状态与特质之分：来自社会创造性的证据

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以整群取样的方式选取650名小学儿童,采用社会创造性故事情境问卷、小学儿童社会创造性倾向问卷,分别测量了儿童在问题情境中的社会创造性和日常生活中的社会创造性,同时采用小五人格学生问卷中的开放性分量表、Rosenberg(1965)编制的自尊量表以及互联网使用偏好问卷中的(网络交往)信息交流偏好分量表,考察了儿童问题情境中的社会创造性与日常生活中的社会创造性的特点和性质。结果表明:(1)二者的发展趋势有所不同,儿童在问题情境中的创造性得分总体上呈现“倒Z形”的发展趋势,而日常生活中的创造性倾向总体上呈现“U形”发展趋势;(2)两种社会创造性与经验开放性、自尊及网络交往(信息交流)偏好呈现不同的相关,日常生活中的社会创造性与经验开放性、自尊及网络交往偏好均具有极其显著的正相关,问题情境中的社会创造性与经验开放性、自尊之间也具有显著正相关,但相关系数较低,而且与网络交往偏好无显著相关;(3)经验开放性、自尊和网络交往偏好均可以显著地预测日常生活中的社会创造性,而难以预测问题情境中的社会创造性。这表明,社会创造性可能存在状态与特质之分。

关键词: 状态创造性, 特质创造性, 社会创造性, 小学儿童

Abstract: In order to investigate the characteristics of social creativity in problem solving situation and stable social creativity in daily life, 650 elementary school children selected by group sampling were measured by the questionnaires. The questionnaire of story situation about social creativity was adopted to measure their social creativity in the problem situation; the questionnaire of social creativity of elementary school children was adopted to measure their persistent social creativity in daily life. The subscale of openness to experience in the questionnaire of five personality factors for elementary school children, Rosenberg self-esteem scale, and the information communication subscale in the questionnaire of internet use preference were also adopted to analyze the characteristics and nature of social creativity in problem situation and social creativity in daily life. The results indicated that, firstly, the developmental trajectories of two types of social creativity differ from each other, and the scores of social creativity in problem situations showed the "inverted Z" curve, however, the social creativity in daily life of children showed the "U-shaped" curve; secondly, two types of social creativity had different associations with openness to experience, self-esteem, and information communication preference of children, and the social creativity in daily life was correlated positively with openness to experience, self-esteem, and information communication preference, however, social creativity in the problem situation was correlated with openness to experience, self-esteem with low correlation coefficients, and meanwhile was not associated with the information communication preference; finally, openness to experience, self-esteem, and information communication by internet could predict significantly the social creativity in daily life instead of that in the problem situation. The results indicated that there may be state creativity and trait creativity which differs from each other.

Key words: state creativity, trait creativity, social creativity, elementary school children

中图分类号:

B844.1

谷传华, 张笑容, 陈洁, 郝恩河, 王亚丽. 状态与特质之分：来自社会创造性的证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2013, 29(5): 483-490.

GU Chuan-hua, ZHANG Xiao-rong, CHEN Jie, HAO En-he, WANG Ya-li. State and Trait：The Evidence from Social Creativity[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2013, 29(5): 483-490.

参考文献

Baer, J. (2008). Commentary: Divergent thinking tests have problems, but this is not the solution. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and Arts, 2(2), 89-92.

Bransford, J. D., & Stein, B. S. (1984). The ideal problem solver. New York: Freeman.

D'Zurilla, T. J., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (1995). Conceptual and methodological issues in social problem solving assessment. Behavior Therapy, 26, 409-432.

Eysenck, H. J. (1997). Creativity and personality. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), The creativity research handbook. NJ: Hampton Press, 41-66.

Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290-309.

Feist, G. J. (1999). The influence of personality on artistic and scientific creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 273-296.

Finke, R. A. (1995). Creative realism. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 301-326.

Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. In S. T. Fiske (Ed.). Annual Review of Psychology, Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, 569-598.

Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1988). The computer and the mind: An introduction to cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kaplan, C. A., & Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 374-419.

Kock, N. (2007). Media naturalness and compensatory encoding: the burden of electronic media obstacles is on senders, Decision Support Systems. 44, 175-187.

McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1258-1265.

Mayer, R. E. (1999). Fifty years of creativity research. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 449-461.

Mouchiroud, C., & Lubart, T. I. (2002). Social creativity: A cross-secitonal study of 6-11-year-old children. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26(1), 60-69.

Revelle, W. (2007). Experimental Approaches to the Study of Personality. In B. Robins, C. Fraley, and R. Krueger (Eds.), Personality Research Methods, New York: Guilford Press, 37-61.

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton Press.

Runco, M. A., & Charles, R. (1997). Developmental trends in creativity. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Creativity Research Handbook. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 115-154.

Runco, M. A. (2004). Creativity. In D. L. Schacter & C. Waxler (Eds.), Annual Review of Psychology, 55(1), 657-687.

Schmitt, D. P., & Allik, J. (2005). Simultaneous administration of the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale in 53 nations: Exploring the universal and culture-specific features of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 623-642.

