創造力是人們應具備的核心能力，然而社會大眾認知不會將理工領域與創造力聯想在一起，反而常將藝術相關領域歸類在高創意族群，而技術創造力也是提升國家科技競爭力的關鍵，對於理工領域學生而言，創造力更是不可或缺的能力。本研究旨在探討大學之理工領域碩士學生之創造力概況進行初探，並使用Processing軟體與Leap Motion裝置創作視覺音樂互動藝術作品，藉由互動藝術體驗之美感經驗量測其對創造力之影響。
以南部某大學理工碩士生為研究對象，分別為理學院、工學院、電資學院，其中工學院兩個研究所科系，理學院、電資學院各一個研究所科系，共計70人。研究工具有陶倫斯創造力測驗成人適用精簡版(ATTA)進行前後測與參考張文璇(2011)研究所使用之學習偏好量表區分所屬之認知風格類型。使用描述性統計、單一樣本t檢定、成對樣本t檢定、單因子變異數分析(ANOVA)、皮爾森(Pearson)相關係數等統計方式進行資料之分析。
研究結果:
一、理工碩士生創造力為平均標準(創意指數CI)
二、不同性別的理工碩士生在創造力表現上無顯著差異
三、不同認知風格的理工碩士生在創造力表現上無顯著差異
四、不同研究所科系的理工碩士生在創造力表現上無顯著差異
五、不同學院的理工碩士生在創造力表現上無顯著差異
六、視覺音樂互動藝術作品對理工碩士生創造力表現上有顯著影響

Creativity is one of the core abilities that people should have. The public’s cognition doesn’t associate science and technology with creativity; instead, they usually classify art-related fields as high creativity group. Technology creativity is also a key to increase country’s competitive capability. For students in science and technology field, creativity is more necessary. This research is to discuss the creativity of master’s degree students in science and technology filed. By using the Processing Software and Leap Motion to create visual and music interactive art works, through the experience of interactive art and aesthetic sense to observe its effect on creativity.
The subjects are master’s degree students in College of Science, and College of Engineering and College of Electronical Engineering and Computer Science from a southern university. There two institutes in College of Science, one institute in College of Engineering and one institute in College of Electronical Engineering and Computer Science, 70 subjects in total. The research materials are Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults (ATTA) for pretest-posttest research design and the Study Preference Questionnaire (SPQ) used by Wen-Hsuan Chang (2011) to differentiate the cognitive styles. Using descriptive statistics, One-Sample t test, Paired-samples t test, One-Way ANOVA and Pearson Correlation etc. for statistical analysis.
Result:
1.The master of science and technology students' creativity is in average standard (Creative Index, CI)
2.Different genders of science and technology students at creativity makes no significant different.
3.Different cognitive styles of science and technology students at creativity makes no significant different.
4.Different institutes of science and technology students at creativity makes no significant.
5.Different colleges of science and technology students at creativity makes no significant.
6.Visual and music interactive art works make significant effect on science and technology students’ creativity performance.

一、西文部分
1.Bicer, A., Nite, S. B., Capraro, R. M., Barroso, L. R., Capraro, M. M., & Lee, Y. (2017, October). Moving from STEM to STEAM: The effects of informal STEM learning on students' creativity and problem solving skills with 3D printing. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
2.Kemppainen, A., Hein, G., & Manser, N. (2017, October). Does an open-ended design project increase creativity in engineering students?. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1-5). IEEE.
3.Oner, A. T., Nite, S. B., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2016). From STEM to STEAM: Students’ beliefs about the use of their creativity. The STEAM Journal, 2(2), 6.
4.Al-Fawadi, H. M. S. (2017). The role of Creativity and Talent in art education of School Students. مجلة كلية التربية الاساسية-الجامعة المستنصرية, 23(98), 23-34.
5.Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation.
6.Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait-names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological monographs, 47(1), i.
7.Alwi, A. (2012, June). Interactive effects between cognitive preferences and instructional strategies in museum learning experiences. In International Conference on e-Learning (p. 483). Academic Conferences International Limited.
8.Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of personality and social psychology, 45(2), 357.
9.Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in organizational behavior, 10(1), 123-167.
10.Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: The social psychology of creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview.
11.Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Hachette UK.
12.Ascott, R. (1966). Behaviourist art and cybernetic vision. Cybernetica, 9(4), 247.
13.Ascott, R. (2004). Planetary technoetics: Art, technology and consciousness. Leonardo, 37(2), 111-116.
14.Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view (Vol. 6). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
15.Baer, J. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 16-29.
16.Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2008). Gender differences in creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(2), 75-105.
17.Barr, N., Pennycook, G., Stolz, J. A., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015). Reasoned connections: A dual-process perspective on creative thought. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(1), 61-75.
18.Barron, F., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual review of psychology, 32(1), 439-476.
19.Blamires, M., & Peterson, A. (2014). Can creativity be assessed? Towards an evidence-informed framework for assessing and planning progress in creativity. Cambridge Journal of Education, 44(2), 147-162.
20.Bowers, K. S., Regehr, G., Balthazard, C., & Parker, K. (1990). Intuition in the context of discovery. Cognitive psychology, 22(1), 72-110.
21.Brkich, M., Jeffs, D., & Carless, S. A. (2002). A global self-report measure of person-job fit. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18(1), 43.
22.Bruner, J. S. (1962). The conditions of creativity. In Contemporary Approaches to Creative Thinking, 1958, University of Colorado, CO, US; This paper was presented at the aforementioned symposium.. Atherton Press.
23.Carson, S. H., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2003). Decreased latent inhibition is associated with increased creative achievement in high-functioning individuals. Journal of personality and social psychology, 85(3), 499.
24.Christiane, P. (2003). Digital Art (World of Art).
25.Clarke, J. A. (1993). Cognitive style and Computer-Assisted Learning: problems and a possible solution1. Alt-j, 1(1), 47-59.
26.Coopey, J. (1987). The case for creativity in complex organizations. Personnel management, 19(3), 30-3.
27.Cornock, S., & Edmonds, E. (1973). The creative process where the artist is amplified or superseded by the computer. Leonardo, 11-16.
28.Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988a). The dangers of originality: Creativity and the artistic process. Psychoanalytic perspectives on art, 213-224.
29.Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988b). Motivation and creativity: Toward a synthesis of structural and energistic approaches to cognition. New Ideas in psychology, 6(2), 159-176.
30.Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988c). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. RJ Sternberg, ed. The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives.
31.Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). The domain of creativity.
32.Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity：Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. NY：Harper Collins Publishers.
33.Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. Basic Books.
34.Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). 16 implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In Handbook of creativity (pp. 313-335). Cambridge University Press.
35.Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2014). New conceptions and research approaches to creativity: Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In The systems model of creativity (pp. 161-184). Springer, Dordrecht.
36.Dacey, J. S. (1989). Fundamentals of creative thinking. Lexington Books/DC Heath and Com.
37.Davis, G. A. (1973). Psychology of problem solving: Theory and practice. Basic Books (AZ).
38.DeTure, M. (2004). Cognitive style and self-efficacy: Predicting student success in online distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 21-38.
39.Orhun, E., & Orhun, D. (2013, September). Creativity and engineering education. In 41st SEFI Conference, Leuven, Belgium.
40.Eisenman, R. (1987). Creativity, birth order, and risk taking. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25(2), 87-88.
41.Entwistle, N. (1988). Motivational factors in students’ approaches to learning. In Learning strategies and learning styles (pp. 21-51). Springer, Boston, MA.
42.Federico, P.-A., & Landis, D. B. (1984). Cognitive styles, abilities, and aptitudes: Are they dependent or independent? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 9(2), 146-161.
43.Federico, P. A., & Landis, D. B. (1984). Cognitive styles, abilities, and aptitudes: Are they dependent or independent?. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 9(2), 146-161.
44.Feist, G. J. (1999). 14 The Influence of Personality on Artistic and Scientific Creativity. Handbook of creativity, 273.
45.Ford, N. (1985). Learning Styles and Strategies of Postgraduate Students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 65-77.
46.Ford, N. (1985). Learning Styles and Strategies of Postgraduate Students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 65-77.
47.Ford, N., & Chen, S. Y. (2000). Individual differences, hypermedia navigation, and learning: an empirical study. Journal of educational multimedia and hypermedia, 9(4), 281-311..
48.Ford, N., & Chen, S. Y. (2001). Matching/mismatching revisited: an empirical study of learning and teaching styles. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(1), 5-22.
49.Forisha-Kovach, B. (1978). Sex roles and personal awareness. General Learning Press.
50.Turner, G., Edmonds, E., & Weakley, A. (2005, July). Seeing eye-to-eye: supportive transdisciplinary environments for interactive art. In Information Visualisation, 2005. Proceedings. Ninth International Conference on (pp. 912-919). IEEE..
51.Gardner, H. (1982). Art, mind, and brain: A cognitive approach to creativity. New York, NY: Basic Books
52.Gardner, H. (1988). 12 Creative lives and creative works: a synthetic scientific approach. The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives, 298.
53.Garner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligences: new horizons.
54.Gardner, H., & Gardner, E. (2008). Art, mind, and brain: A cognitive approach to creativity. Basic Books.
55.Gardner, H. (2011). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Ghandi. Basic Civitas Books.
56.Groborz, M., & Necka, E. (2003). Creativity and cognitive control: Explorations of generation and evaluation skills. Creativity Research Journal, 15(2-3), 183-197.
57.GUASTELL, S. J., Shissler, J., Driscoll, J., & Hyde, T. (1998). Are some cognitive styles more creatively productive than others?. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 32(2), 77-91.
58.Guilford, J. P. (1986). Creative talents: Their nature, uses and development. Bearly limited.
59.Heller, K. A., Mönks, F. J., Subotnik, R., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (2000). International handbook of giftedness and talent. Elsevier.
60.Hocevar, D., & Bachelor, P. (1989). A taxonomy and critique of measurements used in the study of creativity. In Handbook of creativity (pp. 53-75). Springer, Boston, MA.
61.Huhtamo,E.(1995).Seeking deeper contact: interactive art as metacommentary. Convergence, 1(2), 81-104.
62.Ibrahim, B., DeMiranda, M. A., & Siller, T. J. (2016, December). The correlation between creativity and engineering knowledge among engineering undergraduate students. In Engineering Education (ICEED),2016 IEEE 8th International Conference on(pp. 38-43). IEEE.
63.International Business Machines (IBM). (2010). Capitalizing on complexity: Insights from the global chief executive officer study.
64.Grabowski, B. L., & Jonassen, D. H. (1993). Handbook of individual differences. Learning and Instruction, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
65.Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., & Cole, J. C. (2009). Expertise, domains, and the consensual assessment technique. The Journal of creative behavior, 43(4), 223-233.
66.Kaufman, J. C. (2006). Self‐reported differences in creativity by ethnicity and gender. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 20(8), 1065-1082.
67.Kozhevnikov, M., Kozhevnikov, M., Yu, C. J., & Blazhenkova, O. (2013). Creativity, visualization abilities, and visual cognitive style. British journal of educational psychology, 83(2), 196-209.
68.Ku, O., Hou, C. C., & Chen, S. Y. (2016). Incorporating customization and personalization into game-based learning: A cognitive style perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 359-368.
69.Larkin, T. L. (2015, September). Creativity in STEM education: Reshaping the creative project. In Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), 2015 International Conference on (pp. 1184-1189). IEEE.
70.Lin, W. L., Tsai, P. H., Lin, H. Y., & Chen, H. C. (2014). How does emotion influence different creative performances? The mediating role of cognitive flexibility. Cognition & emotion, 28(5), 834-844.
71.Mampadi, F., Chen, S. Y., Ghinea, G., & Chen, M. P. (2011). Design of adaptive hypermedia learning systems: A cognitive style approach. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1003-1011.
72.Messick, S. (1976). Individuality in learning. Jossey-Bass.
73.Messick, S.(1984).The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promise in educational practice.Educational Psychologist, 19(2), 59-74.
74.Messick, S. (1996). Bridging cognition and personality in education: The role of style in performance and development. European journal of Personality, 10(5), 353-376.
75.Miller, A. L., & Smith, V. A. (2017). Exploring differences in creativity across academic majors for high-ability college students. Gifted and Talented International, 32(1), 44-5
76.Morgan, H. (1997). Cognitive styles and classroom learning. Praeger Publishers.
77.Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive Psychology New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Google Scholar.
78.Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. Appleton-Century-Crofts.[JH, GR](1976) Cognition and reality: Principles and implications of cognitive psychology.
79.Neisser, U. (2014). Cognitive psychology: Classic edition. Psychology Press.
80.Ólafsdóttir, M. E. (2001). Art and Interactivity. Retrieved Oct. 8, 2003,
from http://www.multimedia.hi.is/lecturers/margret_art_interactivity.htm
81.Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of management journal, 39(3), 607-634.
82.Paivio, A. (1969). Mental imagery in associative learning and memory. Psychological review, 76(3), 241.
83.Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Hold, Rinehart & Winston. Paivio, A.(1986). Mental representations: A dual-coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press. Paivio, A.(1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45, 255-287.
84.Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford University Press.
85.Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie, 45(3), 255.
86.Pask, G. (1976). Styles and strategies of learning. British journal of educational psychology, 46(2), 128-148.
87.Federico, P. A., & Landis, D. B. (1984). Cognitive styles, abilities, and aptitudes: Are they dependent or independent?. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 9(2), 146-161.
88.Peracchio, L. A., & Meyers-Levy, J. (1997). Evaluating persuasion-enhancing techniques from a resource-matching perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 178-191.
89.Plucker, J., & Zabelina, D. (2009). Creativity and interdisciplinarity: One creativity or many creativities?. Zdm, 41(1-2), 5-11.
90.AlMaian, R. Y. (2017, December). Analysis of the stakeholders of engineering education system to improve the creativity of engineering education. In Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), 2017 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 110-114). IEEE.
91.Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan, 42(7), 305-310.
92.Riding, R., & Rayner, S. (2013). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: Understanding style differences in learning and behavior. David Fulton Publishers.
93.Riding, R. J. (1997). On the nature of cognitive style. Educational psychology,17(1-2), 29-49.
94.Riding, R. J., & Calvey, I. (1981). The assessment of verbal‐imagery learning styles and their effect on the recall of concrete and abstract prose passages by 11‐year‐old children. British Journal of Psychology, 72(1), 59-64.
95.Riding, R. J., & Rayner, S. (1998). Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies. London: David Fulton.
96.Riding, R. J., & Rayner, S. (1998). Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies. London: David Fulton.
97.Riding, R. J., & Taylor, E. (1976). Imagery performance and prose comprehension in seven‐year‐old children. Educational Studies, 2(1), 21-27.
98.Riding, R. J., & Wigley, S. (1997). The relationship between cognitive style and personality in further education students. Personality and individual differences, 23(3), 379-389.
99.Riding, R., & Cheema, I. (1991). Cognitive styles—an overview and integration. Educational psychology, 11(3-4), 193-215.
100.Riding, R., & Rayner, S. (2013). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: Understanding style differences in learning and behavior. David Fulton Publishers.
101.Riding, R., & Rayner, S. (2013). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: Understanding style differences in learning and behavior. David Fulton Publishers.
102.Robinson,K. (2001) Out of Our Minds: Learning to Be Creative.Oxford:Capstone.
103.Rubenstein, L. D., Ridgley, L. M., Callan, G. L., Karami, S., & Ehlinger, J. (2018). How teachers perceive factors that influence creativity development: Applying a Social Cognitive Theory perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 100-110.
104.Runco, M. A. (2007). Creativity: Theories and themes: Research, development, and practice. New York, NY: Academic Press.
105.Russ, S. W. (1993). Personality assessment. Affect and creativity: The role of affect and play in the creative process. Hillsdale, NJ, US..
106.Amato-Henderson, S., Kemppainen, A., & Hein, G. (2011, October). Assessing creativity in engineering students. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2011 (pp. T4F-1). IEEE.
107.Cornock, S., & Edmonds, E. (1973). The creative process where the artist is amplified or superseded by the computer. Leonardo, 11-16.
108.Sadler-Smith, E. U. G. E. N. E., Zhang, L., & Sternberg, R. (2009). A duplex model of cognitive style. Perspectives on the nature of intellectual styles, 3-28.
109.Sadler-Smith, E., & Riding, R. (1999). Cognitive style and instructional preferences. Instructional science, 27(5), 355-371.
110.Sakane, I. (1997). An Invitation to Interactive Art. ＂The Interaction ＇97: toward the expansion of media art: Retrieved Dec. 14, 2002,
from http://www.iamas.ac.jp/interaction/i97/chief_Sakane.html
111.Saracho, O. N. (1998). Research directions for cognitive style and education. International Journal of Educational Research, 29(3), 287-290.
112.Shepard, A., & Runco, M. (2016). Recent Research on Creativity and Education. RICERCAZIONE, 21.
113.Simonton, D. K. (1984). Genius, creativity and leadership.
114.Solso, R. L.， 認知心理學，吳玲玲譯，華泰書局，台北市，民國 87 年。
115.Sternberg, R. J., & Wagner, R. K. (Eds.). (1986). Practical intelligence: Nature and origins of competence in the everyday world. CUP Archive.
116.Sternberg, R. J. (1994). Encyclopedia of human intelligence (Vol. 2). New York: Macmillan.Sternberg, R. J. (1996a). Cognitive psychology. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
117.Sternberg, R. J. (1997). The concept of intelligence and its role in lifelong learning and success. American psychologist, 52(10), 1030.
118.Sternberg, R. J., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (1999). Handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press.
119.Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (1997). Are cognitive styles still in style?. American psychologist, 52(7), 700.
120.Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). A capsule history of theory and research on styles. Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles, 1-21.
121.Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its development. Human development, 34(1), 1-31.
122.Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. Free Press.
123.Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional science, 32(1-2), 9-31.
124.Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational psychology review, 10(3), 251-296.
125.Tennant, M. (2006). Psychology and adult learning: Taylor & Francis.
126.Tennant, M. (2007). Psychology and adult learning. Routledge.
127.Thomas, K., & Chan, J. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of research on creativity. Edward Elgar Publishing.
128.Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent.
129.Torrance, E. (1963). Education and the creative potential. University of Minnesota Press.
130.Torrance, E. P. (1972). Predictive validity of the Torrance tests of creative thinking. The Journal of creative behavior, 6(4), 236-262.
131.Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: norms-technical manual (Bensenville, Illinois, Scholastic Testing Service).
132.Torrance, E. P. (1995). Why fly? Cresskill.
133.Torrance, E. P. (1998). Torrance tests of creative thinking: Norms-technical manual: Figural (streamlined) forms A & B. Scholastic Testing Service.
134.Turner, G., Edmonds, E., & Weakley, A. (2005, July). Seeing eye-to-eye: supportive transdisciplinary environments for interactive art. In Information Visualisation, 2005. Proceedings. Ninth International Conference on (pp. 912-919). IEEE.
135.Weisberg, R. W. (1995). Prolegomena to theories of insight in problem solving: A taxonomy of problems. The nature of insight, 157-196.
136.Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of educational research, 47(1), 1-64.
137.Witkin, H. A., Dyk, R. B., Fattuson, H. F., Goodenough, D. R., & Karp, S. A. (1962). Psychological differentiation: Studies of development.
138.Wyse, D., & Ferrari, A. (2015). Creativity and education: Comparing the national curricula of the states of the European Union and the United Kingdom. British Educational Research Journal, 41(1), 30-47.
139.Yuan, X., & Liu, J. (2013, November). Relationship between cognitive styles and users' task performance in two information systems. In Proceedings of the 76th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Beyond the Cloud: Rethinking Information Boundaries (p. 40). American Society for Information Science.
140.Zhang, L. F., & Sternberg, R. J. (2005). A threefold model of intellectual styles. Educational psychology review, 17(1), 1-53.
141.Zhang, L. F., & Sternberg, R. J. (2009). Intellectual styles and creativity. The Routledge companion to creativity, 256-266.
142.Zhou, J., & Oldham, G. R. (2001). Enhancing creative performance: Effects of expected developmental assessment strategies and creative personality. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 35(3), 151-167.
二、中文部分
1.毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台（2007）。創造力研究（初版二刷）。台北：心理。
2.王司沁(2008)。認知風格對學習者於互動多媒體輔助統計學習之影響-以圖像型與文字型為例。中央大學學習與教學研究所學位論文。
3.王佳玲(2004)。大學生情緒智力信念、創造力信念與情緒智力、創造力之關係。國立政治大學教育學系教育心理與輔導組碩士論文。
4.史美瑤(2016)。如何提升學生的創造力？。評鑑雙月刊第62期。
5.吳靜吉(1998)：新編創造力思考測驗研究。教育部輔導工作六年計劃研究報告。執行單位：學術交流基金會。[Wu, J. J. (1998). The Chinese version of creative thinking test. The Ministry of Education funding 6-year Guidance Program Report. Taiwan: Foundation for Scholarly Exchange.]
6.吳靜吉、丁興祥、邱皓政主編(2002)。創造力的發展與實踐。臺北：五南。
7.李乙明(2006)。陶倫斯創造思考測驗圖形與語文版指導手冊。臺北市：心理。
8.李乙明、李淑貞(譯) (2005)。以系統觀點談創造力研究。(原編者：Robert J.Sternberg)。載於 (主編)，創造力 I、II 理論 (頁 411-438)。臺北：五南。
9.李乙明、李淑貞（譯）(2005)。創造力Ⅱ：應用（原作者：R. J. Sternberg）。臺北：五南。（原著出版年：1999）
10.李乙明、李淑貞（譯）(2008)。多元智能（原作者：H. Gardner）。臺北：五南。（原著出版年：2006）
11.李郁文(2018)。互動式視覺藝術結合聲音之創作研究。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士論文。
12.李昱廷(2013)。認知風格對學習者於擴增實境輔助頭燈系統配線學習之影響。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士論文。
13.杜明城(譯) (1999)。創造力 (原著者：Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi)。臺北：時報。
14.周冠甫(2015)。結合擴增實境與體感互動技術於學習系統之研究。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士論文。
15.林大維、吳佩樺(2010)。互動藝術脈絡與其美學之研究。藝術學報。(87)，31-54。
16.林珮淳、吳佩芬(2002)。數位藝術相關理論研究與創作探討。藝術學報，(70)，43-58。
17.林珮淳、范銀霞(2004) 。林珮淳、范銀霞(2004)。從數位藝術探討互動觀念、媒介與美學。藝術學報，101-105。
18.林幸台(2000)。創造力評量。載於創造力研究。台北：心理。
19.林義桀(2013)。認知風格與先備知識對教室中兩人共用一機推測式學習策略活動影響之探討。國立嘉義大學數位學習設計與管理學系碩士論文。
20.林怡廷(2014)。自然景觀環境對創造力的影響。國立臺灣大學園藝暨景觀學系碩士論文。
21.林語瑄(2017)。探討不同認知風格中結合隨境遊戲與擴增實境於廟宇導覽之應用。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士論文。
22.林思彤(2008)。創造力的匯合觀點與影響因素。T&D 飛訊，70，1-19.
23.林思妤(2017)。不同認知風格的大學生在 MOOCs教學網站上使用者經驗的差異。淡江大學教育科技學系碩士班學位論文。
24.金程(2014)。APP 新手引導對不同認知風格者使用者經驗及學習成效之影響。國立臺北科技大學創新設計學系碩士論文。
25.姚瑞中(2002)。台灣裝置藝術。台北：木馬文化。
26.姜尚文(2017)。以內在動機為中介變項探究家庭複合性結構對創造力之影響‐以淡江大學大一學生為例。淡江大學教育心理與諮商研究所碩士班學位論文,
27.昭萍錢,&麗珍梁 (2017)認知風格和多元智能對學習動機與學習成效之影響-以科技大學大一國文課數位化教學為例。人文社會學報 Journal of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences，13(4).
28.柳秀蘭(1995)。資優學生、普通學生、山地學生創造力與問題解決能力之比較研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
29.洪蘭(譯) (1999)。Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I.著。不同凡想（ Defying the crowd）。89台北：遠流出版社。
30.翁慈蓮(2018)。創造力教學融入高中公民科選修課程對學生公民科學科成效, 創造力、創意自我效能、問題解決態度之影響-以 [e 起拍出苗栗魂] 及 [公民遊意識] 創造力教學為例。成功大學教育研究所學位論文。
31.國家教育研究院(2016)。科技領域課程綱要。臺北：國教院。
32.張文璇(2011)。多型態影片代理表徵對摘要影片式學習之影響。中央大學網路學習科技研究所學位論文。
33.張世忠(2000)。建構教學 ─ 理論與應用。臺北：五南。
34.張世彗(2006)。行動與動作創造力考測驗。臺北：心理。
35.張世彗(2011)。創造力教學、學習與評量之探究。教育資料與研究雙月刊， 100，1-22。
36.張世彗(2013)。創造力理論、技法與教學。臺北：五南。
37.張春興(2007)。張氏心理學辭典。臺北：東華。
38.張春興(2013)。教育心理學—三化取向的理論與實踐。臺北：東華。
39.張春興(2015)。教育心理學。臺北：東華。
40.張原誠(2015)。學生美感經驗、創意自我效能與創造力之研究:教師創造力教學的多層次調節式中介效果。國立臺南大學教育學系教育經營與管理碩博士班論文。
41.張家維(2016)。康丁斯基抽象藝術風格結合互動視覺音樂創作與研究。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士論文。
42.教育部(2002)。創造力教育白皮書—打造創造力國度。臺北市：教育部(2013)。
43.陳木子(1997)。藝術的創造鑑賞批評。臺北：環宇。
44.陳長益。Goff, K., & Torrance, E. P. (2006)。陶倫斯創造力測驗成人適用精簡版–指導手冊。臺北：心理。
45.陳龍安(1994）。創造思考的理論與實際。臺北：心理。
46.陳龍安(2006)。創造思考教學的理論與實際。臺北：心理。
47.陳麗秋(2001)。從數位藝術之世界潮流談台灣藝術教育之現代化。資訊科技與藝術教育國際學術暨實務研討會，元智大學。
48.曾鈺涓(2010)。當代數位互動藝術之特質。國立交通大學應用藝術研究所學位博士論文。
49.黃于庭(2015)。博物館網站與使用者認知風格之研究：以國立臺灣師範大學數位校史館為例。 臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文
50.黃富財(2015)。創造思考教學對國中學生創造力與創造性傾向之成效研究。國立臺北師範大學教育學系碩士論文。
51.黃祖菁(2012)。運用多模式情感運算技術設計智慧型家教系統之人機介面─以數位藝術為例。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士班碩士論文。
52.為例。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士班碩士論文。
53.楊坤原(1996)。認知風格與科學學習成就的關係(一)(二)。科學教育月刊，14，2-12。
54.楊坤原(2001)。創造力的意義及其影響因素簡介。科學教育月刊，239，3-12。
55.溫怡梅(1987)。領導才能訓練課程對國小智能優異學生正向自我概念、創造力與領導能力的影響。國立台灣師範大學碩士論文。
56.葉玉珠(2006)。創造力教學-過去、現在與未來。臺北：心理。
57.葉玉珠、吳靜吉& 鄭英耀 (2000)。影響科技與資訊產業人員創意發展的因素之量表編製。師大學報：科學教育類，45(2)，39-63.
58.廖詠年(2010)。擴增實境在科學教育領域中學習與應用之評析。2010電腦與網路科技在教育上的應用研討會，新竹。
59.劉信雄(1992)。國小學生認知風格、學習策略、自我效能與學業成就關係之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
60.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，48，211-228。
61.歐德淯(2017)。探討內外在因素對個人創造力之影響。中原大學企業管理研究所學位論文。
62.蔡孟君(2015)。行動無標記擴增實境互動遊戲結合於認知風格之研究。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士論文。
63.賴倍玉(2010)。概念構圖教學策略與認知風格對高職學生的應用文學習成效之研究。國立雲林科技大學技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文。 .
64.賴麗珍譯（Ruth Richards著）(2009)。日常創造力與人類特質新論。台北市：五南。
65.簡茂發(1982)。我國資賦優異兒童創造思考能力之研究。教育心理學報，15， 97-110。
66.羅伊·阿斯科特 著，慕容青 譯(2003)：藝術與轉化的科技，2003/12/09 於http://arts.tom.com/zhuanti/11012_1/index.html 取得。
67.羅伊·阿斯科特(2003)：關於羅伊·阿斯科特，2003/12/11 於 http://arts.tom. com/zhuanti/110901_2/index.html/取得。
68.羅芝芸(1998)。兒童認知風格、情緒智力與問題解決能力之相關研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文。
69.羅景瓊(2010)。網路同步腦力激盪環境下大學生思考風格與創造力之研究。臺灣師範大學科技應用與人力資源發展學系學位論文。