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación. Retrieved January 25, 2022, from https://www.rae.es/academicos/academicos-de-numero#mainpl
    dc.description.referencesReis, S.M. (1995). Talent ignored, talent diverted: The cultural context underlying giftedness in females. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(3), 162–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629503900306pl
    dc.description.referencesReis, S.M. (2002). Internal barriers, personal issues, and decisions faced by gifted and talented females. Gifted Child Today, 25(1), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.4219/gct-2002-50pl
    dc.description.referencesRomo, M. (2018). ¿Tiene género la creatividad? Obstáculos a la excelencia en mujeres. Estudios de Psicología, 35(3), 247–258. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-02752018000300003pl
    dc.description.referencesRoot-Bernstein, R.S., & Root-Bernstein, M.M. (1999). Sparks of genius. Houghton Mifflin.pl
    dc.description.referencesRunco, M.A., Cramond, B., Pagnani, A.R. (2010). Gender and creativity. In J. Chrisler & D. McCreary (Eds.), Handbook of gender research in psychology (pp. 343–357). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1465-1_17pl
    dc.description.referencesSimonton, D.K. (1994). Greatness: Who makes history and why. The Guilford Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesStainback, K., Kleiner, S., & Skaggs, S. (2016). Women in power: Undoing or redoing the gendered organization? Gender & Society, 30(1), 109–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243215602906pl
    dc.description.referencesStrauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2008). Pesquisa qualitativa: Técnicas e procedimentos para o desenvolvimento de teoria fundamentada. Artmed.pl
    dc.description.referencesStorage, D., Charlesworth, T.E.S., Banaji, M.R., & Cimpian, A. (2020). Adults and children implicitly associate brilliance with men more than women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 90, Article 104020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104020pl
    dc.description.referencesThompson, T.L., & Pfeiffer, S.I. (2020). The identification and development of creativity with particular attention to gender. In H. David (Ed.), Understanding gifted children: Perspectives, gender differences and challenges (pp. 69–96). Nova Science Publishers.pl
    dc.description.referencesVohlídalová, M. (2017). Academic couples, parenthood and women’s research careers. European Educational Research Journal, 16(2–3), 166–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904116668883pl
    dc.description.referencesWilliams, C.L., Muller, C., & Kilanski, K. (2012). Gendered organizations in the new economy. Gender & Society, 26(4), 549–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243212445466pl
    dc.identifier.eissn2354-0036-
    dc.description.volume9pl
    dc.description.issue2pl
    dc.description.firstpage119pl
    dc.description.lastpage137pl
    dc.identifier.citation2Creativity. Theories – Research – Applicationspl
    Występuje w kolekcji(ach):Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 2022, Vol. 9, Issue 2

    Pliki w tej pozycji:
    Plik Opis RozmiarFormat 
    Creativity_9_2_2022_M_Porto_M_Romo_The_Generative_Force_of_the_Domain.pdf269,91 kBAdobe PDFOtwórz
    Pokaż uproszczony widok rekordu Zobacz statystyki


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