Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Palgrave Handbook of Social Creativity Research pp 263–280Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

The Plasticity of Natural Concepts and Creativity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1848 Accesses

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Creativity and Culture ((PASCC))

Abstract

When thinking, we use very often natural concepts – the building blocks of our common-sense knowledge. Consequently, creativity may depend on the characteristics of a person’s natural concepts. Natural concepts are composed from a representation of a “prototype” exemplar and a space of accepted dissimilarities from it, and they have no clear boundaries. They enable people to differentiate objects according to the degree of their “typicality” and to reject or include them – automatically or deliberatively – as exemplars of a given concept. Natural concepts differ in their plasticity, that is – in the amount of accepted dissimilarities from the prototypic characteristics. It may be assumed that higher plasticity within a given life domain facilitates creative thinking in this domain. In several studies we have reinforced experimentally the plasticity of concepts within a given domain and compared the effects with placebo. The results show the facilitating role of induced concepts’ plasticity in different aspects of creative thinking and in openness to novel experiences. In the chapter, we will present the theory and data as well as practical conclusions related to education and therapeutic work, key contexts of social creativity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Addison, N., Burgess, L., Steers, J., & Trowell, J. (2010). Understanding art education: Engaging reflexively with practice. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Anglin, J. (1970). The growth of word meaning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beghetto, R. A. (2013). Killing ideas softly? The promise and perils of creativity in the classroom. Charlotte, NC: IAP Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bierwisch, M. (1971). On classifying semantic features. In D. Steinberg & L. A. Jakobovits (Eds.), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bojesen, E. (2015). Educational plasticity: Catherine Malabou and ‘the feeling of a new responsibility’. Educational Philosophy and Theory: Incorporating ACCESS, 47(10), 1039–1051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantor, N., & Mischel, W. (1977). Traits as prototypes: Effects or recognition memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 38–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cremin, T., Burnard, P., & Craft, A. (2006). Pedagogy and possibility thinking in the early years. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(2), 108–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deese, J. (1967). Meaning and change of meaning. American Psychologist, 22(8), 641–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, P., Craft, A., Best, P., Rigby, A., & Simms, K. (2007). Turning peases west inside out: Flexible educational environments for developing possibilities and pedagogies. Creative Partnerships Durham Sunderland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dollinger, S. J., Urban, K. K., & James, T. A. (2004). Creativity and openness: Further validation of two creative product measures. Creativity Research Journal, 16(1), 35–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eliawa, N. (1967). Badania nad kształtowaniem się pojęć w pracach psychologów gruzińskich, [Studies on concept formation in works of Georgian (USSR) psychologists], Psychologia Wychowawcza, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldhusen, J. F., & Goh, B. E. (1995). Assessing and accessing creativity: An integrative review of theory, research, and development. Creativity Research Journal, 8(3), 231–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franks, J. J., & Bransford, J. D. (1971). Abstraction of visual patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90(1), 65–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gajda, A., Beghetto, R. A., & Karwowski, M. (2017). Exploring creative learning in the classroom: A multi-method approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 24, 250–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gandini, L., Hill, L., Cadwell, L., & Schwall, C. (Eds.). (2005). In the spirit of the studio: Learning from the Atelier of Reggio Emilia. New York: Teachers’ College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, W. (1961). Synectics: The development of creative capacity. New York: Harper & Brothers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hampton, J. A. (1993). Prototype models of concept representation. In I. van Mechelen, J. A. Hampton, R. S. Michalski, & P. Theuns (Eds.), Categories and concepts: Theoretical views and inductive data analysis (pp. 67–95). London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen, T. L., & Asher, J. J. (1963). Validity of the concept constancy measure of creative problem solving. Journal of General Psychology, 68(1), 9–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, L., Morrison, J., Sharp, C., & Yeshanew, T. (2008). The longer-term impact of Creative Partnerships on the attainment of young people: Results from 2005 and 2006. Slough, UK: National Foundation for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, G. S., Gardner, R. W., & Schlesinger, H. J. (1962). Tolerance for unrealistic experience: A study of the generality of a cognitive control. British Journal of Psychology, 53, 41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koestler, A. (1965). The act of creation. London: Hutchinson & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G. (1972). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts, The 8th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society: 183–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: John Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, R., & Hood, K. E. (1986). Plasticity in development: Concepts and issues for intervention. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 7(2), 139–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, A. K.-y., & Chiu, C.-y. (2010). Multicultural experience, idea receptiveness, and creativity. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 41(5–6), 723–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mednick, M., Mednick, S., & Mednick, E. (1964). Incubation of creative performance at specific associative priming. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69, 84–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, C. (2002). Goals, goal structures, and patterns of adaptive learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minsky, M. (1975). A framework for representing knowledge. In P. H. Winston (Ed.), The psychology of computer vision. New York: McGraw-Hill Book.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran, S. (2010). Creativity in school. In K. Littleton, C. Woods, & J. K. Staarman (Eds.), International handbook of psychology in education (pp. 319–359). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, G. L. (2002). The big book of concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, P. G. (1974). An attribute frequency model for the abstraction of prototypes. Memory and Cognition, 2, 241–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newport, E. L., & Bellugi, U. (1978). Linguistic expression of category levels in a visual-gestural language: A flower is a flower. In E. Rosch & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 49–71). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, M., Meagher, R., Chait, J., & Gillie, K. (1973). The abstraction and generalization of dot pattern. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 378–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T. (1958). The measurement and correlates of category width as a cognitive variable. Journal of Personality, 26, 532–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I. (1969). Abstraction and the process of recognition. In G. H. Bower & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation. Oxford, UK: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I., & Keele, S. W. (1968). On the genesis of abstract ideas. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 353–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prince, G. (1970). The practice of creativity. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, S. K. (1972). Pattern recognition and categorization. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 382–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rips, L. J. (1975). Inductive judgments about natural categories. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14(6), 665–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rips, L. J., Shoben, E. J., & Smith, E. E. (1973). Semantic distance and the verification of semantic relations. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, K. (1998). Creativity knows no stereotypes. Times Educational Supplement, 3, 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robson, J., & Jaaniste, L. (2010). Growing future innovators. http://pica.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Growing_Future_Innovators_online_report.pdf.

  • Rosch, E. (1973). On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosch, E. (1975a). Cognitive reference points. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 532–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosch, E. (1975b). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 104(3), 192–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosch, E. (1976). The good-old-days effect: Misjudgment of frequency as a function of typicality (Unpublished manuscript). Available from Eleanor Rosch, Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelhart, E. D., & Ortony, A. (1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. In R. C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, & W. E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 99–135). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassenberg, K., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2005). Don’t stereotype, think different! Overcoming automatic stereotype activation by mindset priming. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(5), 506–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaption, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp. 281–303). New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shank, K., & Abelson, K. (1977). Scripts, plan, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoben, E. (1976). The verification of semantic relations in a same-different paradigm: An asymmetry in semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Behavior, 12, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sieber, J., & Lanzetta, J. (1966). Some determinants of individual differences in predecision information- processing behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 561–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (1997). Foreign influence and national achievement: The impact of open milieus on Japanese civilization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), 86–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. E., Shoben, E., & Rips, L. (1974). Semantic memory and psychological semantics. Psychology of Learning Motivation, 8, 1–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. (2003). Creative thinking in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(3), 325–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thagard, P. (2012). Creative combination of representations: Scientific discovery and technological invention. In R. W. Proctor & E. J. Capaldi (Eds.), Psychology of science: Implicit and explicit processes. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1992). Can we teach children to think critically. Journal of Creative Behavior, 6(2), 114–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tourette, G. (1976). Role de la spécialité dans l’apprentissage et la memorisation de listes categorielles, Annes Psychologiąues, 461–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treffinger, D. J. (1995). Creative problem solving: Overview of educational implications. Educational Psychology Review, 7(3), 301–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trzebiński, J. (1980). Natural concepts and creativity. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 11(1), 41–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trzebiński, J. (1981). Twórczość a struktura pojęć [Structure of concepts and creativity]. Warszawa, Poland: PWN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallach, M., & Caron, A. (1959). Attribute criticality and sex-linked conservatism as determinants of psychological similarity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59(1), 43–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallach, M., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children: A study of the creativity – intelligence distinction. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H. C., Fussell, S. R., & Cosley, D. (2011). From diversity to creativity: Stimulating group brainstorming with cultural differences and conversationally-retrieved pictures. In Proceedings of CSCW 2011 (pp. 265–274), New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, W. C. (1969). Creativity and environmental cues in nursery school children. Development Psychology, 1(5), 543–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1972). Dociekania filozoficzne. Warszawa, Poland: PWN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worell, J., & Worell, L. (1965). Personality conflict, originality of response and recall. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 29(1), 55–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Warsaw, Poland

    Jerzy Trzebiński

  2. Faculty of Education, Warsaw University, Warsaw, Poland

    Agnieszka Wołowicz

Authors
  1. Jerzy Trzebiński
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Agnieszka Wołowicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Psychology, University of Wrocław, Wrocław, Poland

    Izabela Lebuda

  2. Department of Psychology, Webster University Geneva, Bellevue, Switzerland

    Vlad Petre Glăveanu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Trzebiński, J., Wołowicz, A. (2019). The Plasticity of Natural Concepts and Creativity. In: Lebuda, I., Glăveanu, V.P. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Social Creativity Research. Palgrave Studies in Creativity and Culture. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95498-1_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation