Volume 77, Issue 12 (March 2020)
Tehran Univ Med J 2020, 77(12): 767-775 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Shariati M, Shirazi M, Hosseini Dehshiri A S, Modarres M. Inhibitory cognitive factors of creativity in medical students. Tehran Univ Med J 2020; 77 (12) :767-775
URL: http://tumj.tums.ac.ir/article-1-10218-en.html
URL: http://tumj.tums.ac.ir/article-1-10218-en.html
1- Department of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
2- Department of Clinical Sciences and Education Karolinska Institute Sweden; Department of Medical Education, Shool of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
3- Department of Psychology and Education, School of Educational Sciences, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran.
4- - Department of Reproductive Health, Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. ,modarres@tums.ac.ir
2- Department of Clinical Sciences and Education Karolinska Institute Sweden; Department of Medical Education, Shool of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
3- Department of Psychology and Education, School of Educational Sciences, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran.
4- - Department of Reproductive Health, Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. ,
Abstract: (2050 Views)
Background: Changing the mental structure of students and identifying creativity inhibitors are essential for academic survival and the pursuit of innovation. This study aimed to identify the inhibitory cognitive factors in medical students.
Methods: This study was a directional qualitative content analysis that conducted based on scientific literature review and opinions of experts in a semiformal expert panel by using semi-structured interviews ranging from 20 to 70 minutes from February 2015 to October 2016. Seventeen talented students were interviewed and conversations were recorded with a digital voice recorder at the Exceptional Talent Development Center (ETDC). The extraction and content analysis was continuously done by listening and writing through several times. The students were in various medical disciplines, and most of them were first rank students in scientific performance and they were collaborating with ETDC.
Results: The inhibition variables of creativity were classified in the four main subcategories according to the semantic relationship and after compression, these classes of inhibitory factors included: teacher-related inhibitors, teaching and assessment methods related inhibitors, student barriers and inhibitors of the university's educational system. Finally, 10 codes were extracted from the 4th categories, which were mentioned as inhibitory variables of creativity. The teachers' lack of enthusiasm with the new ideas, the lack of creativity in the academic context and the lack of motivation among the students were the main inhibitors of creativity that were extracted from interviewing with talented students.
Conclusion: In this study, the most important cognitional inhibitory factors in creativity promotion were the inhibitors related to the teacher’s character and his attitude to creativity, methods of teaching and the university environment. Planning for the removal of these barriers in medical students recommended.
Methods: This study was a directional qualitative content analysis that conducted based on scientific literature review and opinions of experts in a semiformal expert panel by using semi-structured interviews ranging from 20 to 70 minutes from February 2015 to October 2016. Seventeen talented students were interviewed and conversations were recorded with a digital voice recorder at the Exceptional Talent Development Center (ETDC). The extraction and content analysis was continuously done by listening and writing through several times. The students were in various medical disciplines, and most of them were first rank students in scientific performance and they were collaborating with ETDC.
Results: The inhibition variables of creativity were classified in the four main subcategories according to the semantic relationship and after compression, these classes of inhibitory factors included: teacher-related inhibitors, teaching and assessment methods related inhibitors, student barriers and inhibitors of the university's educational system. Finally, 10 codes were extracted from the 4th categories, which were mentioned as inhibitory variables of creativity. The teachers' lack of enthusiasm with the new ideas, the lack of creativity in the academic context and the lack of motivation among the students were the main inhibitors of creativity that were extracted from interviewing with talented students.
Conclusion: In this study, the most important cognitional inhibitory factors in creativity promotion were the inhibitors related to the teacher’s character and his attitude to creativity, methods of teaching and the university environment. Planning for the removal of these barriers in medical students recommended.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
