This article was downloaded by: [University of Southampton Highfield] On: 08 November 2011, At: 04:30 Publisher: Routledge

Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/csje20

Creativity and Culture: A two way interaction

Elisabeth Rudowicz
a a

Department of Applied Social Studies, City University of Hong Kong, 83 Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong, China Available online: 25 Aug 2010

To cite this article: Elisabeth Rudowicz (2003): Creativity and Culture: A two way interaction, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47:3, 273-290 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313830308602

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 47, No. 3, 2003

Creativity and Culture: a two way interaction

ELISABETH RUDOWICZ
Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

Department of Applied Social Studies, City University of Hong Kong, 83 Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong, China

ABSTRACT Different manifestations of the impact of culture on creativity are discussed and illustrated by empirical studies. They include: (i) conceptualisation of creativity on both the explicit and implicit levels; (ii) attitudes towards creativity and values attached to creativity; (iii) channelling creative endeavour through different domains of human activities; and (iv) socialisation processes and educational goals and practices. It is argued that creative expression is a universal human phenomenon that is rmly grounded in culture and has its own profound impact on culture itself. The effects of culture on creativity are presented within an interactive model that, besides culture, also incorporates historical, societal and individual factors. Methodological dilemmas involved in cross-cultural studies of creativity are also discussed.

Key words: creativity; culture; development

INTRODUCTION Creativity can be perceived as an inherent capacity and a need of the human species that has survival value for the individual as well as the culture (Albert, 1990). Csikszentmihalyi (1996) asserts that creativity is the cultural counterpart of genetic changes resulting from biological evolution. In biological evolution random variations take place in genes and chromosomes, whereas in cultural evolution changes take place in memes, i.e. in units of information created, maintained and transmitted by the culture. Language, tools, carvings, paintings, social norms, values and ideas such as love, freedom or lial piety are, among others, examples of memes passed from generation to generation. In biological evolution futile changes may disappear after a few generations and the changes that proved to be vital for survival may be built into innate structures. Memes, the outcomes of cultural evolution, cannot be automatically passed on to the next generation. Each person has to learn them from the start for the sake of survival and continuation of culture. It is, however, for the same sake of survival that some people have to dare to change these memes. Efforts to change the existing memes can be identied as a creative endeavour. Creativity, however, will retain a useful meaning only if it results in an idea or product that is recognised as desirable or adopted by others. Thus, creativity understood as a
ISSN 0031-3831 print; ISSN 1430-1170 online/03/030273-18 2003 Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research DOI: 10.1080/0031383032000079245

274 E. Rudowicz mental process cannot be isolated from the socio-cultural systems in which the individual functions. These systems can facilitate or hinder changes in memes as well as inuence the judgements about a creative product or an idea. Creativity should be perceived as a cultural and social phenomenon rather than merely a mental process (Csikszentmihalyi, 1999). Interest in the socio-cultural and historical milieu of creativity developed in the 1980s and gained momentum in the 1990s (Barron, 1988; Csikszentmihalyi, 1988, 1990, 1996, 1999; Lubart & Sternberg, 1988; Simonton, 1988, 1991, 1996; Sternberg & Lubart, 1991; Ludwig, 1992). Although in the 1960s and 1970s creativity researchers acknowledged that cultural practices inuence the development and expression of creativity, they generally underestimated the magnitude of this inuence. Consequently, they focused their attention on the contributions to creativity development of cognitive factors and personal characteristics, such as motivation, personality, values, problem solving and problem nding orientation. The person-centred perspective of creativity researchers could have its roots in the fact that the majority of them have been psychologists and as such they adopted an individualistic perspective (Montuori & Purser, 1995; Simonton, 2000). Thus, Csikszentmihalyi, while proposing his dynamic systems perspective for the study of creativity, felt obliged to reassure the readers that he had no intention of betraying psychology in favour of sociological approaches. He has justied his use of systems inquiry by pointing out that in order to fully understand an individuals behaviour we need to abandon the Ptolemaic view of creativity, in which the person is in the centre of everything, for a more Copernican model in which the person is part of a system of mutual inuences and information (1988, p. 336). The systems perspective recognises that creativity is a result of human thought but stresses that the thinking process operates on a set of existing representations, rules, objects, or notions. A person can make a change in a given domain only because of the existing knowledge, rules, standards and tradition. This change can be evaluated, accepted and transmitted through time. Thus, the social, historical and cultural milieu in which an individual functions affects the development and expression of creativity. Csikszentmihalyi (1988, 1999) has further proposed that creativity is a process resulting from an interaction among three main forces: the culture, which stores and transmits the selected ideas, values and beliefs to the next generations; the social system, which selects which behaviours, values and information (a new meme) are worth preserving; the individual, who brings about some transformation to the social and cultural domain. Once we recognise that creativity is a product of an interaction of individual, social system and culture, it emerges as a far more complex phenomenon than in the individualistic perspective. The profound effect of the socio-cultural environment on creative expression stems from the fact that culture not only inuences what is expressed, by whom it is expressed and how it is expressed, but it also determines what function this expression serves and what its consequences are for an individual and society (Ludwig, 1992). The effects of culture on creativity can be manifested in a number of areas. Lubart (1990, 1999) and Lubart & Sternberg (1998) proposed four such areas: the conceptualisation of creativity, the creative process, the forms and domains of

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

Creativity and Culture 275 creativity and the degree to which creativity is encouraged and nurtured within a given society. The inuence of the cultural environment on creativity is the primary focus of this review. A number of problems can hamper analysis of the impact of culture on creativity. One of them is the concept of culture. Another is the absence of a commonly accepted denition of creativity. For the purposes of this review, we will not enter into a long academic discussion but instead assert that culture represents a composite of all the traditions and values, beliefs, behaviours, customs and rules as well as economic, political and technological forces that operate on a given group of people at a given time within a given place (Ludwig, 1992). Throughout this review we will consider the different cultural perceptions of the creative product, the creative personality and, to a lesser extent, of the creative process. Particular attention will be given to the areas in which a dynamic relationship between the forces of culture and creativity might be worth considering: rst, explicit concepts of creativity across different cultural settings; second, conceptualisation of creativity expressed in the implicit theories held by representatives of different cultures; third, cultural differences in the value attached to creativity; fourth, domains of creativity and its facilitation in different cultures; fth, the relationship between socialisation practices and the development of creativity. Methodological limitations and difculties faced by researchers involved in cross-cultural studies of creativity will also be briey discussed and possible directions for further studies outlined.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

