• Aladé, F., Lauricella, A. R., Beaudoin-Ryan, L., & Wartella, E. (2016). Measuring with murray: Touchscreen technology and preschoolers’ STEM learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 433-441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.080.
• Ashby, M., Shercliff, H., & Cebon, D. (2007). Materials engineering, science, processing and design. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
• Bakhshi, H., Hargreaves, I., & Mateos-Garcia, J. (2013). A manifesto for the creative economy: Resource document. London, UK: Nesta. https://www.nesta.org.uk/publications/manifesto-creative-economy.
• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.
• Beeftink, F., Van Eerde, W., Rutte, C. G., & Bertrand, J. W. M. (2012). Being successful in a creative profession: The role of innovative cognitive style, self-regulation, and self-efficacy. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(1), 71-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9214-9.
• Beghetto, R. A. (2016). Creative learning: A fresh look. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 15, 6-23. https://doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.15.1.6.
• Bell, D. (2016). The reality of STEM education, design and technology teachers’ perceptions: A phenomenographic study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 61-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9300-9.
• Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book. https://doi.org/10.1037/.
• 11164-000.
• Berlyne, D. E. (1966). Curiosity and exploration. Science, 153, 25-33. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.153.3731.25.
• Besemer, S. P., & O’Quin, K. (1999). Confirming the three-factor creative product analysis matrix model in an American sample. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 287-296. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1204_6.
• Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision, Technol. Teach, 70 (1), 30-35.
• Byrge, C., & Tang, C. (2015). Embodied creativity training: Effects on creative self-efficacy and creative production. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 16, 51-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2015.01.002.
• Caprara, G. V., Giunta, L. D., Eisenberg, N., Gerbino, M., Pastorelli, C., & Tramontano, C. (2008). Assessing regulatory emotional self-efficacy in three countries. Psychological Assessment, 20, 227-237. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.20.3.227.
• Cheng, V. M.Y. (2016). Understanding and enhancing personal transfer of creative learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 58-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.09.001.
• Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), 295-336.
• Christiaans, H. C. M.(2002). Creativity as a design criterion. Creativity Research Journal, 14(1), 41-54. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1401_4.
• Claxton, G., Edwards, L., & Scale-Constantinou, V. (2006). Cultivating creative mentalities: A framework for education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1), 57–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2005.11.001.
• Clinton, G., & Hokanson, B. (2012). Creativity in the training and practice of instructional designers: The design/creativity loops model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(1), 111-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-011-9216-3.
• Cor, M. K. (2016). Trust me, it is valid: Research validity in pharmacy education research. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 8(3), 391-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2016.02.014.
• Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing (Vol. 1). London, UK: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628- 301-9.
• Daly, S. R., Mosyjowski, E. A., & Seifert, C. M. (2014). Teaching creativity in engineering courses. Journal of Engineering Education, 103, 417-449. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20048.
• Duch, W. (2007). Creativity and the brain. In A. G. Tan (Ed.), A handbook of creativity for teachers (pp. 507–530). Singapore, SG: World Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812770868_0027.
• Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
• Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256.
• Fan, S. C., & Yu, K. C. (2017). How an integrative STEM curriculum can benefit students in engineering design practices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 107-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9328-x.
• Finke, R., Ward, T., & Smith, S. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research and applications. Cambridge, UK: MIT Press.
• Fleischhauer, M., Enge, S., Brocke, B., Ullrich, J., Strobel, A., & Strobel, A. (2010). Same or different? Clarifying the relationship of need for cognition to personality and intelligence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(1), 82-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209351886.
• Fornell, C. R., & Larcker, F. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-51.
• Gajda, A., Beghetto, R. A., & Karwowski, M. (2017). Exploring creative learning in the classroom: A multi-method approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 24, 250-267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.04.002.
• Goldberg, S., Gibbs, A., Caro-Aguado, B. M., & Munoz, M. (2015). Enhancement of memory through curiosity-driven learning. Eukaryon, 11. Retrieved from http://www.lakeforest.edu/live/files/2701-goldberggibbscaro-aguadomunozenhancementpdf.
• Gomez, A., & Albrecht, B. (2013). True STEM education. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 73(4), 8-16.
• Green, S. B., & Salkind, N. (2004). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
• Gulten, D. C., Yaman, Y., Deringol, Y., & Ozsari, I. (2011). Investigating the relationship between curiosity level and computer self-efficacy beliefs of elementary teachers candidates. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology - TOJET, 10(4), 248-254.
• Hair, J. F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Anderson multivariate data analysis (7th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
• Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Henseler, J. (2012). On the emancipation of PLS-SEM: A commentary on Rigdon. Long Range Planning, 47(3), 154-160.
• Hall, A., & Miro, D. (2016). A study of student engagement in project‐based learning across multiple approaches to STEM education programs. School Science and Mathematics, 116(6), 310-319. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12182.
• Han, S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2016). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics project based learning affects high-need students in the U.S. Learning and Individual Differences, 51, 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.08.045.
• Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (Eds.)(2006). Structural equation modeling: A second course. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1303_2.
• Hardy III, J. H., Ness, A. M., & Mecca, J. (2017). Outside the box: Epistemic curiosity as a predictor of creative problem solving and creative performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 230-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.08.004.
• Harrison, R. L., & Parks, B. (2017). How STEM can gain some STEAM: Crafting meaningful collaborations between STEM disciplines and inquiry-based writing programs. In A. J. Myatt, & L. L. Gaillet (Eds.), Writing program and writing center collaborations (pp. 117-139). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59932-2_6.
• Harrison, S. H., Sluss, D. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2011). Curiosity adapted the cat: The role of trait curiosity in newcomer adaptation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021647.
• Hartnett, E.J., Malzahn, N., & Goldsmith, R. (2014). Video performances juxtaposing STEM with creativity. In C. Rensing, S. de Freitas, T. Ley, & P. J. Munoz-Merino (Eds.), Open Learning and Teaching in Educational Communities (pp. 570-571). EC-TEL 2014. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 8719). Cham, CH: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11200-8_74.
• Hathcock, S. J., Dickerson, D. L., Eckhoff, A., & Katsioloudis, P. (2015). Scaffolding for creative product possibilities in a design-based STEM activity. Research in Science Education, 45(5), 727-748. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9437-7.
• Horzyk, A. (2014). How does generalization and creativity come into being in neural associative systems and how does it form human-like knowledge? Neurocomputing, 144, 238-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2014.04.046.
• Huang, Y., & Li, J. (2015). Comparing personal characteristic factors of imagination between expert and novice designers within different product design stages. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25, 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-014-9276-x.
• Ito, M., Gutiérrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K., Schor, J., Sefton-Green, J, & Watkins, S. C. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.
• Jeraj, M., & Marič, M. (2013). Relation between entrepreneurial curiosity and entrepreneurial self-efficacy: A multi-country empirical validation. Organizacija, 46, 264-273. https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2013-0027.
• Johnson, E. A., & O’Brien, K. A. (2013). Self-compassion soothes the savage EGO-threat system: Effects on negative affect, shame, rumination, and depressive symptoms. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 32(9), 939–963. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2013.32.9.939.
• Jovanović, V., & Brdaric, D. (2012). Did curiosity kill the cat? Evidence from subjective well-being in adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 380-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.10.043.
• Kaldi, S., Filippatou, D., & Govaris, C. (2011). Project-based learning in primary schools: Effects on pupils’ learning and attitudes. Education 3–13: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 39(1), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004270903179538.
• Kang, M. J., Hsu, M., Krajbich, I. M., Loewenstein, G., McClure, S. M., Tao-yi Wang, J., & Camerer, C. F. (2009). The wick in the candle of learning: Epistemic curiosity activates reward circuitry and enhances memory. Psychological Science, 20(8), 963-973. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02402.x.
• Karwowski, M. (2011). Doesn’t hurt to ask . . . but sometimes it hurts to believe: Polish students’ creative self-efficacy and its predictors. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(2), 154–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021427.
• Karwowski, M. (2012). Relationship between trait curiosity, creative self-efficacy and creative personal identity. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 8(4), 547. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v8i4.513.
• Karwowski, M. (2017). Subordinated and rebellious creativity at school. In. R. A. Beghetto & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creative contradictions in education (pp. 89-115). Cham, CH: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21924-0_6.
• Khedhaouria, A., Montani, F., & Thurik, R. (2017). Time pressure and team member creativity within R&D projects: The role of learning orientation and knowledge sourcing. International Journal of Project Management, 35(6), 942-954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.04.002.
• Kim, K. H. (2006). Can we trust creativity tests? a review of the Torrance tests of creative thinking (TTCT). Creativity Research Journal, 18, 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_2.
• Kulturel-Konak, S., D’Allegro, M. L., & Dickinson, S. (2011). Review of gender differences in learning styles: Suggestions for stem education. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 4(3), 9-18. https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v4i3.4116.
• Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Beede, D., Khan, B., & Doms, M. (2011). STEM: Good jobs now and for the future. Retrieved from http://www.esa.doc.gov/sites/default/files/stemfinalyjuly14_1.pdf.
• Lauriola, M., Litman, J. A., Mussel, P., De Santis, R., Crowson, H. M., & Hoffman, R. R. (2015). Epistemic curiosity and self-regulation. Personality and Individual Differences, 83, 202-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.017.
• León, J., Núñez, J. L., & Liew, J. (2015). Self-determination and STEM education: Effects of autonomy, motivation, and self-regulated learning on high school math achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 43, 156-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.08.017.
• Li, C., & Wu, J. (2011). The structural relationships between optimism and innovative behavior: Understanding potential antecedents and mediating effects. Creativity Research Journal, 23(2), 119-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.571184.
• Li, Y., Wang, J., & Li, X. (2007). Design creativity in product innovation. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 33(3), 213-222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-006-0457-y.
• Litman, J. A. (2005). Curiosity and the pleasures of learning: Wanting and liking new information. Cognition and Emotion, 19, 793-814. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930541000101.
• Litman, J. A. (2008). Interest and deprivation factors of epistemic curiosity. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1585-1595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.01.014.
• Litman, J. A. (2014). Cross cultural validity of the interest- and deprivation-type epistemic curiosity model: Findings from three German samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 60, S8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.07.172.
• Litman, J. A., & Jimerson, T. L. (2004). The measurement of curiosity as a feeling of deprivation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82, 147-157. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8202_3.
• Litman, J. A., & Silvia, P. J. (2006). The latent structure of trait curiosity: Evidence for interest and deprivation curiosity dimensions. Journal of Personality Assessment, 86, 318-328. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8603_07.
• Litman, J. A., & Spielberger, C. D. (2003). Measuring epistemic curiosity and its diversive and specific components. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80, 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_16.
• Lobato, J. (2012). The actor-oriented transfer perspective and its contributions to educational research and practice. Educational Psychologist, 47(3), 232–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.693353.
• Lou, S.-J., Liu, Y.-H., Shih, R.-C., Chuang, S.-Y., & Tseng, K.-H. (2011). Effectiveness of on-line STEM project-based learning for female senior high school students. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(2), 399–410.
• MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130.
• Markham, T. (2003). Project based learning handbook: A guide to standards-focused project based learning for middle and high school teachers. Novato, CA: Buck Institute for Education.
• Martin, A. J. (2015). Implicit theories about intelligence and growth (personal best) goals: Exploring reciprocal relationships. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 207-223. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12038.
• Mathisen, G. E., & Bronnick, K. S. (2009). Creative self-efficacy: An intervention study. International Journal of Educational Research, 48(1), 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2009.02.009.
• Miller, B. G., & Roehrig, G. (2018). Indigenous cultural contexts for STEM experiences: Snow snakes’ impact on students and the community. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(1), 31-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-016-9738-4.
• Moye, J. J., Dugger, W. E., & Stark-Weather, K. N. (2014). Learning by doing: Research introduction. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 74(1), 24-27.
• Mussel, P. (2013). Introducing the construct curiosity for predicting job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 453-472. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1809.
• Puente-Díaz, R., & Cavazos-Arroyo, J. (2017). The influence of creative mindsets on achievement goals, enjoyment, creative self-efficacy and performance among business students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 24, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.02.007.
• Robbins, T. L., & Kegley, K. (2010). Playing with thinker toys to build creative abilities through online instruction. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5, 40-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.07.001.
• Satchwell, R. E., & Loepp, F. L. (2002). Designing and implementing an integrated mathematics, science, and technology curriculum for the middle school. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 39(3), 1-15.
• Sawyer, R. K. (2015). A call to action: The challenges of creative teaching and learning. Teachers College Record, 117(100303), 1-34.
• Shapira, L. B., & Mongrain, M. (2010). The benefits of self-compassion and optimism exercises for individuals vulnerable to depression. The Journal of Positive Psychology 5(5), 377–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2010.516763.
• Stolarova, M., Wolf, C., Rinker, T., & Brielmann, A. (2014). How to assess and compare inter-rater reliability, agreement and correlation of ratings: An exemplary analysis of mother-father and parent-teacher expressive vocabulary rating pairs. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 509. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00509.
• Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2016). Robotics in the early childhood classroom: Learning outcomes from an 8-week robotics curriculum in pre-kindergarten through second grade. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 3-20.
• Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-Efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1137-1148.
• Tierney, P., &Farmer, S. M. (2011). Creative self-efficacy development and creative performance over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 277-293. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020952.
• Torrance, E. P. (1966). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-technical manual (research edition). Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press.
• US Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019). Occupational outlook handbook. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/ooh/arts-and-design/fashion-designers.htm.
• van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., & Walma van der Molen, J. H. (2018). Modeling the relation between students’ implicit beliefs about their abilities and their educational STEM choices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9387-7.
• Vogt, W. P. (2007). Quantitative research methods for professionals. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
• Wagner, J. F. (2006). Transfer in pieces. Cognition and Instruction, 24, 1–71. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2401_1.
• Wagner, J. F. (2010). A transfer-in-pieces consideration of the perception of structure in the transfer of learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19, 443–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2010.505138.
• Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 817-835. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016127.
• Wang, S., Zhang, X., & Martocchio, J. (2011). Thinking outside of the box when the box is missing: Role ambiguity and its linkage to creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 23(3), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.595661.
• Ward, J. R., Clarke, H. D., & Horton, J. L. (2014). Effects of a research-infused botanical curriculum on undergraduates’ content knowledge, STEM competencies, and attitudes toward plant sciences. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 387-396. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0231.
• Warr, A., & O’Neill, E. (2005). Understanding design as a social creative process. In E. Edmonds (Ed.), Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 118-127). London, UK: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1056224.1056242.
• White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66, 297–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040934.
• Williams, J., Jones, A., & Bunting, C. (2015). The future of technology education. Singapore, SG: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-170-1.
• Workosky, C., & Willard, T. (2015). Answers to teachers’ questions about the next generation science standards. Science Teacher, 82(6), 29-31. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/tst15_082_06_29.
• World Economic Forum. (2015). New vision for education: Unlocking the potential of technology: Resource document. Geneva, CH: World Economic Forum. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEFUSA_NewVisionforEducation_Report2015.pdf.
• Worsham, E. K., Clevenger, A., & Whealan-George, K. A.(2016). STEM education discrepancy in the united states and Singapore. Beyond, 1, 20-26.
• Wright, N., & Wrigley, C. (2019). Broadening design-led education horizons: Conceptual insights and future research directions. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798- 017-9429-9.
• Wu, C.-C. (2002). Chinese students to explore and cultivate creativity. The Application of Psychological Research, 15, 17–22.
• Wu, Q. (2015). Computational curiosity (a book draft). Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1502/1502.04780.pdf.
• Wu, Q., & Miao, C. (2013). Curiosity: From psychology to computation. ACM Computing Surveys, 46(2), 18:1-18:26.
• Yang, H. L., & Cheng, H. H. (2009). Creative self-efficacy and its factors: An empirical study of information system analysts and programmers. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 429-438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.10.005.
• Zeisel, J. (2006). Inquiry by design: Environment/Behavior/Neuroscience in architecture, interiors, landscape and planning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Norton.
• Zhang, L. (2019). “Hands-on” plus “inquiry”? Effects of withholding answers coupled with physical manipulations on students' learning of energy-related science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 60, 199-205. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475217305455?via%3Dihub.
• Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2012.00101.x.

Vancouver

Hong J, Ye J, Fan J. STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2019;15(9):em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455

APA

Hong, J., Ye, J., & Fan, J. (2019). STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(9), em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455

AMA

Hong J, Ye J, Fan J. STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2019;15(9), em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455

Chicago

Hong, Jon-Chao, Jian-Hong Ye, and Jing-Yun Fan. "STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2019 15 no. 9 (2019): em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455

Harvard

Hong, J., Ye, J., and Fan, J. (2019). STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(9), em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455

MLA

Hong, Jon-Chao et al. "STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 15, no. 9, 2019, em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455