本研究的研究目的為二：（一）研究一主要是建構一個包含未來目標、課室目標結構、自我決定動機、自我調整學習策略與創造力之「創造力動機歷程模式」，並蒐集實徵資料考驗該模式的適配度，以瞭解各動機構念與創造力之關係。（二）研究二則是依據研究一結果，採用實驗教學方法，考驗未來目標、課室目標結構對創造力的因果關係。故研究者操弄課室目標結構與未來目標兩者（合稱情境目標線索），用以探討情境目標線索融入數學科教學課程與個人目標導向之交互作用，是否會對自我決定動機、自我調整學習策略及創造力產生效果，並分析此效果隨時間改變之情形。
為完成上述研究目的，本研究共進行兩個研究。首先。在研究一中，本研究抽取913位國中生為研究樣本，研究工具包括「未來目標量表」、「課室目標結構量表」、「自我決定動機量表」、「自我調整學習策略量表」與「數學創造力測驗」，並將蒐集的資料以SEM法進行考驗。其次，在研究二，本研究在北部地區抽取兩所國中，十個班級、共計232位國一學生為研究樣本，以進行「情境目標線索融入數學科教學方案」。研究以班級為單位進行實驗操弄，共分為趨向精熟課室目標教學組、未來內在目標＋趨向精熟課室目標教學組、多重課室目標教學組、未來內在目標＋多重課室目標教學組與對照組五個水準，以前測、後測、延後測（創造力無延後測）三階蒐集受試者資料，以作為分析情境目標線索與學習者個人目標導向在自我決定動機、自我調整學習策略與創造力上的交互作用。除了個人目標導向量表與後測使用的擴散性生產測驗（周長12公分的各種圖形）以外，所使用的測量工具與研究一同。本研究將蒐集的資料以三因子混合設計變異數分析來考驗各假設。
本研究發現如下：
一、 研究一結果顯示：本研究建構的「創造力動機歷程模式」可用來解釋國中生的觀察資料，分析結果顯示：未來目標能透過自我決定動機，進而對創造力與自我調整學習策略產生間接效果；課室目標結構亦可形塑個體的自我決定動機，進而影響創造力與自我調整學習策略。然而，並非所有的未來目標、課室目標結構均有助於創造力與自我調整學習策略。結果指出只有以內在焦點為主的未來目標及精熟導向的課室目標結構才對創造力及自我調整學習策略有正向效果，而未來外在目標與表現導向的課室目標結構則無助於創造力與自我調整學習策略。
二、 研究二結果顯示：
（一） 在認知調整策略、動機/情感調整策略與行為調整策略上，情境目標線索×個人目標導向二因子交互作用達顯著水準。結果指出當個體未持有任何目標時，接受實驗教學組（趨向精熟與多重課室目標教學組）的認知、動機/情感與行為調整策略的得分會顯著高於未接受實驗教學組（對照組）；而若未接受教學實驗的對照組個體若本身持有多重或表現目標，其在認知、動機/情感與行為調整策略的得分也會高於未持有任何目標者。
（二） 在自主動機與動機/情感調整策略上，情境目標線索×測量階段二因子交互作用達顯著水準。結果指出多重課室目標結構對個體學習的保護效果最大，其能維持自主動機與動機/情感調整策略的狀態，並在自主動機上有延宕效果；其次則為趨向精熟課室目標結構，亦能維持自主動機與動機/情感調整策略的狀態，但並無延宕效果產生；而對照組在自主動機與動機/情感調整策略的狀態則會隨時間經過有下降的趨勢。
（三） 在擴散性生產之流暢力與變通力上，情境目標線索×測量階段二因子交互作用達顯著水準。結果發現在流暢力上，接受教學實驗組（趨向精熟與多重課室目標教學組）的流暢力在後測上會顯著高於對照組；而在變通力上，接受教學實驗組的變通力在後測上易顯著高於對照組，但趨向精熟課室目標教學組與對照組的變通力均有明顯下降的情況發生。
本研究依據研究結果提出建議，以作為提供國中教學學習輔導與未來研究之參考。

The purposes of the present research were aimed to: (a) construct a motivational process model of creativity in which future goal, classroom goal structure, self-determination motivation, self-regulated learning strategies and creativity are examined with an investigation of empirical model-fitting analysis based on the performance of Taiwanese junior high students; (b) explore the effects of situational goal cues, personal goal orientation, and measurement stages on self-determination motivation, self-regulated learning strategies, and creativity.
