本研究旨在探究畫家在高齡期前後的創造力變化、影響此創造力之內外部因素、畫家面對這些因素的因應策略，與他們持續發展創造力的實踐，並由此進一步地嘗試理解高齡期創造力的意涵。
本研究以Csikszentmihalyi的系統模型理論為基礎。以立意取向選擇四位臺灣的傑出高齡畫家做為研究對象；在資料收集上，以深度訪談為主，輔以蒐集與畫家相關之畫冊書籍、藝評評論、與文獻檔案，並至展場看展及聆聽畫家演講等，以探究這些畫家何以具有源源不斷的創作能量。此外，亦邀請具鑑賞能力之三位畫家協助檢視本研究對象在高齡期前後的畫作變化，以強化本研究之信效度。
經檢視與四位畫家相關的研究材料後，本研究有以下發現：
一、就四位畫家高齡期前後創造力的變化與產生變化的因素而言：(一)此四位畫家認為創作在高齡期仍有突破的可能；(二)創作數量非因年齡而有所差異，若創作減少係因對某些創作題材的熱情及感受不若以往、媒材轉變、或生命事件影響等因素，非因生理心理社會老化的原因；(三)創作品質隨技法而更純熟，加上時間與經驗的累積，創作整體水準更整齊；(四)創作內涵部分，在高齡期之前，畫家從聯想思考去開發獨創技法，高齡期後，畫家則融合自己獨創的技法，並直觀表達其想法；(五)高齡期後，創作畫面隨高齡畫家心境、視野而有所轉變。
二、Csikszentmihalyi創造力系統模型是以個人、學門、領域之間的交互作用為主軸，本研究利用此創造力模型來做分析，發現高齡期創造力在個人、學門和領域間未必都有互動或影響。高齡畫家之創造力受個人影響最大，包括其創作信念、身心靈社會面向的成功老化、生命事件與人生體悟等。而個人和學門之間的聯結，就是畫家的創作，畫家以其畫作展現創造力，而畫壇其他學門守門人，如收藏家、學生或同儕等則是接納、詮釋、傳遞高齡畫家的創造力信息，接受高齡畫家以守門人或領頭羊的方式所發揮的影響力。在領域方面，高齡畫家是為了自我突破，而持續吸收其他領域的新知，希望可以融合於其創作之中，這些創造力展現是否在領域系統永久常存，則是由學門將來的守門人決定。因此，將高齡畫家創造力與學門、領域系統變化之研究結果歸納為：(一)與學門的良性互動有助於持續創作動機的強化；(二)不接觸敗壞情緒與不感興趣的人事物；(三)學門其他守門人的重要性逐漸淡化；(四)受環境影響較少，廣泛吸收跨領域知識。
三、就老化過程與四位畫家創造力變化的關聯而言： (一)此四位畫家進入高齡期後，在生理、心理和社會三個老化面向，均朝成功老化發展；(二)「適應力」對於高齡期創造力的發揮是重要因素；(三)強化身心運作有助創造力持續發揮；(四)高齡期創造力強調精神層面，智慧使創作具深刻內涵；(五)藝術創作及持續學習與成功老化互有助益。
四、為因應高齡期所需之調整，他們主要以四種調整策略，包括(一)建立支
援性系統；(二)心理調整；(三)尋求替代方案或專注於強項；(四)學習。本研究歸納出，高齡畫家為創造力之永續發展而有五大實踐：(一)保持健康及以獨創一格的紀律在創作；(二)持續自我學習，著重在定靜專注；(三)適度的壓力以持續創作；(四)多用腦思考；(五)不間斷從事自己喜歡的事。
最後，本研究認為高齡期創造力意涵，以畫家為例則包含(一)創造力受內在動機影響，創作呈現畫家的內心情感與個人心靈視野；(二)畫家進行傳承、發揮影響力；(三)畫家廣泛吸收跨領域知識以尋求自我突破；(四)其創作對社會與人類文化有所貢獻。

The main purpose of this research is to investigate the changes of creativity for aging artist painters, the internal and external factors affecting such changes and the painters’ responding strategies, and their practice for developing sustainable creativity.
In this research, four outstanding Taiwanese senior painters were purposively sampled. In-depth interview was the major method of this study, supplemented by collecting artists’ painting-albums and books, reviewing art critics and documentaries, visiting relevant exhibitions, and attending their speeches. In addition, in order to enhance the reliability and creditability of this research, three professional painters were invited to participate in assessing these painters’ changes of paintings. Basically, this research analyzed the artists’ sustainable creativity via the systems model developed by Csikszentmihalyi.
After inspecting the materials of the four cases, the findings of this research are as follows :
1. The relations of the changes of creativity and relevant factors: (1) Painters believe artistic break-through are still possible even in aged period; (2) The quantities of their creation do not decrease even though in old age. If there is any decrease, it is due to less passion for certain topics, changes of painting media, or important life events; (3) The quality of the artworks gets better and more even with the painters’ more mature skills, techniques and experiences. (4) Before their aged period, the painters tended to develop unique techniques/skills by “associated thinking” as their artistic approach. After that, the artists use their own integrated and unique skills to directly express their thoughts. (5) After the aged period, the painters tend to have different mindsets and visions, and thus create different artwork.
2. Based on creativity systems model created by Csikszentmihalyi, this research found that the systems model is partially applicable to the development of creativity for senior painters. Among the three systems, “individual”, which includes artistic faith, successful aging, important life events and their understanding about life, is the most important system that affects the senior artists’ creativity transformation. The painters’ art creations, representing explicitly their creativity, are the connection between the “individual” and the “field” systems. Other gatekeepers in the “field”, such as collectors, students and peer artists, may embrace, interpret, and/or propagate the creativity messages passed by the senior painters, and are influenced by the senior painters with their leadership. In the aspect of the “domain” system, the senior painters have been seeking their own personal breakthroughs, while they continue absorbing but from other knowledge domain and hope to infuse these into their artworks. Nevertheless, whether these creativity showed by the painters’ artworks will last permanently in the domain or not is up to the future domain gatekeepers to decide. On the “field” and “domain” systems with respect to the senior painters’ creativity, this research concludes: (1) Virtuous interaction with the “field” helps them to strengthen their motivation for art creation; (2) The painters tend not to interact with uninteresting people or matters and those cause negative feelings; (3) They gradually pay less attention to the gatekeepers in the field; (4) They are influenced less by surrounding environment but are eager to absorb interdisciplinary knowledge extensively.
3. The relations of aging and the changes of the painters’ creativity: (1) all four painters are approaching toward “successful aging,” in terms of physiological aging, psychological aging, and social aging; (2) Resilience plays an important role in developing creativity during the aging period; (3) Strengthening cognitive function help maintaining and promoting creativity; (4) Spirituality is the main emphasis of their creativity, and wisdom is the shinning spot of such creativity; (5) Artistic creation and continuous learning help to achieve successful aging and vice versa.
4. In additional to the decline of physical conditions and psychological aging such as memory deterioration, the painters currently also face many challenges not related to aging, like computer literacy or time management. To cope these imminent need in their old age, they adopt four specific strategies: (1) establishing supporting systems; (2) adjusting their mindsets; (3) always having alternatives or only focusing on what they are good at; (4) learning. From the study of the four cases, this research also found that the painters take the following practices to sustain their development of creativity: (1) maintaining good health and keeping creating artworks with their own unique self-discipline; (2) continuing self-learning -- focusing on peacefulness and concentration; (3) exerting moderate self-pressure to sustain creating artworks; (4) taking more pondering; (5) continuing to engage in their favorite matters.
Finally, this research found the meaning of creativity in old age, exemplified by these painters, are: (1) Creativity, influenced by internal motivation, expresses the painters’ inner feelings and spiritual vision; (2) The painters try to pass on their legacy and have influence through their creations; (3) They continue to absorb interdisciplinary knowledge extensively in order to make self-breakthrough; (4) Their art creations have been contributing to human cultures and societies.

ㄧ、中文部分
內政部(2013)。人口政策白皮書-少子女化、高齡化及移民。臺北：內政部。
內政部(2014)。103年簡易生命表提要分析。取自內政部統計處，網址
http：//sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/Life/T04-analysis.html
毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台(2000)。創造力研究。臺北：心理。
王文科(2000)。質的研究的問題與趨勢。載於中正大學教育學研究所(主編)，質的研究方法(頁1-23)。高雄：麗文。
王其敏(1997)。視覺創意：思考與方法。臺北：正中。
王保昀(2013)。心上繪影 心上光。載於葉樹姍總編輯，焠煉顯風華：吳隆
榮油畫個展(頁4-5)。臺中：中市港區藝術中心。
王延煌(2006)。藝術是一種人文價值的體現。「2006 全國藝術教育展」藝術教育
專題研討會論文手冊(頁1-3)。臺北：國立臺灣藝術教育館。
王舒(2015)。野思。臺北：樂韻出版社。
王雅各(1998)。臺灣地區社會學論文摘要含社會心理學：1986-1993。中央
硏究院民族學硏究所、社會學硏究所籌備處，1。
王釗洪(2015)。熟齡經濟學淺釋Gerontonomics。臺北：活石文化。
王斌(2013)。劉國松捐贈作品集。山東：山東美術出版社。
田秀蘭(2006)。質性研究的基本概念－研究方法概論。臺北：國立臺灣師範大學。
皮道堅(2009)。率意為之 鑄就輝煌—李錫奇的開拓發現與其“中國形式”的獨特表現。廣東美術館年鑑。網址
http//archive.artnchina.com/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?filename=N2011070065000027&dbcode=CYFD&dbname=CYFD
朱光潛(1987)。文藝心理學。臺北：漢京文化事業。
朱倩儀(2009)。在職進修成人學習者思考風格與創造力之相關研究。屏東教育大學學報-教育類，32(3)，359-392。
江心靜(2014)。大器、無私、自信-劉國松的水墨革命。今藝術，11，110-116。
江學瀅(2011)。成年人藝術創作依戀行為之研究。國立臺灣師範大學美術系博士論文(未出版)。
余秋雨(2006)。藝術創造論。臺北：天下遠見。
吳老德(2003)。高齡社會理論與策略。臺北：新文京。
吳芝儀、李奉儒(譯)（1995）。質的評鑑與研究。臺北：桂冠圖書。
吳信如(譯)(2006)。瑪土撒拉的密謀：顛覆高齡化社會的迷思(原作者：Frank Schirrmacher)。臺北：臺灣商務。
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。
呂慧珊(2006)。心流經驗與其前因對創造力的影響。國立中正大學企業管理所博士論文(未出版)。
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。
李奉儒(譯)（2001）。質性教育研究之基礎。載於黃光雄主譯，質性教育研究：理論與方法 (頁5-68)。嘉義：濤石文化。
李芳齡(譯)(2012)。創新5個技巧簡單學(原著者：Clayton M. Christensen、Jeff Dyer、Hal Gregersen)。臺北：天下。
李美蓉(2000)。視覺藝術概論。臺北市：雄獅。
李嵩義(2007)。高齡學習者學習偏好、社會支持與幸福感關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所博士論文(未出版)。
村上隆(2007)。藝術創業論。臺北：城邦文化。
杜明城(譯)（1999）。創造力(原著者：Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi)。臺北：時報。
車文博（2001）。人本主義心理學。臺北：東華。
林小玉(2005)。邁向藝術課程模式應用於國小五年級學童編曲創作知能之研究。藝術教育研究，10，87-126。
林佩瑜(2007)。國民中學音樂才能班學生創造力表現及其影響因素之研究。國立臺灣師範大學碩士論文(未出版)。
林昌德(2010)。用畫筆讓社會更美好。載於國立臺灣師範大學管理學院(主編)，管理你的創意-14位國內頂尖藝術家教你邁向卓越之路(頁89-104)。臺北：國立臺灣師範大學管理學院。
林磐聳(2010)。樂在生活玩設計。載於國立臺灣師範大學管理學院(主編)，管理你的創意-14位國內頂尖藝術家教你邁向卓越之路(頁133-144)。臺北：國立臺灣師範大學管理學院。
邱天助 (2007)。社會老年學。高雄：復文。
邱文彬（2000）。後形式思考與創造力的關係。淡江人文社會學刊，6，239-262。
邱發忠(2005a)。我笑、我玩，但我創造。應用心理研究，27，7-29。
邱發忠(2005b)。創造力認知運作機制之探究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系博士論文(未出版)。
邱皓政、丁興祥、林耀南、陳育瑜、林碧芳、王詩婷(譯)(2008)。創造力：當代理論與議題(原著者：Mark A.Runco)。臺北：心理。
洪于雯主編(2012)。劉國松：藝術的叛逆 叛逆的藝術。臺北：南方家園文化出版。
洪翠霞(2012)。札根青春-新銳藝術家成長與創作歷程之研究。國立高雄師範大學特殊教育系博士論文(未出版)。
胡幼慧、姚美華(1996)。ㄧ些質性方法上的思考：信度與效度?如何抽樣?如何收集資料、登錄與分析? 載於胡幼慧(主編)，質性研究：理論、方法及本土女性研究實例(頁141-158)。臺北：巨流。
范睿榛(2013)。走過烽火年代的藝術家王舒與中國文化。東亞歷史文化研究，4，41-51。
凌嵩郎(1970)。藝術創造因素的分析。藝術學報，10，96-116。
凌嵩郎(1996)。藝術概論。臺北：空中大學。
徐玟玲(2011)。以榮格學說探究個體心理功能與多元主體性：解構藝術創作者。國立臺灣師範大學美術學系博士論文(未出版)。
徐振邦、梁文蓁、吳曉青、陳儒晰譯(2006)。最新教育研究法。(原著者：Louis Cohen、Lawrence Manion、Keith Marrison)。臺北：韋伯。
徐錦源(2003)。臺灣老人學的濫觴。銀髮世紀，15，1-2。
高行健(2008)。論創作。臺北：聯經。
高淑清(2008)。質性研究的18堂課—首航初探之旅。高雄：麗文。
國家發展委員會(2014)。中華民國人口推計103年至150年，取自網址
https：//www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=84223C65B6F94D72
張玉山(2003)。藝術創意的激發與實現－在國小的試探性實驗研究。中小學一般藝術教育師資培育與實務研討會論文集(頁377-398)。臺北：國立臺灣藝術教育館。
張孟起、劉素玉(2007)。宇宙即我心-劉國松的藝術創作之路。臺北：典藏藝術家庭。
張宜玲(2009)。童話故事中的老人智慧與Erikson 生命階段統觀的敘述：重返自性的曼陀羅之旅。國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所博士論文(未出版)。
張芬芬(2001)。研究者必須中立客觀嗎?行動研究的之事論與幾個關鍵問題。載於中華民國課程與教學學會主編：行動研究與課程教學革新。臺北：揚智。
張家琳(2010)。從當代藝術教育統整課程教學探討國小學童創造力表現研究。國立臺灣師範大學博士論文(未出版)。
梁永安等(譯)(2002)。弗洛伊德傳(原著者：Peter Gay）。臺北：立緒文化。
梁錦鋆（譯）(2011)。藝術的意義：美學思考的關鍵課題。(原著者：Herbert Read)。臺北：遠流。
莊安祺(譯)(2014)。創作者的日常生活(原著者：Mason Currey)。臺北：聯經。
郭為藩(2003)。成人學習-心理學的探討。臺北：心理出版社。
陳木子(1997)。藝術的創造鑑賞批評。臺北：環宇。
陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。臺北：五南出版。
陳伯璋(2000)。質性研究方法的理論基礎。載於中正大學教育學研究所(主編)，質的研究方法(頁25-49)。高雄市：麗文。
陳昭儀(2003)。創意人物研究之回顧與探析。資優教育季刊，87，27-40。
陳昭儀(2006)。傑出表演藝術家創作歷程之探析。師大學報，51，29-50。
陳昭儀(2007)。傑出音樂家人格特質之探析。臺北市立教育大學學報，38（2），33-58。
陳昭儀(2008)。傑出音樂家生涯歷程之研究。特殊教育研究學刊，33(2)，113-132。
陳昭儀(2013)。臺灣傑出表演藝術家之創造與生涯歷程。臺北：台師大出版中心。
陳貺怡(2010)。臺灣名家美術100年。臺北縣：香柏樹文化科技股份有限公司。
陳龍安(1994）。創造思考的理論與實際。臺北市：心理。
陳瓊花(2010)。把創意帶入生活，為志業建立品牌。載於國立臺灣師範大學管理學院(主編)，管理你的創意-14位國內頂尖藝術家教你邁向卓越之路(頁105-116)。臺北：國立臺灣師範大學管理學院。
陶文岳(2011)。在大音稀聲-李錫奇的創作世界。載於長流美術館主編，本位、對應—李錫奇。臺北：長流。
陶文岳(2013)。縱恆橫經緯談畫藝-李錫奇1955-2013的藝術世界。載於藍姿寬編，游藝志道：李錫奇的藝術世界(頁21-32)。臺北：國立臺灣藝術大學、台東縣政府。
傅清雪、劉宏鈺（2004）。歲月的禮物－淺談人類老化過程。華醫學報，21，13-19。
彭月茵(2010)。創造力系統理論之介紹與教學實務分享。北縣教育，70，37-41。
黃光男(2007)。畫境與化境-繪畫美學與創作。臺北：典藏。
黃秀瑄(譯)(2009)。認知心理學。(原著者：John B. Best)。臺北：心理。
黃富順(2004)。成人學習。臺北：五南。
黃富順(2012)。高齡心理學。臺北：師大書苑。
黃富順、楊國德(2011)。高齡學。臺北：五南。
黃舜卿(2014)。人口結構老化下之我國高齡者就業政策探討。經建專論，7，109-125。
楊培珊、羅鈞令、陳奕如(2009)。創意老化的發展趨勢與挑戰。社區發展季刊，6(125)，408-423。
楊蕙瑀（2009）。高齡者以生命回顧為藝術創作主題之研究—以花蓮拔子庄繪畫班阿嬤為例。國立臺中教育大學美術系碩士論文(未出版)。
葉玉珠(2006)。創造力教學-過去、現在與未來。臺北：心理。
葉玉珠、吳靜吉、鄭英耀(2002)。影響科技與資訊產業人員創意發展的因素之量表編制。師大學報：人文與社會類(臺灣)，45，15-28。
葉怡寧、林克能、邱照華、李嘉馨、黃婉茹(2014)。老人心理學。臺北：華都。
詹志禹(2002)。創造力教育白皮書-小學教育。臺北：教育部。
詹啟德(2012)。2000 至2011 年創造力文獻之研究趨勢。國立中山大學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
鄔滄萍主編(1999)。社會老年學。北京市：中國人民大學出版社。
漢寶德(2005)。漢寶德談藝術。臺北：典藏藝術家庭。
劉世南、郭誌光(2001)。創造力的概念與定義。資優教育季刊，81，1-7 。
劉世南、郭誌光(2002)。創造力理論的發展：一個心理構念演進的省思。資優教育季刊，85，20-30。
劉政(2014)。「藝壇變調鳥」李錫奇的游藝人生。載於藍姿寬編，游藝於道-李錫奇的藝術世界。臺北：國立臺灣藝術大學、台東縣政府。
劉豐榮(2004)。藝術創作研究方法之理論基礎探析：以質化研究觀點為基礎。藝術教育研究，8，73-94。
潘淑滿(2003)。質性研究：理論與應用。臺北市：心理。
蔡敏玲(2001)。教育質性研究報告的書寫：我在記實與虛構間的認真與想像。國立臺北師範學院學報，14，233-259。
蕭瓊瑞(1996)。眾神復活--深究李錫奇的藝術行動。臺北：北美館。
蕭瓊瑞(2012)。本位/變異/新發--藝壇「變調鳥」李錫奇的藝術歷程與成就。取自國藝會網頁。http：//www.ncafroc.org.tw/award-prize.asp?ser_no=97&Prize_year=2012&Prize_no=%A4Q%A4%BB&prize_file=Prize_Desc
賴聲川(2006)。賴聲川的創意學。臺北：天下。
謝金青(2005)。論創造力發展障礙之跨越。教育研究月刊，133，23-30。
羅興漢(譯)(1990)。符號.神話.文化。(原著者：Ernst Cassirer)。臺北：結構群文化事業。
 
 
二、英文部份
Albert, R. S., & Runco, M.A. (1989). Independence and cognitive ability in gifted and exceptionally gifted boys. Journal of Youth and Adolescence.18, 221-230.
Albert, R.S., & Runco, M.A. (1999). A history of research on creativity. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 16-31). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Alpaugh, P. K., Parham, I.A., & Cole, K. D. (1982). Creativity in adulthood and old age：An Exploratory Study. Educational Gerontology, 8(2), 101-116.
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. NY：Springer-Verlag.
Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123-167.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. CO：Westview Press.
Arieti, S. (1976). Creativity, the magic synthesis. NY：Basic Books.
Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual Thinking. Oakland：UC Press.
Arnheim, R. (1980). The genesis of a painting：Picasso’s Guernica. Berkeley： University of California Press.
Arons, M., & Richards, R. (2001). Two noble insurgencies：Creativity and humanistic psychology. In K. Schneider, J. Bental & J. Pierson (Eds.), The handbook of humanistic psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA：Sage.
Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2006). Creativity research in English–speaking countries. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The international handbook of creativity. NY：Cambridge University Press.
Baltes, P. B., & Baltes, M. M. (1990). Psychological perspectives on successful aging： The model of selective optimization with compensation. In P. B. Baltes & M. M. Baltes (Eds.), Successful aging：Perspectives from behavioral science (pp. 1-34). NY：Cambrige University Press.
Barron, F. (1969). Creative person and creative process. NY：Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Batey, M., & Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, intelligence, and personality：A critical review of the scattered literature. Genetic, Social & General Psychology Monographs, 132(4), 355-429.
Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1905). Methodes nouvelles pour le diagnostic du niveau intellectual des anormaux. L’annee Psychologique, 11, 191-244.
Bink, M.L., & Marsh, R.L. (2000). Cognitive regularities in creative activity. Review of General Psychology, 4(1), 59-78.
Birren, J.E. & Cunningham, W. (1985). Research on the psychology of aging： Principles, concepts and theory. In Birren JE, Schaie KW(Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of aging (pp. 3-34). NY：Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Birren, J.E. (1985). Age, competence, creativity, and wisdom. In N.N. Butler & H.P. Gleason (Eds.), Productive ageing (pp. 29-45). NY：Springer.
Boughton, D. (2008). Promoting Creativity in the Art Class through Assessment. In Ann C. S. Kuo (Chair), “Creativity Culture Arts Education” 2008 World Creativity Summit, Symposium conductd at Taipei Fine Arts Museum, Taipei.
Bowden, C. L. (1994). Bipolar disorder and creativity. In M. P. Shaw & M. A. Runco (Eds.), Creativity and affect (pp. 73-86). Norwood, NJ：Ablex.
Burnett, C. & Cabra, J.F. (2015). Ignite your Everyday Creativity, retrieved from https：//www.coursera.org/learn/ignite-creativity.
Carson, S. H. (2009). Creativity and the Aging Brain-Use the powers of the aging brain to enhance creativity. Psychology today, retrieved from http：//www.psychologytoday.com/blog/life-art/200903/creativity-and-the-aging-brain.
Cattell, R. B. (1965). Análise científica da personalidade. Paulo, SP：IBRASA.
Cavanaugh, J. C. & Blanchard-Fields, F. (2002). Adult development and aging. Belmont, CA：Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
Ch•vez-Eakle, R., Lara, M., & Cruz-Fuentes, C. (2006). Personality：A possible bridge between creativity and psychopathology ? Creativity Research Journal, 18(1), 27-38.
Chan, D.W., & Chan, L.K. (2007). Creativity and drawing abilities of Chinese students in Hong Kong：Is there a connection? New Horizons in Education, 55(3), 77-95.
Chan, D. W., & Zhao, Y. J. (2010). The relationship between drawing skill and artistic creativity：Do age and artistic involvement make a difference? Creativity Research Journal, 22(1), 27-36.
Charyton, C., & Snelbecker, G. E. (2007). General, artistic and scientific creativity attributes of engineering and music students. Creativity Research Journal, 19(2-3), 213-225.
Clark, B. (1997). Growing up gifted (5th Ed.). Columbia：Marvall.
Cohen, G.D. (2000). The creative age-awakening human potential in the second half of life. NY：Harper Collins Publishers.
Cohen, G.D. (2006). The mature mind：The positive power of the aging brain. NY：Basic Books.
Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310-357.
Cohen-Shalev, A. (1989). Old age style：Developmental changes in creative productivity from a life span perspective. Journal of Aging Studies, 3, 21-37.
Collins, G. (1981). Exploring the past：Creativity in old age, retrieved from http：//www.nytimes.com/1981/03/02/style/exploring-the-past-creativity-in-old-age.html.
Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R. R. (1994). Stability and change in personality from adolescence through adulthood. In C. F. Halverson, G. A. Kohnstamm, & R. P. Martin (Eds.), The Developing structure of temperament and personality from infancy to adulthood. Hillsdale, NJ：Erlbaum.
Cox, C.M. (1926). Genetic studies of genius. The early mental traits of three hundred geniuses (Vol.2).Stanford：Stanford University Press.
Cropley, A.J (1995). Creative performance in older adults, retrieved from https：//www.waxmann.com/fileadmin/media/zusatztexte/postlethwaite/cropley.pdf
Cropley, A.J (2003). Creativity in education & learning. Bodmin, Cornwall： Routledge Falmer.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988a). The dangers of originality：Creativity and the artistic process. In Gedo, M.M. (Ed.), Psychoanalytic perspectives on art. NJ：Analytic Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988b). Motivation and creativity：Toward a synthesis of structural and energistic approaches to cognition. New Ideas in Psychology, 6(2), 159-176.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988c). Society, culture, person：A systems view of creativity. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), The Nature of Creativity. Cambridge：Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). The domain of creativity. In Runco, M. A. & Albert, R. S. (Eds.), Theories of creativity. London：Sage Publications.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity：Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. NY：Harper Collins Publishers.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow：The psychology of engagement with everyday life. NY：Basic books.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a system’s perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. NY：Cambridge University Press.
Csikzentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2000). New conceptions and research approach to creativity：Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In Heller, K. A., Monk, F. J., Sternberg, R. J. & Subotnik, R. F. (Eds.) (2000). International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent. NY：Elsevier.
Currey, M. (2013). Daily rituals：How great minds make time, find inspiration, and Get to Work. London：Picador.
Dacey, J. (1989). Peak periods of creative growth across the life span. Journal of Creative Behavior, 23 (4), 224-247.
Davis, G.A. (1973). Psychology of problem solving. NY：Basic Books.
Delbanco, N. (2011). Lastingness：The Art of Old Age. NY：Grand Central Publishing.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. NY：Collier Books.
Dyer, J., Gregersen, H., & Christensen, C.M. (2011). The innovator's DNA： mastering the five skills of disruptive innovators. Massachusetts：Harvard Business Review Press.
Erikson, E. (1982). The life cycle completed. NY：Norton.
Feist, G. J. (1999). The influence of personality on artistic and scientific creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. Cambridge, UK：Cambridge University Press.
Feldhusen, J.F., & Goh, B.E. (1995). Assessing and assessing creativity：An integrative review of theory. Creativity Research Journal, 8(3), 231-247.
Fisher, B. J., & Specht, D. K. (1999). Successful aging and creativity in later life. Journalof Aging Studies, 13 (4), 457-472.
Flood, M., & Phillips, K. D. (2007). Creativity in older adults：a plethora of possibilities. Mental Health Nursing, 28(4), 384-411.
Fry, P.S. (1986). Depression, stress, and adaptations in the elderly：Psychological assessment and intervention. In Cavanaugh, J.C. & Rockville, M.D. (Eds.) (1986), Adult development and aging. Boston：Cengage Learning.
Galenson, D.W. (2007). Wisdom and creativity in old Age：Lessons from the impressionists. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2007(6), JEL No. J01.
Galton, F. (1879). Psychometric experiments. Inquiries into human faculty and its development. London：Macmillan.
Gardner, H. (1982). Art, mind and brain：A cognitive approach to creativity. NY：Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1993a). Creating minds. NY：Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1993b). Multiple intelligences：The theory in practice. NY：Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1997). Extraordinary minds：Portraits of 4 exceptional individuals and an examination of our own extraordinariness. NY：Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1998). Creativity：An interdisciplinary perspective. Creativity Research Journal, 1, 8-26.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind：The theory of multiple intelligence. NY：Basic Books.
Getz, I., & Lubart, T.I. (2000). An emotional experiential perspective on creative symbolic-metaphorical processes. Consciousness and Emotion, 1, 89-118.
Getzels, J. A., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision：A longitudinal study of probale finding in art. Toronto：John Wiley & Sons.
Gordon, K. (1998). Resilience from poverty and stress. Human Development and Family Bulletin, 4(1), 7-26.
Gough, H.G. (1961). Techniques for identifying the creative research scientist. In Conference on the creative person. Berkeley：University of California, Institute of Personality Assessment and Research.
Gough, H.G. (1979). A creative personality scale for the adjective check list. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(8), 1398-1405.
Gruber, H. E. (1984). The emergence of a sense of purpose：A cognitive case study of young Darwin. In M. L. Commons, F. A. Richards, & C. Armon (Eds.), Beyond formal operations：Late adolescence and adult cognitive development. NY： Praeger.
Gruber, H. E. (1986). Darwin on man. Chicago：Chicago University Press.
Gruber, H. E., & Wallace, D. B. (1999). The case study method and evolving systems approach for understanding unique creative people at work. In R. J.Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 93-115). Cambridge：Cambridge University Press.
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. NY：McGraw-Hill.
Guilford, J. P. (1970). Traits of creativity. In P.E.Vernon (Ed.), Creativity：Selected readings (pp. 126-136). Baltimore：Penguin Books.
Guilford, J. P. (1986). Creative talents：Their nature, uses and development. NY：Bearly.
Haller, C. S., Courvoisier, D. S., & Cropley, D. H. (2010). Correlates of creativity among visual art students. The International Journal of Creativity Problem Solving, 20(1), 53-71.
Hanna, G. (2006). Focus on creativity and aging in the United States. Generations, 30 (1), 47-49.
Hannemann, B. T. (2006). Creativity with dementia patients. Gerontology, 52, 59-65.
Hickson, J., & Housley, W. (1997). Creativity in later life. Educational Gerontology, 23(6), 539-547.
Hooyman, N.R., & Kiyak, H.A. (2002). Social gerontology： A multi-disciplinary perspective (6th Ed.). Boston, MA：Allyn and Bacon.
House, J. S., Umberson, D., & Landis, K. R. (1988). Structures and processes of social support? Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 293-318.
http//www.waxmann.com/fileadmin/media/zusatztexte/postlethwaite/cropley.pdf
Johnson, M. L. (1995). Lesson from the open university：Third-age learning education. Gerontology, 21, 415-425.
Jonathan A. P., & Joseph S. R. (1999). Psychometric approaches to the study of human Creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.). Handbook of creativity (pp 37-61). NY：Harper Collins.
Kahl, C.H., Fonseca, L.H. & Witte, E.H.W. (2009). Revisiting creativity research： An investigation of contemporary approaches. Creativity Research Journal, 21(1), 1-5.
Katz, A. N. (1997). Creativity in the cerebral hemispheres. In Runco, M.A. (Ed.), Creativity research handbook. Cresskill, NJ：Hampton Press.
Kaun, D. E. (1991). Writers die young：The impact of work and leisure on longevity. Psychol. 12, 381–399.
Kavaler-Adler, S. (1993). The compulsion to create：A psychoanalytic study of women artists. NY：Routledge.
Kessler, R. C., Price, R. H., & Wortman, C. B. (1985). Social factors in psycholopathlogy：Stress, social support and coping processes ? Annual Review of Psychology, 36, 531-572.
Kim, T., Hon, A. Y., & Deog-Ro, L. (2010). Proactive personality and employee creativity：The effects of job creativity requirement and supervisor support for creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 22(1), 37-45.
Kris, E. (1952). Psychoanalytic explorations in art. NY：International Universities Press.
Kubie, L.S. (1958). The neurotic distortion of the creative process. Lawrence： University of Kansas Press.
Langer, E. (1989). Mindfulness. MA：Addison-Wesley.
Lehman, H.C. (1953). Age and achievement. NJ：Princeton University Press.
Lemme, B.H. (2006). Development in adulthood. NY：Pearson Education.
Lemme, B.H. (1995). Cognitive processes in adulthood, part I. Development in Adulthood. NY：Simon＆Schuster Company.
Levinson, D. J., Darrow, C. N., Klein, E. B., & Levinson, M. (1978). Seasons of a Man's Life. NY：Random House.
Levinson, D.J. (1986). A conception of adult development. American Psychologist, 41(1), Jan, 3-13.
Lindauer, M.S., Orwoll, L., & Kelley, M.C. (1997). Aging artists on the creativity of their old age. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 2&3, 133-152.
Lindauer, M.S. (1991). Physiogonomy and verbal synesthesia. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 6(3), 183–202.
Lindauer, M.S. (1992). Creativity in aging artists：Contributions from the humanities to the psychology of old age. Creativity Research Journal, 5, 211-231.
Lindauer, M.S. (1998). Artists, art, and arts activities：What do they tell us about aging? In C. Adams-Price (Ed.), Creativity and successful aging：Theoretical and empirical approaches. NY：Springer.
Lindauer, M.S. (2003). Aging, creativity and art：A positive perspective on late-life development. NY：Springer.
Lubart, T. (1999). Creativity across cultures. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 339-350). Cambridge, UK：Cambridge University Press.
Lubart, T. (2003). Psychologie de la creativite. Paris：Armand Colin.
Lubart, T. (2007). Creativity and cross-cultural variation (on line). International Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 39-59.
Mackavey, W.R., Malley, J.E., & Stewart, A.J. (1991). Remembering autobiographically consequential experiences：Content analysis of psychologists’ accounts of their lives. Psychology and Aging, 6, 50-59.
MacKinnon, D. W. (1962). The nature and nurture of creative talent. American Psychologist, 17, 484-495.
MacKinnon, D. W. (1978). In search of human effectiveness：Identifying and developing creativity. Buffalo, NY：Bearly.
Magno, C. (2009). Explaining the creative mind. International Journal of Research & Review, 3(1), 10-19.
Martindale, C. (1984). The pleasures of thought：A theory of cognitive hedonics. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 5, 49-80.
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. NY：Van Nostrend.
May, R. (1994). The courage to create. NY：W. W. Norton.
McKee, P. (2010). Transcendence in James Reynolds' Old Age Landscapes. Humanities, and the Arts, 4(3), 200-209.
Miller, N., & Boud, D. (Eds.) (1996). Working with experience：Animating learning. NY：Routledge.
Moody, H.R. (2014). Aging concepts and controversies (8th Ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA：Sage Publications.
Mumford, M. D. (2003). Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research. Creativity Research Journal, 15(2-3), 107-120.
Mumford, M. D., Medeiros, K., & Partlow, P. J. (2012). Creative thinking： Processes, strategies, and knowledge. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 30-47.
Niu, W., & Kaufman, J.C. (2013). Creativity of Vhinese and American cultures：A synthetic analysis. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(1), 77-87.
Papalia, D. E., Olds, S.W, & Feldman, R.D. (1998). Human development. NY：McGraw-Hill.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, Calif：Sage Publications.
Peck, R. C. (1968). Psychological development in the second half of life. In B. L. Neugarten(Ed.), Middle age and aging. Chicago：University of Chicago Press.
Perkins, D. (1988). The possibility of invention. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity. NY：Cambridge.
Perkins, D. (2000). The art and logic of breakthrough thinking. NY：Norton & Company.
Piirto, J. (1998). Understanding those who create. London：Gifted Pschology Press.
Policastro, E., & Gardner, H. (1999). From case studies to robust generalizations：An approach to the study ofcreativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. (pp. 213-225) Cambridge：Cambridge University Press.
Pruyser, P.W. (1987). Creativity in aging persons. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 51, 425-435.
Rak, C. F., & Patterson, L. E. (1996). Promoting resilience in at-risk children. Journal of Counseling & Development, 74, 368-373.
Rebok, G. (1987). Life-span cognitive development. NY：Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Reed, H. (2014). Becoming a channel of creativity and inspiration.Virginia：A.R.E.Press.
Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305-310.
Richards, R. (Ed.) (2007). Everyday creativity and new views of human nature： Psychological, social, and spiritual perspectives.Washington, DC：American Psychological Association, xiii.
Richardson, J.A. (1992). Art：The way it is. NJ：Prentice Hall.
Riley, Matilda W. (1979). Aging from birth to death： Interdisciplinary perspectives. UK：Oxford.
Roe, A. (1952). The making of a scientist. NY：Dodd, Mead.
Roe, A. (1970). A psychologist examines sixty-four eminent scientists. UK：Middlesex.
Rogers, C.R. (1962). Toward a theory of Creativity. In H. H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation. NY：Harper & Row.
Rostan, S. M. (2010). Studio Learning：Motivation, competence, and the development of young art student’s talent and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 22(3), 261-271.
Roukes, N. (1988). Design synectics. Massachusetts：Davis Publications.
Runco, M. A., Cramond, B., & Pagnani, A. R. (2010). Gender and creativity. Psychology, 4, 343-357.
Runco, M.A. (2008). Commentary：Divergent thinking is not synonymous with creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(2), 93-96.
Runco, M.A. (2004). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 657-687.
Runco, M.A. (2006). Creativity：theories and themes： Research, development, and practice. New York：Academic Press.
Sasser-Coen, J.R. (1993). Qualitative changes in creativity in the second half of life： A life-span developmental perspective. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 27, 18-27.
Schmidt, P.B. (2006). Creativity and coping in later life. Generations, 30(1), 27-31.
Schneider, B.A., & Pichora-Fuller, M.K. (2000). Implications of perceptual deterioration for cognitive aging research. In F.I.Craik & T.A.Salthouse (Eds.), Handbook of aging and cognition. Mahwah, NJ：Lawrence ErIbaum.
Schwarz, N. (1990). Feelings as information：Informational and motivational functions of affective states. In E.T. Higgins & R.M. Sorrentino (Eds.). Handbook of Motivation and cognition：Foundations of social behavior. NY：Guilford.
Sears, R.R., Lapidus, D., & Cozzens, C. (1978). Content analysis of Mark Twain’s novels and letters as a biographical method. Poetics, 7, 155-175.
Simonton, D.K. (1976). Biographical determinants of achieved eminence：A multivariate approach to the Cox data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 218-226.
Simonton, D.K. (1977). Creative productivity, age and stress：A biographical time-series analysis of 10 classical composers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 791-804.
Simonton, D.K. (1980). Thematic fame and melodic originality in classical music：A multivariate computer-content analysis. Journal of Personality, 48, 206-219.
Simonton, D.K. (1983). Dramatic greatness and content：A quantitative study of eighty-one Athenian and Shakespearean plays. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 1, 109-123.
Simonton, D.K. (1984). Artistic creativity and interpersonal relationships across and within generations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1273-1286.
Simonton, D.K. (1986). Popularity, content, and conext in 37 Shakespeare plays. Poetics, 15, 493-510.
Simonton, D.K. (1988). Age and outstanding achievement：What do we know after a century of research？Psychological Bulletin, 104, 251-267.
Simonton, D.K. (1989). Creativity and individual development. In T. Husen, & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education：Supplementary volume one, (pp181-184). NY：Pergamon Books.
Simonton, D.K. (1990a). History, chemistry, psychology, and genius：An intellectual autobiography of historiometry. In M. A. Runco & R. S. Albert (Eds.), Theories of creativity. Newbury Park, CA：Sage.
Simonton, D.K. (1990b). Creative in the later years：Optimistic prospects for achievement. The Gerontologist, 30, 626-631.
Simonton, D.K. (1994). Creativeness：Who makes history and why. NJ：LEA.
Simonton, D.K. (2000). Creativity：Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55(1), 151-158.
Sinnott, J. (2009). Cognitive development as the dance of adaptative transformation： Neo- piagetian perspectives on adult cognitive development. Em M. Cecil Smith & N. DeFrates-Densch (Edits.), Handbook of research on adult learning and development (pp. 103-134). NY：Routledge.
Skinner, B. F. (1983). Intellectual self-management in old age. American Psychologist, 38, 239–244.
Smith, G.J.W. & Meer, G. (1990). Creativity in old age. Creativity Research Journal, 3(4), 249-264.
Sternberg, R. J. (1988). The nature of creativity：Contemporary psychological erspectives. NY：Cambridge University.
Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.) (1999). Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge：Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J. (2000). Identifying and developing creative giftedness. Roeper Review, 23 (2), 60-64.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd：cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. NY：The Free Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). Concept of creativity：Prospects and paradigms. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3-15). Cambridge, UK：Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Williams, W. M. (1996). How to develop student creativity. Alexandria, VA：Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Sternberg, R.J. (2006). Creating a vision of creativity：The first 25 years. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, S (1), 2-12.
Storr, A. (1988). Solitude：A return to the self. NY：The Free Press.
Suler, J.R. (1980). Primary process thinking and creativity. Psychological Bulletin, 88,144-165.
Tennant, M. & Pogson, P. (1995). Learning and change in the adult years：A developmental perspective. San Francisco：Jossey-Bass.
Thomas, H. (1997). Research methods and data analysis in the social sciences. Boston, MA：Pearson.
Torrance, E. P., Clements, C. B., & Goff, K. (1989). Mind-body learning among the elderly：Arts, fitness, incubation. Educational Forum, 54, 123–133.
Torrance, E.P. (1988). The nature of creativity as manifest in its testing. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity. Cambridge：Cambridge University Press.
United Nations (2008). A society for all ages：Challenges and opportunities. Report of the UNECE Ministerial Conference on ageing. Retrieved from http：//www.unece.org/pau/¬¬_docs/ece/2007/ECE_AC30_2007_2.e.pdf.
Wallas, G. (1926). The Art of Thought. London：Jonathan Cape.
Williams, F.E. (1970). Classroom ideas for encouraging thinking and feeling. NY：D.O.K. Publishers.
Winner, E. (1996). The rage to master：The decisive role of talent in the visual arts. In K. Ericcson (Ed.), The road to excellence：The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports and games (pp.255-301). Mahwah, NJ：Erlbaum.
Wolcott, H. (1990). Ethnographic research in education. In R.Jaeger (Ed.) , Complementary Research Methods for research in Education. Washington, DC： American Educational Research Association, 329-353.
Woodman, R.W., & Schoenfeldt, L. F. (1990). An interactionist model of creative behavior. Journal of Creative Behavior, 24(4), 279-291.
Wyatt-Brown, A. M. (1988). Late style in the novels of Barbara Pym and Penelope Mortimer. The Gerontologist, 28(6), 835-839.
Yoko, H. (2015). Arts Alive-Art Programs for Elderly including those with Dementia in Japan：Practice and Issues. Retrieved from National Leadership Exchange and Conference on Creative Aging. https：//drive.google.com/file/d/0B-dNSj0ywPmZVzBoNmY5WGtvVnM/view
Zausner, T. (2007). Artist and audience：Everyday creativity and visual art. In Ruth Richards (Ed.), (2007). Everyday creativity and new views of human nature：Psychological, social, and spiritual perspectives. Washington, DC：American Psychological Association, xiii, 349.
Zhang, W., & Niu, W. (2013). Creativity in the later life：Factors associated with the creativity of the Chinese elderly. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(1), 60-76.
Zimmerman, E. (2006). It takes effort and time to achieve new ways of thinking： creativity and art education. The International Journal of Arts Education, 3(2), 57-87.
Zimmerman, E. (2009). Reconceptualizing the role of creativity in art education theory and practice. Studies in Art Education, 50(4), 382-399.