个体变量、材料变量对大学生创造性问题提出能力的影响

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2015.05.01

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究以139名大学生为被试,采用2(信息素养:高、低)×2(批判性思维倾向:强、弱)×2(信息量:高、低)×2(批判情境:有、无)四因素混合设计,考察个体变量和材料变量对创造性问题提出能力的影响。结果显示:(1)从个体变量看,批判性思维倾向在信息素养预测创造性问题提出能力时起调节作用;(2)从材料变量看,信息量高且含批判情境的材料对创造性问题提出能力有促进作用;(3)个体变量和材料变量在灵活性和独创性上存在交互作用。高信息素养或强批判性思维倾向的被试在含批判情境材料下灵活性、独创性表现更好;低信息素养或弱批判性思维倾向的学生在无批判情境材料下灵活性表现更好,在两种批判情境下独创性无显著差异。

关键词: 大学生, 创造性问题提出, 信息素养, 批判性思维倾向, 材料变量

Abstract: This study investigates 139 college students in order to explore the impact of individual and material variables on creative problem finding ability by using a 2 (information literacy: high, low)×2 (critical thinking disposition: high, low)×2 (the amount of information: large, little)×2 (critical situation: with, without)mixed factorial design. Creative problem finding ability was be evaluated from four aspects of fluency, flexibility, uniqueness and profundity.The results are as following: (1)Critical thinking disposition played a moderating effect between information literacy and critical problem finding ability. (2)From the material variables, the ability of creative problem finding was higher when the larger amount of information was presented in a critical situation. (3)Individual variables and material variables had an interaction effect in the dimension of flexibility and uniqueness. The students who had higher information literacy or critical thinking disposition obtained a higher score in flexibility in a critical situation, and the other students had a higher level of flexibility without a critical situation; the students who had higher information literacy or critical thinking disposition obtained a higher level of uniqueness in a critical situation, however, the critical situation did not have the effect on the other students.

Key words: undergraduate, creative problem finding, information literacy, critical thinking disposition, material variables

中图分类号:

B844

刘春晖, 林崇德. 个体变量、材料变量对大学生创造性问题提出能力的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(5): 513-521.

LIU Chunhui, LIN Chongde. The Impact of Individual and Material Variables on Creative Problem Finding Ability[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2015, 31(5): 513-521.

参考文献

Ahmed, A., & Pollitt, A. (2007). Improving the quality of contextualized questions: An experimental investigation of focus. Assessment in Education,14(2), 201-232.

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357-376.

American Library Association (ALA). (1989). Presidential Committee on Information Literacy. Final Report [EB/OL]. http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aerl/publications/whitepapers/presidential.cfm

Baer, J. (1996). The effects of task-specific divergent-thinking training. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 30(3), 183-187.

Bink,M. l., & Marsh, R. L. (2000). Cognitive regularities in creative activity. Review of General Psychology, 4(1), 59-78.

Bose, M., Folse, J. A. G., & Burton, S. (2013). The role of contextual factors in eliciting creativity: Primes, cognitive load and expectation of performance feedback. Journal of Consumer Marketing,30(5), 400-414.

Bransford, J., & Stein, B. S. (1984). The IDEAL problem solver: A guide for improving thinking, learning, and creativity. New York: W.H. Freeman.

Chin, C., Brown, D. E., & Bruce, B. C. (2002). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. International Journal of Science Education,24(5), 521-549.

Christou, C., Mousoulides, N.,Pittalis, M., Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Sriaman, B. (2005). An empirical taxonomy of problem posing processes. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik (ZDM),37(3), 149-158.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.). The nature of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 325-339.

Dorfman, L., Martindale, C., Gassimova, V., &Vartanian, O. (2008). Creativity and speed of information processing: A double dissociation involving elementary versus inhibitory cognitive tasks. Personality and Individual Differences,44(6), 1382-1390.

Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. American Philosophical Association. Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press, 315-423.

Finke, R. A., & Slayton, K. (1998). Explorations of creative visual synthesis in mental imagery. Memory & Cognition, 16(3), 252-257.

Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Guilford, J. P. (1967). Creativity: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Creative Behavior,1, 3-14.

Hu, W., Shi, Q., Han, Q., Wang, X., & Adey, P. (2010). Creative scientific problem finding and its developmental trend. Creativity Research Journal, 22(1), 1-7.

Isaksen, S. G., Dorval, K. B., & Treffinger, D. J. (2000). Creative approaches to problem solving: A framework for change.DuBuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Kalady, S., Elikkottil, A., & Das, R. (2010). Natural language question generation using syntax and keywords. In Boyer, K. E., &Piwek, P. (Eds.), Proceedings of QG2010: The third workshop on question generation (pp. 1-10). Pittsburgh:questiongeneration. org.

Klahr, D., & Simon, H. A. (1999). Studies of scientific discovery: Complementary approaches and convergent findings. Psychological Bulletin, 125(5), 524-543.

Kwon, N. (2008). A mixed-methods investigation of the relationship between critical thinking and library anxiety among undergraduate students in their information search process. College and Research Libraries, 69(2), 117-131.

Liu, M. X., Hu, W. P., Adey, P., Cheng, L., & Zhang, X. L. (2013). The impact of creative tendency, academic performance, and self-concept on creative science problem-finding. Psycho Journal,2(1), 39-47.

Mumford, M. D., Baughman, W. A., & Sager, C. E. (2003). Picking the right material: Cognitive processing skills and their role in creative thought. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Critical and creative thinking. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton, 19-68.

Mumford, M. D., Mobley, M. I., Uhlman, C. E., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Doares, L. M. (1991). Process analytic models of creative capacities. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 91-122.

Mumford, M. D., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Redmond, M. R. (1994). Problem construction and cognition: Applying problem representations in ill-defined domains. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 3-39.

Norton-Meier, L., Hand, B., Hockenberry, L., & Wisw, K. (2008). Questions, claims, and evidence:The important place of argument in children's science writing. National Science Teacher Association Press.

Norris, S. P., & Ennis, R. H. (1989). Evaluating critical thinking. Pacific Grove, CA: Critical Thinking Press.

Otero, J., & Graesser, A. C. (2001). PREG: Elements of a model of question asking. Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 143-175.

Pettus, C., & Diener, E. (1977). Factors affecting the effectiveness of abstract versus concrete information. The Journal of Social Psychology, 103(2), 233-242.

Ramirez, V. E. (2002). Finding the right problem. Asia Pacific Education Review, 3(1),18-23.

Reiter-Palmon, R., Mumford, M. D., O'Connor Boes, J., & Runco, M. A. (1997). Problem construction and creativity: The role of ability, cue consistency, and active processing. Creativity Research Journal, 10(1), 9-23.

Runco, M. A., & Okuda, S. M. (1988). Problem discovery, divergent thinking, and the creative process. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 17(3), 211-220.

Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Scharf, D., Elliot, N., Huey, H., Briller, V., & Joshi, K. (2007). Direct assessment of information literacy using writing portfolios. Journal of Academic Librarianship,44(4), 462-478.

Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16(4), 361-388.

Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Questioning and intelligence. Questioning Exchange, (1), 11-13.

Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The nature of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 87-98.

Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd. New York: Free Press.

Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51, 677-688.

Torres, B. B. (1998). Learning by posing questions. Biochemical Education, 26(4), 294-296.

Yoshioka, T., Suganuma, T., Tang, A. C., Matsushita, S., Manno, S., & Kozu, T. (2005). Facilitation of problem finding among first year medical school students undergoing problem-based learning. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 17, 136-141.

Yerdelen-Damar, S., & Eryilmaz, A. (2009). Questions about physics: The case of a Turkish 'ask a scientist'website. Research Science Education, 40(2), 223-238.

陈丽君. (2014). 大学生问题发现过程的思维特点. 心理与行为研究,12(4),513-520.

陈丽君, 郑雪. (2009). 大学生问题发现过程的表征层次研究. 心理发展与教育, (3), 46-53.

陈丽君, 郑雪. (2011). 大学生问题发现过程的问题行为图研究. 心理发展与教育, (1), 35-43.

陈丽君, 郑雪. (2014). 矛盾式与潜藏式情境问题发现思维策略的比较研究. 心理学探新,34(4), 365-371.

韩琴, 胡卫平, 邹玉敏. (2005). 中小学生“创造性问题提出能力”及其培养. 山西师大学报 (社会科学版),32(5), 131-134.

胡卫平, 韩琴. (2006). 小学生创造性科学问题提出能力的发展研究. 心理科学,29(4), 944-946.

胡卫平, 刘少静, 贾小娟. (2010). 中学生信息加工速度与科学创造力、智力的关系. 心理科学,33(6), 1417-1421.

胡卫平, 王兴起. (2010). 情绪对创造性科学问题提出能力的影响. 心理科学,33(3), 608-611.

林崇德. (2008). 我的心理学观.北京:商务印书馆.

刘春晖. (2015). 大学生信息素养与创造性问题提出能力的关系——批判性思维倾向的调节效应. 北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),(1), 55-61.

彭美慈等. (2004). 批判性思维能力测量表的信效度测试研究. 中华护理杂志,39(9), 644-647.

杨小洋. (2006). 中学生个人认识论的特点及与自我提问、创造性思维的关系.北京师范大学博士学位论文.

相关文章 15

[1]	郭嘉程, 董柔纯, 许放, 徐旋, 牛更枫, 周宗奎. 社会临场感与大学生网络过激行为的关系：双自我意识的并行中介及性别的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(2): 176-186.
[2]	樊香麟, 崔英锦. 客体化身体意识与女大学生限制性饮食行为的关系：外貌负面评价恐惧和社会文化压力的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(1): 122-131.
[3]	张慧如, 张伟达, 傅王倩, 邓敏, 彭苏浩, 李玉. 孤独感对创造性倾向的影响：无聊倾向和焦虑情绪的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(1): 132-141.
[4]	何安明, 张钰睿, 惠秋平. 大学生感恩与社会幸福感的关系:手机冷落行为的中介作用和负性生活事件的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(4): 505-512.
[5]	杜秀芳, 武玉玺, 徐政, 袁晓倩, 陈功香. 金钱启动与道德认同对大学生道德伪善的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 342-349.
[6]	喻昊雪, 李卉, 王福兴. 大学生公正世界信念与学业倦怠的关系:应对方式与无聊倾向的链式中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 391-401.
[7]	曾子豪, 彭丽仪, 詹林, 刘双金, 欧阳晓优, 丁道群, 黎志华, 胡义秋, 方晓义. 儿童期受虐对大学生抑郁症状的影响:主观幸福感的中介和基因的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(2): 276-285.
[8]	曹瑞琳, 梅松丽, 梁磊磊, 李传恩, 张莹. 感恩与大学生网络成瘾的关系:核心自我评价和生命意义感的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(2): 286-294.
[9]	陈子循, 李金文, 王雨萌, 刘霞. 累积环境风险与大学生自伤的关系:情绪调节策略的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(1): 109-120.
[10]	郑爽, 刘红瑞, 李静, 席雨, 姚梅林. 主动性人格与大学生创业准备行为的关系:创业意向的中介效应与创业社会支持的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(6): 813-821.
[11]	王浩, 俞国良. 大学生依恋焦虑与抑郁的关系:恋爱中关系攻击和关系质量的序列中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(6): 879-885.
[12]	朱黎君, 杨强, 叶宝娟, 陈智楠, 张丽. 自然联结对大学生抑郁的影响:有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(6): 886-893.
[13]	张宝生, 李鑫, 李新野, 张庆普. 主观规范对大学生志愿者志愿工作投入的影响机制研究——一个链式双重中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(5): 658-666.
[14]	李松, 陈旭, 冉光明, 张琪. 被动性社交网站使用与社交焦虑：反刍思维和自我建构的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(5): 720-728.
[15]	蔺姝玮, 孙炳海, 黄嘉昕, 肖威龙, 李伟健. 共情对广义互惠的影响：自我-他人重叠的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(4): 475-484.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed