ARTICLES

 

The mediating role of cognitive flexibility in the relationship between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills

 

 

Zeynep Nur Aydın Kıiıç^I; Nilay Çelik Ercoşkun^II

^ICareer Planning Application and Research Center, Gazi University, Ankara, Türkiye zeynepnuraydin@gmail.com
^IIDepartment of Education Science, Kazım Karabekir Faculty of Education, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Türkiye

 

 

---

ABSTRACT

In the study reported on here we aimed to investigate the mediating effect of pre-school teacher candidates' cognitive flexibility between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills. The relational model was used to examine the direct and mediation relationship between the variables. The sample consisted of 516 pre-school teacher candidates, 445 of whom were female and 71 male, studying at 16 universities in Türkiye. Three Likert-type scales were used in the research: the Marmara creative thinking tendencies scale, the problem-solving inventory and the cognitive flexibility scale. To analyse data, the Pearson moment correlation coefficient and Hayes process macro for the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) were used through the SPSS-22 program to examine the relationship between the variables and to conduct the mediation analysis. The results show a moderate relationships between the creative thinking tendencies, problem-solving skills, and cognitive flexibility of pre-school teacher candidates. Cognitive flexibility also played a mediating role between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills. According to these results, creative thinking tendencies and cognitive flexibility variables together explain 35% of the change in problem-solving skills. Based on the results, some suggestions are made.

Keywords: cognitive flexibility; creative thinking tendencies; pre-school teacher candidates; problem-solving skills

---

 

 

Introduction

Problem-solving is a high-level cognitive capacity and has some consequences for daily functioning. Science and technology are rapidly advancing in the 21st century. In this rapid progress, instability increases with the growth of knowledge. As a result, problems become more complex (Hacıoğlu, 1990; Kalia, Fuesting & Cody, 2019). Since the pace of social change never slows down, citizens of the 21st century should become master problem-solvers, be able to deal with ill-defined problems, and become successful (Martinez, 1998). The future may bring new and more complex problems.

It is important to provide students with skills that enable them to find their way in an increasingly uncertain and unstable world and to provide them with high-level thinking skills that are vital for the 21st century to prepare them for a future full of unknowns. To cope with problems, economically develop, and achieve sustainable development, individuals should not only acquire knowledge but also be able to innovatively and flexibly use this knowledge in new situations. In the 21st century, individuals can exist not with what they already know, but with their actions - they can use what they know. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) attaches importance to problem-solving skills as many other 21st-century skills. For this reason, the OECD provides evidence-based data by associating the education systems of countries with many variables to contribute to the world economy through international student evaluation programmes such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). In this way, the OECD provides information to education stakeholders about the current status and improvability of problem-solving skills (Csapó & Funke, 2017; OECD, 2021). These evaluations show that in the education systems of high-performing countries the importance of problem-solving skills, which are acquired at an early age through pre-school education are acknowledged and teachers have the necessary competencies to support these skills (Bausela Herreras, 2017; Pholphirul, 2017; Tonga, Eryiğit, Yalçın & Erden, 2022).

Individuals with developed problem-solving skills are open to innovation, aware of their choices and decisions, responsible, flexible, courageous, able to develop new ideas, are intelligent, careful, self-confident, objective, logical, pay attention to procedures and methods, are active, energetic, creative, productive, and have the ability to critically look at events (Nezu & Nezu, 2001). Individuals with better problem-solving skills are more likely to make faster decisions and find functional solutions in their lives (Snyder & Snyder, 2008).

Hamza and Griffith (2006) emphasise that individuals should acquire creative thinking skills as well as problem-solving skills to be contributing members of society and to survive in the real world. For a qualified education process, it is more important for teachers to have these skills. However, research conducted in recent years shows that teachers do not have sufficient 21st-century skills such as creative thinking and problem-solving (Mullet, Willerson, Lamb & Kettler, 2016). Problem-solving is a skill that can be learned (Bingham, 2004) and improved through education (Webster-Stratton, 2005). For this reason, raising individuals who can overcome problems has always been one of the primary goals of education (Charles & Lester, 1982:15). The ability of students to live effectively and sustainably depends on their awareness of the problems that naturally arise in rapid progress and their ability to develop effective solutions to these problems during their learning processes. Paine, Blömeke and Aydarova (2016) state that discussions about teaching are no longer local issues and emphasise that teacher qualifications and teacher training processes should be defined with a global vision. As such, many organisations such as the OECD, Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills Framework (ATSC21), Partnership for 21st Century Skills ([P21], 2009), and the National Research Council (NRC) strongly argue for the essential skills that individuals should acquire in school and life today and in the future. The conclusion from these discussions is that problem-solving and creativity are among the fundamental skills that students need to develop in the 21st century (Beers, 2011; Lemke, 2002; OECD, 2018; P21, 2009; Wagner, 2008). The development of these skills is of particular importance for children who are the active individuals of the future. At this point, teachers should have and be able to use these skills.

Problem-solving

Researchers define the concept, "problem", in various ways. Evans (1997) states that the problem is a complex and troublesome situation. Nezu, Nezu and D'Zurilla (2007) describe a problem as emerging when there's a discrepancy between what is and what one wishes it to be. Bingham (2004) defines a problem as the obstacles that individuals encounter while trying to achieve their goals. However, what most researchers agree on is that problems have two basic features: a goal and an obstacle (Jackson, 1975).

While a problem is any situation for which individuals do not have ready and instant solution reactions, a solution is the act of choosing between different ideas or possible solutions (Ramsey, 1989).

The solution process to a problem consists of the interaction of many cognitive processes such as research, decision-making, analysis, and synthesis (Wang & Chiew, 2010). Many researchers report that problem-solving includes various processes (D'Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971; Gunawan, Suranti, Nisrina & Herayanti, 2018; Wang & Chiew, 2010). For example, D' Zurilla and Goldfried (1971) describe the problem-solving process in which they define five steps: (1) recognising the problem, (2) diagnosing and formulating the problem, (3) producing alternative solutions, (4) making a decision and (5) applying the solutions to the problem. However, the process involves recognising the existence of a problem, thinking about what needs to be done, and doing what has been decided (Gilhooly, 1989). The multi-stage and complex structure of the problem-solving process causes many factors to affect the solution process. Researchers state that problem-solving, like the problem itself, is a process with different underlying factors (Bingham, 2004; Heppner, 1978; Mayer & Wittrock, 2006; Weiss, 1993). The solution to problems encountered in daily life varies depending on the type of problem, existing situation, resources, and even the individual (Heppner, Witty & Dixon, 2004; Khademi, 2016). While Mayer and Wittrock (2006) state that cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational factors are effective in problem-solving, Jonassen (2011) draws attention to the internal and external factors influencing the problem-solving process. Internal factors are related to the affective and mental processes of the persons who solve the problem (Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987; Jonassen, 2011). External factors, on the other hand, are mostly related to the characteristics of the problem encountered (e.g., structure, difficulty, scope, and quality) (Jonassen, 2011; Weiss, 1993).

Researchers state that problem-solving is influenced by the individual' s personality traits (D'Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971), sense of responsibility, anxiety, shyness (Bingham, 2004), self-confidence, and belief in solving the problem (D'Zurilla, Nezu & Maydeu-Olivares, 2004). Chi and Glaser (1985) highlight that problem-solving represents a sophisticated cognitive ability, marking it as one of the highest forms of human intelligence. Problem-solving has been associated with many cognitive skills such as perception (Bingham, 2004, D'Zurilla, 1988), attention (Nezu & D'Zurilla, 2005), reasoning skills, and cognitive style (Cormier & Nurius, 2003; D'Zurilla & Nezu, 2006, 2007; Gorski, 2003; Jonassen, 2011). Additionally, problem-solving has been so closely associated with intelligence that it has become part of the definition of intelligence (Sternberg, 1981). Similar to intelligence, many researchers directly explain problem-solving skills through creative processes (Bingham, 2004; Torrance, 1962).

Problem-solving and Creative Thinking

For many years the relationship between problem-solving and creativity has been and is being discussed by various researchers (Guilford, 1977; Hilgard, 1959; Isaksen, 1995; Kaufmann, 1988; MacKinnon, DW 1978; Maltzman, 1960; Newell, Shaw & Simon, 1962; Rugg, 1963; Russell, 1956; Smith, 1966; Torrance & Torrance, 1973; Wu & Koutstaal, 2020). Although creative thinking and problem-solving are two distinguishable types of activities, there appears to be a significant overlap between abilities, skills, and outcomes (Isaksen, 1995). The conceptual connection between problem-solving and creativity is clearly seen in Torrance' s definition of creativity. According to Torrance (2003), creativity is a natural problem-solving process that requires perceiving difficulties, problems, knowledge deficiencies, and flaws, making predictions developing hypotheses to solve the problems, and presenting the results after testing these hypotheses. This definition supports the idea that creativity is a problem-solving action (Butcher & Niec, 2005; Monahan, 2002; Vidal, 2003). Problem-based tasks generally require creative thinking (Ubah & Ogbonnaya, 2021).

Problem-solving processes precede knowledge. Bare facts, no matter how they are stored in memory, do not solve problems (Simon, 1980:85). Halpern (2013) states that producing satisfactory solutions to problems often requires creativity. It is emphasised that creativity is required, particularly in solving problems that are ill-structured or require productive thinking (Frederiksen, 1983). Recognition, definition, and the problem-solving procedure constitute the basis of the creativity process (Starko, 2013). Creativity assists individuals in solving problems, presenting new ideas, and making decisions regarding various situations (Sarwinda, 2013). The first stage of problem-solving is considered as recognising the problem. DW MacKinnon (1978) states that the creative process always begins with seeing, that is, perceiving the problem. Creative individuals generally see problems that others cannot. Torrance and Torrance (1973) state that creative thinking begins with being sensitive to problems and becoming aware of gaps in knowledge, missing elements, and incompatibilities. Recognition and definition of the problem require more creativity than solving the problem (Starko, 2013). The person who notices the problem is expected to produce alternative solutions. At this point, creativity enables the fluent production of new ideas (Benedek, Franz, Heene & Neubauer, 2012; Mednick, 1962).

The productivity of creative thinking facilitates the generation of alternatives for solving a problem (Guilford, 1977; Siburian, Corebima & Saptasari, 2019; Wechsler, Saiz, Rivas, Vendramini, Almeida, Mundim & Franco, 2018). After this stage, the creative person should choose the most useful one among the alternative solutions. Merely being original is inadequate for the solution. The creative process occurs not only by creating and producing new uses but also by finding a useful solution to the problem (Clément, 2022). In other words, a creative idea should also be useful (James, Brodersen & Eisenberg, 2021; Sternberg & Lubart, 1999; Takala, 1993; Torrance, 1968). This information shows that creativity has an important role in creating and formulating solution techniques and producing alternative solutions, acting as a bridge between problem-posing and problem-solving.

Cognitive Flexibility as a Mediating Variable Creativity is vital in solving many types of complex problems (Wu & Koutstaal, 2020). While Russell (1956) recognises the relationship between creative thinking and problem-solving, he thinks that problem-solving is more objective and external, and emphasises that creativity is more personal and related to innovation rather than predetermined conditions. According to Farcaş (2013), not all problem-solving methods are creative. While simple problem situations are solved with existing solutions and tried-and-tested solutions, creativity is required in productive problem-solving methods.

The diverse viewpoints in the literature regarding the relationship between creativity and problem-solving prompt inquiries into the extent of creativity used by individuals who are adept at navigating challenges. Or do individuals who develop effective solution strategies for problems always use their creativity at the first stage? Does the characteristic definition of creativity (e.g., making meaningful and new connections to think about many possibilities, thinking in different ways and from different perspectives, thinking of new and unusual possibilities, and producing alternatives) (Meintjes & Grosser, 2010) tell us that creative people are always good problem-solvers across a variety of issues? Cañas, Quesada, Antolí and Fajardo (2003) emphasise that this is not always the case and reveal that individuals who perform well in problem-solving tasks are sometimes affected by this change when they encounter new conditions and their problem-solving performance decreases. This interesting result shows that developing effective solution strategies in the face of unexpected situations cannot be explained primarily by creativity. This situation requires finding an answer to the question of what other skills should be employed along with creativity to develop effective solution strategies in the face of problems. Different views exist regarding whether creative individuals engage in more automatic processing due to unfocused attention or looser associations when working on a creative task, or, conversely, more controlled processing due to a greater ability to focus (Zabelina & Robinson, 2010). According to Miller and Cohen (2001), more creative human cognition uses the brain's cognitive control circuits to overcome over-learned ordinary associations. Diminished cognitive control might enhance associative mechanisms, which have historically been deemed crucial for inventive thought. Conversely, persons inclined towards automatic processing tend to exhibit persistence in their cognitive patterns, leading to reduced creativity (Zabelina & Robinson, 2010). Generally, individuals who perceive themselves as competent are less inclined to alter their strategies upon recognising changes and may initially struggle to detect these changes. Consequently, when they depend on established automated routines for performance, they might be less prone to assess the potential for system failures (Edland, Svenson & Hollnagel, 2000).

Clerc and Josseron (2022) analysed the challenges that an individual faces in problem resolution as a misinterpretation of the situation' s characteristics. The knowledge and experiential background of a person undeniably contribute significantly to their ability to solve problems (Bassok & Olseth, 1995). Familiar information is useful for problems that require the same solution strategy. However, an incorrectly coded problem and an incorrectly coded solution strategy for this problem make the solution to the problem difficult. When solvers recognise problems as similar because they follow the same solution principle, the transfer of solutions is beneficial. Conversely, when problems with distinct abstract structures are mistakenly perceived as similar, the transfer of solutions is detrimental. Likewise, there is an absence of solution transfer when problems that adhere to the same solution principle are perceived as dissimilar (Clément, 2022).

Achieving accurate problem transfer necessitates an individual's departure from automatic processing modes. Exiting such modes embodies representational flexibility, enabling the person to formulate a novel representation of the issue at hand and to amalgamate diverse viewpoints that facilitate the derivation of a solution (Clément, 2001, 2008). Researchers concur that recognising a change in circumstances is crucial for an individual to transition from automatic to controlled processing modes, especially when confronted with unforeseen alterations (Hollnagel, 1998; Norman, 1981; Norman & Shallice, 1980; Rasmussen, 1983; Reason, 1990). At this point, cognitive flexibility is understood as the capacity to modify one's cognitive framework, abilities, thoughts, or focus in order to perceive, interpret, or react to various situations in alternative manners (Eslinger & Grattan, 1993). Cognitive flexibility is essential for recognising that a situation has altered and requires a response that deviates from routine practices (Cañas, Fajardo & Salmerón, 2006).

For cognitive flexibility to be exhibited, an individual must be aware of environmental factors that could potentially disrupt the execution of the current task (Cañas et al., 2006). Flexibility refers to the ability to modify one' s cognitive representations and processes in alignment with the objective sought, as a reaction to shifts in environmental signals (Blaye, 2022). Individuals adapt to unexpected environmental changes through cognitive flexibility (Payne, Bettman & Johnson, 1993). Due to cognitive flexibility, individuals can modify their cognitive processing strategies to tackle new and unforeseen situations (Cañas et al., 2003), thereby generating an alternative mental representation that more accurately reflects the traits of the encountered scenario (Gamo, Sander & Richard, 2010; Richard & Zamani, 2003). Thus, instead of using frequently used solutions based on faulty representations, they create new representations that enable them to solve the problems (Clement & Richard, 1997).

Cognitive flexibility manages individuals' knowledge about a problem and the possible solution strategies they develop with this information. This knowledge is acquired through the experience gained from previous analogous situations. However, when the situation evolves, this information must be updated to reassess potential new task demands. When a person is cognitively inflexible, this person behaves dysfunctionally in coping with situational demands and, thus often performs incorrectly (Cañas et al., 2006).

Problem-solving is inherently domain-specific and contextual, meaning that problems emerge within specific contexts or situations. Solutions effective in one context might not be applicable in another. As such, problem-solving necessitates an awareness of the unique constraints of the problem's context. This demands the creation of novel problem-solving approaches, embodying an ethos of flexibility, open-mindedness, and creativity (Kitchener, 2011).

Creativity is a multifaceted concept consisting of dimensions such as fluency, originality, and flexibility (Mumford & Gustafson, 1988; Simonton, 2003). Flexibility, as an aspect of creativity, fosters the processes of ideation and the ability to transform. It enables individuals to reinterpret and reorganise existing knowledge to innovate and generate new concepts. Although the components of creativity seem to be inseparable parts of each other, the issue becomes not a matter of creating and producing new uses, but also a matter of finding a solution in the problem-solving process. Cognitive flexibility is closer to daily life situations and is the more analytical dimension of creativity (Clément, 2022). Cognitive flexibility is characterised by individuals' ability to think and select choices and responses in a deliberate and measured manner, rather than resorting to impulsive alterations (Schommer-Aikins, 2011). This may facilitate the problem-solving process by playing a regulatory role in the unfocused attention and loose association process claimed for creative individuals (Zabelina & Robinson, 2010). Cognitive flexibility is crucial for adapting behaviour to the fluctuating conditions of daily life. Especially in problem-solving, uncovering a solution frequently necessitates a shift in perspective, namely, altering the representation of the situation, thus demonstrating representational or conceptual flexibility (Clément, 2022). Cognitive flexibility, which emphasises the change of the problem solver' s existing beliefs and strategies (Krems, 2014), facilitates the use of imagination and creativity to solve the problem (Georgsdottir & Lubart, 2003). Creative insights and original ideas are the final products of creative processes. These outcomes can be realised through the application of cognitive flexibility (Dreu, Nijstad & Baas, 2011). To create the new, it is necessary to reinterpret and rearrange the known. This can happen, as mentioned, through cognitive flexibility (Clément, 2022).

Although this information shows that creativity is a necessary skill for problem-solving, it strengthens the idea that to develop effective strategies for solving the problem, it is necessary to first realise that the problem representation has changed and use cognitive flexibility to create new problem representations. In this sense, it can be said that cognitive flexibility acts as a catalyst when using creativity in the process of solving a problem. It is clear from recent studies that, as the cognitive flexibility of teacher candidates increases, positive changes take place in their problem-solving skills (Idawati, Setyosari, Kuswandi & Ulfa, 2020). However, other studies also prove the existence of a positive relationship between the creativity of teacher candidates (Ubah & Ogbonnaya, 2021), cognitive flexibility (Çağlar Özhan, Tekeli & Altun 2024; Yaşar Ekici & Balcı, 2019) and problem-solving skills.

It is very important for pre-school teachers, who are the most significant legacy guiding our rapidly changing and developing world, to be individuals equipped with the necessary knowledge and skills. Various studies have shown that pre-school teachers who work with children with different individual characteristics, having cognitive flexibility and creative problem-solving skills - both of which are metacognitive functions - have positive effects on children (Kömbeci, 2021; Yılmaz, İnce & Kırımoğlu, 2020). The cognitive flexibility skills that begin to develop rapidly during the pre-school period continue to evolve until adolescence, alongside the growth of neural networks (Buttelmann & Karbach, 2017). While cognitive flexibility creates a variety of strengths and creative abilities in children, it also enhances their problem-solving skills (Diamond, 2013). Teachers' ability to serve as role models for children in terms of the skills they possess is an important step for supporting the development of the same skills in children. Therefore, teachers play a critical role in fostering metacognitive gains such as cognitive flexibility during early childhood. On the other hand, unexpected situations are quite likely to arise in educational settings with children. Pre-school teachers need to apply their cognitive flexibility and creativity skills to develop alternative solutions to the different situations they encounter during the educational process. At this point, the role of cognitive flexibility, defined as the ability to adapt to new situations and provide different solutions, is significant for teachers (Çağlar Özhan et al., 2024; Camcı Erdoğan, 2018). In this context, examining the cognitive flexibility, creativity, and problem-solving skills of pre-school teacher candidates is important for the training they will receive throughout the teaching process.

Purpose of the Research

With this research we aimed to examine the mediating role of cognitive flexibility in the relationship between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills.

In this context, we sought to answer questions regarding whether creative thinking tendencies have an impact on problem-solving skills and whether cognitive flexibility plays a mediating role in the relationship between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills. The model to be tested is shown in Figure 1.

 

Method

Research Model

In this study, the relational survey model, one of the quantitative research methods, was used to examine the mediating role of cognitive flexibility in the effect of creative thinking tendencies on problem-solving skills. The main purpose of the relational screening model is to reveal whether two or more variables change together (Creswell, 2011). In the study, the Hayes model (Gürbüz, 2019), one of the contemporary approaches, was used to statistically calculate the mediation effect.

Population and Sample

The population of the research consisted of pre-school teacher candidates studying at universities in Türkiye. The sample, which consisted of 516 pre-school teacher candidates (445 female and 71 male) studying at 16 universities in Türkiye, was determined through the convenience sampling method, which is one of the non-random sampling methods. Data were collected via online forms. The required ethical permission to conduct the research was obtained from the Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Board of the University of Social and Human Sciences. The research team ensured that all participants knew and agreed on the principles of informed consent, voluntary participation, and confidentiality of their responses.

Data Collection Tools

The Marmara creative thinking tendencies scale, the problem-solving inventory and the cognitive flexibility scales were used in the study. Detailed information about the scales is given below.

Marmara creative thinking tendencies scale

The Marmara creative thinking tendencies scale was developed by Özgenel and Çetin (2017). The scale is a 5-point Likert-type measurement tool consisting of 25 items and six factors. The dimensions of the scale are defined as seeking innovation, courage, self-discipline, curiosity, doubting and flexibility. The total score can be calculated on the scale. In this research, the Cronbach alpha coefficient was calculated as .90 for the entire scale.

Problem-soiving inventory

The problem-solving inventory, developed by Heppner and Petersen in 1982, was adapted into Turkish by Taylan (1990), and its validation was also conducted. The scale is a 6-point Likert-type tool consisting of a three-factor and 35-item structure: confidence in problem-solving ability, approach-avoidance and personal control, including positive and negative items. The total score can be calculated on the scale. In this study, the Cronbach alpha coefficient was calculated as .86 for the entire scale.

Cognitive flexibility inventory

The Turkish adaptation of the cognitive flexibility inventory developed by Dennis and Vander Wal (2010) and its validation was carried out by Sapmaz and Doğan (2013). The scale is a 5-point Likert-type measurement tool consisting of 20 items and two factors: alternatives and control. The total score can be calculated from the scale consisting of positive and negative items. In this study, the Cronbach alpha coefficient was calculated as .93 for the entire scale.

Data Analysis

The data obtained in the research were analysed through the SPSS 22.0 program. Central tendency measures, kurtosis, and skewness coefficients were used to determine whether the data showed normal distribution. From the analyses it was seen that the central tendency measures of the score distributions obtained from the scales were close to each other. When the analysis results regarding kurtosis and skewness are examined, creative thinking tendencies (kurtosis = .385, skewness = -.334), problem-solving skills (kurtosis = .094, skewness = -.445), and cognitive flexibility (kurtosis = .256, skewness = -.599) scales showed a normal distribution (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Before moving on to the analysis of the variable "role of the mediator" in the study, correlation analysis was conducted to reveal whether multicollinearity existed between the variables. The results of the analyses show that the relationships between the variables (r = .487-.599) were not above .90 (Çokluk, Şekercioğlu & Büyüköztürk, 2014), tolerance values (Tolerance = .613-.673) were greater than .20, and the variance inflation factor were (VIF = 1.485-1.632) below 10 (Büyüköztürk, 2019). These scores show that there was no multicollinearity problem between the variables and mediation analysis could be performed for the proposed model. Model 4 put forward by Hayes (2018) was used through SPSS Process Macro v4.3 to reveal the mediating role of cognitive flexibility in the relationship between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills. When examining Figure 1, it can be seen that the effect of creative thinking tendencies on cognitive flexibility is represented as path a, the effect of cognitive flexibility on problem-solving skills is represented as path b, the direct effect of creative thinking tendencies on problem-solving is represented as path c¹, and the total effect is symbolised by c. The mentioned symbolic paths represent unstandardised regression coefficients. It is anticipated that the established model demonstrates the effect of creative thinking tendencies on problem-solving skills through the mediating role of cognitive flexibility. Thus, it aims to reveal whether cognitive flexibility transfers the influence of creative thinking tendencies to problem-solving skills.

The effect of the mediator variable was tested with the bootstrap method using 5,000 repeated samples at a 95% confidence interval, and it was taken into account that the confidence intervals did not include zero (Preacher & Hayes, 2004).

 

Results

Results Regarding the Examination of the Mediating Role of Cognitive Flexibility in the Relationship Between Creative Thinking Tendencies and Problem-solving

Regression analysis based on the bootstrap method was used to test whether cognitive flexibility played a mediating role in the effect of pre-school teacher candidates' creative thinking tendencies on their problem-solving skills. It is claimed that the bootstrap method provides more reliable results than Baron and Kenny' s traditional method and the Sobel test (Gürbüz, 2019; Hayes, 2018). Analyses were done using the process macro developed by Hayes (2018). In the analysis, 5,000 resampling options were used with the bootstrap technique. In mediation effect analyses conducted with the bootstrap technique, to support the research hypothesis, the 95% confidence interval (CI) values obtained as a result of the analysis should not include the zero value (MacKinnon, DP, Lockwood & Williams, 2004). The results of the regression analysis conducted for this purpose are given in Table 1.

Table 2 shows that the total effect of creative thinking tendencies on problem-solving skills (b = .7340, SE = .0588, p <. 05) is positive and significant. The effect of creative thinking tendencies on problem-solving (b = .4746, SE = .0617, p < .05) and the effect of creative thinking tendencies on cognitive flexibility, which is the mediator variable (b = .6534, SE = .0551, p < .05) is seen to be positive and significant. It is also revealed that the indirect effect of creative thinking tendencies on problem-solving skills (b = .2594, SE = .0437, p < .05) is positive and significant. When the full standardised effect size of the mediation effect is examined, it can be said that it is in the 95% CI (β = . 1704, CI = .1193, .2315) and this value is between medium and high mediation effect values. An effect size value close to .01 is interpreted as a low effect, close to .09 as a medium effect, and close to .25 as a high effect (Preacher & Kelley, 2011). From the findings we see that cognitive flexibility plays a mediating role in the relationship between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills. The mediating role of cognitive flexibility in the relationship between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills is shown in Figure 2.

 

Discussion

In this study, the mediating role of cognitive flexibility in the relationship between pre-school teacher candidates' creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills was examined. In this section, the results regarding the relationship between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills and ultimately the mediating role of cognitive flexibility are presented in line with the stated hypotheses.

We found a positive and significant correlation between the creative thinking tendencies of preschool teacher candidates and their problem-solving abilities. These findings align with previous research, which also indicate a link between creative thinking and problem-solving skills (Güven & Karasulu Kavuncuoğlu, 2020; Khalid, Saad, Hamid, Abdullah, Ibrahim & Shahrill, 2020; Köse, Çelik Ercoşkun & Balcı, 2016; Simanjuntak, Hutahaean, Marpaung & Ramadhani, 2021; Sonmaz, 2002).

Hamza and Griffith (2006) concluded in their study that a learning environment based on creative thinking improves students' problem-solving skills. The results of our and other studies show that creative thinking tendencies support the development and use of problem-solving skills, which is an important skill for pre-school teachers. Indeed, mirroring the outcomes of the research, Treffinger, Selby and Isaksen (2008) provide a theoretical explanation for the link between creative thinking capabilities and problem-solving skills. Vidal (2009) states that successful and effective use of problem-solving skills in real life depends on a high level of creative thinking and the ability to innovate. According to Martz, Hughes and Braun (2017), since innovation and entrepreneurship are seen as a driving force for career life, it is the mutual relationship between the two skills that makes creative thinking and problem-solving skills important and necessary for 21st-century education programmes. Newell, Shaw and Simon (1958) state that problem-solving and creativity are different concepts and suggest that if certain conditions are met, the presence of creative thinking skills can be mentioned in the use of problem-solving skills. These conditions are as follows: (1) the product of thinking is original and valuable, (2) the existence of an unconventional thought in the sense that it requires changing or rejecting previously accepted ideas, (3) high motivation and concentration for a solution process that can take a long time, (4) being able to formulate the problem if the problem is not clear and well-defined. Ismayılov and Khudiyeva (2023), similar to the results obtained in the research, state that with creative thinking, a way out of difficult situations can be found to achieve goals, new ideas can be created for problems, and non-standard solutions can be found to problems. Based on the research they conducted in South Africa, which focused on the need for teachers to develop creative thinking, solve problems, apply solutions, and thus provide an effective learning environment, they concluded that there was a need to develop teachers' creative thinking and problem-solving skills through pre-service teacher training programmes (Ubah & Ogbonnaya, 2021). Similarly, studies emphasise that in South Africa, which has a cultural mix, creative thinking and problem-solving skills are important global skills for both education stakeholders and educational programmes (Gcabashe, 2024; Meintjes & Grosser, 2010). As a result, it can be said that problem-solving skills are supported and gained value by creative thinking skills at the point of coming up with new and original solutions through the transfer of previously acquired knowledge in case of encountering new problems.

A significant finding from our study is that cognitive flexibility serves as a mediator in the relationship between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills. This outcome validates the model designed to explore the connection between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving abilities. Thus, it is seen that the effect of creative thinking tendencies on problem-solving skills decreases as cognitive flexibility plays a mediating role. Consistent with this finding, it has been demonstrated that cognitive flexibility also contributes to the influence of creative thinking tendencies on problem-solving abilities.

This result also shows that cognitive flexibility plays a facilitating role in the effect of creative thinking tendencies on problem-solving skills. Researchers acknowledge that cognitive flexibility is necessary for higher-level cognition, similar to higher-level skills such as creative thinking skills and problem-solving (Arán Filippetti & Krumm, 2020; Rende, 2000; Wang & Chiew, 2010).

Wu and Koutstaal (2020) state that creative thinking is vital in solving various complex problems, but how cognitive flexibility dynamically supports creative thinking processes is largely unexplored. Additionally, Wu and Koutstaal (2020) argue that cognitive flexibility has significant effects on creative thinking.

Based on the research findings, it has been concluded that creative thinking tendencies and cognitive flexibility are related. Q Chen, Yang, Li, Wei, Li, Lei, Zhang and Qiu (2014) uncovered that a correlation between creative thinking skills and cognitive flexibility exists and they emphasise that the cognitive flexibility skills of individuals with creative thinking are critical for real life. Li (2023) revealed that cognitive flexibility contributes to academic success with the power to produce alternative thoughts in new and difficult situations.

DeHaan (2017) argues that creative thinking skills are explained by cognitive flexibility and creative problem-solving skills - a synthesis of creative thinking and problem-solving skills - can be improved with cognitive flexibility. Similarly, research shows that creative thinking tendencies and cognitive flexibility are related (Arán Filippetti & Krumm, 2020; Chen, X, He & Fan, 2022; Çuhadaroğlu, 2013; Erkin & Göl, 2021; Kim & Runco, 2022; Shao, Nijstad & Tâuber, 2018; Tayhan, Çetinkaya, Özmen, Şahin Büyük & Uyar, 2023; Zabelina & Robinson, 2010; Zhao, Zhang & Heng, 2024). Our study shows that cognitive flexibility has an impact on problem-solving skills by playing a mediating role. The research results are similarly compatible with many research results revealing the relationship between cognitive flexibility and problem-solving skills (Bahadır Yılmaz & Yüksel, 2023; Buğa, Özkamalı, Wise & Çekiç, 2018; Esen-Aygun, 2018; Taş & Deniz, 2018; Türe & Sarıçam, 2016). Stevens (2009) asserts that a connection exists between the cognitive flexibility and problem-solving skills of children, who are the primary focus of pre-school educators. Furthermore, within the same study, it was observed that children exhibiting high levels of cognitive flexibility displayed enhanced social skills, attributed to their improved problem-solving abilities. The results obtained are also confirmed by the theoretical infrastructure regarding cognitive flexibility and problem-solving skills.

Cognitive flexibility helps individuals to look for alternative and flexible solutions when thinking about their problems and deciding on a solution. For this reason, cognitive flexibility plays an important role in that individuals can recognise problems and take initiative for solutions when alternative ideas and new and original ways are tried (Kim & Runco, 2022). Keeping up with changing situations requires an information processing system that can adapt to new tasks and situations. This depends on cognitive flexibility. Solving a problem requires more than merely using previously acquired knowledge as opposed to simply performing a task. As individuals' cognitive flexibility increases, their likelihood of developing and using problem-solving skills increases. Cognitive flexibility increases the problem-solving performance of individuals by enabling the modification and development of existing problem-solving strategies (Krems, 2014).

 

Conclusion and Recommendations

In this research, as in other fields, the starting point was the relationship between the theoretical structures of creative thinking dispositions, problem-solving skills and cognitive flexibility, which are important global skills for education systems. Since the aforementioned skills are important for children in the pre-school period, it is necessity for pre-school teachers to have these skills.

Problem-solving is a natural process found in human functioning and is a cognitive passport that opens doors to the future. The 21st century, where rapid social changes are experienced, has made problem-solving skills more important than before. In the current time period, it is more important for individuals to be skilled problem-solvers in order to keep up with change and find effective solutions to unusual problems (Martinez, 1998). In order to achieve goals and solve unexpected problems in the most effective way, the role of creative thinking skills, which is effective in offering alternative perspectives and solutions to problems, is very important (Awang & Ramly, 2008; Ramalingam, Anderson, Duckworth, Scoular & Heard, 2020). Problem-solving skills are high-level cognitive skills that require the use of creative thinking skills (Wanya, 2016). Creative thinking skills, on the other hand, are complex cognitive processes that include new and useful ideas or solutions to problems. Creative thinking and problem-solving skills, which are related to each other, require cognitive flexibility skills that include higher-level cognitive functions along with many skills for more efficient processing of information (Tardner, 2024).

The aim with this study was to reveal the mediating role of cognitive flexibility in the relationship between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills, based on the theoretical structures of creative thinking, problem-solving and cognitive flexibility skills that are important for individuals to acquire from an early age, and the relationships between these structures. The research results reveal that the aforementioned skills are interrelated and that cognitive flexibility plays a mediating and, therefore, facilitating role in the relationship between creative thinking tendencies and problem-solving skills. We consider this result important in terms of proving that creativity predicts problem-solving through increased cognitive flexibility.

In line with the research results, it is recommended that pre-school teacher training programmes be structured in a way that supports the skills in question and the relationships between these skills. We also believe that the programme in question should focus on practices and lessons that will develop students' cognitive flexibility as well as problem-solving and creativity. In addition, it is important for the pre-school education programme to take on a function that will support teachers so that teachers can apply the skills in question and reflect them to children.

Limitations

Our study had some limitations. The research was conducted with pre-school teaching students only. Research can also be conducted with other disciplines for future studies. Another limitation of this study was that we only worked with university students. Due to these limitations, caution should be exercised when generalising the findings. Future studies should also examine how cognitive flexibility and creativity may contribute to problem-solving.

 

Authors' Contribution

The authors equally contributed to the article and all authors reviewed the latest version of the manuscript.

 

Notes

i. This research was presented as an oral presentation at the 12th World Conference on Psychology and Sociology on 4 November 2023.

ii. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution Licence.

 

References

Arán Filippetti V & Krumm G 2020. A hierarchical model of cognitive flexibility in children: Extending the relationship between flexibility, creativity and academic achievement. Child Neuropsychology, 26(6):770-800. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297049.2019.1711034        [ Links ]

Awang H & Ramly I 2008. Creative thinking skill approach through problem-based learning: Pedagogy and practice in the engineering classroom. International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, 2(4):334-339.         [ Links ]

Bahadır Yılmaz E & Yüksel A 2023. Lise öğrencilerinin bilişsel esneklik ve problem çözme beceri düzeyleri: Tanımlayıcı ve ilişkisel bir çalışma [Cognitive flexibility and problem-solving skill levels of high school students: A descriptive and correlational study]. Ordu Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Çalışmaları Dergisi, 6(3):649-656. https://doi.org/10.38108/ouhcd.1141062        [ Links ]

Bassok M & Olseth KL 1995. Judging a book by its cover: Interpretative effects of content on problem-solving transfer. Memory & Cognition, 23:354367. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197236        [ Links ]

Bausela Herreras E 2017. Risk low math performance PISA 2012: Impact of assistance to Early Childhood Education and other possible cognitive variables. Acta de Investigación Psicológica, 7(1):2606-2617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aipprr.2017.02.001        [ Links ]

Beers SZ 2011. 21st century skills: Preparing students for their future. Available at http://cosee.umaine.edu/files/coseeos/21st_century_skills.pdf. Accessed 30 October 2023.         [ Links ]

Benedek M, Franz F, Heene M & Neubauer AC 2012. Differential effects of cognitive inhibition and intelligence on creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(4):480-485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.04.014        [ Links ]

Bingham A 2004. Çocuklarda problem çözme yeteneklerinin geliştirilmesi [Developing problem solving skills in children]. Translated by A. Ferhan Oğuzkan. 6th ed. Istanbul, Türkiye: Milli Eğitim Bakanlı         [ Links ]ğı.

Blaye A 2022. Development of cognitive flexibility. In E Clément (ed). Cognitive flexibility: The cornerstone of learning. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.         [ Links ]

Buğa A, Özkamalı E, Wise FA & Çekiç A 2018. Üniversite öğrencilerinin bilişsel esneklik düzeylerine göre sosyal problem çözme tarzlarının incelenmesi [University students' social problem solving styles on the basis of their cognitive flexibility levels]. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 2(1):48-58. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/485028. Accessed 20 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Butcher JL & Niec LN 2005. Disruptive behaviors and creativity in childhood: The importance of affect regulation. Creativity Research Journal, 17(2-3):181-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2005.9651478        [ Links ]

Buttelmann F & Karbach J 2017. Development and plasticity of cognitive flexibility in early and middle childhood. Frontiers in Psychology, 8:1040. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01040        [ Links ]

Büyüköztürk Ş 2019. Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum [Handbook of data analysis for social sciences: Statistics, research design, SPSS applications and interpretation] (25th ed). Ankara, Türkiye: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.         [ Links ]

Çağlar Özhan Ş, Tekeli P & Altun A 2024. Investigating the role of cognitive flexibility in shaping teacher engagement in a simulated virtual classroom. In L Gómez Chova, C González Martínez & J Lees (eds). INTED2024 proceedings. Valencia, Spain: IATED Academy. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2024.1697        [ Links ]

Camcı Erdoğan S 2018. Üstün zekalılar öğretmenliği adaylarının bilişsel esneklik düzeylerinin incelenmesi [A research on the cognitive flexibility skills of prospective teachers for gifted students]. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 16(3):77-96. https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.465710        [ Links ]

Cañas J, Quesada J, Antolí A & Fajardo I 2003. Cognitive flexibility and adaptability to environmental changes in dynamic complex problem-solving tasks. Ergonomics, 46(5):482-501. https://doi.org/10.1080/0014013031000061640        [ Links ]

Cañas JJ, Fajardo I & Salmerón L 2006. Cognitive flexibility. International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human Factors, 1(3):297-301.         [ Links ]

Charles R & Lester F 1982. Teaching problem solving: What, why & how. Palo Alto, CA: Dale Seymour Publications.         [ Links ]

Chen Q, Yang W, Li W, Wei D, Li H, Lei Q, Zhang Q & Qiu J 2014. Association of creative achievement with cognitive flexibility by a combined voxel-based morphometry and resting-state functional connectivity study. NeuroImage, 102(Pt. 2):474-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.08.008        [ Links ]

Chen X, He J & Fan X 2022. Relationships between openness to experience, cognitive flexibility, self-esteem, and creativity among bilingual college students in the U.S. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(1):342-354. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1688247        [ Links ]

Chi MTH & Glaser R 1985. Problem-solving ability. Pittsburgh, PA: Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh. Available at https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED257630.pdf. Accessed 23 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Clément E 2001. Étude des différences de flexibilité mentale dans l'activité de resolution de problems [Study of mental flexibility differences in problem solving activities]. In A Flieller, C Bocéréan, JL Kop, E Thébaut, AM Toniolo & Tournois J (eds). Questions de psychologie différentielle. Rennes, France: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.         [ Links ]

Clément E 2008. Flexibilité, changement de point de vue et découverte de solution [Flexibility, change of point of view and discovery of solution]. In G Chasseigne (ed). Cognition, santé et vie quotidienne (Vol. 1). Paris, France: Éditions Publibook.         [ Links ]

Clément E 2022. Successful solution discovery and cognitive flexibility. In E Clément (ed). Cognitive flexibility: The cornerstone of learning. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.         [ Links ]

Clement E & Richard JF 1997. Knowledge of domain effects in problem representation: The case of Tower of Hanoi isomorphs. Thinking & Reasoning, 3(2):133-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/135467897394392        [ Links ]

Clerc J & Josseron L 2022. Transfer of learning and flexibility in childhood. In E Clément (ed). Cognitive flexibility: The cornerstone of learning. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.         [ Links ]

Çokluk Ö, Şekercioğlu G & Büyüköztürk Ş 2014. Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları [Multivariate statistics for social sciences: SPSS and LISREL applications] (3rd ed). Ankara, Türkiye: Pegem Akademi.         [ Links ]

Cormier S & Nurius PS 2003. Reframing, cognitive modeling and problem-solving strategies. In S Cormier & P Nurius (eds). Interviewing and change strategies for helpers: Fundamental skills and cognitive behavioral interventions (5th ed). Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson/Brooks/Cole.         [ Links ]

Creswell JW 2011. Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed). Boston, MA: Pearson.         [ Links ]

Csapó B & Funke J (eds.) 2017. The nature of problem solving: Using research to inspire 21st century learning. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264273955-en        [ Links ]

Çuhadaroğlu A 2013. Bilişsel esnekliğin yordayıcıları [Predictors of cognitive flexibility]. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 2(1):86-101. Available at http://cije.cumhuriyet.edu.tr/en/download/article-file/48648. Accessed 19 September 2024.         [ Links ]

DeHaan RL 2017. Teaching creativity and inventive problem solving in science. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 8(3):172-181. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08-12-0081        [ Links ]

Dennis JP & Vander Wal JS 2010. The cognitive flexibility inventory: Instrument development and estimates of reliability and validity. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 34:241 -253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-009-9276-4        [ Links ]

Diamond A 2013. Executive functions. Annual Review Psychology, 64:135-168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750        [ Links ]

Dreu CKW, Nijstad BA & Baas M 2011. Behavioral activation links to creativity because of increased cognitive flexibility. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(1):72-80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550610381789        [ Links ]

D'Zurilla TJ 1988. Problem solving therapies. In KS Dobson (ed). Handbook of cognitive-behavioral therapies. New York, NY: Guilford Press.         [ Links ]

D'Zurilla TJ & Goldfried MR 1971. Problem solving and behavior modification. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 78(1):107-126. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031360        [ Links ]

D'Zurilla TJ & Nezu AM 2006. Solving life's problems: A 5-step guide to enhanced well-being. [e-book]. New York, NY: Springer.         [ Links ]

D'Zurilla TJ & Nezu AM 2007. Problem-solving therapy: A positive approach to clinical intervention (3rd ed). New York, NY: Springer.         [ Links ]

D'Zurilla TJ, Nezu AM & Maydeu-Olivares A 2004. Social problem solving: Theory and assessment. In EC Chang, TJ D'Zurilla & LJ Sanna (eds). Social problem solving: Theory, research, and training. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10805-001        [ Links ]

Edland A, Svenson O & Hollnagel E 2000. A process for the identification of weak spots in a severe incident management sequence. In P Wright, S Dekker & CP Warren (eds). ECCE 10: Confronting reality. Proceedings of the tenth European conference on cognitive ergonomics. Linköping, Sweden: University of Linköping. Available at https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA402318.pdf. Accessed 23 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Erkin Ö & Göl İ 2021. Sağlık bilimleri fakültesi öğrencilerinin bilişsel esneklik ve yaratıcılık düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [Investigation of the relationship between cognitive flexibility and creativity levels of the faculty of health sciences students]. Sağlık Akademisyenleri Dergisi, 8(2):97-102. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1309856. Accessed 18 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Esen-Aygun H 2018. The relationship between pre-service teachers' cognitive flexibility and interpersonal problem-solving skills. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 18(77):105-128. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2018.77.6        [ Links ]

Eslinger PJ & Grattan LM 1993. Frontal lobe and frontal-striatal substrates for different forms of human cognitive flexibility. Neuropsychologia, 31(1):17-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(93)90077-D        [ Links ]

Evans JR 1997. Creativity in OR/MS: The creative problem-solving process, Part 1. Interfaces, 27(5):78-83. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.27.5.78        [ Links ]

Farcaş F 2013. The creativity and problem solving for qualitative situations. Review of International Comparative Management, 14(5):766-773. Available at https://hiba.edu.sy/FCKBIH/Farcas%202013%20Creativity%20and%20Problem%20Solving.pdf. Accessed 17 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Frederiksen N 1983. Implications of cognitive theory for instruction in problem solving. ETS Research Report Series, 1983(1):363-407. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2330-8516.1983.tb00019.x        [ Links ]

Gamo S, Sander E & Richard JF 2010. Transfer of strategy use by semantic recoding in arithmetic problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 20(5):400-410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaminstruc.2009.04.001        [ Links ]

Gcabashe NB 2024. Adopting learner-centred pedagogy to develop business studies learners' problem-solving and creative thinking skills in selected schools in South Africa. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 9(2):31-50. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.2024.24        [ Links ]

Georgsdottir AS & Lubart TI 2003. La flexibilité cognitive et la créativité: Une approche développementale, différentielle et expérimentale [Cognitive flexibility and creativity: A developmental, differential and experimental approach]. Psychologie Française, 48(3):29-40.         [ Links ]

Gilhooly KJ (ed.) 1989. Human and machine problem solving. New York, NY: Pelnum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8015-3        [ Links ]

Gorski TT 2003. Problem solving group therapy: A group leader's guide for developing and implementing group treatment plans. Independence, MO: Herald House.         [ Links ]

Guilford JP 1977. Way beyond the IQ: Guide to improving intelligence and creativity. Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.         [ Links ]

Gunawan G, Suranti NMY, Nisrina N & Herayanti L 2018. Students' problem-solving skill in physics teaching with virtual labs. International Journal of Pedagogy and Teacher Education, 2:87-96. https://doi.org/10.20961/ijpte.v2i0.24952        [ Links ]

Gürbüz S 2019. Sosyal bilimlerde aracı, düzenleyici ve durumsal etki analizleri [Mediator, moderator and situational impact analyzes in social sciences]. Ankara, Türkiye: Seçkin Yayıncılık.         [ Links ]

Güven Y & Karasulu Kavuncuoğlu M 2020. Okul öncesi dönem çocukların yaratıcılık düzeyleri ile problem çözme becerileri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [Examining the relationship between preschool children's creativity levels and problem-solving skills]. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(1):37-53. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1167814. Accessed 16 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Hacıoğlu F 1990. 21. Yüzyıl için öğretmen eğitimi [Teacher education for the 21st century]. Eğitim ve Bilim, 14(77):48-53. Available at http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/6000/2129. Accessed 16 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Halpern DF 2013. Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (5th ed). New York, NY: Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315885278        [ Links ]

Hamza MK & Griffith KG 2006. Fostering problem-solving & creative thinking in the classroom: Cultivating a creative mind! National Forum of Applied Educational Research Journal-Electronic, 19(3):1-30. Available at http://www.nationalforum.com/Electronic%20Journal%20Volumes/Hamza,%20Mohammed%20Fostering%20Problem%20Solving%20&%20Creative%20Thinking%20in%20the%20Classroom.pdf. Accessed 16 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Hayes AF 2018. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed). [e-book]. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.         [ Links ]

Heppner PP 1978. A review of the problem-solving literature and its relationship to the counseling process. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 25(5):366-375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.25.5.366        [ Links ]

Heppner PP & Krauskopf CJ 1987. An information-processing approach to personal problem solving. The Counseling Psychologist, 15(3):371-447. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000087153001        [ Links ]

Heppner PP, Witty TE & Dixon WA 2004. Problem-solving appraisal: Helping normal people lead better lives. The Counseling Psychologist, 32(3):466-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000003262794        [ Links ]

Hilgard ER 1959. Creativity and problem solving. In HH Anderson (ed). Creativity and its cultivation: Addresses presented at the interdisciplinary symposia on creativity, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. New York, NY: Harper & Row.         [ Links ]

Hollnagel E 1998. Cognitive reliability and error analysis method. Oxford, England: Elsevier.         [ Links ]

Idawati, Setyosari P, Kuswandi D & Ulfa S 2020. Investigating the effects of problem-solving method and cognitive flexibility on improving university students' metacognitive skills. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 8(2):651-665. https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.652212        [ Links ]

Isaksen SG 1995. CPS: Linking creativity and problem solving. In G Kaufmann, T Helstrup & KH Teigen (eds). Problem solving and cognitive processes: A festschrift in honour of Kjell Raaheim. Bergen-Sandviken, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.         [ Links ]

Ismayılov N & Khudiyeva V 2023. Conducting training and research, problem solving, creative thinking [Special issue]. Akademik Tarih ve Düşünce Dergisi, 10(2):643-649. https://doi.org/10.46868/atdd.174        [ Links ]

Jackson KF 1975. The art of solving problems. New York, NY: St. Martin's Press.         [ Links ]

James K, Brodersen M & Eisenberg J 2021. Workplace affect and workplace creativity: A review and preliminary model. In NM Ashkanasy (ed). Emotion and performance. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429187636        [ Links ]

Jonassen D 2011. Supporting problem solving in PBL. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 5(2):95-119. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1256        [ Links ]

Kalia V, Fuesting M & Cody M 2019. Perseverance in solving Sudoku: Role of grit and cognitive flexibility in problem solving. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 31(3):370-378. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2019.1604527        [ Links ]

Kaufmann G 1988. Problem solving and creativity. In K Gr0nhaug & G Kaufmann (eds). Innovation: A cross-disciplinary perspective. Oslo, Norway: Norwegian University Press.         [ Links ]

Khademi M 2016. Investigation of relation between problem solving method (insolvency, control and creativity factors) of parents (fathers) with children's (sons). World Scientific News, 57:557563.         [ Links ]

Khalid M, Saad S, Hamid SRA, Abdullah MR, Ibrahim H & Shahrill M 2020. Enhancing creativity and problem solving skills through creative problem solving in teaching mathematics. Creativity Studies, 13(2):270-291. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2020.11027        [ Links ]

Kim D & Runco MA 2022. Role of cognitive flexibility in bilingualism and creativity. Journal of Creativity, 32(3):100032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjoc.2022.100032        [ Links ]

Kitchener RF 2011. Personal epistemology and philosophical epistemology: The view of a philosopher. In J Elen, E Stahl, R Bromme & G Clarebout (eds). Links between beliefs and cognitive flexibility. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1793-0_5        [ Links ]

Kömbeci ES 2021. Investigation of the relationship between preschool teachers' levels of loving children and their teaching attitudes. PhD thesis. Sivas, Türkiye: Sivas Cumhuriyet University.         [ Links ]

Köse E, Çelik Ercoşkun N & Balcı A 2016. Okul öncesi ve sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının yaratıcı düşünme ve problem çözme becerilerinin incelenmesi [Investigation of creativity thinking and problem solving skills of candidate pre- and primary school teachers]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40:153-170. https://doi.org/10.21764/efd.13121        [ Links ]

Krems JF 2014. Cognitive flexibility and complex problem solving. In PA Frensch & J Funke (eds). Complex problem solving: The European perspective. New York, NY: Psychology Press.         [ Links ]

Lemke C 2002. enGauge 21st century skills: Digital literacies for a digital age. Naperville, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/ERIC-ED463753/pdf/ERIC-ED463753.pdf. Accessed 18 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Li S 2023. Enhancing professional success: Chinese EFL teachers' workplace buoyancy and cognitive flexibility. Heliyon, 9(2):e13394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13394        [ Links ]

MacKinnon DP, Lockwood CM & Williams J 2004. Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1):99-128. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4        [ Links ]

MacKinnon DW 1978. In search of human effectiveness: Identifying and developing creativity. Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.         [ Links ]

Maltzman I 1960. On the training of originality. Psychological Review, 67(4):229-242. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046364        [ Links ]

Martinez ME 1998. What is problem solving? The Phi Delta Kappan, 79(8):605-609.         [ Links ]

Martz B, Hughes J & Braun F 2017. Creativity and problem-solving: Closing the skills gap. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 57(1):39-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2016.1181492        [ Links ]

Mayer RE & Wittrock MC 2006. Problem solving. In PA Alexander & PH Winne (eds). Handbook of educational psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.         [ Links ]

Mednick S 1962. The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3):220-232. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048850        [ Links ]

Meintjes H & Grosser M 2010. Creative thinking in prospective teachers: The status quo and the impact of contextual factors. South African Journal of Education, 30(3):361-386. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v30n3a360        [ Links ]

Miller EK & Cohen JD 2001. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24:167-202. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167        [ Links ]

Monahan T 2002. The do-it-yourself lobotomy: Open your mind to greater creative thinking. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.         [ Links ]

Mullet DR, Willerson A, Lamb KN & Kettler T 2016. Examining teacher perceptions of creativity: A systematic review of the literature. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21:9-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.001        [ Links ]

Mumford MD & Gustafson SB 1988. Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103(1 ):27-43.         [ Links ]

Newell A, Shaw JC & Simon HA 1958. Elements of a theory of human problem solving. Psychological Review, 65(3):151-166. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048495        [ Links ]

Newell A, Shaw JC & Simon HA 1962. The processes of creative thinking. In HE Gruber, G Terrell & M Wertheimer (eds). Contemporary approaches to creative thinking: A symposium held at the University of Colorado. New York, NY: Atherton Press. https://doi.org/10.1037/13117-003        [ Links ]

Nezu AM & D'Zurilla TJ 2005. Problem-solving therapy-general. In A Freeman, SH Felgoise, CM Nezu, AM Nezu & MA Reinecke (eds). Encyclopedia of cognitive behavior therapy. Boston, MA: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48581-8_85        [ Links ]

Nezu AM & Nezu CM 2001. Problem solving therapy. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 11:187-205. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016653407338        [ Links ]

Nezu AM, Nezu CM & D'Zurilla TJ 2007. Problem-solving skills training. In G Fink (ed). Encyclopedia of stress (2nd ed., Vol. 3). Oxford, England: Academic Press.         [ Links ]

Norman DA 1981. Categorization of action slips. Psychological Review, 88(1):1-15. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.1.1        [ Links ]

Norman DA & Shallice T 1980. Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior. In RJ Davidson, GE Schwartz & D Shapiro (eds). Consciousness and self regulation. New York, NY: Plenum.         [ Links ]

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2018. The future of education and skills: Education 2030. Paris, France: Author. Available at https://d15k2d11r6t6rl.cloudfront.net/public/users/Integrators/5eb55a21-9496-46ce-8161-f092fc9def23/aaie/OECD%202030%20Position%20Paper%20SUMMARY%20%2805.04.2018%29.pdf. Accessed 25 December 2023.         [ Links ]

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2021. Who we are? Available at https://www.oecd.org/about/ Accessed 24 November 2023.         [ Links ]

Özgenel M & Çetin M 2017. Marmara yaratıcı düşünme eğilimleri ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [Development of the Marmara creative thinking tendencies scale: Validity and reliability analysis]. Marmara Üniversitesi Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 46(46):113-132. https://doi.org/10.15285/maruaebd.335087        [ Links ]

Paine L, Blömeke S & Aydarova O 2016. Teachers and teaching in the context of globalization. In DH Gitomer & CA Bell (eds). Handbook of research on teaching (5th ed). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Partnership for 21st Century Skills 2009. P21 framework definitions. Available at https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED519462.pdf. Accessed 25 December 2023.         [ Links ]

Payne JW, Bettman JR & Johnson EJ 1993. The adaptive decision maker. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.         [ Links ]

Pholphirul P 2017. Pre-primary education and long-term education performance: Evidence from Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Thailand. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 15(4):410-432. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X15616834        [ Links ]

Preacher KJ & Hayes AF 2004. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4):717-731. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206553        [ Links ]

Preacher KJ & Kelley K 2011. Effect size measures for mediation models: Quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychological Methods, 16(2):93-115. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022658        [ Links ]

Ramalingam D, Anderson P, Duckwort D, Scoular C & Heard J 2020. Creative thinking: Skill development framework. Camberwell, Australia: The Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd. Available at https://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1041&context=ar_misc. Accessed 25 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Ramsey RF 1989. "Effective problem solving." The Shild & Lance, 7(4).         [ Links ]

Rasmussen J 1983. Skills, rules, and knowledge; signals, signs, and symbols, and other distinctions in human performance models. In IEEE transactions on systems, man, and cybernetics (Vol. SMC-13, no. 3). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1983.6313160        [ Links ]

Reason J 1990. Human error. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.         [ Links ]

Rende B 2000. Cognitive flexibility: Theory, assessment, and treatment. Seminars in Speech and Language, 21(2):121-153. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2000-7560        [ Links ]

Richard JF & Zamani M 2003. A problem-solving model as a tool for analyzing adaptive behavior. In RJ Sternberg, J Lautrey & TI Lubart (eds). Models of intelligence: International perspectives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.         [ Links ]

Rugg H 1963. Imagination: An inquiry into the sources and conditions that stimulate creativity. New York, NY: Harper & Row.         [ Links ]

Russell D 1956. Children thinking. New York, NY: Ginn.         [ Links ]

Sapmaz F & Doğan T 2013. Bilişsel esnekliğin değerlendirilmesi: Bilişsel Esneklik Envanteri Türkçe versiyonunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmaları [Assessment of cognitive flexibility: Reliability and validity studies of Turkish version of the Cognitive Flexibility Inventory]. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 46(1):143-161. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/508721. Accessed 12 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Sarwinda W 2013. Empowering student creativity through reciprocal teaching strategies in high school biology learning. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Biologi, 10(2):1-5.         [ Links ]

Schommer-Aikins M 2011. Spontaneous cognitive flexibility and an encompassing system of epistemological beliefs. In J Elen, E Stahl, R Bromme & G Clarebout (eds). Links between beliefs and cognitive flexibility. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1793-0_4        [ Links ]

Shao Y, Nijstad BA & Tauber S 2018. Linking self-construal to creativity: The role of approach motivation and cognitive flexibility. Frontiers in Psychology, 9:1929. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01929        [ Links ]

Siburian J, Corebima AD & Saptasari M 2019. The correlation between critical and creative thinking skills on cognitive learning results. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 19(81):99-114. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2019.81.6        [ Links ]

Simanjuntak MP, Hutahaean J, Marpaung N & Ramadhani D 2021. Effectiveness of problem-based learning combined with computer simulation on students' problem-solving and creative thinking skills. International Journal of Instruction, 14(3):519-534. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14330a        [ Links ]

Simon HA 1980. Problem solving and education. In D Tuma & F Reif (eds). Problem solving and education: Issues in teaching and research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.         [ Links ]

Simonton DK 2003. Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: The integration of product, person, and process perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4):475-494.         [ Links ]

Smith JA 1966. Setting conditions for creative teaching in the elementary school. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.         [ Links ]

Snyder LG & Snyder MJ 2008. Teaching critical thinking and problem solving skills. The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 1(2):90-99. Available at https://dme.childrenshospital.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Optional-_Teaching-Critical-Thinking-and-Problem-Solving-Skills.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Sonmaz S 2002. Problem çözme becerisi ile yaratıcılık ve zekâ arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [Examining the relationship between problem solving skills and creativity and intelligence]. Master's thesis. Istanbul, Türkiye: Marmara University. Available at https://www.proquest.com/docview/26068788247porigsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true&sourcetype=Dissertations%20&%20Theses. Accessed 12 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Starko AJ 2013. Creativity in the classroom: Schools of curious delight (5th ed). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.         [ Links ]

Sternberg RJ 1981. Intelligence as thinking and learning skills. Educational Leadership, 39(1):18-21.         [ Links ]

Sternberg RJ & Lubart TI 1999. The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In RJ Sternberg (ed). Handbook of creativity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.         [ Links ]

Stevens AD 2009. Social problem-solving and cognitive flexibility: Relations to social skills and problem behavior of at-risk young children. PhD dissertation. Seattle, WA: Seattle Pacific University. Available at https://www.proquest.com/docview/3051385557pqorigsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true&sourcetype=Dissertations%20&%20Theses. Accessed 12 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Tabachnick BG & Fidell LS 2007. Using multivariate statistics (5th ed). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.         [ Links ]

Takala T 1993. A neuropyschologically-based approach to creativity. In JS Gero & ML Maher (eds). Modeling creativity and knowledge-based creative design. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.         [ Links ]

Tardner P 2024. Can piracetam improve creativity and problem-solving abilities, and if so, how? Available at https://www.ijest.org/uncategorized/can-piracetam-improve-creativity-problem-solving/. Accessed 11 September 2024.         [ Links ]

Taş S & Deniz S 2018. Sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin matematiğe yönelik öğrenilmiş çaresizliklerinin yordanması: Problem çözme becerisi ve bilişsel esneklik [Prediction concerning the learned helplessness about mathematics of the 8th grade students: Problem solving skills and cognitive flexibility]. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 9(3):618-635. https://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.415087        [ Links ]

Tayhan A, Çetinkaya A, Özmen D, Şahin Büyük D & Uyar F 2023. Hemşirelik öğrencilerinin akademik başarılarına göre yaratıcı düşünce ve bilişsel esneklik düzeylerinin karşılaştırılması [Comparison of creative thinking and cognitive flexibility levels according to academic achievements of nursing students]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(1 ):42-51. https://doi.org/10.31125/hunhemsire.1273021        [ Links ]

Taylan S 1990. Heppner'in problem çözme envanterinin uyarlama güvenirlik ve geçerlik çalışmaları [Adaptation reliability and validity studies of Heppner's problem solving inventory]. Master's thesis. Ankara, Türkiye: Ankara University.         [ Links ]

Tonga FE, Eryiğit S, Yalçın FA & Erden FT 2022. Professional development of teachers in PISA achiever countries: Finland, Estonia, Japan, Singapore and China. Professional Development in Education, 48(1):88-104. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1689521        [ Links ]

Torrance EP 1962. Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. https://doi.org/10.1037/13134-000        [ Links ]

Torrance EP 1968. Torrance tests of creative thinking. Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press.         [ Links ]

Torrance EP 2003. The millennium: A time for looking forward and looking back. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15(1):6-12. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2003-442        [ Links ]

Torrance EP & Torrance JP 1973. Is creativity teachable? Phi Delta Kappa Foundation Fastback 20. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation. Available at https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED120651.pdf. Accessed 25 December 2023.         [ Links ]

Treffinger DJ, Selby EC & Isaksen SG 2008. Understanding individual problem-solving style: A key to learning and applying creative problem solving. Learning and Individual Differences, 18(4):390-401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.11.007        [ Links ]

Türe HB & Sarıçam H 2016. Öğretmen adaylarının bilişsel esneklik düzeyleri ile problem çözme becerileri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [Examining the relationship between teacher candidates' cognitive flexibility levels and problem-solving skills]. Paper presented at the 1st Eurasian Congress on Positive Psychology, Istanbul, Türkiye, 28-30 April.         [ Links ]

Ubah IJA & Ogbonnaya UI 2021. Primary school pre-service teachers' solutions to pattern problem-solving tasks based on three components of creativity. South African Journal of Education, 41(4):Art. #1933, 10 pages. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v41n4a1933        [ Links ]

Vidal RVV 2003. Creativity and problem solving. Lecture notes, informatics and mathematical modelling. Kongens Lyngby, Denmark: Technical University of Denmark.         [ Links ]

Vidal RVV 2009. Creativity for problem solvers. AI & Society, 23(3):409-432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-007-0118-1        [ Links ]

Wagner T 2008. The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don't teach the new survival skills our children need - and what we can do about it. New York, NY: Basic Books.         [ Links ]

Wang Y & Chiew V 2010. On the cognitive process of human problem solving. Cognitive Systems Research, 11(1):81-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsys.2008.08.003        [ Links ]

Wanya CS 2016. Performance and determinants of problem solving among college physics students. International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sciences, 5(6):830-854.         [ Links ]

Webster-Stratton C 2005. The incredible years: A training series for the prevention and treatment of conduct problems in young children. In ED Hibbs & PS Jensen (eds). Psychosocial treatments for child and adolescent disorders: Empirically based strategies for clinical practice (2nd ed). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.         [ Links ]

Wechsler SM, Saiz C, Rivas SF, Vendramini CMM, Almeida LS, Mundim MC & Franco A 2018. Creative and critical thinking: Independent or overlapping components? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27:114-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.12.003        [ Links ]

Weiss DH 1993. Problem çozümünde yaratıcılık [Creativity in problem solving]. Istanbul, Türkiye: Rota Yayıncılık, Cep Yönetim Dizisi.         [ Links ]

Wu Y & Koutstaal W 2020. Charting the contributions of cognitive flexibility to creativity: Self-guided transitions as a process-based index of creativity-related adaptivity. PloS ONE, 15(6):e0234473. https://doi.org/10.1371/joumal.pone.0234473        [ Links ]

Yaşar Ekici F & Balcı S 2019. Okul öncesi öğretmen adaylarının bilişsel esneklik düzeyleri ve duygusal tepkisellik düzeylerinin incelenmesi [Examination of the cognitive flexibility and emotional reactivity levels of preschool teacher candidates]. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 9(1):65-77. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2019.310        [ Links ]

Yılmaz A, İnce G & Kırımoğlu H 2020. Beden eğitimi ve çocuk gelişimi öğrencilerinin bilişsel esneklik ve kaynaştırma eğitimine bakış açıları [Cognitive flexibility of physical education and child development students and their perspectives on inclusive education]. Trakya Eğitim Dergisi, 10(1):207-220. https://doi.org/10.24315/tred.602942        [ Links ]

Zabelina DL & Robinson MD 2010. Creativity as flexible cognitive control. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4(3):136-143. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017379        [ Links ]

Zhao H, Zhang Z & Heng S 2024. Grit and college students' learning engagement: Serial mediating effects of mastery goal orientation and cognitive flexibility. Current Psychology, 43(8):7437-7450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04904-7        [ Links ]

 

 

Received: 8 February 2024
Revised: 18 August 2024
Accepted: 23 September 2024
Published: 30 November 2024