Abstract: Abstract: Positivity bias existed widely in the research of creativity in the past. People believed that creativity is a good thing, so it can produce good results. While in the fact creativity has its dark side. In recent years researchers introspect the tendency of creativity worship. They begin to face up to the negative consequences of creativity and promote a series of studies about The Dark Side of Creativity. This paper reviews the study of malevolent creativity, including the concept, Measurement, Influence Factors and outlook of it. Clark and James (1999) used problem-solving tasks, which need the subjects to measure malevolent creativity. They asked the subjects to solve a negative problem. Problem-solving tasks pattern was the application of consensual assessments test in creativity measurement. It assessed the creativity products through expert evaluation. So this method emphasized the measurement of malevolent creativity products. It didn’t aim at the thinking process of malevolent creativity. Lee and Dow (2011) used divergent thinking test to measure malevolent Creativity. For example, they asked the subjects to think up the use of brick and pencil as much as possible. Harris et al. improved these two methods. They used Positivity versus Negativity Solution Evaluation Scale to evaluate the negative and original feature of the subjects’ answer. Harris et al. absorbed the negative and original feature into the evaluation standard, which make up the measurement shortage of Clark &James and Lee &Dow. Some researches show that the activation of creativity is related to situational factors, such as social climate, cultural environment and social complexity. Clark and James discovered that individual would produce malevolent creativity when they encounter unfair treatment in the organization. Some indicate that personality trait, especially aggressiveness has a close relationship with malevolent creativity. Aggressiveness may motivated malevolent creativity fundamentally. The others state negative correlation is found between emotional intelligence and malevolent creativity. Potential malevolent creators can be screened out by analyzing their emotional intelligence. Motivation and mood are also closely related to the generation of malevolent creativity, while the result needs to be verified further. As a new research topic in recent years, malevolent creativity has become more and more popular. While this area still has many undeveloped aspects and needs to be improved further. For example, there has some defects in the existing definition of malevolent creativity. Malevolent creativity emphasizes ‘intentional injuries’, while it is hard to discriminate intentional injuries and unintentional injuries objectively. Most researchers judge the purpose according to the malicious activity, which has no essential difference with negative creativity. There are also deficiencies in the measuring method. Firstly, we can not ensure that the subject’s malevolence is motivated, because the test can be accomplished in harmlessness state. Secondly, laboratory test may lead that the subjects are unwilling to express the true thought, so implicit measurement should be regarded as an important view in the future’ test designing. Beyond that, the existing creativity study experience should be used for reference to promote the empirical research of malevolent creativity, such as using ERP classical paradigm in insight problem study to investigate the neural mechanisms of malevolent creativity.

Key words: Key words: Malevolent Creativity, Creativity, aggressiveness, terrorism

摘要： 摘要：与传统创造力研究强调创造力的积极作用不同，恶意创造力研究强调创造力背后的恶意目的和消极结果。它深入挖掘创造力的阴暗面，创立了崭新的恶意创造力概念。问题解决任务和发散思维测验是当前恶意创造力测量的主要范式，前者针对恶意创造力产品；后者侧重于对恶意创造力思维过程进行考察。情境、人格特质以及情绪是恶意创造力的主要影响因素。未来该领域应当在基本概念问题、测量方法问题以及从实证角度深化恶意创造力研究等方面进一步拓展和深入。

关键词: 关键词：恶意创造力, 创造力, 攻击性, 恐怖主义