Two studies were conducted in these regards. In study 1, Future Goal Scale, Classroom Goal Structure Scale, Self-Determination Motivation Scale, Self-Regulated Learning Strategies Scale, and Mathematical Creativity Test were used as instruments to measure the performance of the participating 913 junior high school students and the results were analyzed by Structure Equation Model (SEM). In study 2, 10 classes with 232 7th grades of 2 junior high schools in Taipei City were selected. All the classes were conducted as the individual study groups for different manipulations which included 5 distinct levels: teaching group of approach-mastery classroom goal, teaching group of future intrinsic goal plus approach-mastery classroom goal, teaching group of multiple classroom goal, and teaching group of future intrinsic goal plus multiple classroom goal and control group. The interaction effects between the cues of situational goal and individual goal orientation on self-determination motivation, self-regulated learning strategies, and creativity were examined at three different study stages: pretest, posttest and delayed posttest. All the instruments were adopted as Study 1 but Personal Goal Orientation Scale and a divergent production measurement only for the posttest stage.

The principal findings of Studies 1 and 2 include:

1. The result of study1 pointed out that the motivational process of creativity fits the empirically observed data well. Moreover, future goal had indirect effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies through self-determination; and classroom goal structure had indirect effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies through self-determination. However, not all kinds of future goal and classroom goal structure were benefit to creativity and self-regulated learning strategies. Only the future intrinsic goal and mastery classroom goal structure had a positive effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies; and future extrinsic goal and performance classroom goal structure were found have no effect on creativity and self-regulated learning strategies, respectively.
2. For Study 2:
(1) There was a significant two-way interaction effect between the cues of situational goal and individual goal orientation on cognitive regulation, motivational/effective regulation and behavioral regulation strategies. It was revealed that the score of cognitive regulation, motivational/effective regulation and behavioral regulation strategies of the experiment teaching group were higher than control group. And if the subjects of control group who had multiple goal or performance goal, they would have better scores of cognitive regulation, motivational/effective regulation and behavioral regulation strategies.
(2) A two-way interaction effect between the cues of situational goal and measurement stages on autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies exists. It was found that the multiple classroom goal structure has a largest protection effect on learning behavior. In meanwhile, it could maintain the same level of autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies at the pretest stage and had a superior delayed effect on autonomous motivation. Furthermore, the protection effect can be viewed as a approach-mastery classroom goal structure and it could keep the same level of autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies but it had no any delayed effect. Also, the scores of autonomous motivation and motivational/effective regulation strategies for the control group declined with time.
(3) The two-way interaction effect between cues of situational goal and measurement stages on fluency and flexibility of divergent production was found significant. It was indicated that the score of fluency of experiment teaching group was higher than control group in the posttest. The score of flexibility of experiment teaching group was higher than control group in the posttest, but the scores of flexibility of approach-mastery classroom goal group and control significantly appeared to decline from the pretest to the posttest.

吳昭容、陳如珍（2008）。從擬題看三年級學童的數學創造力。台灣心理學會主辦，台灣心理學會第47屆年會，臺灣師範大學，台北。
吳靜吉（2002）。華人學生創造力的發掘與培育。應用心理學，15，17-42。
周淑楓（2007）。未來取向之自我調整學習歷程模式分析。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
林幸台（1995）。威廉斯創造力測驗修訂報告。特殊教育研究學刊，11，133-149。
林易慧（2005）。課室目標線索與個人目標導向對國小學童解題成就及自我調整學習之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
林易慧、程炳林（2006）。課室目標線索與個人目標導向對國小學童解題成就及自我調整學習之影響。教育心理學報，37，231-255。
林宴瑛（2006）。個人目標導向、課室目標結構與自我調整學習策略之關係及潛在改變量分析。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
林宴瑛、程炳林（2007）。個人目標導向、課室目標結構與自我調整學習策略之潛在改變量分析。教育心理學報，39，173-194。
林偉文(2002)。國民中小學學校組織文化、教師創意教學潛能與創意教學之關係。政治大學教育研究所博士論文（未出版）。
林偉文（2006）。樂在其中的創意教師：國民中小學教師教學福樂經驗與創意教學之關係。國立臺北教育大學學報，19，111-128。
林清山、程炳林（1996）。國中生自我調整學習因素與學習表現之關係暨自我調整的閱讀理解教學策略效果之研究。教育心理學報，28，15-58。
邱發忠（2005）。創造力認知運作機制之探究。國立台灣師範大學教育教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文（未出版）。
邱皓政（2002）。學校組織創新氣氛的內涵與教師創造力的實踐：另一件國王的新衣？應用心理研究季刊，15, 191-224。
侯玫如（2002）。多重目標導向對國中生認知、動機、情感與學習行為之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
施淑慎（2006）。教育心理學研究的趨勢與議題。國科會人文處教育學門新進學者研習會。
施淑慎（2008）。學習情境中之自主支持與國中生成就相關歷程間關係之探討。教育與心理研究，31，1-26。
洪素蘋、黃宏宇、林珊如（2008）。重要他人回饋影響創意生活經驗？以模式競爭方式檢驗創意自我效能與創意動機的中介效果。教育心理學報，90，303-322。
洪慧津（2004）。國小數學資優生和一般生數學解題的創造力與情意之探究。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
張春興（2001）。教育心理學。台北：東華書局
張華城（2003）。探討國小六年級學童數學創造力與科學創造力之相關性與差異性。國立屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
陳正昌、程炳林（2002）。SPSS、SAS、BMDP統計軟體在多變量統計上的應用（第二版）。台北：五南。
陳秀惠（2009）。國中生自我決定動機之發展模式及其相關因素探討。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
陳嘉成（1999）。成就目標、動機氣候、自我歷程與自我調整策略、持續學習動機和數學成就之關係。國立政治大學教育系博士班博士學位論文（未出版）。
陳嘉成（2005）。個人目標/目標結構以及知覺課室目標變化對適應學習組型之影響。論文發表於台灣心理學會主辦之「台灣心理學會第四十四屆年會」，中壢。
彭淑玲（2004）。四向度課室目標結構、個人目標導向與課業求助行為之關係。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
彭淑玲、程炳林（2005）。四向度課室目標結構、個人目標導向與課業求助行為之關係。師大學報：教育類，50，69-95。
程炳林（2002）。多重目標導向、動機問題與調整策略之交互作用。師大學報：教育類，47，36-58。
程炳林（2003）。四向度目標導向模式之研究。師大學報：教育類，48，39-58。
程炳林（2006）。主觀能力與逃避策略之關係。師大學報：教育類，52，1-24。
程炳林、林清山（2001）。中學生自我調整學習量表之建構及其信、效度研究。測驗年刊，48，1-41。
楊岫穎（2003）。國中生自我設限的情境及歷程因素之研究。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
葉玉珠（2006）。創造力教學—過去、現在與未來。台北：心理出版社。
葉玉珠、吳靜吉（2002）。創意發展組織因素量表之編製—以科技產業為例。應用心理研究，15，225-247。
劉士豪（1999）。年齡、性別、成就目標、目標導向與創意生活經驗、創造力之關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
劉曉雯（1997）：創造力工作環境特質對組織創租行為影響關係之研究－兼論內外在動機與資訊科技基磐特徵的作用。國立中央大學企業管理學研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
蔡宜貞、林珊如（2005）。學校組織創新氛圍與教師工作動機之相關研究。政治大學創新與創造力研究中心：2005第三屆創新與創造力研討會。
謝志偉（2003）。國小高年級學生自我調整學習能力及其相關因素之研究－以數學領域為例。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
謝岱陵（2003）。國中生四向度目標導向之中介效果分析。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
簡嘉菱（2009）。自我決定動機與學業情緒模式之探討。國立成功大學教育研究。
蘇嘉鈴、程炳林（2005）。國中生行動導向、目標導向與動機調整策略之關係。教育心理學報，36，395-415。

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: a componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357-376.
Amabile, T. M. (1985). Motivation and creativity: Effects of motivational orientation on creative writers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 393-399.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in the context. CO: Westview Press.
Amabile, T. M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organizations: On doing what you love and loving what you do. California Management Review, 40, 39-58.
Amabile, T. M., Hennessey, B., & Grossman, B. S. (1986). Social influences on creativity: The effects of contracted-for reward, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 14 - 23.
Amabile,T. M. (1985). Motivation and creativity: Effects of motivational orientation on creative writers", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 393 - 399.
Ames, C. (1992). Classroom: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Student’s learning strategies and motivation process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.
Andriessen, I., Phalet, K., & Lens, W. (2006). Future goal setting, task motivation and learning of minority and non-minority students in Dutch schools. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 827-850.
Archer, J. (1997). Motivation and creativity: The influence of achievement goals on creativity in writing poetry. University of Newcastle.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Academic of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94.
Bandalos, D. L. (2002). The effects of item parceling on goodness-of-fit and parameter estimate bias in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(1), 78-102.
Bandura A. (1986). Social foundations of though and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Baron, K. E., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2001). Achievement goal and optimal motivation: Testing multiple goal models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 706-722.
Barron, F., & Harrington. D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 439-476.
Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Creative self-efficacy: Correlates in middle and secondary students. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 447-457.
Boekaert, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: A new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators,teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7, 161-186.
children . Development Review, 1, 224-246.
Choi, J. N. (2004). Individual and contextual predictors of creative performance: The mediating role of psychological processes. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 187-199.
Church, M. A., Elliot, A. J., & Gable, S. L. (2001). Perceptions of classroom environment , achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 43-54.
Collins, M. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1999). Motivation and Creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 297-312). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Daltrey M. H., & Langer P. (1984). Development and evaluation of a measure of future time perspective. Perceptual and Motor Skill, 58, 719-725.
De Volder M. L., & Lens J. (1982).Academic achievement and future time perspective as a cognitive-motivational conceot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 566-571.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The"what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life’s domain. Canadian Psychology, 49, 14-23.
Deci, E. L.,＆ Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048.
Edwards, B. (2003). Learning and creativity. Education Review, 16, 91-96.
Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Incremental effects of reward on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 728-741.
Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L., & Cameron, J. (1999). Does pay for performance increase or decrease perceived self-determination and intrinsic motivation? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1026-1040.
Ekvall, G., & Ryhammer, L. (1999). Its determinants and effects at a Swedish university. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 303-310.
Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34, 169-189.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2×2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501-519.
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 290-309.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T.B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T.B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Förster, J., Friedman, R. S., & Liberman, N. (2004). Temporal construal effects on abstract and concrete thinking: Consequences for insight and creative cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 177-189.
Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2001). The effects of promotion and prevention cues on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 81, 1001-1013.
Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2005). Effects of motivational cues on perceptual asymmetry: Implications for creativity and analytical problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 88, 263-275.
Gjesme T. (1983). On the concept of future time orientation: Considerations of some functions’ and measurements’ implications. International Journal of Psychology, 18, 443-461.
Glynn, M. A. (1996). Innovative genius: A framework for relating individual and organizational intelligences to innovation. The Academy of Management Review, 21, 1081-1111.
Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Haylock, D. W (1987b). A framework for assessing mathematical creativity in schoolchildren. Educational studies in mathematics, 18, 59-74.
Haylock, D. W. (1987a). Mathematical creativity in schoolchildren. Journal of Creative Behavior, 21, 48-59.
Haylock, D. W. (1997). Recognizing mathematical creativity in school children. International Reviews on Mathematical Education, 29, 68-74.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280-1300.
Hui, A. (2006) Effects of goal orientation and self regulation on creative Behaviors. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Hunter, S. T., Bedell,K. E., & Mumford,M. D. (2007). Climate for creativity: a quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 19, 69-90.
Husman J., & Lens J. (1999). The role of the future in student motivation. Educational Psychology, 34, 113-125.
Jackson, N., & Sinclair, C. (2006). Developing students’ creativity: Searching for an appropriate pedagogy. Creativity in Higher Education: An imaginative curriculum (pp. 118-141). Abingdon: Routledge.
Jöreskog, K. G.., & Sörbom, D.（1993）. LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Kaplan, A., Gheen, M., & Midgley, C. (2002). Classroom goal structure and student disruptive behavior. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 191-211.
Kauffman, D. & Husman, J. (2004). Effects of Time Perspective on Student Motivation: Introduction to a Special Issue. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 1-7
Kaufmann, G. & Vosburg, S. K. (2002). The effects of early and late idea production. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 317-330.
Lam, T. W., Chiu, C. (2002). The motivational function of regulatory focus in creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 36, 138-150.
Lau, S., & Nie, Y. (2008). Interplay between personal goals and classroom goal structures in predicting student outcomes: A multilevel analysis of person-context interactions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 15-29.
Lens, W. (2001). How to combine intrinsic task-motivation with the motivational effects of the instrumentality of present task for future goals. In A. Efklides, J. Kuhl, & R.M. Sorrentino (Eds.). Trends and prospects inmotivation research (pp. 23-36). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Linnenbrink, E. A. (2005). The dilemma of performance-approach goals: The use of multiple goal contexts to promote students’ motivation and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 197-213.
Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2001). Multiple goals, multiple contexts: The dynamic interplay between personal goals and contextual goal stress. In S. Volet, & S. Järvelä (Eds.), Motivation in learning context: Theoretical advances and methodological implications. New York: Pergamon.
Loevinger, J., & Blasi, A. (1991). Development of the self as subject. In J. Strauss & G. Goethals (Eds.), The self: interdisciplinary approaches (pp. 150-167). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Lubart, T. (2008). Connecting learning, individual difference and creativity. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 361-362.
Mann, R. L. (2005). The Identification of Gifted Students with Spatial Strengths: An Exploratory Study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Connecticut.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J.R., & Hau, K. T. (1996). An evaluation of incremental fit indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling techniques (pp.315-353). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mayer, R. E. (1987). Educational Psychology: A cognitive approach. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of ability: An underexplored aspect goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(4), 710-718.
Milgram, R. M., & Livne, N. L. (2005). Creativity as a General and a Domain-Specific Ability: The Domain of Mathematics as an Exemplar. In J. C. Kaufman & J. Bear. (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces the muse(pp. 187-204). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Miller R. B., & Brickman S. J. (2004). A model of future-oriented motivation and self-regulation. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 9-33.
Miller, R. B., & Greene, B. A., Montalvo, G. P., Ravindran, B., & Nichols, J. D. (1996). Engagement in academic work: The role of learning goals, future consequences, pleasing others, and perceived ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 388-422.
Miller, R. B., DeBacker, T. K., & Green, B. A. (1999). Perceived instrumentality and academics: The link to task valuing. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 26, 250-261.
Miserandino, M. (1996) Children who do well in school: individual differences in perceived competence and autonomy in above-average children, Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 203–214.
Moneta, G. B., & Siu, C. M. Y. (2002). Trait Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, academic performance, and creativity in Hong Kong college students. Journal of College Student Development, 43, 664-683.
Nelson-Le Gall, S. (1981). Help-seeking: An understudied problem-solving skill in
Newman, R. S. (1998). Student help seeking during problem solving: Influences of personal and contextual achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 644-658.
Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press.
Nuttin J., & Lens J. (1985). future time perspective and motivation: Theory and research method. Leuven & Hillsdale, NJ: Leuven University Press & Erlbaum.
Oldham, G. R. and A. Cummings (1996), Employee creativity: personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 607-635.
Ononye, G. C., Blinn-Pike, L. M., & Smith, D. E. (1993). Creativity and future time perspective: Exploring fantasy and realistic measures. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 449-456.
Otis, N., Grouzet, M. E., & Pelletier, L. G. (2005). Latent motivational change in an academic setting: A 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 170-183.
Pesut, D. J. (1990).Creative thinking as a self-regulatory metacognitve process-A model for education, training and further research. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 24, 105-110.
Pintrich, P. R. (1999). Taking control of research on volitional control: Challenges for
Pintrich, P. R. (2000a). Multiple goals , multiple pathways : The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology ,92, 544-555.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000b). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp.13-39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Rubio, D. M., Berg-Weger, M., & Tebb, S. S. (2001). Using structural equation modeling to test for multidimensionality. Structural Equation Modeling, 8(4), 613-626.
Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749-761.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54 – 67.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.
Ryan, R. M.,＆ Deci, E. L. (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY; The University of Rochester Press.
Seijts G. H.( 1998). The importance of future time perspective in theories of work motivation. The Journal of Psychology, 132, 154-168.
Senecal, C., Koestner, R., & Vallerand, R. (1995). Self-regulation and academic procrastination. The Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 607-619.
Shally, C. E., Zhou, J., & Oldham, G. R. (2004). The effects of per-soal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where should we go from here? Journal of management, 30, 933-958.
Sheldon, K. M. (1995). Creativity and self-determination in personality. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 25-36.
Simons J., Vansteenkiste M., Lens W., & Lacante M. (2004). Placing motivation and future time perspective theory in a temporal perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 121-139.
Simons, J., Dewitte, S., & Lens, W. (2004). The role of different types of instrumentality in motivation, study strategies, and performance: Know why you learn, so you’ll know what you learn! British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 343-360.
Simonton, D. K. (1991). Emergence and realization of genius: The lives and works of 120 classical composers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 829-840.
Simonton, D. K. (2000). Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55, 151-158.
Sternberg, R. J. (1988). The triarchic mind: A new theory of human intelligence. New York: Viking. Image courtesy of Robert J. Sternberg, taken by Michael Marsland, Yale University, Office of Public Affairs.
Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.). (1999) Handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R.J. & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investment in creativity. American Psychologist, 51, 677-688.
Tabachnick, S. E., Miller, R. B., & Relyea, G. E. (2008). The relationships among students’ future-oriented goals and subgoals, perceived task instrumentality, and task-oriented self-regulation strategies in an academic environment. Journal of Education Psychology, 100, 629-642.
Turner, J. C., Midgley, C., Meyer, D. K., Gheen, M., Anderman, E. M., Kang, Y., & Patrick, H. (2002).The classroom environment and student’s reports of avoidance strategies in mathematics: A multimethod study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 88-106.
Urdan, T. C. (2004). Predictors of academic self-handicapping and achievement: Examining achievement goals, classroom goal structures, and culture. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 251-264.
Urdan, T., & Schoenfelder, E（2006）. Classroom effects on student motivation: Goal structures, social relationships, and competence beliefs. Journal of School Psychology, 44. 331-349.
Urdan, T., Midgley, C., & Anderman, E. M. (1998). The role of classroom goal structure in student’s use of self-handicapping strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 101-122.
Vallerand, R. J., & Ratelle, C. F. (2002). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: A hierarchical model. Dans E. L. Deci and R. M. Ryan (Eds.), The motivation and self-determination of behavior: Theoretical and applied issues. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Vallerand, R. J., Fortier, M. S.,& Guay, F. (1997).Self-determination and persistence in real-life setting: Toward a motivational model of high school dropout, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1161-1176.
Vansteenkist, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivating learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 246-260.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Soenens, B., & Lens, W. (2004). How to become a persevering exerciser: The importance of providing a clear, future goal in an autonomy-supportive way. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 26, 232 – 249.
Vansteenkiste, M., Timmermans, T., Lens, W., Soenens, B., & Broeck, A. (2008). Does extrinsic goal framing enhance extrinsic goal-oriented individuals’ learning and performance? An experimental test of match perspective versus self-determination theory. Journal Educational Psychology,100, 387-397.
Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Creativity: Understanding innovation in problem solving, science, invention, and the arts. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 189-205.
Wolters, C. A. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structure and goal orientations to predict student’s motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 236-250.
Xiang, P., & Lee, A. (2002). Achievement goals, perceived motivational climate, and student’s self-reported mastery behaviors. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 73, 58-65.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of educational psychology, 81, 329-339.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2 nd ed.) (pp. 1-37). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 614-628.
Zimmerman, B. J.,& Schunk, D. H. (Eds.) (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed.) .Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.