Why Researches of Professional and Eminent Creators’ Self Beliefs Need Social Context

  • Izabela Lebuda
  • Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Creativity and Culture book series (PASCC)


This chapter presents reflections on professional and eminent creativity, especially on the need to consider the social context in studying creators’ self-concepts. We emphasize the importance of social interactions to the formation of creators’ self-concepts, and of the perception of opportunities in the role. We would like to present how important coexistence of all elements of the creative system is (person, domain, and field), and why it is crucial to take them into consideration when we try to understand how creators’ self-images develop.


Professional creativity Eminent creativity Creators’ self concept The creative system 



Izabela Lebuda was supported by a grant from the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education (Iuventus Plus Program, 0252/IP3/2015/73).


  1. Albert, R. S., & Runco, M. A. (1986). The achievement of eminence: A model based on a longitudinal study of exceptionally gifted boys and their families. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 332–357). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The Amusement park theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27, 158–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  4. Barron, F. (1983). Creative writers. In R. S. Albert (Ed.), Genius and eminence: The social psychology of creativity and exceptional achievement (pp. 302–310). Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  5. Barron, F., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 439–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Creative self-efficacy: Correlates in middle and secondary students. Creativity Research Journal, 18(4), 447–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity. Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  8. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Condren, M., & Lebuda, I. (2016). Deviant heroes and social heroism in everyday life: Activists and artists. In S. T. Allison, G. R. Goethals, & R. M. Kramer (Eds.), The handbook of heroism and heroic leadership (pp. 249–261). New York: Routledge Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dollinger, S. J., Dollinger, S. M. C., & Centeno, L. (2005). Identity and creativity. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 5, 315–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dowd, T. J., & Pinheiro, D. L. (2013). The ties among the notes: The social capital of jazz musicians in three metro areas. Work and Occupations, 40, 431–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Feist, G. J. (2014). Psychometric studies of scientific talent and eminence. In D. K. Simonton (Ed.), The Wiley handbook of genius (pp. 62–86). Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gandhi. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  13. Getzels, J. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding in art. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Glăveanu, V. P. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: The five A’s framework. Review of General Psychology, 1, 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Glăveanu, V. P. (2015). Creativity as a sociocultural act. Journal of Creative Behavior, 49, 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Glăveanu, V. P. (2017). The creative self in dialogue. In M. Karwowski & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The creative self: Effects of self-efficacy, mindset and identity (pp. 119–138). San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
  17. Glăveanu, V. P., & Tanggaard, L. (2014). Creativity, identity, and representation: Towards a socio-cultural theory of creative identity. New Ideas in Psychology, 34, 12–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gruber, H. E., & Wallace, D. B. (1999). The case study method and evolving systems approach for understanding unique creative people at work. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 93–115). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Haslam, S. A., Adarves-Yorno, I., Postmes, T., & Jans, L. (2013). The collective origins of valued originality: A social identity approach to creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 384–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Helson, R. (1967). Personality characteristics and developmental history of creative college women. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 76, 205–256.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Helson, R., & Pals, J. L. (2000). Creative potential, creative achievement, and personal growth. Journal of Personality, 68, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Holt.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Karwowski, M. (2016). The dynamics of creative self-concept: Changes and reciprocal relations between creative self-efficacy and creative personal identity. Creativity Research Journal, 1, 99–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Karwowski, M., & Barbot, B. (2016). Creative self-beliefs: Their nature, development, and correlates. In J. C. Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to creativity and reason in cognitive development (pp. 302–326). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Karwowski, M., & Beghetto, R. A. (2017). Toward untangling creative self-beliefs. In M. Karwowski & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The creative self: Effects of self-efficacy, mindset and identity (pp. 3–22). San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
  26. Karwowski, M., Gralewski, J., & Szumski, G. (2015). Teachers’ effect on students’ creative self-beliefs is moderated by students’ gender. Learning and Individual Differences, 44, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Karwowski, M., & Kaufman, J. C. (Eds.). (2017). The creative self: Effect of beliefs, self-efficacy, mindset, and identity. Waltham, MA: Academic.Google Scholar
  28. Karwowski, M., & Lebuda, I. (2016). The big five, the huge two, and creative self-beliefs: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2, 214–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Karwowski, M., & Lebuda, I. (2017). Creative self-concept: A surface characteristic of creative personality. In G. J. Feist, R. Reiter-Palmon, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity and personality research (pp. 84–102). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Karwowski, M., Lebuda, I., & Beghetto, R. A. (in press). Creative self-beliefs. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Kasof, J. (1995). Explaining creativity: The attributional perspective. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 311–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2013). In praise of Clark Kent: Creative metacognition and the importance of teaching kids when (not) to be creative. Roeper Review, 33, 155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Larson, R., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1983). The experience sampling method. In H. Reis (Ed.), Naturalistic approaches to studying social interaction: New directions for methodology of social and behavioral science. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  35. Lebuda, I. (2016). Political pathologies and big-C creativity – Eminent polish creators’ experience of restrictions under the communist regime. In V. P. Glăveanu (Ed.), The Palgrave Handbook of Creativity and Culture Research (pp. 329–354). London, United Kindgdom: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lebuda, I., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2017). Me, myself, I, and creativity: Self-concepts of eminent creators. In M. Karwowski & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The creative self: Effects of self-efficacy, mindset and identity (pp. 138–146). San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
  37. Lebuda, I., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2018). All you need is love: The importance of partner and family relations to eminent creators’ well-being and success. Journal of Creative Behavior.
  38. Lebuda, I., & Karwowski, M. (2013). Tell me your name and I’ll tell you how creative your work is: Author’s name and gender as factors influencing assessment of product originality in four different domains. Creativity Research Journal, 25, 137–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. MacKinnon, D. W. (1978). In search of human effectiveness. New York: Creative Education Foundation.Google Scholar
  40. MacKinnon, D. W. (1983). Creative architects. In R. S. Albert (Ed.), Genius and eminence: The social psychology of creativity and exceptional achievement (pp. 291–301). Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  41. Martin, J. (2013). Life positioning analysis: An analytic framework for the study of lives and life narratives. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 33, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Martin, J. (2016). Position exchange, life positioning, and creativity. In V. Glaveanu (Ed.), Palgrave handbook of creativity and culture research (pp. 243–262). London: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mockros, C. A., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). The social construction of creative lives. In A. Montuori & R. E. Purser (Eds.), Social creativity (Vol. 1, pp. 175–219). Cresskill: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  44. Montuori, A., & Purser, R. (1996). Context and creativity beyond social determinism and the isolated genius: A rejoinder to Hale. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 2, 34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 173–220). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  46. Simonton, D. K. (1995). Exceptional personal influence. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 371–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stein, M. I. (1953). Creativity and culture. Journal of Psychology, 36, 311–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sternberg, J. R., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 7, 677–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Szen-Ziamiańska, J., Lebuda, I., & Karwowski, M. (2017). Mix and match: Opportunities, conditions, and limitations of cross-domain creativity. In J. C. Kaufman, J. Baer, & V. P. Glăveanu (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity across different domains (pp. 18–40). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Taylor, S., & Littleton, K. (2012). Contemporary identities of creativity and creative work. Farnham, GBR: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  51. Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Wallace, D. B., & Gruber, H. E. (1989). Creative people at work. New York/Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Walters, J., & Gardner, H. (1986). The crystallizing experience: Discovering an intellectual gift. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 306–331). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Yoon, K. S., Harold, R. D., Arbreton, A., Freedman-Doan, C., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (1997). Changes in children’s competence beliefs and subjective task values across the elementary school years: A three-year study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 451–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Izabela Lebuda
    • 1
  • Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Psychology, University of WrocławWrocławPoland
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyClaremont Graduate UniversityClaremontUSA

Personalised recommendations