Sternberg's Facets of Creativity

Robert Sternberg laid out several “facets of creativity” in a 2006 article he wrote summarizing 25 years of interest and study on the subject of creativity.

1) Intellectual Abilities are necessary, according to Sternberg (2006) with three particular skills being key to creativity. First, the ability to see problems in novel ways, or what Getzels (1964) and Csikszenthmihalyi (1994) call problem finding. This synthesis requires the ability to move beyond predictable thinking and look at numerous options simultaneously. Another key intellectual ability is key to creativity is the capacity to look analytically at various ideas and determine which are going to be valuable or useful. Finally, what Sternberg refers to as “practical-contextual ability” (2006), the capacity to be aware of the value of one’s pursuits and convince others of this value. It is crucial that an individual have all three of these skills so that one can come up with new ideas, analyze them to see which are worthwhile and then convince others of their value. Any one of the skills would be limited without the others.

2) Knowledge is another of the key facets of creativity defined by Sternberg (2006). The idea here is that one must have a sufficient amount of knowledge to come up with novel ideas and solutions. Sternberg also stresses the fact that one must not let one’s knowledge limit the ability to think freely.

3) Thinking styles are important to creativity. In particular, the legislative style (Sternberg, 2006), wherein one decides and prefers to think in new ways.

4) Personality is a factor that comes up time and time again in creativity research. There are many different ideas about what kinds of personalities tend toward creativity. Sternberg discusses a few attributes which foster creativity. Self-efficacy, risk taking, a tolerance for ambiguity, and desire to overcome challenges. It is also important that one be comfortable being unconventional as creative ideas are often not popular as they are initially being developed.

5) Motivation is another aspect of creativity that comes up as the subject of numerous empirical studies and theoretical discussions. Sternberg suggests, as others have confirmed (Csikszentmihalyi, 1994; Amabile, 1985). that intrinsic motivation, wherein creative acts are the motivation for work rather than external rewards, is fundamental to creative functioning.

6) Environment is important to creativity because an internal tendency or aptitude requires a supportive arena in which to display new ideas. Without this facet, Sternberg (2006) suggests, the individual might never display creativity.

7) The final facet of creativity that Sternberg stresses is the confluence of the elements listed above. The interplay of these various elements as well as the levels of each an individual possesses are key to creative functioning.



Amabile, T.M. (1985). Motivation and creativity: Effects of motivational orientation on creative writers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 48(2), 393-399.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1994). The domain of creativity, in Feldman, D.H., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Gardner, H. (Eds),Changing the World: A Framework of the Study of Creativity, Praeger, Westport, CT, pp.135-58.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Getzels, J.W. (1971). Discovery-oriented behavior and the originality of creative products: A study with artists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 19(1), 47-52.

Getzels, J.W. (1964). Creative thinking, problem-solving, and instruction. In E.R. Hilgard (Ed.), Theories of learning and instruction (63rd Yearbook of the national Society for the Study of Education, pp. 240-267). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Sternberg, R.J. (2006). Creating a vision of creativity: The first 25 years. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, S (1), 2-12.

Defining Creativity

Creativity, when viewed as a psychological process, is defined as the generation of something novel that appropriately solves a problem or responds to a challenge. There are three important elements in this definition: 1) the creation, generation or production of something (idea, object, treaty, etc.) 2) novel, new, innovative, unique or original that 3) serves a purpose, solves a problem, or neutralizes dissonance. (Guilford, 1950; Sternberg, 2006; Flora, 2009; Sternberg & Lubart, 1996; Runco, 2008; Maddux & Galinsky, 2009; Runco, 2007; Ivcevic, 2009; Morris, 2006; Hegarty, 2009)

It is important to define creativity because I have found that what an artist thinks of as creativity: a spontaneous, organic, originative process, tends to focus on action, whereas many theorists view creativity in terms of the product that is created as a result of this creative action. I am not suggesting that that artists do not value the product of creativity, but, the process of being creative, for many artists, is enormously rewarding, and is a necessary component of living a fulfilling life, with the product being a part of that process, completely inseparable, but still just one aspect of the whole. The process of being creative, frequently thought of in terms of the production of art and laid out in countless models by researchers, is made up of several components, which, for artists, may occur in a very instinctual, non-linear manner. Artist do not follow conceptual models, these models have instead been developed to try to understand the artistic process, which for most artists, functions with uncanny precision, never requiring definition. The arts are not the only disciplines where creativity exists, they are just the most obvious.

So why study creativity? If is it instinctual to creative individuals, should we assume that those who are not instinctually creative are not meant to be? Or are we all instinctively creative, falling victim to life situations and educational environments that stomp this innate ability out with 12+ years of rote memorization and standardized tests? These are questions that lead to the larger question that will be addressed here: is there any point to studying creativity?

The answer is yes. I intend to demonstrate here how creativity can first be understood (definitions and conceptual models), and then follow with studies demonstrating that it can also be cultivated and trained in individuals. The consumer value is pretty easy to illustrate: look around you. All of the products you use, books you enjoy, films you view, all of the tools that help you complete tasks, each one is the product of creative innovation. These things clearly benefit society in concrete ways, but there are other deeper ways in which creativity can benefit society. Practicing creativity can be a way of building self-efficacy, it helps the individual learn to make qualitative judgments about works and gain confidence in their own ability to make appropriate choices. It teaches flexibility. The creative process also teaches individuals to observe and contemplate. This blog will discuss many of these gains as it reviews research that demonstrates them.


Flora, C. (2009). Everyday creativity. Psychology Today. Nov/Dec, 63-73.

Giulford, J.P., (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444-454.

Hegarty, C.B., (2009). The value and meaning of creative leisure. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(1), 10-13.

Ivcevic, Z., (2009). Creativity map: Toward the next generation of theories of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(1), 17-21.

Kelly, R. & Leggo, C. (2008). Creative expression, creative education: creativity as a primary rationale for education. Calgary, AB: Detselig Enterprises Ltd.

Maddux, W. W., & Galinski, A. D., (2009). Cultural borders and mental barriers: The relationship between living abroad and creativity. The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1047-1061.

Morris, W. (2006). Creativity: Its place in education.

Runco, M.A. (2007). To understand is to create: An epistemological perspective on human nature and personal creativity. In Richards, R.A. (Ed.), Everyday creativity and new views of human nature : psychological, social, and spiritual perspectives (91-107). Washington: American Psychological Association.

Sternberg, R.J., & Dess, N.K. (2001). Creativity for the new millennium. American Psychologist, 56(4), 332.

Sternberg, R.J. (2006). Creating a vision of creativity: The first 25 years. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, S (1), 2-12.

Sternberg, R.J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51(7), 677-688.

Wallas, Graham. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Eisner’s 6 Modes of Artistic Thinking

In his an insightful essay, Elliot W. Eisner, of Stanford University discussed six “artistically rooted qualitative forms of intelligence” which could be effectively developed within educational practice in a effort to better prepare students to be effective, articulate, curious and motivated learners.

His assertion that we are now living in an educational industrial age where the focus is on ends rather than means, achievement instead of investigation and test scores above problem-solving skills, is not a new one, what is noteworthy is the way that Eisner proposes we tackle the problem. His views may seem revolutionary, as what he proposes is nothing short of a complete overhaul of the Western educational system, but, frankly, his reasoning is faultless. He suggest this dramatic shift based on the simple fact that we do not live in a world where there are “single correct answers to questions or clear-cut solutions to problems” and therefore, it makes no sense to educate our children in this manner. In fact, doing so is doing a tremendous disservice to them, as future world leaders, they ought to be prepared to deal with the demands of modern living in an applicable and authentic manner that will enable them to find accurate and creative solutions to unexpected problems, as they arise. He does not specifically mention it, but this kind of artistically rooted thinking will also enable future generations to realize where potential problems may arise and take preventative steps, thus avoiding problems. In short, Eisner suggests that education ought to prepare students for the world they will face. That world is not one populated with true or false questions, but rather, it is a world in which they will be continually required to make judgments in situations that are less than clear cut, and effectively makes sense conflicting information, It follows that we ought to be promoting the kinds of skills that will assist them in making sense of ambiguous challenges and proceeding confidently with effective, appropriate solutions. So simple and accurate it is almost silly.

The following are Eisner’s 6 modes of artistic thinking

1) The ability to create a qualitative relationship that serves a purpose
(Eisner also calls this qualitative intelligence)
What Eisner means is that an artist creates a composition from an almost limitless array of elements. What the artist does as he/she combines elements is essentially build relationships, which is important because the artist must then make judgments about those relationships. This practice of making judgments is done intuitively (or somatically), without specific rules (as in math), it therefore teaches the artist to tune into and trust his/her self. The process of creation requires continued appraisal and the practitioner gains confidence in their ability to make qualitative judgments about work in an ongoing basis. Another benefit of this kind of intelligence is that through the process of continued assessment, one learns to pay attention to details and awareness is honed. There is, as Eisner states, a refinement of perception.

2) Expression of aims
Eisner looks at the fact that the Western model is comprised of a cycle which begins with conceptualizing the goal, proceeds through formulation and implementation of the goals and ends with the evaluation of the results. This cycle leaves no room for what he calls “flexible purposing” or a process that capitalizes on the discoveries that come throughout the cycle or process of realizing a goal. Inherent in this mode of thinking is uncertainty, and possibility. It employs the awareness gained in the prior thinking mode as awareness is required to recognize emerging opportunities. This also engenders a greater sense of curiosity and flexibility though exploration.

3) The relationship between form and content
The basic idea here is that the way a thing is constructed is inseparable from what is said. How something is expressed, the medium, is so much a part of it that it is not possible to tease apart the aspects of the relationship. In fact, the content is altered by the form with which it is expressed until the two become one thing. As Eisner says, “the form we use to display data shapes its meaning.”

4) Not everything knowable can be articulated in propositional form
(Our cognition is not limited by our ability to express what is known or understood)
Science demonstrates that we can know a thing before we have the language to express it. The artist also knows that this is true. Exploration leads to new ideas which in turn, lead to new ways of expressing what is understood.


5) There is a relationship between thinking and the material in which the one works
The arts teach individuals to work within a medium considering what Eisner labels “constraints and affordances”. The idea here is that the limitations of a specific form are part of the work of creating and because of this, artists must bend thinking and shape work within the medium. This concept, like the content/form point discussed earlier demonstrates the fact that the two things are indivisible, as the opportunities and limitations of the form help to shape the content.

6) The authentic challenge of art creates intrinsic motivation
In the arts, the process and challenge of creating work provides one with a sense of satisfaction and therefore ensures the continuation of the practice of art making. Motivation is a major challenge for educators so this factor is one that is especially interesting. Creating an educational environment wherein the satisfaction of the work (in any subject) was sufficient to beget future motivation would be beneficial and welcome.

Eisner, E.W., (2002). What can education learn from the arts about the practice of education? Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(1), 4-16.