本研究以雙重過程理論為框架，透過兩階段視覺刺激任務，探討五大人格特質對創意轉化歷程之影響。研究邀請 44 名工業設計研究生參與，第一階段以抽象視覺刺激誘發以系統一（System 1）為主導之自由聯想，第二階段以具象產品刺激引導以系統二（System 2）為主導之具體化歷程，並以創意轉化指標量化兩階段之創意變化，採 K-means 集群分析將受試者分為創意提升群、創意中間群與創意下降群，輔以一致性評估技術（CAT）評分及回顧訪談。結果顯示：其一，約四分之三受試者在兩階段間出現明顯位移，顯示創造力並非跨任務穩定之能力，而是隨認知情境變動之歷程；其二，創意轉化類型顯著影響第二階段之新穎性與詳細性，對適用性則無顯著影響；其三，神經質為組間差異最明顯之特質，創意下降群顯著高於其他兩群，嚴謹性亦達顯著，創意提升群顯著高於下降群，開放性則未達顯著；其四，探索性分析觀察到嚴謹性與神經質呈跨階段反向模式——嚴謹性在系統一與創意生成呈負相關、在創意轉化上呈正相關，神經質方向則完全相反。研究結果初步顯示，人格特質對創造力之影響具階段性差異，情緒穩定性（低神經質）為與創意轉化關聯最密切之人格因素。相關發現屬有待驗證之初步觀察，建議未來研究擴大樣本並採縱貫設計進一步檢驗。

Grounded in Dual-Process Theory, this study employed a two-stage visual stimulus task to investigate the influence of the Big Five personality traits on the creative transformation process. Forty-four industrial design graduate students participated. In Stage 1, abstract visual stimuli were used to elicit System 1–dominated free association; in Stage 2, concrete product stimuli guided System 2–dominated concretization. A creative transformation index was used to quantify creative change across the two stages, and K-means cluster analysis classified participants into a Creative Increase Cluster, a Creative Middle Cluster, and a Creative Decrease Cluster, supplemented by the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) for sketch rating and retrospective interviews. The findings are as follows. First, about three-quarters of participants showed pronounced shifts across the two stages, indicating that creativity is not a stable, cross-task ability but a process that varies with cognitive context. Second, creative transformation type significantly affected Stage 2 originality and elaboration, but not usefulness. Third, Neuroticism showed the clearest between-group difference, with the Creative Decrease Cluster scoring significantly higher than the other two clusters; Conscientiousness was also significant, with the Creative Increase Cluster scoring significantly higher than the Decrease Cluster, while Openness was not significant. Fourth, exploratory analysis revealed a cross-stage reversal pattern between Conscientiousness and Neuroticism—Conscientiousness was negatively correlated with creative generation in System 1 but positively correlated with creative transformation, whereas Neuroticism showed the opposite pattern. These findings preliminarily suggest that the influence of personality traits on creativity is stage-dependent, with emotional stability (low Neuroticism) being the trait most closely associated with creative transformation. As these are preliminary and exploratory observations, future research with larger samples and longitudinal designs is recommended for verification.

Chinese References
蔡冠深 (1984)。創造力的心理學研究。心理學報，16(4), 23-34。
高其華 (1992)。關於創造性思維的理論探討。中國科學技術大學學報， 22(1), 15-21。
劉珈妤、林緯倫、蔡秉勳 (2016)。對的風格遇上對的人，謂之創意－人格特質、認知風格與兩類創造力之關係探討。教育心理學報，48(2)，211-228。
English References
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. Springer-Verlag.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Westview Press.
Barron, F., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32(1), 439–476. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.002255
Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Silvia, P. J., & Schacter, D. L. (2016). Creative cognition and brain network dynamics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(2), 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.004
Benedek, M., & Fink, A. (2019). Toward a neurocognitive framework of creative cognition. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 27, 116–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.11.002
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1985). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2
Cash, P., & Maier, A. (2021). Understanding representation: Contrasting gesture and sketching in design through dual-process theory. Design Studies, 73, 100992.
De Dreu, C. K. W., Baas, M., & Nijstad, B. A. (2008). Hedonic tone and activation level in the mood-creativity link: Toward a dual pathway to creativity model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(5), 739–756. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.739
Diedrich, J., Benedek, M., Jauk, E., & Neubauer, A. C. (2018). Are creative ideas novel and useful? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(1), 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000125
Evans, J. St. B. T., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460685
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5
Gabora, L., & Kaufman, S. B. (2010). Evolutionary approaches to creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 279–300). Cambridge University Press.
Glăveanu, V. P. (2014). Distributed creativity: Thinking outside the box of the creative individual. Springer.
Grajzel, K., Acar, S., & Singer, G. (2023). The Big Five and divergent thinking: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 214, 112338.
Gronchi, G., Gavazzi, G., Viggiano, M. P., & Giovannelli, F. (2024). Dual-process theory of thought and inhibitory control: An ALE meta-analysis. Brain Sciences, 14(1), 101.
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. McGraw-Hill.
Ivcevic, Z., & Brackett, M. A. (2015). Predicting creativity: Interactive effects of openness to experience and emotion regulation ability. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(4), 480–487. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000037
Karwowski, M., & Lebuda, I. (2016). The Big Five and creative self-beliefs. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10(4), 434–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000089
Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (2007). Constellations of creativity: A review of personality and creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.1.1.3
Kelly, N., & Gero, J. S. (2021). Design thinking and computational thinking: A dual process model for addressing design problems. Design Science, 7, e8.
Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., Schmeck, R. R., & Avdic, A. (2011). The Big Five personality traits, learning styles, and academic achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(4), 472–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.04.019
Nijstad, B. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., Rietzschel, E. F., & Baas, M. (2010). The dual pathway to creativity model: Creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence. European Review of Social Psychology, 21(1), 34–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463281003765323
OECD (2024). PISA 2022 Results (Volume III): Creative Minds, Creative Schools. OECD Publishing.
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x
Runco, M. A. (2004). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 657–687. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141502
Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Silvia, P. J., Nusbaum, E. C., Berg, C., Martin, C., & O’Connor, A. (2009). Openness to experience, plasticity, and creativity. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(6), 1087–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.04.015
Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (1995). The creative cognition approach. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29(4), 254–264. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1995.tb01399.x
Stanovich, K. E. (2004). The robot’s rebellion: Finding meaning in the age of Darwin. University of Chicago Press.
Torrance, E. P. (1966). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-technical manual. Personnel Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood (M. E. Sharpe, Trans.). Taylor & Francis. (Original work published 1930)
Wigert, B. G., Murugavel, V. R., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2022). The utility of divergent and convergent thinking in the problem construction process during creative problem-solving. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts.