ISSN 1671-3710
CN 11-4766/R
主办:中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理科学进展 ›› 2026, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (10): 1876-1886.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2026.1876 cstr: 32111.14.2026.1876

• 研究前沿 • 上一篇    下一篇

从利己到伤害: 负创造力向恶意创造力的演化路径与干预

周淑金, 朱静怡, 涂洪悦, 李燕   

  1. 上海师范大学学前教育学院, 上海 200234
  • 收稿日期:2025-12-17 出版日期:2026-10-15 发布日期:2026-07-20
  • 基金资助:
    中国博士后科学基金项目(2024M752071, GZB20240457)资助

From self-serving to harm-seeking: Evolutionary pathways from negative to malevolent creativity and intervention

ZHOU Shujin, ZHU Jingyi, TU Hongyue, Li Yan   

  1. Shanghai Institute of Childhood Education, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China
  • Received:2025-12-17 Online:2026-10-15 Published:2026-07-20

摘要: 创造力既可产生建设性成果, 也可能带来负面社会后果; 后者包括负创造力与恶意创造力。二者均以“新颖性+适用性”为认知基础, 且结果具有消极社会效价, 但动机属性不同: 负创造力以利己为目标, 伤害多为副产品; 恶意创造力则以伤害他人、组织或社会为核心目标。本文系统梳理二者的概念边界及测量困境, 指出负创造力向恶意创造力的演化并非线性必然过程, 而是由认知控制失效、情境诱发、动机强化、道德推脱及社会监管不足等因素独立或叠加驱动。在此基础上, 本文提出“认知-动机-发展” (CMD)干预模型, 主张通过认知评估训练、动机价值重构与发展生态支持, 对儿童负创造力进行前移性引导, 为理解创造力消极面的发展机制及促进儿童创造力健康发展提供理论框架与实践路径。

关键词: 负创造力, 恶意创造力, 演化路径, CMD干预模型

Abstract: Creativity is commonly understood as a neutral cognitive capacity that enables individuals to generate novel and appropriate ideas, solutions, or products. Depending on its motivational orientation and social consequences, creativity may lead to constructive outcomes, but it may also produce negative social consequences. The latter constitutes the negative side of creativity and includes two closely related forms: negative creativity and malevolent creativity. Both forms share the cognitive foundation of high novelty and high appropriateness, and both may result in negative social outcomes. However, they differ fundamentally in motivational orientation. Negative creativity is primarily driven by self-serving goals, with harm emerging mainly as an incidental byproduct. By contrast, malevolent creativity is motivated by an explicit intention to harm others, organizations, or society, with self-interest functioning as a possible but secondary motive.
In early childhood, behaviors that may contain elements of negative creativity, such as rule-bending, self-serving deception, and risky exploration, begin to emerge. However, the boundary between negative creativity and malevolent creativity is particularly difficult to determine during this developmental period. Children’s negative ideas are often situationally induced, unstable, and closely tied to immature cognitive control, moral reasoning, and social understanding. As a result, it is difficult to distinguish temporary negative ideation from stable malicious intent. Existing measurement tools, which are largely developed for adults and often rely on self-report scales or scenario-based tasks, are limited in their ability to identify children’s negative creativity and to differentiate it from malevolent creativity. This measurement dilemma constrains early identification and intervention.
Adopting a developmental perspective, this review systematically examines the multi-pathway mechanisms through which negative creativity may evolve into malevolent creativity. The proposed dynamic transformation model identifies four internal driving mechanisms: cognitive control failure, situational triggers, motivational reinforcement, and moral disengagement. It also highlights one external contextual factor: insufficient social regulation. These factors may operate independently, but they may also interact and accumulate, thereby increasing the likelihood that self-serving negative creativity becomes transformed into intentional harm. Specifically, cognitive control failure may weaken children’s ability to evaluate consequences and inhibit harmful responses; situational triggers such as anger, perceived injustice, or frustration may activate revenge-oriented ideation; motivational reinforcement may transform accidental gains into intentional value-seeking through harm; moral disengagement may reduce guilt and justify harmful behavior; and insufficient social regulation may weaken the feedback link between behavior and consequence. When these factors converge, the transformation from negative creativity to malevolent creativity may be accelerated. This framework moves beyond static trait-based conceptualizations and advances a process-oriented understanding of the negative side of creativity.
Building on this evolutionary framework, this review proposes the Cognitive-Motivational-Development (CMD) intervention model. The CMD model is grounded in Yeh’s ecological systems theory of creativity development and integrates three theoretical resources: social information processing theory, task motivation theory in the creativity component model, and moral disengagement theory. It consists of three interconnected tiers. The cognitive tier targets cognitive control failure and situational information misinterpretation by strengthening children’s social information processing and creative evaluation abilities. Specific strategies include guiding children to encode multifaceted situational cues, regulate emotion-induced arousal, and evaluate the possible consequences of creative ideas. The motivational tier aims to interrupt motivational reinforcement and prevent the escalation from self-interest to harm. Strategies include validating children’s creative motivation, making visible the social consequences of their actions, identifying morally disengaged justifications, and reconstructing the value link between self-benefit and prosocial outcomes. The developmental tier addresses insufficient social regulation and weak moral constraints by fostering a supportive moral ecology. Strategies include establishing clear behavioral norms and consistent feedback mechanisms, embedding moral dialogue into daily interactions, integrating cultural values into situated activities, and creating supportive physical and social environments.
The CMD model has three major implications. First, it shifts the focus of intervention from post-harm remediation to pre-harm upstream guidance, targeting negative creativity before malevolent intent becomes stabilized. Second, it translates the proposed evolutionary mechanisms into concrete, tiered intervention targets, thereby enhancing the applicability of the model in educational settings. Third, it integrates individual-level cognitive evaluation, motivational value reconstruction, and developmental ecological support into a coherent framework, offering a holistic approach to guiding children’s creative expressions.
The theoretical contribution of this review lies in clarifying the conceptual hierarchy among creativity, negative creativity, and malevolent creativity, and in reframing the negative side of creativity as a developmental process rather than a static trait. It explains how self-serving creativity may, under specific cognitive, motivational, emotional, moral, and environmental conditions, escalate toward intentional harm. The practical significance lies in providing an evidence-informed intervention framework that bypasses the measurement dilemma of malevolent creativity and enables early, developmentally appropriate guidance of children’s negative creativity. Future research should develop validated assessment tools for negative creativity in early childhood, conduct longitudinal and experimental studies to test the proposed transformation pathways and the effectiveness of the CMD model, and translate this framework into teacher-friendly and family-friendly intervention practices.

Key words: negative creativity, malevolent creativity, evolutionary pathways, CMD intervention

中图分类号: