need be postulated (Perkins, 1981; Weisberg, 2006). This is
sometimes referred to as the expertise view of creativity
because it stresses the extent to which creative acts draw
upon familiarity with a particular domain of knowledge.
Thus this view in particular is associated with the notion
that creativity is highly domain-specific; expertise in one
domain is not viewed as enhancing creativity in another
domain. The expertise view is also associated with the
notion that the creative process result in products that are
largely derivative, or reproductive (as Weisberg puts it), as
opposed to genuinely new, or productive.
The Darwinian Theory of Creativity
Another approach to modeling the creative process involves
framing it in Darwinian terms. While some philosophers
describe the growth of knowledge as Darwinian merely in
the sense that conjectures must be refutable, i.e., able to be
selected against (Popper, 1963; Lorenz, 1971), Campbell
(1960) goes further, arguing that a stream of creative
thought is a Darwinian process. The basic idea is that we
generate new ideas through ‘blind’ variation and selective
retention (abbreviated BVSR): ‘mutate’ the current thought
a multitude of different ways, select the fittest variant(s),
and repeat this process until a satisfactory idea results. The
variants are ‘blind’ in the sense that the creator has no
subjective certainty about whether they are a step in the
direction of the final creative product.
Currently the Darwinian view of creativity is most closely
associated with Simonton (1998, 1999a,b, 2007a,b), who
views creativity as essentially a trial-and-error process in
which the most promising ‘blindly’ generated ideational
variants are selected for development into a finished
product. It should be noted that the endeavor to apply
natural selection to creative thought is not without critics
(Dasgupta, 2004; Eysenck, 1995; Gabora, 2005, 2007;
Sternberg, 1998, Thagard, 1980; Weisberg, 2000, Weisberg
& Haas, 2007). Nevertheless, the development of a creative
idea can be said to be evolutionary in the very general sense
that it exhibits descent with adaptive modification.
The Honing Theory of Creativity
Central to the honing theory of creativity is the notion of a
worldview, by which we mean one’s internal model of the
world, as well as one’s values, attitudes, predispositions,
and habitual patterns of response (Gabora, 2000, 2004,
2008, Gabora & Aerts, 2009). Honing theory posits that
creativity arises due to the self-organizing, self-mending
nature of a worldview, and that it is by way of the creative
process the individual hones (and re-hones) an integrated
worldview. Honing theory places equal emphasis on the
externally visible creative outcome and the internal
cognitive restructuring brought about by the creative
process. Indeed one factor that distinguishes it from other
theories of creativity is that it focuses on not just
restructuring as it pertains to the conception of the task, but
as it pertains to the worldview as a whole. When faced with
a creatively demanding task, there is an interaction between
the conception of the task and the worldview. The
conception of the task changes through interaction with the
worldview, and the worldview changes through interaction
with the task. This interaction is reiterated until the task is
complete, at which point not only is the task conceived of
differently, but the worldview is subtly or drastically
transformed. Thus one distinguishing feature of honing
theory is that the creative process reflects the natural
tendency of a worldview to seek integration or consistency
amongst both its pre-existing and newly-added components,
whether they be ideas, attitudes, or bits of knowledge; it
mends itself as does a body when injured.
The Recognizability of Creative Style
Theories of creativity based on heuristic search, the
acquisition of expertise, or chance, random processes, such
as BVSR, give no reason to expect that the act of creation
leads to a clearer or more integrated sense of self, or that the
works of a particular creator should exhibit a unique and
recognizable style. This is particularly so if, as is often
claimed, creativity is strongly domain-specific (Baer, 1998;
Sawyer, 2006; Weisberg, 2006). If creativity is limited to a
particular domain then why should it result in a global sense
of wellbeing or integration?
Claims about the domain-specificity of creativity are
based largely on findings that correlations amongst
alternative measures of creativity are small, and expertise or
eminence with respect to one creative endeavor is rarely
associated with expertise or eminence with respect to
another (e.g. Getzels & Jackson, 1962). Thus, for example,
creative scientists rarely become famous artists or dancers.
The focus of these studies is squarely on expertise or
eminence as evidence of creative achievement. But what if
creative achievement is measured not by expertise or
eminence but by having found a way to express what is
genuine and unique about us through whatever media we
have at a given time at our disposal? One might expect that
an artist’s or scientist’s personal style comes through in how
he or she prepares a meal or decorates a room, what
creativity researchers refer to as little-c (Richards, Kinney,
Benet, & Merzel, 1988) or mini-c (Beghetto & Kaufman,
2007) creative activities. Findings of domain-specificity in
creativity may have more to do with the fact that we focus
on creative achievement at a level that takes a decade or
more to obtain (Simonton, 2007), as opposed to looking for
evidence that creative potential and personal style
transcends particular domains. In other words, looking for
evidence of exceptional creativity in multiple domains is not
the only or necessarily even the best way to address the
question of whether creativity is domain-specific. Another
way is to look for evidence that an individual exhibits a
creative style in one domain that also ‘comes through’ when
engaged in creative activities in other domains.
Although the phenomenon of recognizable style or voice
is not predicted by the view that creativity is a matter of
heuristic search, expertise, or Darwinian selection, it is
predicted by the honing theory of creativity. We have seen