Services on Demand
Journal
Article
text in 
English (pdf)
Article in xml format
Automatic translation
Send this article by e-mailShare
Permalink
Educar em Revista
Print version ISSN 0104-4060On-line version ISSN 1984-0411
Educ. Rev. vol.37 Curitiba 2021 Epub Nov 14, 2021
https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-4060.81544
DOSSIER - Creativity, emotion and education
21st century skills: relationship between creativity and socioemotional skills in Brazilian students 1
( Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia. Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil. E-mail: tatiananakano@hotmail.com
(* Universidade São Francisco. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia. Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil. E-mail: rprimi@mac.com
(** Universidade Federal de Rondonópolis. Rondonópolis, Mato Grosso, Brasil. E-mail: rauniroama@gmail.com
A series of skills are more and more valued in the educational context than cognitive ones. The constructs of creativity and socio-emotional competencies are some of them and were the focus of the study. The aim was to investigate the relationship between both constructs in 362 students from the 3rd (n = 168) and 5th year (n = 194) of Elementary School. That sample was composed of 8 and 15-year-old students (M = 10.3; SD = 1.33) and 180 female, from 13 different municipal public schools in Pernambuco, Brazil. The students answered two creativity tests (figural and verbal) and another that assesses six socio-emotional competencies (openness to experiences, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, external locus of control, and neuroticism). The results indicated significant and positive correlations between figural creativity and three socio-emotional competencies (conscientiousness, agreeableness, openness to experiences, and locus of control) and between verbal creativity and two socio-emotional dimensions (conscientiousness and agreeableness). Although constructs have shown some commonality, the importance of stimulating both in the educational context is relevant, given the positive results related to these skills, considered essential in the 21st century.
Keywords: Personality; Big five model; Social skills; Emotional skills; Psychological assessment
No contexto educacional, cada vez mais, uma série de habilidades, além das cognitivas, vêm sendo valorizadas. Dentre elas, os construtos de criatividade e competências socioemocionais, foco do estudo. Tendo como objetivo investigar a relação entre os dois construtos, a amostra foi composta por 362 estudantes do 3o(n = 168) e 5o ano (n = 194) do Ensino Fundamental, idades entre 8 e 15 anos (M = 10,3 anos; DP = 1,33), sendo 180 do gênero feminino, provenientes de 13 diferentes escolas públicas municipais localizadas no estado de Pernambuco, Brasil. Os estudantes responderam dois testes de criatividade (figural e verbal) e um instrumento que avalia seis competências socioemocionais (abertura a novas experiências, conscienciosidade, extroversão, amabilidade, lócus de controle externo e neuroticismo). Os resultados apontaram para a existência de correlações positivas significativas entre a criatividade figural e quatro das competências socioemocionais (conscienciosidade, amabilidade, abertura a experiências e lócus de controle externo) e da criatividade verbal com duas dimensões socioemocionais (conscienciosidade e amabilidade). Ainda que os construtos tenham apresentado alguma comunalidade, a importância de se estimular ambos no contexto educacional se faz presente, dados os resultados positivos que têm sido relacionados a essas habilidades, consideradas essenciais no século XXI.
Palavras-chaves: Personalidade; Cinco grandes fatores; Habilidades sociais; Habilidades emocionais; Avaliação psicológica
Introduction
Children and young adults’ education in the 21st century should focus developing skills necessary for academic, professional and personal success. Creativity and socioemotional skills are critical skills, assuming an essential role in school curricula in several countries (HECKMAN; STIXRUD; URSUA, 2006). These skills are considered essential to achieve holistic and healthy functioning, leading to complete development and personal and professional fulfillment. Significant institutions such as World Bank and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have been fostering the promotion of these skills at governments and policy-making levels internationally (CLERKIN, 2018), considering that both abilities can act as factors that driver the healthy development.
Creativity is highlighted as an essential 21st-century skill (KUPERS et al. 2019). It is perceived as an asset for economies wanting a differential accomplishment in professional, social, academic, and personal life. In this sense, creativity development is a hot topic for educators, policy makers and researchers (KAUFMAN, LURIA; BEGHETTO, 2018; ZHU et al., 2019).
Creativity is defined as the interaction between an individual’s ability, process, and environment in creating a product that is perceived as new and useful within a social context (PLUCKER; BEGHETTO, 2004). It is a multidimensional construct resulting from an interaction between cognitive skills, emotional aspects, personality characteristics, and environmental elements (WECHSLER, 2018). So, researchers have highlighted this construct as a positive and relevant feature for human development and essential for mental health (CHARYTON et al., 2009; OLIVEIRA; NAKANO; WECHSLER, 2016; WECHSLER; NAKANO, 2018). Consequently, the development of creativity must be encouraged as a vital capacity to face current problems and future challenges (LASSIG, 2019; ZHAO; GERAIN, 2016).
Literature highlights various benefits of fostering creativity. In organizations, it helps to thrive in modern, complex, and competitive environments. It can promote positive moods and facilitate coping negative experiences (YAHN; KAUFMAN, 2016). Governments can help increase prosperity and economic development by discoveries in the arts, science, technology. It also can help improve the well-being of its citizens (GRIGORENKO, 2019).
Socioemotional characteristics are also associated with satisfaction in interpersonal relationships, positive development of children and adolescents, such as adjustment and adaptation to the environment, preventing learning problems and academic failure, emotional self-regulation, and positive social interaction (ATANNAZIO et al., 2020; CUI et al., 2018; LIPNEVICH; ROBERTS, 2012). Other benefices include impulse control, motivation, persistence, cooperation with others (LECHNER; ANGER; RAMMSTEDT, 2019), prevention of learning problems and academic failure, increased frequency, and additional hours of study (DELANEY; HARMON; RYAN, 2013). Early childhood has been highlighted as a sensitive period for developing socioemotional skills (LECHNER; ANGER; RAMMSTEDT, 2019).
A group of scholars has proposed to understand socioemotional characteristics using the taxonomy of the Big Five Personality Factors model. This model includes five broad categories: (1) open-mindedness (associated skills of curiosity, imagination, broad interests, and search for questions), (2) agreeableness (tendency to act cooperatively, including depth and closeness in interpersonal relationships), (3) conscientiousness (tendency to the organization, self-discipline, and persistence, responsibility; task focus on learning), (4) extraversion (orientation of interests and engagement towards the outside world) and (5) emotional stability (ability to regulate and not to be overwhelmed by negative affect’s such as sadness, anxiety, and anger) (ABRAHAMS et al., 2019; KRAUZ et al., 2015; PRIMI et al. , 2019; SANTOS; PRIMI, 2014).
Despite the importance of creativity and socio-emotional skills, their relationship among young students in school settings is less frequently studied. One more common field of research in creativity tries to identify adult’s creative personality, whether the personality of recognized creative adults differs from others adults from the general population (MUSSEL et al., 2015). The studies also seek to analyze how each of the five personality factors relates to creativity (CHÁVEZ-EAKLE; EAKLE; CRUZ FUENTES, 2012; CHRISTENSEN; DREWSEN; MAALOE, 2014).
Studies of Big Five Personality factors and creativity in adults show that open-mindedness is associated with creativity (BATEY; CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC; FURNHAM, 2010; CHENG; KIM; HULL, 2010; CONNER; SILVIA, 2015; GEORGE; ZHOU, 2001; HOSEINIFAR et al., 2011; MA, 2009; PURYEAR; KETTLER; RINNI, 2017; SILVIA; MARTIN; NUSBAUM, 2009; SUN; CHOI, 2009; VON STUMM; CHUNG; FURNHAM, 2011; ZARE; FLINCHBAUGH, 2018). Studies of emotions and creativity in adults show that positive emotional state would favor creativity, and negative states (low emotional regulation) would act as an inhibiting element (ZENASNI; LUBART, 2008).
The present study seeks to investigate the relationship between creativity and socioemotional skills in young students. It aims to assess creativity potential in two domains (in figural drawings and verbal metaphor productions) to test the associations of two different expressions of creativity and six socio-emotional skills specifically purposed to measure personal characteristics in young students.
Method
Participants
The sample comprised 362 elementary school students attending 3rd (n = 168) and 5th (n = 194) grades, from 13 different public schools located in Pernambuco, Brazil. The participants were aged between 8 and 15-year-old (M = 10.3; SD = 1.33), and 180 were female (five did not answer this question). Convenience criteria selected the sample and the students had been took part of another research, and the database was used in the present research.
Instruments
To measure the constructs, the researchers opted for the use of tests to evaluate the target constructs. Thus, they started with the possibility of using instruments that showed psychometric qualities evidenced for the purpose for which they were developed. The results were aimed at helping to understand the creative potential and personality traits presented by the sample.
We assessed creativity using two subtests of the Giftedness Assessment Battery (NAKANO; PRIMI, 2015), which focused on verbal and figural creativity. Global psychometric properties of these tests were reported in previous studies (NAKANO et al., 2015, 2020; Nakano et al., 2017; NAKANO et al., 2020b; NAKANO; PRIMI, 2020; NAKANO et al., 2016; NAKANO et al., 2015b; RIBEIRO; NAKANO; PRIMI, 2014).
Completing Figures Test (CFT)
CFT is a divergent thinking task that asks students to complete ten incomplete figural stimuli. Creativity is assessed by eleven characteristics/creative indicators: Fluency, Flexibility, Elaboration, Originality, Expression of Emotion, Fantasy, Movement, Uncommon Perspective, Internal Perspective, Use of Context, and Expressive Titles. These indicators are scored and organized into three factors: Elaboration, Emotional and Cognitive.
Metaphor Creation Test (MCT)
MCT is a verbal divergent thinking task that asks students to complete sentences to write a metaphor such as “The camel is the _______ of the desert” (“motorcycle,” “boat”). For each sentence, MCT asks up to four answers and an explanation of the relationship provided. MCT assesses verbal creativity by asking raters to score the quality of the metaphor into 0 (not a metaphor), 1 (a simple metaphor), 2 (a metaphor with the remote association), and 3 (a metaphor with the very remote association). Raters also score Flexibility by counting how many different response categories for the same sentence (varying 1 to 4).
SENNA v1.0 inventory
SENNA (PRIMI et al., 2019) is a self-report questionnaire composed of 92 statements about personal socioemotional characteristics organized into six factors/scales: open-mindedness (F5.Opns), agreeableness (F4.Agre), conscientiousness (F1.Cons), extraversion (F2.Extr), emotional stability (F3.Neur), and external locus of control beliefs (F6.ELoc). Students are asked to answer on a scale of similarity to the self from 1 (nothing like me) to 5 (totally like me). Scale scores are calculated as average endorsements of scale items resenting in a metric of 1 to 5. They are all positive scores (more agreeable, conscientiousness, extraversion and more emotional stability). The exception occurs in the locus of control scale that means external beliefs (“Do you usually feel that it’s almost useless to try in school because most other children are just plain smarter than you are?”) and internal beliefs (“Most of the time, do you feel that you can change what might happen tomorrow by what you do today?”). A series of studies has already investigated its psychometric qualities (PANCORBO; LAROS, 2017; PRIMI et al., 2019c; PRIMI, et al., 2016a; PRIMI et al., 2016b).
Procedures and data analysis
Initially, the research was approved by the Research Ethics Committee (CAAE: 48871215.5.0000.54781). Data collection was performed in a single session, with an estimated one hour and forty minutes, coordinated by a psychologist and other trained researchers. The participants responded to the creativity tests (given the need to control the execution time) and then to the socioemotional instrument.
Raters scored 11 indicators of the CFT figural test. Then three factors scores were calculated. Twelve raters scored MCT responses. At least two raters scored each answer, and the final score was the average of scores of all productions. Raters were graduated students previously trained in scoring rubrics for these two tests. See previous studies for psychometric properties of MCT test: David et al. (2014), Dias, Couto and Primi (2009), Primi, Miguel, Couto and Muniz (2007) that compose a given factor. Before calculating scores, we reversed the negatively keyed items.
We calculated the correlation coefficients between creativity and socioemotional characteristics testing whether coefficients were significantly different from zero.
Results
Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics and correlations for all variables. On CFT, cognitive factor (Fluency, Flexibility, and Originality) had a higher score than other factors. Emotional factor (Expression of Emotion, Movement, and Expressive Title) had the lowest mean. This result has been noticed in previous research and has been interpreted as low creative performance in emotional characteristics (NAKANO, WECHSLER; PRIMI, 2012; RIBEIRO; NAKANO; PRIMI, 2014; WECHSLER, 2004a, 2004b). SENNA scores have a metric of 1 to 5 and were all around 3.5 except locus of control that is reversed and had a lower average (M = 2.9). The results are presented in Table 1.
Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations with Confidence Intervals
| Variable | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. cft_elb | 10.0 | 8.0 | ||||||||||||
| 2. cft_emo | 0.74 | 1.4 | .41** | |||||||||||
| 3. cft_cog | 15.9 | 8.5 | .61** | .21** | ||||||||||
| 4. CFCTtotal | 27.5 | 15.3 | .90** | .42** | .89** | |||||||||
| 5. mct_qual | 2.43 | 3.9 | .22** | .17* | .20* | .26** | ||||||||
| 6. mct_flex | 0.31 | 0.3 | .16* | .10 | .19* | .20** | .72** | |||||||
| 7. MCTtotal | 2.7 | 4.2 | .22** | .17* | .21** | .26** | 1.00** | .76** | ||||||
| 8. F1. Cons | 3.5 | 0.61 | .11 | .07 | .14* | .14* | .29** | .26** | .30** | |||||
| 9. F2. Extr | 3.2 | 0.50 | .00 | .11 | .15* | .09 | .13 | .09 | .13 | .38** | ||||
| 10. F3. Neur | 3.1 | 0.62 | -.06 | .00 | -.01 | -.04 | .06 | .08 | .07 | .43** | .04 | |||
| 11. F4. Agre | 3.4 | 0.66 | .18** | .09 | .21** | .23** | .21* | .11 | .21* | .60** | .48** | .20** | ||
| 12. F5. Opns | 3.4 | 0.82 | .19** | .10 | .17* | .21** | .13 | .03 | .13 | .47** | .54** | .01 | .69** | |
| 13. F6. ELoc | 2.9 | 0.75 | .15* | .09 | .07 | .13* | -.15 | -.23* | -.16 | -.03 | .31** | -.41** | .32** | .56** |
Legend: CFT = Completing Figures Test; MCT = Metaphor Creation Test; Cons = Conscientiouness; Extr = Extroversion; Neur = Emotional Stability; Agre = Agreeableness; Opns = Open Mindedness; ELoc = External Locus of Control; * indicates p < .05. ** indicates p < .01.
Note: M and SD are used to represent mean and standard deviation, respectively.
SOURCE: author’s elaboration.
The shaded part of Table 1 shows Pearson’s correlations of creativity and socioemotional skills. Figural creativity total was positively correlated with four factors: agreeableness, open mindedness, conscientiousness and external locus of control. The effect size was small (.13 to .23). Conscientiousness and Extroversion were also positively correlated with the cognitive factor. Agreeableness and Open-Mindedness presented positive correlations with cognitive and elaboration factors. Locus of control only showed significant correlations with Elaboration factor. Neuroticism was not related to any figural creativity measure.
Verbal creativity total was positively correlated with conscientiousness and agreeableness with small to moderate magnitude (.21 to .30). The metaphor quality measure was positively correlated to conscientiousness and agreeableness and flexibility with conscientiousness and negatively with external locus of control.
Discussion
We found that creativity was positively and significantly related to socioemotional skills, namely: agreeableness, conscientiousness, open-mindedness, and locus of control. Also, figural creativity is associated with all these skills, and verbal creativity (metaphor production) was strongly associated with conscientiousness.
Agreeableness is interpreted as a tendency to act cooperatively, and have empathy and depth and closeness in interpersonal relationships (SANTOS; PRIMI, 2014) is listed as a characteristic of creative personality. A series of research on the subject reported results confirming the relationship between creativity and agreeableness (BATEY; FURNHAM, 2006; CHÁVEZ-EAKLE; EAKLE; CRUZ-FUENTES, 2012; CHRISTENSEN; DREWSEN; MAALOE, 2014; HUGHES; FURNHAM; BATEY, 2013; HSU; HOA; FAN, 2011; SILVIA et al., 2011; VON STUM; CHUNG; FURNHAM, 2011). Also, creative products are related to a people’s collective effort and not produced by isolated individuals. We can also mention that agreeableness is related to school achievement. This result is probably related to agreeable students being willing to do the tasks asked by the teachers and researchers.
Open-mindedness is associated with curiosity, imagination, broad interests, and wealth of ideas, particularly in new situations. Open students have increased chances to retrieve remote ideas and associations, resulting in creative thinking (BATEY; CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC; FURNHAM, 2010). Creative people tend to be open to the unknown world, both outside and inside, tend to be more imaginative, seek external stimulation. They also be spontaneous and uninhibited expressing ideas and emotions without being afraid of error and welcome new information even when they are complex (FEIST, 1998; WECHSLER, 2018). Openness is the number one Big Five factor associated to creativity (BATEY; CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC; FURNHAM, 2010; BATEY; FURNHAM, 2006; BATEY, FURNHAM; SAFFIULINA, 2010; CHANG et al., 2015; CHEN, 2016; CHENG; KIM; HULL, 2010; CONNER; SILVIA, 2015; DOLINGER; URBAN; JAMEZ, 2004; FEIST, 1998; HOSEINIFAR et al., 2011; HUGHES et al.., 2013; IVCEVIC; MAYER 2007; KING; WALKER; BROYLES, 1996; LUBART, 2007; MA, 2009; MARTINSEN, 2011; MCCRAE, 1993; NELSON; RAWLINGS, 2010; PRABHU; SUTTON; SAUSER, 2008; PURYEAR; KETTLER; RINNI, 2017; SILVIA et al., 2009, 2014; SUN; CHOI, 2009; TEHRAN; KHALEDI, 2014; VON STUMM et al., 2011; WOLFRADT; PRETZ, 2001; ZARE; FLINCHBAUGH, 2018).
Conscientiousness describes a tendency to be organized, hardworking, responsible, disciplined, persistent, and task-oriented from organized goals (SANTOS; PRIMI, 2014). Such skills are essential for the long-term creative process, especially the development of final products, as they are usually the result of many failed attempts, effort, and dedication. This factor is composed of skills related to self-discipline, goal setting, and persistence (PURYERAR et al., 2017). Ivcevic and Nusbaum (2017) propose two abilities related to the implementation phase of creative process. The person “select promising ideas and develop ideas into products and services” (IVCEVIC; NUSBAUM, 2017, p. 343) described as: “(1) revising and re-strategizing on the way from the creative idea to a completed product; and (2) sustaining and maintaining effort in the face of obstacles and discouragement” (IVCEVIC; NUSBAUM, 2017, p. 346). These are explicit attributes of the conscientiousness domain on the Big Five Model.
The literature shows that the relationship between conscientiousness and creativity is not stable (REITER-PALMON; ILLIES; KOBE-CROSS, 2009). Sometimes a positive relationship is described (CHANG et al., 2015; CHEN, 2016; HOSEINIFAR et al., 2011; PURYEAR; KETTLER; RINNI, 2017; SILVIA et al., 2014; XU et al., 2018; ZARE; FLINCHBAUGH, 2018), but also an absence of relationship (CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC, 2006; FURNHAM; BATCHIAR, 2008; GEORGE; ZHOU, 2001; KELLY, 2006; TEHRAN; KHALEDI, 2014) or even negative correlation (FURNHAM; ZHANG; CHAMORRO--PREMIZIC, 2006; ROBERT; CHEUNG, 2010; WOLFRADT; PRETZ, 2001). One possible explanation of absence or a negative relationship between conscientiousness and creativity is based on the idea that high conscientiousness individuals have difficulty breaking rules and acting impulsively. There are typical characteristic of a creative individual. Such behaviors can decrease the chances of being unconventional and finding original ideas (BATEY; CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC; FURNHAM, 2010).
The absence of correlation with extroversion was an unexpected result because several studies have shown that more outgoing people are more creative (BATEY; CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC; FURNHAM, 2010; FURNHAM; BACHTIAR, 2008; NAKANO; CASTRO, 2013; GONÇALVES; SCHELINI; DEFFENDI, 2016; ZHANG; ZHOU; KWAN, 2017), because they are more confident in their skills (CHIANG; HSU; SHIH, 2017). One possible reason is that the domain of creativity assessed by metaphor and drawing production was more close to an academic task and not personal expression that would be more related to extroversion.
We found the most expected association of socioemotional skills and creativity (figural and verbal) demonstrated in adults study. However, caution is recommended to interpret the results considering certain limitations presented on this study, such as the number of participants, the instruments selected to measure each of the constructs, and the investigation of a single Brazilian state. Future studies involving other instruments for assessing socioemotional competences, and assessing other aspects of creativity in addition to their verbal and figurative expression are recommended. The review of studies has pointed out that the relationship between the constructs may vary based on the type of creativity measure used.