CONCEPTUALISATION OF CREATIVITY ACROSS CULTURES Different psychological concepts, including creativity, can be described through explicit or implicit theories (Sternberg, 1985; Runco, 1990). The former are developed by social scientists based on theoretically or empirically derived hypotheses, whereas the latter are derived from individuals belief systems. Implicit theories are argued to be of great theoretical and practical importance as they are helpful in formulating the common cultural views on creativity and in understanding what people in a given community mean when referring to creativity. They might account for cross-cultural differences in human behaviour and reveal which aspects of a given category of behaviour are overlooked in available explicit theories (Dweck et al., 1995). The practical usefulness of implicit theories lies in the fact that they function as internal standards to judge and assess both ourselves and others and also serve as a basis for training (Sternberg, 1985; Runco & Bahleda, 1987; Runco et al., 1993).

Explicit Concepts of Creativity During the past 40 years creativity studies have originated and received great attention in the USA, leading to a number of conceptualisations and theories (Guilford, 1959; Torrance, 1981, 1988; Csikszentmihalyi, 1988, 1996, 1999; Simonton, 1988; Sternberg, 1988; Sternberg & Lubart, 1991). In spite of the various perspectives and methodological approaches a slow consensus appears to be

276 E. Rudowicz emerging around a concept of creativity as multi-dimensional and adaptive in nature. Important elements of a widely used explicit denition of creativity are originality and novelty of ideas, behaviours or products which are accepted and judged as appropriate by a group of people within the specic socio-cultural context. Researchers seem to agree that creativity may be expressed not only in visual arts, music or poetry, but also in everyday activities. Initially, Western concepts of creativity and measuring instruments were blindly imported by researches working in other parts of the world and put to use on the assumption of their universal value. In the 1980s, however, when psychologists became more aware that culture does play a very important role in the development of creativity, a number of investigators from various socio-cultural systems started to question the validity of such importation (Mari & Karayanni, 1983; Azuma 1984; Wonder & Blake, 1992; Khaleefa et al., 1996b, 1997; Kuo, 1996; Abou-Hatab, 1997; Cheng, 1999; Oner, 2000; Baldwin, 2001). This criticism led to the development of investigations concerned with: (i) the broadly dened dichotomy between the Eastern and Western or the Western and non-Western perception of creativity (Wonder & Blake, 1992; Ng, 2001); (ii) creativity and a specic culture or philosophy such as Afro-Arab Islamic culture (Khaleefa et al., 1996b, 1997), a Taoist (Kuo, 1996) or Hindu (Hallman, 1970) perspective, African-American culture (Simonton, 1998; Baldwin, 2001) Turkish culture (Oner, 2001) or Chinese culture (Rudowicz & Hui, 1996, 1998); (iii) the intra-cultural differences in the perception of creativity (Rudowicz & Yue, 2000). The review of literature regarding the EastWest conceptualisation of creativity shows that there is cross-cultural agreement that a creative product has to be accepted as useful, satisfactory or appropriate by a group at some point in time and should go beyond the given. The creative is perceived as not the average, the ordinary or the habitual (Weiner, 2000). Yet, the focus on newness in the Western conception is not shared in the East. The denition of creativity embracing novelty and originality ts perfectly with the North American belief system based on the ideals of individuality, democracy and freedom. In contrast, Eastern societies rmly grounded in the ideals of interdependence, collectivity, cooperation and authoritarianism have developed a different perspective on the meaning inherent to novelty and originality. Creative individuals in a traditional Eastern society must know how to adhere to the socio-cultural norms and at the same time detach from them. Within this framework, the individual can be original or come up with a new idea or product and at the same time be committed to the socio-cultural system. This is possible because the norms are perceived as unchangeable but a person is free in his/her deeds and actions. Thus, in the Eastern culture the concept of creativity may not necessarily contradict conformity (Khaleefa et al., 1996b). Creativity here may take the form of modication and adaptation. In some African societies newness and originality do not hold special value, e.g. each type of new ceremonial mask must have certain characteristics, whereas others are a matter of choice (Ludwig, 1992). Mazuri (cited in Khaleefa et al., 1996b) observed that in Africa innovations were concerned with improvements rather than with new inventions. Samoan people were

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

Creativity and Culture 277 reported to appreciate variations in dance style more than any substantial change (Ludwig, 1992). The other category of creative behaviour aimed at development of existing tradition is renovation, perceived as a form of intellectual revision that can pave the way for continuation of culture in a new transformed form (Khaleefa et al., 1996b). The scope of modication, adaptation and renovation depends on how much threat is posed to the established social, religious or political order. Among Melanesians, for whom religion and ritual play a central role, any change in tradition in these two areas is thought abusive to the ancestors (Ludwig, 1992). Along the same lines, Mari & Karayanni (1983) found that creativity level among Arab youth was higher if the problem situation was not value loaded. Similar observations stem from a study among Turkish adults by Oner (2000) exploring attitudes towards innovation and adaptation. Participants support for innovation varied with the type of context. Innovation was welcomed within the contexts of work, science and technology, but rejected within the family and interpersonal relationships. The participants expressed their fear of corruption of the pure traditional moral values of Turkish culture through innovation. Within indigenous Afro-Arab Islamic socio-cultural systems original ideas and products can be accepted and promoted more eagerly when conforming to the moral and religious values. Thus, ideas which emphasise collective spirit and skills of verbal expression will be encouraged, as verbal expression has a high status and is considered a form of originality. The repetitive religious poetry developed according to a given pattern and practices of memorisation of the Holy Koran may appear to an outsider as uncreative, however, within the Islamic culture diverse interpretations would be highly valued as an expression of creativity (Khaleefa et al., 1996b). In some cultures the explicit concept of creativity is strongly linked to ethical standards. The Chinese researchers Liu et al. (1997) and Wu (1996) have advocated that good morality and sociability are an integral part of the Chinese concept of creativity. Gardener (1989) observed that art education in China was not only skills oriented but also aimed at using artistic expression as a means of moral education. In Kenya creativity in the oral tradition, i.e. storytelling, has been left to the elders in order to ensure ethical insight. Hence, a good story should have imaginative charm and ethical insight (Gacheru et al., 1999). Another approach to conceptualisation of the EastWest differences in creative expression is based on the theory of two forms of knowledge, i.e. intuitive and logical knowledge. Wonder & Blake (1992) have proposed that Eastern thought, and hence Eastern approaches to creativity, are intuitive, whereas Western ones are more logical. Thus, assuming that creativity means either adding a new fact (meme) or deleting the existing one from the database, the East looks inward towards inner peace, towards experiencing what is already in the database (culture) and is less likely to force the creative process by introducing new information. Thus, the East may be more willing to rearrange the pattern and puts emphasis on inner experience and on mastering or perfecting skills through a rigid training. In contrast, the West looks outward towards progress and the right way of problem solving. Western thought relies heavily on logic and demands that everything ts together

