Lecture 11: Creativity Flashcards
Learning objectives:
- Overview of Creativity
- Divergent Thinking
- Convergent Thinking
- Applying Creativity Research
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- Define creativity and explain the key cognitive processes thought to underlie creative thinking.
- Explain measures of divergent thinking and be able to critically evaluate them.
- Recognise why measures of convergent thinking vary with age.
- Discuss factors that could influence creative thinking in young children.
1: Overview of Creativity
What is creativity?
Creativity: the generation of products or ideas that are both novel and appropriate
Allows flexibility and facilitates adaptive changes
Stereotypically, we might assume creativity is associated with the arts, but it’s a necessity in science too
1: Overview of Creativity
Why is creativity important?
> Creativity is a highly valued skill in society.
- job specifications will ask for ability to solve problems, innovate and “think outside of the box”.
> Emphasis on encouraging creativity in schools.
- “creativity/ creative/ creatively” are mentioned 23 times in the Primary National Curriculum (Department for Education, 2013).
- mentions problem-solving as key area for development in different subjects
> Important to industry, arts and the economy more generally but it’s important in our everyday lives too.
1: Overview of Creativity
Overview of creativity research
A popular way of organising creativity research is through the 4 Ps (Rhodes, 1961/ 1987):
- Person (intrinsic factors e.g. personality, values, motivation).
- Process (more behavioural and cognitive e.g. what happens during creative thinking).
- Press (social and environmental influences, inhibitors and facilitators of creativity).
- Product (results of creative process e.g. paintings, poems).
Many different disciplines in creativity research:
Neurological, genetic, clinical, organisational, personality, social environment, culture.
We’re going to focus on the cognitive perspective - categorised as “process”.
1: Overview of Creativity
Early days of creativity research
J.P Guilford – President of American Psychological Association in 1950.
–> His presidential address discussed creativity - prompted a flurry of research activity.
- Guilford suggested that intellectual skills underlie creativity.
- Important to make a distinction between intelligence and creativity
- They can be correlated, but not so much that we could conclude they are the same skill
1: Overview of Creativity
What does the creative process look like?
Creativity is a reactive process - it usually occurs in response to problems or challenges.
DRAW DIAGRAM
1: Overview of Creativity
How do psychologists measure creativity?
In taking a cognitive perspective, we also take a psychometric perspective - assume that the creative process can be captured through tests.
We saw from the previous slide that creative thinking is made up of different components.
Generating ideas = divergent thinking.
Evaluating and implementing ideas = convergent thinking.
Both are important in the creative process and can be measured using psychometric tests.
2: Divergent Thinking
What is divergent thinking?
Divergent thinking (DT) is defined as: the ability to generate multiple ideas in response to a problem
Diverging paths of thought, several ideas
Arguably, DT has been the focus of creativity research.
Debate in research community as to whether divergent thinking is a sufficient measure of creativity. DT may not capture the entire creative process (focuses on generation of ideas), but it helps us see an important aspect of creativity.
2: Divergent Thinking
How do psychologists measure DT?
There are several ways of measuring DT – verbal, figural and physical tasks.
Verbal tasks:
- Alternative Uses Task
“what other uses for…?”
- Consequences Task
“Imagine if… what would happen?” - Instances Task
“Think of as many things that are…”
2: Divergent Thinking
How do psychologists score divergent thinking?
Divergent Thinking Indices
FOFE:
- Fluency: number of ideas you come up with.
- Originality: number of ideas you come up with, that no-one else came up with.
- Flexibility: number of different categories the ideas can be organised into.
- Elaboration: the amount of detail put into an idea.
- Higher scores indicate higher levels of divergent thinking.
- Fluency and originality tend to be the most popular indices.
- Elaboration and flexibility may be better suited to some DT tasks compared to others e.g. elaboration may be better for Consequences, flexibility may be better for Instances.
- Inter-rater agreement is important – usually need a minimum of two coders
–> Consensual Assessment Technique involves a group of experts judging whether a product or idea is creative in relation to their particular expertise.
This method of coding is particularly useful if participants have been asked to create a product.
2: Divergent Thinking
Pros and Cons of verbal DT tasks
Advantages
- Quick and fairly easy to administer.
- Can be used with a range of ages, from children as young as 3 years (Instances task) up to adults.
Disadvantages
- Relies on verbal proficiency – if you have a more expansive vocabulary or are able to articulate yourself well, you’ll probably get better scores.
- Requires representational understanding – e.g. in the AUT, need to understand that bricks can be used differently.
- If administered in timed or exam conditions, could impact on DT.
2: Divergent Thinking
Other DT measures…
Figural Tasks
- Circles (TTCT) - looking at circles and drawing things with them
- Pattern Meaning (WKTB) - what does this pattern look like?
- drawing allows you to tap into another form of divergent thinking that doesn’t rely on verbal proficiency
- limited by reliance on fine motor skills
Can use the same indices mentioned before to score drawings.
2: Divergent Thinking
Is creativity stable over time?
Key question: does divergent thinking at age 4 and 5 predict creativity at age 11?
Harrington, Block and Block (1986)
Study:
- longitudinal study of 75 kids
- kids given instances DT tasks at 4, AUT at age 5
- teacher evaluations age 11
Found:
- DT correlated with rating of creativity age 11
- DT = sig predictor of creativity at pre-adolescence
Means:
- DT may have imp. implications for creativity in later life
- possibly other factors involved e.g. personality - natural curiosity could lead to greater creative thought
2: Divergent Thinking
Are there differences in DT in neurodiverse populations?
Key question: how does DT compare between children with Asperger’s Syndrome and neurotypical children?
