Cargando…

Scientific Creativity: Discovery and Invention as Combinatorial

Although scientific creativity has often been described as combinatorial, the description is usually insufficiently formulated to count as a precise scientific explanation. Therefore, the current article is devoted to elaborating a formalization defined by three combinatorial parameters: the initial...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Simonton, Dean Keith
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8419278/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34497566
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.721104
_version_ 1783748714738745344
author Simonton, Dean Keith
author_facet Simonton, Dean Keith
author_sort Simonton, Dean Keith
collection PubMed
description Although scientific creativity has often been described as combinatorial, the description is usually insufficiently formulated to count as a precise scientific explanation. Therefore, the current article is devoted to elaborating a formalization defined by three combinatorial parameters: the initial probability p, the final utility u, and the scientist’s prior knowledge of that utility v. These parameters then lead logically to an 8-fold typology involving two forms of expertise, two irrational combinations, and four “blind” combinations. One of the latter provides the basis for the definition of personal creativity as c=(1−p)u(1−v), that is, the multiplicative product of originality, utility, and surprise. This three-criterion definition then has six critical implications. Those implications lead to a discussion of various combinatorial processes and procedures that include a treatment of the No Free Lunch Theorems regarding optimization algorithms as well as the creativity-maximizing phenomena of mind wandering and serendipity. The article closes with a discussion of how scientific creativity differs from artistic creativity. Besides the obvious contrasts in the ideas entering the combinatorial processes and procedures, scientific combinations, products, and communities strikingly differ from those typical of the arts. These differences also imply contrasts in developmental experiences and personality characteristics. In sum, the formal combinatorial analysis enhances our understanding of scientific creativity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8419278
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84192782021-09-07 Scientific Creativity: Discovery and Invention as Combinatorial Simonton, Dean Keith Front Psychol Psychology Although scientific creativity has often been described as combinatorial, the description is usually insufficiently formulated to count as a precise scientific explanation. Therefore, the current article is devoted to elaborating a formalization defined by three combinatorial parameters: the initial probability p, the final utility u, and the scientist’s prior knowledge of that utility v. These parameters then lead logically to an 8-fold typology involving two forms of expertise, two irrational combinations, and four “blind” combinations. One of the latter provides the basis for the definition of personal creativity as c=(1−p)u(1−v), that is, the multiplicative product of originality, utility, and surprise. This three-criterion definition then has six critical implications. Those implications lead to a discussion of various combinatorial processes and procedures that include a treatment of the No Free Lunch Theorems regarding optimization algorithms as well as the creativity-maximizing phenomena of mind wandering and serendipity. The article closes with a discussion of how scientific creativity differs from artistic creativity. Besides the obvious contrasts in the ideas entering the combinatorial processes and procedures, scientific combinations, products, and communities strikingly differ from those typical of the arts. These differences also imply contrasts in developmental experiences and personality characteristics. In sum, the formal combinatorial analysis enhances our understanding of scientific creativity. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8419278/ /pubmed/34497566 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.721104 Text en Copyright © 2021 Simonton. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Simonton, Dean Keith
Scientific Creativity: Discovery and Invention as Combinatorial
title Scientific Creativity: Discovery and Invention as Combinatorial
title_full Scientific Creativity: Discovery and Invention as Combinatorial
title_fullStr Scientific Creativity: Discovery and Invention as Combinatorial
title_full_unstemmed Scientific Creativity: Discovery and Invention as Combinatorial
title_short Scientific Creativity: Discovery and Invention as Combinatorial
title_sort scientific creativity: discovery and invention as combinatorial
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8419278/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34497566
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.721104
work_keys_str_mv AT simontondeankeith scientificcreativitydiscoveryandinventionascombinatorial