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

278 E. Rudowicz according to the existing laws. Whatever the differences between the intuitive and logical approaches, none of them is inherently more creative. Each approach leaves room for creation as well as having inherent limitations regarding creative expression. Implicit Concepts of Creativity Interest in implicit concepts of creativity gained ground in North America in the late 1980s (Sternberg, 1985, 1988; Runco & Bahleda, 1987). Soon after, empirical studies regarding implicit concepts of creativity in other cultural settings, e.g. in Britain (Fryer & Collings, 1991), Brazil and Cuba (Welchsler & Martinez, 2001), Finland (Saarilahti et al., 1999), Hong Kong and China (Hui & Rudowicz, 1997; Rudowicz & Hui, 1998; Chan & Chan, 1999; Rudowicz & Yue, 2000), Korea (Lim & Plucker, 2001), India (Singh, 1987), Romania (Dinca, 1999) and Singapore (Cheng, 1999), were reported in the subject literature. Most Western studies exploring implicit conceptions of creativity have focused on creative individuals (Runco & Bahleda, 1987; Montgomery et al., 1993; Runco et al., 1993; Csikszentmihalyi, 1996; Helsen, 1996) or conceptualisation of creativity (Sternberg, 1985; Runco & Bahleda, 1987). On the conceptual level, Sternberg (1985) found that the implicit conception of creativity overlaps with, but also differs distinctively from, those of intelligence and wisdom. He further observed that in conceptions of creativity there was less emphasis on analytical abilities and more on aesthetic taste, imagination and intuitiveness. Implicit concepts focusing on descriptions of a creative person can be grouped into motivational qualities, cognitive traits and personality characteristics. In a North American context, motivational characteristics such as energetic, active, motivated, willing to take a stand, inquisitive, curious, adventurous, ambitious, self-condent, determined and enthusiastic have been found to be a part of the implicit concepts of creativity (Sternberg, 1985; Runco & Bahleda, 1987; Runco, 1989; Runco et al., 1993; Westby & Dawson, 1995). Among cognitive traits Sternberg (1985) identied the ability to make connections and distinctions between ideas and things, ability to understand and interpret environment, ability to grasp abstract ideas, high IQ level, attaching importance to ideas and ability to put old concepts and theories in a new way. Psychology undergraduates and artists in Runco & Bahledas (1987) study identied such cognitive characteristics of a creative person as open-minded, intelligent, logical, experimenting and with problem-solving skills, whereas parents and teachers in Runco et al.s (1993) investigation listed clear thinking, clever, intelligent, capable, imaginative, inventive and questioning. In Western studies frequently listed personality characteristics of a creative person include free spirit, non-conformist, individualistic, condent, assertive, daring, artistic, good aesthetic taste and sense of humour (Sternberg, 1985; Runco & Bahleda, 1987; Runco et al., 1993; Westby & Dawson, 1995). Empirical studies exploring conceptions of creativity in socio-cultural contexts other than the North American (Raina et al., 1980; Singh, 1987; Fryer & Collings, 1991; Rudowicz & Hui, 1997, 1998; Chan & Chan, 1999; Dinca, 1999; Rudowicz

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

Creativity and Culture 279 & Yu, 2000; Lim & Plucker, 2001; Welchsler & Martinez, 2001) provide evidence that despite the many similarities in implicit concepts of creativity across cultures there are also a number of differences which are worth noting. The perception of the core characteristics of a creative person held by the Hong Kong Chinese is to a great extent congruent with the perception held by North American respondents. Yet, characteristics relating to sense of humour, aesthetic and art appreciation, which are consistently reported in North American implicit theories, are absent in the Hong Kong general publics concepts of creativity (Rudowicz & Hui, 1997). Artistic and humorous were also almost non-existent in the implicit concepts of undergraduates in Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan (Rudowicz & Yue, 2000) and of Hong Kong teachers (Lam, 1996; Chan & Chan, 1999). It is also noteworthy that Hong Kong Chinese implicit concepts include characteristics that are not present in the North American samples. They seem to relate to a collectivistic orientation of the Hong Kong Chinese and include such attributes as inspires people, makes a contribution to the progress of society, and is appreciated by others (Rudowicz & Hui, 1997). In addition, Chan & Chan (1999) observed that Hong Kong teachers nominated many more undesirable traits as characteristics of creative students than their North American counterparts (Runco et al., 1993). Ethical standards advocated as an integral part of the Chinese explicit concepts of creativity do not appear to be a signicant factor in the implicit concepts of Chinese undergraduates (Rudowicz & Yue, 2000). Implicit concepts of creativity among Korean lay people overlap to a great degree with Western conceptions, although, similarly to the Hong Kong teachers, Korean teachers emphasise negative characteristics to a greater degree than North Americans. In addition, Korean adults concepts of creativity seem to be deeply rooted in cognitive traits at the expense of non-cognitive aspects such as perseverance or independence. Anecdotal data regarding implicit concepts of creativity held by people from other cultures conrm that the differences across cultures refer to subtle variations rather than to a fundamental divergence. British teachers hold slightly different concepts of creativity depending on their gender. The female teachers perceived creativity in more personal terms describing it as self-expression and awareness of beauty, whereas the males characterised it in more objective terms such as innovation and divergence (Fryer & Collings, 1991). Finnish teachers look at creativity from both the individual and social perspectives. Their implicit concepts include not only such characteristics and behaviours as nding new solutions, using old knowledge in new ways, hard work, humour and imagination, but also exibility in social situations (Saarilahti et al., 1999). Romanian adolescents associated such traits as observant, humorous, inventive, fun loving, unrestrictive, energetic, ambitious, curious, stubborn, non-conformist and spontaneous with creativity (Dinca, 1999). This list of characteristics ts the Western implicit concepts perfectly. However, the Romanians also add that a creative individual is prepared to compromise between his/her own social code of behaviour and that of the society. This characteristic is in accord with that included in the Finnish concept, i.e. exibility in social situations. It seems that in the European context implicit concepts of creativity refer to an

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

280 E. Rudowicz independent thinker who is still able to maintain a balance between self-reliance and group identication. Implicit concepts of creativity among Brazilians and Cubans have been reported to put heavy emphasis on emotional sensitivity, i.e. intuition, humour, curiosity, resistance to failure, being a dreamer and being a humanist. Less attention is paid to the cognitive abilities involved in creativity (Welchsler & Martinez, 2001). VALUE ATTACHED TO CREATIVITY Cultural and socio-historical contexts not only inuence conceptualisation of creativity but also peoples attitudes towards the value and utility of creative endeavours. It is evident that people around the globe have been creative in innumerable ways, but it is also evident that the practice of creativity may bring about tension, controversy and run into endless obstacles. This is so because people in every culture, even the most progressive ones, are to some extent entrenched in a complicated set of human relationships and traditions, and creativity may pose a danger to these very relationships and practices. In the contemporary North American context so inherently associated with individuality, freedom of expression, self-actualisation and with a notion that everyone should be creative because creativity is good for an individual and for the society, there are voices complaining that creativity is not really valued, recognised or rewarded. Weiner (2000) reports that artists, writers, musicians, scientists and business people when asked if creativity was highly valued in the USA invariably answered No!. They all agreed that society only pays lip service to their work and generally prefers old safe solutions to any genuine creativity. Consistent with the above is an observation of Westby & Dawson (1995) that one of the least controversial ndings in educational empirical studies of creativity has been that teachers disapprove of personality characteristics associated with creativity in their students. Instead, they prefer traits that run counter to creativity, such as unquestioning acceptance of authority, conformity, logical thinking, responsibility and a good-natured character that makes students easy to manage in the classroom. Also, Scott (1999) reported that teachers see creative children as a source of interference and disruption. In addition, teachers judgements of their favourite students were negatively correlated with creativity, whereas judgements for the least favourite student were positively correlated with creativity (Westby & Dawson, 1995). These conclusions correspond closely with the earlier study by Raini and Raini (reported in Ludwig, 1992) of traits valued by teachers and parents of ve different cultures, namely Germany, Greece, India, the Philippines and the USA. In all these cultures parents and teachers appeared to reward a compliant child who accepts the judgement of authorities. The cultures slightly differed with regards to the particular characteristics of creativity that were perceived as worthy of encouragement. Germany and the USA placed a premium on originality while curiosity was a valued trait in India. It was, however, qualied by such attributes as obedience and courteousness. Characteristics such as independence of thinking or judgement were not appreciated among parents and teachers from Greece, India and the Philippines.
Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

Creativity and Culture 281 Well-educated Indian parents studied by Singh (1987) did not appreciate such characteristics associated with creativity as courageous, independent thinking and judgement, risk taking, intuitive, preoccupied with tasks, persevering, stubborn and visionary. Instead, the most desirable characteristics were obedience, good adjustment, conformity, sincerity and health. The parents preferences were not correlated in a statistically signicant manner with the ratings of creativity experts. This disparity points to the differences between the implicit and explicit concepts of creativity. A Hong Kong study of teachers perception of an ideal pupil and a creative pupil (Lam, 1996) found that their conception of an ideal student tted a typical Chinese good child type, rather than a creative child model. The ideal pupil characteristics corresponded well with the Confucian values. The top ranked traits were honest, self-disciplined, responsible, respects parents and healthy, followed by diligent, unselsh, humble and obedient. The low desirability of creativity traits for Chinese people was also reported by Rudowicz & Yue (2000). In their study among university undergraduates from Hong Kong, Mainland China and Taiwan, respondents were asked to indicate on a 5 point scale how important it was for a Chinese person to possess the given characteristic. The results indicated that the majority of characteristics associated with creativity were considered as having a relatively low importance for a Chinese person. In all samples the list was topped by characteristics associated with the Chinese personality, including respects parents, responsible, diligent, healthy and honest, followed by self-disciplined and modest. From the characteristics contained in the indigenous concept of creativity only has wisdom and good thinking ranked among the highest, at 4 and 11, respectively. Educators and researchers in countries such as Brazil and Cuba (Welchsler & Martinez, 2001), Hong Kong (Rudowicz et al., 1994), Finland (Saarilahti et al., 1999), Kenya (Gacheru et al., 1999), Mexico (Wilcox & Moreno, 1999) and Romania (Dinca, 1999) have revealed that in spite of formal declarations of policy makers regarding the importance of creativity there is a lack of concern for creativity in the school curricula and school teaching practices. In school practice there is an emphasis on logic and memorisation and students writings are on teacher-directed topics. Everything seems to be geared towards good preparation for tests and examinations. In addition, teachers usually lack appropriate training in creative teaching techniques and approaches. It is also common that educators and policy makers accept myths regarding creativity. Thus, they identify creativity only with the arts, think that creativity permits children to do whatever they wish and believe that creative activity has no goals and causes chaos and disruption as well as takes time away from teaching basic skills (Saarilahati et al., 1999).

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

DOMAINS OF CREATIVE EXPRESSION Culture also inuences how creativity is channelled. Different cultural, social, political and historical circumstances have encouraged and fostered creativity in certain realms of human activity, while discouraging it in others. Thus, depending

282 E. Rudowicz on the cultural setting, certain individuals will receive more or less encouragement for creative expression (Weiner, 2000). In the contemporary North American context creativity seems to be extended to all areas of life, however, scientists, artists, academics and business people feel that their work stands a greater chance of full support if the government and corporate world are successfully convinced that their work is of political or commercial value (Weiner, 2000). In addition, Lubart (1990) argued that in the USA creativity in science and in problem solving has been encouraged to a greater extent than creativity in politics and socio-economic theory. Across different cultures, commerce is a domain which seems to be given freer reign for creative endeavour than are social relations or sacral art. In Indonesia, Balis popular art, especially that aimed at tourists and generating substantial national income, has been given much freer creative reign than social relations or religious rituals. However, in Turkey (Oner, 1999) creativity is strongly encouraged in science and technology in order to increase work efciency and standard of living but discouraged in the areas that can damage traditional social rules and relationships. In contemporary Latin America there is a heavy emphasis on development of creativity in business and advertising (Kastika, 2001; Welchsler & Martinez, 2001). Yet, in Mexico teachers, parents and the community strongly support a rich culture in music, literature, dance and art but do not show similar interest for creativity in everyday classroom tasks (Wilcox & Moreno, 1999). In Arab Islamic culture a great emphasis has been placed on the skills of creative verbal expression. The high regard for verbal expression led to the development of an oral tradition expressed through poetry and songs, both religious and popular. (Khaleefa et al., 1996b). Historically, a major criterion for comparison of one Arab tribe with another was the birth of a poet within the tribe (Mari & Karayanni, 1983). Within contemporary Islamic cultures many more opportunities are created to cultivate verbal skills and individuals ability to memorise the Koran, poems and songs than for the development of gural creativity. In gural expression an aesthetic value has been looked for, rather than novelty or uniqueness. Visual arts have been conned by traditional canons regarding the ways in which the human body could be presented. Cultural and socio-historical contexts not only inuence the development of creativity in certain domains but also determine which domains of human activity are perceived as expressions of creativity. Rudowicz & Huis (1998) study showed that Hong Kong Chinese, in contrast to North Americans, identied creative achievement with nancial and political accomplishments rather than with aesthetic or artistic ones. Thus, when responding to the request to nominate Hong Kong person(s) outstanding for creativity, they listed businessmen, fashion designers and politicians as the most creative. The next on the list were lm directors, actors, popular singers and architects. Writers, artists and scientists were rarely nominated. Chinese university undergraduates from Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan considered politicians, scientists or inventors, both historical and modern gures, as most representative of creative persons and rarely nominated artists, writers and composers for this purpose (Yue & Rudowicz, 2002). It seems that Chinese people

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

Creativity and Culture 283 care a lot more about the creators social inuence, status, fame, charisma and contribution to society than for his/her contribution to culture. Using Simontons (1984, 1988) classication of universally recognised creative gures (1988, p. 387) into creators and leaders, the Chinese consider the contribution of the leaders as more associated with creative endeavour than that of creators. The Chinese students perception contrasts sharply with those of British undergraduates. Data from Smith & Wrights (2000) study showed that British university students consider the contribution of creators as associated with genius more than the contribution of leaders. Those with creative achievements in the arts, classical music, science and philosophy were considered as those who have made a creative and lasting contribution to the world. SOCIALISATION PRACTICES AND DEVELOPMENT OF CREATIVITY One of the basic assumptions underlying comparative studies of creative development in different cultures is that variations in child rearing practices, stemming from cultural values and beliefs as well as from economic and political systems, will inuence the level of creative accomplishments. There seems to be a common agreement among creativity researchers that child rearing practices that restrict internal freedom (have little tolerance for deviation from the traditional or the status quo, insist upon conformity and spoon feed children), hinder creative development (Stein, 1953; Gardener, 1989; Ho, 1994; Lubart, 1999). Socialisation practices across cultures differ in the extent to which they put emphasis on: (i) collectivism or individualism; (ii) conformity and tradition or novelty and originality; (iii) hierarchical organisation or egalitarianism; (iv) selfcontrol or self- expression; (v) social order and harmony or open and democratic exchange of ideas; (vi) learning through memorisation or through trial and error. Although neither of these cultures or societies is a totally homogeneous entity, Western cultures are often associated with principles of liberal individualism, democracy, freedom of self-expression and ideals of equality, whereas Eastern societies are associated with cultivation of collectivism, conformity, tradition, interdependence, social harmony and social order as well as self-control and emotional repression (Khaleefa et al., 1996a; Ng, 2001; Rudowicz et al., 1994). Collectivistic societies of the East, such as Chinese, Japanese or Afro-Arab Islamic cultures, place their emphasis in their socialisation practices on obedience, duty, cooperation, compromise and sacrice for the in-group. As a result, people in these societies will tend to conform to their in-groups and will be concerned with social harmony rather than with expression of their own feelings, opinions or desires. They will believe in the importance of social order and will rigidly uphold social rules and norms. They will emphasise group interests over individual concerns, stress sensitivity to others and encourage self-control in setting and achieving goals. They will also be more prone to experiencing such emotions as shame and embarrassment when interacting with others. Therefore, they will be more cautious and indirect (Rudowicz et al., 1994; Farver et al., 2000; Ng, 2001). In contrast, the typical individualistic society of the West, such as the North American one, puts an emphasis

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

284 E. Rudowicz on freedom, independence and human rights. A child will be encouraged quite early to differentiate himself or herself from others and function as an independent being. Thus, a Western person will become self-determined and autonomous, pursuing their own interests and goals rather than conforming to social group demands. A typical Westerner believes in his/her uniqueness as a person and will be frank and direct when interacting with others. The differences in socialisation practices lead to different educational goals. Farver et al. (2000) note that Korean American teachers emphasise group awareness over individual interests, encourage sensitivity to others and put emphasis on self-control in achieving goals. In contrast, Caucasian American teachers emphasise the importance of independent problem solving, selfexpression and creativity. In addition, a number of researchers hypothesised that people who represent Eastern cultures show less willingness to depart from conventionally accepted behaviour (Jacquish & Ripple, 1985; Saeki et al., 2001), their self-expression and self-actualisation will be inhibited (Ho, 1994) and it will be more difcult for them to be creative (Ng, 2001). Studies comparing originality scores of Chinese and American students (Lin & Chu, 1975; Ho, 1981) and verbal creativity scores of Chinese, North American and German students (Rudowicz et al., 1995) obtained using Western creativity tests conrmed the above speculations. Hierarchically organised societies of the East are governed, in their socialisation practices, by the ethics of lial piety. Children are taught and required to honour, obey and respect their parents, teachers and elders. Parental attitudes and child rearing practices rooted in lial piety exert a strong inuence on cognitive development, attitudes towards learning and denition of the teacherstudent relationship (Ho, 1994). Teachers are expected to guide and control their students as well as transmit knowledge. Students in return are obliged to be respectful, obedient and look for guidance in two directions: Upwards, towards authority, and backwards, to the traditions of the past (Gardener, 1989; Liu, 1990; Rudowicz et al., 1994; Ng, 2001). Empirical evidence strongly suggests that educational practices rooted in lial piety tend to result in high rigidity and low cognitive complexity as well as promote submissiveness and conventionalism, which are incompatible with creative expression (Ho, 1990, 1994; Liu, 1990). Thus, Chinese children learn to draw satisfaction from conforming to expectations of teachers, parents or any other authority gure. In contrast, Western child rearing practices are aimed at enabling a child to develop as an independent person who is able to take care of himself/ herself, rely on ones own resources and maintain a genuine relationship with their parents. To build up the childs condence in his/her ability to conquer the outside world, Western parents put emphasis on the childs expression of opinions, independence and creativity. This cultural emphasis on being an independent and selfreliant person helps children to draw satisfaction from self-expression and selfactualisation as well as makes them more prone to experience self-focused emotions such as pride, joy, anger and sadness. Throughout Chinese history the harmony between the Yin and Yang has been regarded as an ideal state. Thus, social order and harmony as well as avoidance of conict have been emphasised in the socialisation practices of the East. Each individual, as an element of society, has to remain in harmony with the group to

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

Creativity and Culture 285 which he/she belongs. Consequently Eastern societies such as Chinese, Japanese or Saudi Arabian encourage cooperation, compromise and conformity (Dunn et al., 1988; Khaleefa et al., 1997; Ng, 2001). The individual is constantly reminded to sacrice the small me so as to complete the big me (Ng, 2001, p. 123). In the West parents will allow even a small child to solve a problem by himself/herself through trial-and-error, while a traditional Chinese parent will show the child exactly how to do things. The child is rmly told that there is one right way of doing things and many wrong, unacceptable ways. The child is instructed to work carefully and deliberately to avoid mistakes. Traditional Eastern education is oriented towards moulding and shaping rather than developing individuality (Gardener, 1989; Khaleefa et al., 1997; Cheng, 1999). Thus, Gardener (1989) and Cheng (1999) have expressed their concern that such a rigid and skill-oriented education deprives young people, in general, and artists, in particular, of an opportunity for individual explorations and self-expression. Ho (1981) went even further when he asserted The likely effect of this treatment is the burial of whatever creativity the child might have originally (p. 89). Socialisation practices differ not only across cultures but also within a culture. The within culture differences are particularly visible in traditional cultures of the East. They may be observed across social groups or between males and females (Mari & Karayanni, 1983; Khaleefa et al., 1996, 1997). A FINAL NOTE So far, from this review of the literature on creativity and culture the following conclusions become very apparent. First, culture clearly has a profound inuence on conceptualisation of creativity and on creative expression. Second, the relationship between cultural factors and creative expression is extremely complex. Third, the interaction between the forces of culture and creativity is not only reciprocal but also involves other historical, societal and individual factors. Thus, an appreciation and exploration of the contributions of a given culture are important for our understanding of the nature and manifestations of creativity, however, it is not sufcient in itself. Fourth, creative expression is a universal human phenomenon. Each society, regardless of limitations stemming from cultural or social norms, leaves some room for creative expression. Fifth, creativity is a multifaceted phenomenon, hence, its manifestations also have to be studied and understood from the unique perspective of an individual involved in the creative process. In this review, cross-cultural differences in conceptualisation, expression and development of creativity were discussed by contrasting Eastern cultures and societies and Western ones. However, it should be noted that neither the East nor the West are totally homogeneous entities. Opportunities for creative expression might not be equally distributed across different cultures and within any given culture, due to intra-cultural and socio-historical dynamics. As some authors suggest (Mari & Karayanni, 1983; Khaleefa et al., 1997), the differences in creative development might be more attributable to the differences in modernisation than to the culture per se.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

286 E. Rudowicz Until the early 1990s most creativity research was conducted in North America. Generalisation and importation of these theories developed from empirical data collected within one society, and from a sample representing 6% of the world population, to the other cultural and societal contexts inevitably leads to a distortion of reality. In order to differentiate the universal from the culture-specic aspects of creativity we have to move beyond a single cultures perspective and carry out cross-cultural studies. Cross-cultural research allows for more meaningful interpretations of creativity as it helps to unravel the effects of tradition, values and life philosophy on creative expression. Cross-cultural or indigenous studies of creativity, however, are more complex than would rst appear. One of the major problems is that any attempt to understand creativity within the indigenous culture, be it European, Asian or African, requires a complete system of indigenous psychology. In most cases, there are no native theories regarding, for example, cognitive and motivational processes, emotional and social functioning or psychometrics (Bond, 1996; Abou-Hatab, 1997; Khaleefa et al., 1997). The other obstacle in cross-cultural studies of creativity is the problem of linguistic equivalence of meanings. Back-translation cannot guarantee full conceptual equivalence of expressions associated with creativity across two different cultures. In that context, the analysis presented in this review should be treated as suggestive rather than conclusive. Almost half a century ago Stein (1953) cautioned that creativity must be dened and measured in terms of the culture in which it appears, since a creative product must be recognised and accepted within the socio-cultural context in which it was created. Yet, the cultural aspects of creativity have been studied explicitly only in recent years. This newly emerged interest in the indigenous aspects of creativity is currently mostly limited to studies of implicit concepts of creativity and to measurement of creativity. Studies of the culture-specic conceptions of creativity have unveiled both overlaps and differences in creativity concepts embodied in different cultural traditions and also differences in value attached to creativity. There seems to be a great need to continue this line of exploration. Empirical data generated from these studies may allow for the development of some culturesensitive measures of creativity. The second line of cross-cultural studies emerging recently, i.e. measurement of creativity across different cultural groups, has not been included in this review. Cross-cultural comparisons of the development of creativity, although not without value, have a number of inherent weaknesses that are not easy to overcome. The major criticism relates to the use of tools based on the Western concept of creativity to assess creativity in other cultural settings. It can be expected that these foreign tests measure mainly acculturation to and familiarity with Western ways of thinking. The demands of such a measure might be irrelevant to motivation processes, knowledge and cognition inherent in other cultures (Khaleefa et al., 1996a). To conclude, creativity researchers are increasingly aware that culture can and does play an important role in conceptualisation and development of creativity. The current trend for globalisation, however, leaves us pondering how societies can

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

Creativity and Culture 287 preserve and cultivate their unique cultures and their traditional values but at the same time create an opportunity for creative development.

REFERENCES
ABOU-HATAB, F.A.-L.H. (1997). Psychology from Egyptian, Arab, and Islamic perspectives: unfullled hopes and hopeful fullment. European Psychologist, 2(4), 356365. ALBERT, R.S. (1990). Real-world creativity and eminence: an enduring relationship, Creativity Research Journal, 3(1), 15. AZUMA, H. (1984). Psychology in a non-western country. International Journal of Psychology, 19, 145155. BALDWIN, A.Y. (2001). Understanding the challenge of creativity among African Americans. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 12(3), 121125. BARRON, F. (1988). Putting creativity to work. In R.J. STERNBERG (Ed.) The Nature of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BOND, M.H. (Ed.) (1996). The Psychology of the Chinese People. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. CHAN, D.W. & CHAN, L.K. (1999). Implicit theories of creativity: teachers perception of student characteristics in Hong Kong. Creativity Research Journal, 12(3), 185195. CHENG, S.K. (1999). EastWest differences in views on creativity: is Howard Gardener correct? Yes, and no. Journal of Creative Behavior, 33(2), 112123. CSIKSZENTMIHALYI, M. (1988). Society, culture and person: a system view of creativity. In R.J. STERNBERG (Ed.) The Nature of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CSIKSZENTMIHALYI, M. (1990). The domain of creativity. In M.A. RUNCO & R.S. ALBERT (Eds) Theories of Creativity. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. CSIKSZENTMIHALYI, M. (1996). Creativity. Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Collins. CSIKSZENTMIHALYI, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R.J. STERNBERG (Ed.) Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DINCA, M. (1999). Creative children in Romanian society. Childhood Education, 75(6), 355358. DUNN, J.A., ZHANG, X.Y. & RIPPLE, R.E. (1988). Comparative study of Chinese and American performance on divergent thinking tasks. New Horizons, 29, 720. DWECK, C.S., CHIU, C.Y. & HONG, Y.Y. (1995). Implicit theories: elaboration and extension of the model. Psychological Inquiry, 6(4), 322333. FARVER, J.A.M., KIM, Y.K. & LEE-SHIN, Y. (2000). Within cultural differences: examining individual differences in Korean American and European American preschoolers social pretend play. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31(5), 583602. FRYER, M. & COLLINGS, J.A. (1991). British teachers views of creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 25, 7581. GACHERU, M., OPIYO, M. & SMUTNY, J.F. (1999). Childrens creative thinking in Kenya. Childhood Education, 75(6), 346349. GARDENER, H. (1989). The key in the slot: creativity and a Chinese key. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 23(1), 141158. GUILFORD, J.P. (1959). Three faces of intellect. American Psychologist, 14, 469479. HALLMAN, R.J. (1970). Towards a Hindu theory of creativity. Educational Theory, 20(4), 368376. HELSEN, R. (1996). In search of the creative personality. Creativity Research Journal, 9(4), 295306. HO, D.Y.F. (1981). Traditional patterns of Chinese socialization in Chinese society. Acta Psychologica Taiwanica, 23(2), 8195. HO, D.Y.F. (1990). Chinese patterns of socialization: a critical review. In M.H. BOND (Ed.) The Psychology of the Chinese People. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. HO, D.Y.F. (1994). Cognitive socialization in Confucian heritage cultures. In P.M. GREENFIELD & R.R. COCKING (Eds) Cross-cultural Roots of Minority Child Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

288 E. Rudowicz
HUI, A. & RUDOWICZ, E. (1997). Creative personality versus Chinese personality: how distinctive are these two personality factors? Psychologia, XL(4), 277285. JAQUISH, G.A. & RIPPLE, R. (1985). Adolescent divergent thinking: a cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 15, 95104. KASTIKA, E. (2001). Creativity in Argentina: business organizations and psychology. In M.I. STEIN (Ed.) Creativitys Global Correspondents2001. Delray Beach, FL: Winslow Press. KHALEEFA, O.H., ERDOS, G. & ASHRIA, I.H. (1996a). Gender and creativity in an Afro-Arab culture: the case of Sudan. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30(1), 5260. KHALEEFA, O.H., ERDOS, G. & ASHRIA, I.H. (1996b). Creativity in an indigenous Afro-Arab Islamic culture: the case of Sudan. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30(4), 268282. KHALEEFA, O.H., ERDOS, G. & ASHRIA, I.H. (1997). Traditional education and creativity in an AfroArab culture: the case of Sudan. Journal of Creative Behavior, 31(3), 201211. KUO, Y.Y. (1996). Taoistic psychology of creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30(3), 197212. LAM, M.O. (1996). Conceptions of an ideal pupil and a creative pupil among primary school teachers using different teaching approaches in Hong Kong, unpublished masters thesis, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. LIM, W. & PLUCKER, J.A. (2001). Creativity through a lens of social responsibility: implicit theories of creativity with Korean samples. Journal of Creative Behavior, 35(2), 115130. LIN, M.H. & CHU, C.P. (1975). A revision of Torrance Test of Creative Thinking. The Verbal Form. Psychological Testing, 22, 8087 (in Chinese). LIU, I.M. (1990). Chinese cognition. In M.H. BOND (Ed.) The Psychology of the Chinese People. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. LIU, P.Z., WANG, Z.X. & LIU, C.C. (1997). Beijing Hua Luogeng School: a cradle for gifted children. In J. CHAN, R. LI & J. SPINKS (Eds) Maximizing Potential: lengthening and strengthening our stride, Proceedings of the 11th World Conference on Gifted and Talented Children. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, Social Sciences Research Centre. LUBART, T.I. (1990). Creativity and cross-cultural variation. International Journal of Psychology, 25, 3959. LUBART, T.I. (1999). Creativity across cultures. In R.J. STERNBERG (Ed.) Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. LUBART, T.I. & STERNBERG, R.J. (1988). Creativity: the individual, the systems, the approach. Creativity Research Journal, 1, 6367. LUBART, T.I. & STERNBERG, R.J. (1998). Creativity across time and place: life span and cross-cultural perspective. High Ability Studies, 9, 5974. LUDWIG, A.M. (1992). Culture and creativity. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 46(3), 454469. MARI, S.K. & KARAYANNI, M. (1983). Creativity in Arab culture: two decades of research. Journal of Creative Behavior, 16(4), 227238. MONTGOMERY, D., BULL, K.S. & BALOCHE, L. (1993). Characteristics of the creative person. American Behavioral Scientist, 37(1), 6878. MONTUORI, A. & PURSER, R.E. (1995). Deconstructing the lone genius myth: toward a contextual view of creativity. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 35(3), 69112. NG, A.K. (2001). Why Asians Are Less Creative Than Westerners. Singapore: Prentice Hall. ONER, B. (2000). Innovation and adaptation in a Turkish sample: a preliminary study. The Journal of Psychology, 134, 671676. RAINA, M.K., KUMAR, G. & RAINA, V.K. (1980). A cross-cultural study of parental perception of the ideal child. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 5(4), 234241. RUDOWICZ, E. & HUI, A. (1996). Creativity and a creative person: Hong Kong perspective. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 5(2), 511. RUDOWICZ, E. & HUI, A. (1997). The creative personality: Hong Kong perspective. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12(1), 139157. RUDOWICZ, E. & HUI, A. (1998). Hong Kong Chinese peoples views of creativity. Gifted Education International, 13(2), 159174. RUDOWICZ, E. & YUE, X.D. (2000) Concepts of creativity: similarities and differences among Mainland, Hong Kong, and Taiwanese Chinese. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 34(3), 175192.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

Creativity and Culture 289

RUDOWICZ, E., KITTO, J. & LOK, D. (1994). Creativity and Chinese socialization practices: a study of Hong Kong primary school children. The Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 3(1), 48. RUDOWICZ, E., LOK, D. & KITTO, J. (1995). Use of the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking for Hong Kong primary school children. The International Journal of Psychology, 30(4), 417430. RUNCO, M.A. (1989). Parents and teachers ratings of the creativity in children. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4(1), 7383. RUNCO, M.A. (1990). Implicit theories and ideational creativity. In M.A. RUNCO & R.S. ALBERT (Eds) Theories of Creativity. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. RUNCO, M.A. & BAHLEDA, M.D. (1987). Implicit theories of artistic, scientic and everyday creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 20, 9398. RUNCO, M.A., JOHNSON, D.J. & BEAR, P.K. (1993). Parents and teachers implicit theories of childrens creativity. Child Study Journal, 23(2), 91113. SAARILAHTI, M., CRAMOND, B. & SIEPPI, H. (1999). Is creativity nurtured in Finnish classrooms? Childhood Education, 75(6), 326331. SAEKI, N., FAN, X. & DUSEN, L.V. (2001). A comparative study of creative thinking of American and Japanese college students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 35(1), 2436. SCOTT, C.L. (1999). Teachers biases toward creative children. Creativity Research Journal, 12(4), 321328. SIMONTON, D.K. (1984). Genius, Creativity and Leadership: historiometric studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. SIMONTON, D.K. (1988). Creativity, leadership, and chance. In R.J. STERNBERG (Ed.) The Nature of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. SIMONTON, D.K. (1991). Emergence and realization of genius: the lives and works of 120 classical composers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 829840. SIMONTON, D.K. (1996). Individual genius and cultural congurations: the case of Japanese civilization. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 354375. SIMONTON, D.K. (1998). Achieved eminence in minority and majority cultures: convergence versus divergence in the assessments of 294 African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 804817. SIMONTON, D.K. (2000). Creativity. Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55(1), 151158. SINGH, R.P. (1987). Parental perception about creative children. The Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 12(1), 3942. SMITH, C.D. & WRIGHT, L. (2000). Perceptions of genius: Einstein, lesser mortals and shooting stars. Journal of Creative Behavior, 34(3), 151164. STEIN, M.I. (1953). Creativity and culture. The Journal of Psychology, 36, 311322. STERNBERG, R.J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607627. STERNBERG, R J. (1988). A three-faced model of creativity. In R.J. STERNBERG (Ed.) The Nature of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. STERNBERG, R.J. & LUBART, T.I. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its development. Human Development, 34(1), 131. TORRANCE, E.P. (1981). Cross-cultural studies of creative development in seven selected societies. In J.C. GOWAN, J. KHATENA & E.P. TORRANCE (Eds) Creativity. Its educational implications. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing. TORRANCE, E.P. (1988). The nature of creativity as manifested in testing. In R.J. STERNBERG (Ed.) The Nature of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. WEINER, R.P. (2000). Creativity and Beyond. Cultures, values, and change. New York: State University of New York Press. WELCHSLER, S.M. & MARTINEZ, A.M. (2001). Creativity in Latin America: a cross-cultural perspective from Brazil and Cuba. In M.I. STEIN, (Ed.) Creativitys Global Correspondents2001. Delray Beach, FL: Winslow Press. WESTBY, E.L. & DAWSON, V.L. (1995). Creativity: asset or burden in the classroom? Creativity Research Journal, 8(1), 110.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011

290 E. Rudowicz
WILCOX, B. & MORENO, M.V. (1999). Turning points in Mexico. Childhood Education, 75(6), 359362. WONDER, J. & BLAKE, J. (1992). Creativity East and West: intuition vs. logic? Journal of Creative Behavior, 26(3), 172185. WU, W.T. (1996). Many faces of creativity. In S. CHO, J.H. MOON & J.O. PARK (Eds) Selected Proceedings of the 3rd Asia-Pacic Conference on Giftedness. Seoul, Korea. YUE, X.D. & RUDOWICZ, E. (2002) The most creative Chinese minds as perceived by university students. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 36(2), 88104.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 04:30 08 November 2011