IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v101y2011i3p227-32.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal Learning Patterns for Creativity Generation in a Field

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan S. Feinstein

Abstract

I present a model of optimal learning for creativity generation in a field. The field is defined as a knowledge structure. A creative contribution is based on combining two previously unconnected elements, generating a new element. Individuals may possess private information/intuition about new combinations. Individuals contribute the maximum creative contribution they are able to produce based on the set of elements they have learned. In equilibrium individuals learn different elements, with some degree of overlap, effectively pursuing distinct creative interests. The model illustrates a general approach for analyzing the creative development of fields and, in a broader sense, cultural innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan S. Feinstein, 2011. "Optimal Learning Patterns for Creativity Generation in a Field," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 227-232, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:101:y:2011:i:3:p:227-32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.101.3.227
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philippe Aghion & Mathias Dewatripont & Jeremy C. Stein, 2008. "Academic freedom, private‐sector focus, and the process of innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 617-635, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karol Jan Borowiecki & Caterina Adelaide Mauri, 2024. "Originality, influence, and success: a model of creative style," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 48(2), pages 221-258, June.
    2. Glenn Dutcher & Cortney S. Rodet, 2022. "Which two heads are better than one? Uncovering the positive effects of diversity in creative teams," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 884-897, November.
    3. Jonathan S. Feinstein, 2017. "The Creative Development of Fields: Learning, Creativity, Paths, Implications," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 8(1), pages 23-62, March.
    4. Cortney S. Rodet, 2021. "The wellspring of creativity? Using divergent‐thinking tasks to understand creative characteristics," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(6), pages 1435-1453, September.
    5. Clancy, Matthew S., 2018. "Inventing by combining pre-existing technologies: Patent evidence on learning and fishing out," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 252-265.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ozgur Aydogmus & Erkan Gürpinar, 2022. "Science, Technology and Institutional Change in Knowledge Production: An Evolutionary Game Theoretic Framework," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1163-1188, December.
    2. Galasso, Alberto & Schankerman, Mark, 2013. "Patents and Cumulative Innovation:Causal Evidence from the Courts," IIR Working Paper 13-16, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    3. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Incentives and invention in universities," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(2), pages 403-433, June.
    4. Braguinsky, Serguey & Honjo, Yuji & 本庄, 裕司 & Nagaoka, Sadao & 長岡, 貞男 & Nakamura, Kenta & 中村, 健太, 2010. "Science-Based Business : Knowledge Capital or Entrepreneurial Ability? : Theory and Evidence from a Survey of Biotechnology Start-ups," IIR Working Paper 10-05, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    5. Hussinger, Katrin & Pellens, Maikel, 2019. "Guilt by association: How scientific misconduct harms prior collaborators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 516-530.
    6. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2014. "Flying the nest: How the home department shapes researchers’ career paths," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201409, University of Turin.
    7. Karol Jan Borowiecki, 2022. "Good Reverberations? Teacher Influence in Music Composition since 1450," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(4), pages 991-1090.
    8. Cornelia Lawson, 2016. "Putting the Region First: Knowledge Transfer at Universities in Greater Manchester," International Studies in Entrepreneurship, in: David Audretsch & Erik Lehmann & Michele Meoli & Silvio Vismara (ed.), University Evolution, Entrepreneurial Activity and Regional Competitiveness, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 303-325, Springer.
    9. Yuchen Zhang & Wei Yang, 2022. "Breakthrough invention and problem complexity: Evidence from a quasi‐experiment," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2510-2544, December.
    10. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    11. Berggren, Niclas & Bjørnskov , Christian, 2024. "Economic Freedom and Academic Freedom across Nations," Working Paper Series 1486, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    12. De Fraja, Gianni, 2011. "A Theoretical Analysis of Public Funding for Research," CEPR Discussion Papers 8442, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Quatraro, Francesco & Scandura, Alessandra, 2020. "Regional patterns of unrelated technological diversification: the role of academic inventors," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 202001, University of Turin.
    14. Heidi L. Williams, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from Health Care Markets," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 53-87.
    15. Jeffrey L. Furman & Florenta Teodoridis, 2020. "Automation, Research Technology, and Researchers’ Trajectories: Evidence from Computer Science and Electrical Engineering," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 330-354, March.
    16. Jeroen Content & Nicola Cortinovis & Koen Frenken & Jacob Jordaan, 2022. "The roles of KIBS and R&D in the industrial diversification of regions," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 68(1), pages 29-64, February.
    17. Llopis, Oscar & D'Este, Pablo & McKelvey, Maureen & Yegros, Alfredo, 2022. "Navigating multiple logics: Legitimacy and the quest for societal impact in science," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    18. Mukherjee, Arijit & Stern, Scott, 2009. "Disclosure or secrecy? The dynamics of Open Science," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 449-462, May.
    19. Bergemann, Dirk & Ottaviani, Marco, 2021. "Information Markets and Nonmarkets," CEPR Discussion Papers 16459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Jeon, Doh-Shin & Menicucci, Domenico, 2008. "Money, fame and the allocation of talent: Brain drain and the institution of science," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(3-4), pages 558-581, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:101:y:2011:i:3:p:227-32. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.