Opinion of module .4.2
ecl569
alice_benningfield_.docxAlice Benningfield
1 posts
Re:Module 4 DQ 2
The cognitive and affective aspects of creativity may be its most important components. Which of these aspects is likely to have the greater effect on the other? Why?
According to Meador (1997), the dominant factors that determine creativity are process, store, retrieve, and retain. Cognitive creativity is the ability to think or behave in a novel and useful manner, as well as be able to retain the ability (Meador, 1997). It is the ability to think about the present situation and evaluate it to determine what the outcome may be. Remembering the past events occurs in ways like orientation, attention and decision making and being able to evaluate so as to make a future decision that is desirable (Meador, 1997).
Affective creativity is the ability to first recognize the emotional attachment one has to the problem and the ways that can best be used to solve a problem (Gruber, 1962). Affective creativity has demonstrated dominance over cognitive creativity in today’s problem solving skills where one first analyses the emotional attachment they have on an issue before making a decision. According to Whiting (1998), most people tend to consider the advantages they will get from solving a particular issue rather than the general good of the decision. In taking an example from a business situation where a manager has to make a certain decision, they first consider how the decision will benefit them either in terms of money or power before deciding to effect it. Emotional satisfaction supersedes most powers in the human desire to meet their needs. A decision will always be gauged emotionally before first before considering the overall effect of the decision (Whiting, 1998).
Gruber, H. E., (1962). Contemporary approaches to creative thinking: A symposium held at the University of Colorado. New York: Atherton Press.
Meador, K. S. (1997). Creative thinking and problem solving for young learners. Englewood, CO: Teacher Ideas Press.
Whiting, C. S. (1998). Creative thinking. New York: Reinhold.
1 posts
Re:Module 4 DQ 1
Human problem solving covers a wide range of time scales. Present a real-world situation in which the decision making is time-constrained. Would it best be solved using a heuristic or algorithmic problem-solving method? Why? Would the Zeigarnik effect lead one to creatively develop more efficient approaches to learning? Why or why not?
We constantly experience situations that place time constraints on decision making. As we are in the Christmas season, many of us are faced with the question "when do I go Christmas shopping?". This time constrained decision requires many variables to be addressed before we can come to the best decision. Personally, I dread going to the mall or other places where there will be large crowds of people but as we know it is now getting around this during this time or year. This, along with the available time we have between scheduled event work, school, and other responsibilities we have to decide when to partake in this activity. If we wait to late we take the risk of not getting things that we want. This would be a heuristic problem solving method. Here we have information that we can use to help us make this decision which makes use of heuristics a part of this process. People use past experience to guide present behavior, they often use shortcuts to help them reach conclusions rapidly. These shortcuts are called heuristics. (Goldstein, 2011). Algorithmic problem-solving is usually utilized in situations that require more complex problems. With heuristics the conclusions that we come to are not always precise, but with algorithmic problem solving the conclusions we come to are generally more precise.
The Zeigarnik effect refers to the idea that we experience intrusive thoughts come to our minds. It is defined as the tendency to experience intrusive thoughts about an objective that was once pursued and left incomplete (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). This is something that we as humans experience often. As doctoral students there are many subjects that are considered "incomplete" and constantly intrude our minds. I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that this happens frequently. I feel that is effect does lead one to create and develop more efficient approaches to learning because of the internal freedom we have to address these thoughts in any manner we would like. As opposed to readings or hearing the words of someone else, with the Zeigarnik effect we are able to think of information freely and this produces alternative learning techniques.
Reference
Baumeister, R.F., & Bushman, B.J., (2008). Social Psychology and Human Nature. United States: Thompson Wadsworth.
Goldstein, E. B. (2011). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research, and everyday experience (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