Silvia, P. J., Nusbaum, E. C., Berg, C., Martin, C., & O'Connor, A. (2009). Openness to experience, plasticity, and creativity: Exploring lower-order, high-order, and interactive effects. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(6), 1087-1090.

Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 3-15.

Thatcher, S. M. B., & Brown, S. A. (2010). Individual creativity in teams: The importance of communication media mix. Decision Support Systems, 49, 3, 290-300.

Torrance, E. P. Guiding creative talent. NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1962.

Ward, T. B. (1994). Structured imagination: The role of conceptual structure in exemplar generation. Cognitive Psychology, 27, 1-40.

Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Finke, R. A. (1999). Creative Cognition. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 189-212.

陈少华, 曾毅. (2003). 人格特质和创造性及其与学业成绩的关系. 教育研究与实验, 4, 48-52.

程建伟, 刘华山. (2010). 中小学生互联网使用偏好问卷的编制. 中国健康心理学杂志, 18(5), 625-627.

董奇. (1993). 儿童创造力发展心理. 杭州:浙江教育出版社, 174-179, 129-134.

谷传华, 刘艳, 周宗奎. (2010). 小学儿童社会创造性的内部一致性及其领域特征. 心理科学,33(3), 616-620.

谷传华, 周宗奎, 胡靖宜. (2008). 小学生社会创造性倾向问卷的编制和测量学分析. 中国临床心理学杂志,16(4), 340-343.

谷传华, 周宗奎, 种明慧. (2009). 小学儿童社会创造性与其同伴关系、学业成绩的关系. 心理发展与教育, 25(3), 20-25.

谷传华. (2011). 社会创造心理学. 北京:中国社会科学出版社.

雷雳, 柳铭心(2005). 青少年的人格特征与互联网社交服务使用偏好的关系. 心理学报, 37(6), 797-802.

林崇德. (2009). 创新人才与教育创新研究. 北京:经济科学出版社, 25-34.

申继亮, 赵景欣. 创造力的跨文化研究及其对我国教育改革的启示. 见中国心理学会编, 心理学学科发展报告. 北京:中国科学技术出版社, 79-86.

孙云晓, 邹泓. (2006). 良好习惯缔造健康人格——少年儿童行为习惯与人格的关系研究报告. 北京: 北京出版社.

周晖,钮丽丽,邹泓(2000). 中学生人格五因素问卷的编制. 心理发展与教育, 16(1), 48-54.

周宗奎. (2002). 儿童的社会技能. 武汉:华中师范大学出版社.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

[1]	薛笑然, 黄碧娟, 李红霞, 赵晓萌, 司继伟. 小学儿童数学态度与数学成就的纵向联系：学业拖延和数学元认知的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(4): 520-529.
[2]	王振宏, 彭源, 赵一萌. 父母婚姻质量与儿童内化问题:父母情绪表达的中介作用与儿童迷走神经活动的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(1): 121-128.
[3]	刘伟方, 张佳佳, 胡冬梅, 张明亮, 司继伟. 元认知监测与算术知识制约小学儿童心算策略运用能力的发展:一年纵向考察[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(4): 439-446.
[4]	郝嘉佳, 陈英和. 小学儿童分享的发展及反馈信息的促进效应[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(6): 641-647.
[5]	李庆功, 周小梅, 徐芬. 好友可信度与9~12岁儿童信任的关系及其发展[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2013, 29(3): 232-237.
[6]	王昱文, 王振宏, 刘建君. 小学儿童自我意识情绪理解发展及其与亲社会行为、同伴接纳的关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2011, 27(1): 65-70.
[7]	陈庆飞, 雷怡, 李红. 颜色、形状和大小相似性与变化性对儿童归纳推理的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2011, 27(1): 17-24.
[8]	陈庆飞, 雷怡, 李红. 前提项目间差异对儿童归纳推理多样性效应的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2010, 26(5): 457-464.
[9]	李燕芳, 王莹, 郑渝萍, 董奇. 小学儿童英语课堂学习焦虑发展及其与教师教育行为的关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2010, 26(1): 42-47.
[10]	李燕芳, 管益杰, 楼春芳, 董奇. 小学汉语儿童英语口语产出形式的发展[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2009, 25(3): 26-31,38.
[11]	谷传华, 周宗奎, 种明慧. 小学儿童社会创造性与其同伴关系、学业成绩的关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2009, 25(3): 20-25.
[12]	谷传华, 周宗奎. 小学儿童社会创造性倾向与父母养育方式的关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2008, 24(2): 34-38.
[13]	张春妹, 邹泓, 侯珂. 小学儿童尊重行为与人格、班级环境的关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2006, 22(3): 16-22.
[14]	肖浩宇, 张庆林, 史慧颖. 小学儿童提问能力的发展[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2006, 22(1): 58-62.
[15]	王磊, 谭晨, 寇彧. 同伴冲突解决的干预训练对小学儿童合作的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2005, 21(4): 83-88.