REFERENCES
ABRAHAMS, Loes et al. Social-emotional skill assessment in children and adolescents: Advances and challenges in personality, clinical, and educational contexts.Psychological Assessment, Washington , v. 31, n. 4, p. 460-473, 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1037/pas0000591. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
ATANNAZIO, Orazio et al. Inequality in socio-emotional skills: a cross-cohort comparison. Journal of Public Economics, [S. l.], v. 191, p. 1-32, 2020. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104171. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
BATEY, Mark; FURNHAM, Adrian. Creativity, intelligence and personality: A critical review of the scattered literature. Genetic, General and Social Psychology Monographs, [S. l.], v. 132, n. 4, p. 355-429, 2006. Disponível em: https://doi.10.3200/MONO.132.4.355-430. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
BATEY, Mark; CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC, Tomas; FURNHAM, Adrian. Individual differences in ideational behavior: can the Big Five and psychometric intelligence predict creativity scores? Creativity Research Journal, [S. l.], v. 22, n. 1, p. 90-97, 2010. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/10400410903579627. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
BATEY, Mark; FURNHAM, Adrian; SAFIULLINA, Xeniya. Intelligence, general knowledge and Personality as predictors of creativity. Learning & Individual Differences, [S. l.], v. 20, n. 5, p. 532-535, 2010. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.lindif.2010.04.008. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC, Tomas. Creativity versus conscientiousness: which is a better predictor of student performance? Applied Cognitive Psychology, [S. l.], v. 20, n. 4, p. 521-531, 2006. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1002/acp.1196. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CHANG, Chi-Cheng et al. Predicting the creativity of design majors based on the interaction of diverse personality traits. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, [S. l.], v. 52, n. 4, p. 371-382, 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/14703297.2014.999697. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CHARYTON, Christine et al. Creativity as an attribute of positive psychology: The impact of positive and negative affect on the creative personality. Journal of Creativity in Mental Health, [S. l.], v. 4, n. 1, p. 57-66, 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/15401380802708791. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CHÁVEZ-EAKLE, Rosa Aurora, EAKLE Jonathan, CRUZ-FUENTES, Carlos. The Multiple Relations Between Creativity and Personality. Creativity Research Journal, [S. l.], v. 24, n. 1, p. 76-82, 2012. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/10400419.2012.649233. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CHEN, Bin-Bin. Conscientiousness and everyday creativity among Chinese undergraduate students. Personality and Individual Differences, [S. l.], v. 102, p. 56-59, 2016. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.061. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CHENG, Yiling; KIM, Kyung Hee; HULL, Mary Michael. Comparisons of creative styles and personality types between American and Taiwanese college students and the relationship between creative potential and personality types. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, [S. l.], n. 4, v. 2, p. 103-112, 2010. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1037/a0017430. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CHIANG, Yun Hwa; HSU, Chun; SHIH, His-An. Extroversion personality, domain of knowledge, and the creativity of new product development engineers. Creativity Research Journal, [S. l.], v. 29, n. 4, p. 387-396, 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/10400419.2017.1376501. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CHRISTENSEN, Bo; DREWSEN, Lizette Kristine; MAALOE, Johannes. Implicit Theories of the Personality of the Ideal Creative Employee. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, Worcester, v. 8, n. 2, p. 189-197, 2014. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1037/a0036197. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CLERKIN, Aidan. Filling in the gaps: A theoretical grounding for an education programme for adolescent socioemotional and vocational development in Ireland. Review of Education, London, v. 6, n. 2, p. 146-179, 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1002/rev3.3113. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CONNER, Tamlin; SILVIA, Paul. Creative days: A daily diary study of emotion, personality, and everyday creativity.Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, Washington, v. 9, n. 4, p. 463-470, 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1037/aca0000022. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
CUI, Joy et al. Multilevel factors affecting early socioemotional development in humans. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, [S. l.], v. 72, p. 172-192, 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1007/s00265-018-2580-9. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
DAVID, Ana Paula et al. Metáforas e pensamento divergente: criatividade, escolaridade e desempenho em Artes e Tecnologias. Avaliação Psicológica, Campinas, v. 13, n. 2, p. 147-156, 2014. Disponível em: Disponível em: http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-04712014000200002&lng=pt&nrm=iso . Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
DELANEY, Liam; HARMON, Colm; RYAN, Martin. The role of noncognitive traits in undergraduate students behaviors. Economics of Education Review, [S. l.], v. 32, n. C, p. 181-195, 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.econedurev.2012.07.009. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021 [ Links ]
DIAS, Augusto Rodrigues; COUTO, Gleiber; PRIMI, Ricardo. Avaliação da criatividade por meio da produção de metáforas. Psico, Porto Alegre, v. 40, n. 2, p. 210-210, 2009. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/ojs/index.php/revistapsico/article/view/1514 . Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
DOLLINGR, Stephen; URBAN, Klaus; JAMES, Troy. Creativity and openness: further validation of two creative product measures. Creativity Research Journal, [S. l.], v. 16, n. 1, p. 35-47, 2004. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1207/s15326934crj1601_4. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
FEIST, Gregory. A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, [S. l.], v. 4, p. 290-309, 1998. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
FURNHAM, Adrian; ZHANG, Jane; CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC, Tomaz. The relationship between psychometric and self-estimated intelligence, creativity, personality, and academic achievement. Cognition and Personality, [on-line], v. 25, n. 2, p. 119-145, 2006. Disponível em: https://doi.10.2190/530V-3M9U-7UQ8-FMBG. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
FURNHAM, Adrian; BACHTIAR, Velicia. Personality and intelligence as predictors of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, [S. l.], v. 45, n. 7, p. 613-617, 2008. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.paid.2008.06.023. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
GEORGE, Jennifer; ZHOU, Jing. When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach. Journal of Applied Psycholog, [S. l.], v. 86, n. 3, p. 513-524, 2001. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.513. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
GONÇALVES, Maria Clara Miceli; SCHELINI, Patricia Waltz; DEFFENDI, Luma Tizzioto. A relação entre extroversão e criatividade: um estudo com universitários brasileiros. Boletim de Psicologia, São Paulo, v. 66, n. 145, p. 171-186, 2016. Disponível em: Disponível em: http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S0006-59432016000200006 . Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
GRIGORENKO, Elena. Creativity: a challenge for contemporary education. Comparative Education, [S. l.], v. 55, n. 1, p. 116-132, 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/03050068.2018.1541665. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
HECKMAN, James; STIXRUD, Jora; URZUA, Sergio. The effect of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior. Journal of Labor Economics, Chicago, v. 24, n. 3, p. 411-482, 2006. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.org/10734-306X/2006/2403-0003. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
HOSEINIFAR, Jafar et al. An investigation of the relations between creativity and five factors of personality in students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, [S. l.], v. 30, p. 2037-2041, 2011. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.394. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
HUGHES, David John; FURNHAM, Adrian; BATEY, Mark. The structure of personality predictors of self-rated creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, [S. l.], v. 9, p. 76-84, 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.tsc.2012.10.001. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
HSU, Michael; HOU, Sheng-Tsung; FAN, Hsueh-Liang. Creative self-efficacy and innovative behavior in a service setting: Optimism as a moderator. The Journal of Creative Behavior, [S. l.], v. 45, n. 4, p. 258-272, 2011. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1002/j.2162-6057.2011.tb01430.x. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
IVCEVIC, Zorana; MAYER, John. Creative types and personality. Imagination, cognition and personality, [S. l.], v. 26, n. 1-2, p. 65-86, 2007. Disponível em: https://doi.10.2190/0615-6262-G582-853U. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
IVCEVIC, Zorana; NUSBAUM, Emily. From having an idea to doing something with it: Self-regulation for creativity. In: KARWOWSKI, Maciej; KAUFMAN, James.The creative self: Effect of beliefs, self-efficacy, mindset, and identity. Cambridge, USA: Elsevier Academic Press, 2017. p. 343-365. [ Links ]
KAUFMAN, James; LURIA, Sarah; BEGHETTO, Ronald. Creativity. In: PFEIFFER, Steven. APA Handbook of Giftedness and Talent. Washington: American Psychological Association, 2018. p. 287-298. [ Links ]
KELLY, Kathryn. Relationship between the five-factor model of personality and the scale of creative attributes and behavior: A validation study. Individual Differences Research, [S. l.], v. 4, n. 5, p. 299-305, 2006. Disponível em: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-20322-002. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
KING, Laura; WALKER, Lori McKee; BROYLES, Sheri. Creativity and the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Research in Personality, [S. l.], v. 30, n. 2, p. 189-203, 1996. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1006/jrpe.1996.0013. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
KRAZU, Tim et al. Fostering and measuring skills: improving cognitive and non-cognitive skills to promote lifetime success. Paris: OECD, 2015. E-book. Disponível em: Disponível em: http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/Fostering-and-Measuring-Skills-Improving-Cognitive-and-Non-Cognitive-Skills-to-Promote-Lifetime-Success.pdf . Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
KUPPERS, Elisa et al. Children’s creativity: a theoretical framework and systematic review. Review of Educational Research, [S. l.], v. 89, n. 1, p. 93-124, 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.10.3102/0034654318815707. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
LASSIG, Carly. Creativity talent development: fostering creativity in schools. In: SMITH, Susen R. (ed.), Handbook of giftedness and talent development in the Asia-Pacific. Singapore: Springer, 2019. p. 1-25. [ Links ]
LECHNER, Clemens; ANGER, Silke; RAMMSTEDT, Beatrice. Socio-emotional Skills in Education and Beyond: Recent Evidence and Future Research Avenues. In: BECKER, Rolf. Research Handbook on the Sociology of Education. London: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2019. p. 427-453. [ Links ]
LIPNEVICH, Anastasiya; ROBERTS, Richard. Noncognitive skills in education: Emerging research an applications in a variety of international contexts. Journal of Psychology and Education, [S. l.], v. 22, n. 2, p. 173-177, 2012. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.016. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
LUBART, Todd. Psicologia da criatividade. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2007. [ Links ]
MA, Hsen-Hsing. The effect size of variables associated with creativity: a meta-analysis. Creativity Research Journal, [S. l.], v. 21, n. 1, p. 30-42, 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/10400410802633400. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
MARTINSEN, Oyvind. The Creative Personality: A Synthesis and Development of the Creative Person Profile. Creativity Research Journal, [S. l.], v. 23, n. 3, 185-202, 2011. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/10400419.2011.595656. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
McCRAE, Robert. Openness to experience as a basic dimension of personality. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, [S. l.], v. 13, n. 1, p. 39-55, 1993. Disponível em: https://doi.10.2190/H8H6-QYKR-KEU8-GAQ0. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
MUSSEL, Patrick et al. Predicting Creativity Based on the Facets of the Theoretical Intellect Framework. European Journal of Personality, [S. l.], v. 29, n. 4, p. 459-467, 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1002/per.2000. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
NAKANO, Tatiana de Cassia; WECHSLER, Solange Muglia; PRIMI, Ricardo. Teste de Criatividade Figural Infantil. São Paulo: Vetor, 2012. [ Links ]
NAKANO, Tatiana de Cassia; CASTRO, Livia Rech de. Relação entre criatividade e traços temperamentais em estudantes do ensino fundamental. Psico-USF, Bragança Paulista, v. 18, n. 2, p. 249-262, 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1590/S1413-82712013000200009. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
NAKANO, Tatiana de Cassia et al. Bateria para avaliação das altas habilidades/superdotação: análise dos itens via Teoria de Resposta ao Item. Estudos de Psicologia, Campinas, v. 32, n. 4, p. 729- 741, 2015a. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1590/0103-166X2015000400016. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
NAKANO, Tatiana de Cassia et al. Intelligence and creativity: relationships and their implications for Positive Psychology. Psico-USF, Bragança Paulista, v. 20, n. 2, p. 195-206, 2015b. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1590/1413-82712015200201. Acesso em: 21 out. 2021. [ Links ]
NAKANO et al. Multidimensional Assessment of Giftedness: Criterion Validity of Battery of Intelligence and Creativity Measures in Predicting Arts and Academic Talents. Anales de Psicología, Lima, v. 32, n. 3, p. 628-637, 2016. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.10.6018/analesps.32.3.259391. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
NAKANO, Tatiana de Cassia et al. Validity study of intelligence subtests for a Brazilian giftedness assessment battery. Estudos e Pesquisas em Psicologia, Rio de Janeiro, v. 17, n. 1, p. 386-405, 2017. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/revispsi/article/view/35268 . Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
NAKANO, Tatiana de Cassia et al. Avaliação da criatividade no contexto das altas habilidades/superdotação: evidências de validade. Estudos e Pesquisas em Psicologia, Rio de Janeiro, v. 20, n. 3, p. 835-854, 2020a. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/revispsi/article/view/54352/35032 . Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
NAKANO, Tatiana de Cassia et al. Evidências de validade do subteste de criatividade verbal da bateria de avaliação das altas habilidades/superdotação. Revista Iberoamericana de Criatividade e Inovação, Campinas, v. 1, n. 1, p. 13-25, 2020b. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://recriai.emnuvens.com.br/revista/article/view/20 . Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
NELSON, Barnaby; RAWLINGS, David. Relating schizotypy and personality to the phenomenology of creativity. Schizophrenia Bulletin, [S. l.], v. 36, n. 2, p. 388-399, 2010. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1093/schbul/sbn098. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
OLIVEIRA, Karina da Silva; NAKANO, Tatiana de Cassia; WECHSLER, Solange Muglia. Criatividade e saúde mental: uma revisão da produção científica na última década. Temas em Psicologia, Ribeirão Preto, v. 24, n. 4, p. 1493-1506, 2016. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.10.9788/TP2016.4-16. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
PANCORBO, Gina; LAROS, Jacob Arie. Validity evidence of the Social and Emotional Nationwide Assessment (SENNA 1.0) Inventory. Paideia, Ribeirão Preto, v. 27, n. 68, p. 339-347, 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1590/1982-43272768201712 . Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
PLUCKER, Jonathan; BEGHETTO, Ronald. Why creativity is domain general, why it looks domain specific, and why the distinction does not matter. In: STERNBERG, Robert; GRIGORENKO, Elena; SINGER, Jerome. Who’s creative? Washington: American Psychological Association, 2004. p. 153-167. [ Links ]
PRABHU, Veena; SUTTON, Charlotte; SAUSER, William. Creativity and certain personality traits: understanding the mediating effect of intrinsic motivation. Creativity Research Journal, Washington, v. 20, n. 1, p. 53-66, 2008. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/10400410701841955. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
PRIMI, Ricardo et al. Precisão de avaliadores na avaliação da criatividade por meio da produção de metáforas. PsicoUSF, Campinas, v. 12, n. 2, p. 197-210, 2007. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1590/S1413-82712007000200008. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
PRIMI, Ricardo et al. Development of an Inventory Assessing Social and Emotional skills in Brazilian youth. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, [S. l.], v. 32, n. 1, p. 5-16, 2016a. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1027/1015-5759/a000343. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
PRIMI, Ricardo et al. Anchoring vignettes: can they make adolescent self-reports of social-emotional skills more reliable, discriminant, and criterion-valid? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, [S. l.], v. 32, n. 1, p. 39-51, 2016b. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1027/1015-5759/a000336. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
PRIMI, Ricardo et al.SENNA V2.0 technical manual. São Paulo: Instituto Ayrton Senna, 2019a. [ Links ]
PRIMI, Ricardo. Mapping self-report questionnaires for socio-emotional characteristics: What do they measure?Estudos de Psicologia, Campinas, v. 36, p. 1-15, 2019b. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1590/1982-0275201936e180138 . Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
PRIMI, Ricardo et al. True or false? Keying direction and acquiescence influence the validity of socioemotional skills items in predicting high school achievement. International Journal of Testing, [S. l.], v. 20, n. 2, p. 97-121, 2019c. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/15305058.2019.1673398. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
PURYEAR, Jeb; KETTLER, Todd; RINN, Anne. Relationships of personality to differential conceptions of creativity: A systematic review.Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, Washington, v. 11, n. 1, p. 59-68, 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1037/aca0000079. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
REITER-PALMON, Roni; ILLIES, Jody; KOBE-CROSS, Lisa. Conscientiousness is not always a good predictor of performance: the case of creativity. The International Journal of Creativity & Problem Solving, Lincoln, v. 19, n. 2, p. 27-45, 2009. Disponível em: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-20794-002. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
RIBEIRO, Walquiria de Jesus; NAKANO, Tatiana de Cassia; PRIMI, Ricardo. Validade da estrutura fatorial de uma bateria de avaliação das altas habilidades/superdotação. Psico, Porto Alegre, v. 45, n. 1, p. 100-109, 2014. Disponível em: https://doi.10.15448/1980-8623.2014.1.13636. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
ROBERT, Christopher; CHEUNG, Yu Ha. An examination of the relationship between.conscientiousness and group and group performance on a creative task. Journal of Research in Personality, [S. l.], v. 44, n. 2, p. 222-231, 2010. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.jrp.2010.01.005. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
SANTOS, Daniel; PRIMI, Ricardo. Desenvolvimento socioemocional e aprendizado escolar: Uma proposta de mensuração para apoiar políticas públicas. Rio de Janeiro: OCDE: Instituto Ayrton Senna: Secretaria de Educação, 2014. E-book. Disponível em: https://institutoayrtonsenna.org.br/content/dam/institutoayrtonsenna/documentos/desenvolvimento-socioemocional-e-aprendizado-escolar.pdf. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
SILVIA, Paul et al. Openness to experience, plasticity, and creativity: exploring lower-order, high-order, and interactive effects. Journal of Research in Personality, [S. l.], v. 43, n. 6, p. 1087-1090, 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.jrp.2009.04.015. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
SILVIA, Paul; MARTIN, Christopher; NUSBAUM, Emily. A snapshot of creativity: evaluating a quick and simple method for assessing divergent thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, [S. l.], v. 4, n. 2, p. 79-85, 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.tsc.2009.06.005. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
SILVIA, Paul et al. Cantankerous creativity: Honesty-Humility, Agreeableness, and the HEXACO structure of creative achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, [S. l.], v. 51, n. 5, p. 687-689, 2011. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1016/j.paid.2011.06.011. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
SILVIA, Paul et al. Everyday creativity in daily life: An experience-sampling study of “little c” creativity.Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, [S. l.], v. 8, n. 2, p. 183-188, 2014. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1037/a0035722. Acesso em: 23 out. 2021. [ Links ]
SUN, Sun Young; CHOI, Jin Nam. Do Big Five Personality factors affect individual creativity? The moderating role of extrinsic motivation. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, [S. l.], v. 37, n. 7, p. 941-956, 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.10.2224/sbp.2009.37.7.941. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
TEHRAN, Gholamreza Memarzadeh; KHALEDI, Fatemeh. An investigation on the effects of personal characteristics on creativity and innovation. Management Science Letters, [S. l.], v. 4, n. 7, p. 1495-1498, 2014. http://doi.10.5267/j.msl.2014.6.014. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
VON STUMM, Sophie; CHUNG, Audrey; FURNHAM, Adrian. Creative Ability, Creative Ideation and Latent Classes of Creative Achievement: What Is the Role of Personality? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, [S. l.], v. 5, n. 2, p. 107-114, 2011. Disponível: https://doi.10.1037/a0020499. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
WECHSLER, Solange Muglia. Avaliação da criatividade por palavras. Teste de Torrance. Versão brasileira. Campinas: IDB: LAMP/PUC-Campinas, 2004a. [ Links ]
WECHSLER, Solange Muglia. Avaliação da criatividade por figuras. Teste de Torrance. Versão brasileira. Campinas: IDB: LAMP/PUC-Campinas, 2004b. [ Links ]
WECHSLER, Solange Muglia. Criatividade: descobrindo e encorajando. 2. ed. São Paulo: Psy, 2018. [ Links ]
WECHSLER, Solange Muglia; NAKANO, Tatiana de Cassia. Criatividade e inovação como elementos da psicologia positiva: implicações para o contexto organizacional. In: VASQUEZ, Ana Claudia; HUTZ, Claudio Simon. Aplicações da Psicologia Positiva: trabalho e organizações. São Paulo: Hogrefe, 2018. p. 109-130. [ Links ]
WOLFRADT, Uwe; PRETZ, Jean. Individual differences in creativity: Personality, story writing, and hobbies. European Journal of Personality, [S. l.], v. 15, n. 4, p. 297-310, 2001. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1002/per.409. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
XU, Sen et al. How does conscientiousness relate to employee creativity: A study on Chinese technical workers. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, New York, n. 1, 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.10.5465/AMBPP.2018.10714abstract. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
YAHN, Laura; KAUFMAN, James. Asking the wrong question: why shouldn’t people dislike creativity? In: AMBROSE, Don; STERNBERG, Robert. Creative intelligence in the 21st century: grappling with enormous problems and huge opportunities. Netherlands: Sense Publishers, 2016. p. 75-87. [ Links ]
ZARE, Mortaza; FLINCHBAUGH, Carol. Voice, creativity, and big five personality traits: a meta-analysis. Human Performance, [S. l.], v. 32, n. 1, p. 30-51, 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1080/08959285.2018.1550782. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
ZENASNI, Franck; LUBART, Todd. Emotion-related traits moderate the impact of emotional state on creative performances.Journal of Individual Differences, [ S. l.], v. 29, n. 3, p. 157-167, 2008. Disponível em: https://doi.10.1027/1614-0001.29.3.157. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
ZHANG, Xiaomeng; ZHOU, Jing; KWAN, Ho Kwong. Configuring challenge and hindrance contexts for introversion and creativity: Joint effects of task complexity andguanximanagement.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, [ S. l.], v. 143, p. 54-68, 2017. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.02.003. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
ZHAO, Yong; GEARIN, Brian. Squeezed out: the threat of global homogenization of education to creativity. In: AMBROSE, Don; STERNBERG, Robert. Creative intelligence in the 21st century: grappling with enormous problems and huge opportunities. Netherlands: Sense Publishers, 2016. p. 121-138. [ Links ]
ZHU, Weili et al. Convergent Thinking Moderates the Relationship between Divergent Thinking and Scientific Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, [ S. l.], v. 31, n. 3, p. 320-328, 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/ 10.1080/10400419.2019.1641685. Acesso em: 24 out. 2021. [ Links ]
1The authors are grateful for the funding received from the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico [National Council for Scientific and Technological Development] (CNPq) and from the Fundo de Apoio à Iniciação Científica [Scientific Initiation Support Fund] (FAPIC), in the form of scientific initiation scholarships, supervised by the lead author. The lead author also thanks the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo [São Paulo State Research Support Fund] (FAPESP) for the scholarship for research conducted abroad.
Received: June 17, 2021; Accepted: August 23, 2021
Este é um artigo publicado em acesso aberto sob uma licença Creative Commons