Liu, Shih and Ma (2011)
Study:
- kids 10-11 with aspergers and neurotyp. completed figural DT tests
- rated on FOFE
Found:
- kids with aspergers scored sig higher on originality and elaboration
- neurotyp. scored higher on flexibility
Means:
- although kids with asp. may not use as many categories as neurotyp. kids, their reponses were more detailed and unique
- could be due to asp. characteristics e.g. attention to detail, interest in specific areas
2: Divergent Thinking
How can we test even younger kids?
We can use physical measures of DT.
In the same way that figural tasks tap into a slightly different manifestation of DT, physical tasks also offer an alternative perspective.
Thinking Creatively in Action and Movement (TCAM; Torrance, 1981)
e. g.
- How many ways can you move across the room?
- How many ways can you throw a cup in the bin?
Ideal for children 3 years+ because it does not require great verbal proficiency or fine motor skill.
2: Divergent Thinking
Measuring DT in toddlers and infants
Unusual Box Test
- Physical measure of divergent thinking.
- Measure the number of different actions completed with the box.
- children physically explore their environments to learn about them
- non-verbal, don’t necessarily need instructions and participants don’t need to articulate responses.
2: Divergent Thinking
Does parental DT relate to their children’s DT?
Key question: does infant divergent thinking positively relate to parent divergent thinking?
Hoicka et al (2016)
Study:
- measured DT in 29 parents and kids
- parents did figural DT task
- kids did UBT
Found:
- parents could have influence on kids DT
- social learning link, observing parents?
2: Divergent Thinking
Summary of DT
- Divergent thinking (DT) is the ability to generate multiple ideas to a problem.
- It can be measured using verbal and figural tasks but these rely on specialist skills e.g. vocabulary, fine motor skills so arguably are only suitable for adults and older children.
- For younger children (e.g. toddlers and infants), we can use physical measures – we don’t know much about the emergence of divergent thinking but these tests will help!
> Using these tests, we know that:
- DT can predict creativity later in childhood and further on into adulthood.
- There are differences in DT in neurodiverse groups.
- Parent DT is positively related to their children’s DT.
3: Convergent thinking
What is convergent thinking?
Convergent thinking: the ability to produce a single solution using logical and analytical thought processes
Convergent lines of thought to produce one precise idea
While DT has been the focus of most creative thinking research, CT plays an extremely important role and both are critical in problem-solving.
Convergent thinking alone – no new ideas, resulting in an unsolved problem or stagnation.
Divergent thinking alone – many ideas, but difficult to find and evaluate an effective idea to implement.
A combination of both CT and DT makes it more likely that a novel and appropriate idea will be found and, hopefully, a problem solved.
Focuses on evaluating ideas and implementing them
3: Convergent thinking
How do psychologists measure CT?
In adults and older children, psychologists can use the Remote Associations Task (RAT; Mednick, 1962).
Participants are given three target words, and have to come up with a fourth word that is associated with all three target words.
The trick is that each target word will link to other words that do not fit with the other target words.
- Participants must recognise ideas that do not fit and discard them to reach the correct answer.
e.g. Wheel, rocking, high
3: Convergent thinking
Can false memories help RAT performance?
Key question: can priming from a false memory task facilitate children and adult RAT performance?
Howe et al (2011)
Study:
- kids (11) and adults (18) were given DRM false memory tasks, followed by RATs
- DRM asked to recall the loads of words related to a needle (but needle never mentioned)
- RAT words = threat, pine, knitting
- Critical lure was needle, recalled due to false memory priming
Found:
- Priming from the DRM lists led to sigfaster RAT response times and solution rates in both adults and kids.
- If critical lure was falsely produced, RAT response times and solutions rates were significantly higher than if it had not been produced
Means:
- False memories can prime problem-solving.
- Supports the notion of “spreading activation” mechanisms, suggests positive implication of false memories.
3: Convergent thinking
What other measures of CT are there?
Can use insight problems
- complex questions where participants must be able to adopt a different perspective to reach the solution.
- they can be spatial, mathematical or verbal
- key feature of an insight problem is that it primes participants to a familiar but incorrect or inappropriate solution
e.g. “Water lilies double in area every 24 hours. At the beginning of summer there is one water lily on the lake. It takes 60 days for the lake to become completely covered with water lilies. On which day is the lake half covered?”
3: Convergent thinking
Example of an Insight Problem: Nine-Dot Problem
Can you connect all nine dots using four straight lines?
You cannot lift the pencil off the page.
Solution:
- Different perspective = being able to move beyond the perceived square.
Question doesn’t mention a particular shape, just the dots.
Our perception is of a square so we automatically work within those perimeters even though it is incorrect.
3: Convergent thinking
How do psychologists measure CT in kids?
Younger children don’t have the complex cognitive skills required for insight problems.
Similar to DT, we can use physical measures.
Tool-use tasks are very popular and can be used with young children (
Reindl et al (2016) introduced the GATTeB (Great Ape Tool Test Battery) and demonstrate that 2 and 3.5 year old children can spontaneously use tools to solve problems.
3: Convergent thinking
Children can use tools; can they make them?
Key question: At what age do children become proficient in tool innovation?
Tool manufacture: the physical transformation of materials to help solve a problem.
Tool innovation: the imagining the type of tool suitable for the task.
Both important aspects of tool-making.
Study:
- Investigated tool innovation across a range of age groups (3 – 11 years).
- Ppts asked to retrieve bucket containing a reward from a bottle – given pipe-cleaners to make a hook.
Found:
- tool innov. increased with age, young kids are poor at it
- 8 years was point at which majority of kids were able to create tool to solve prob
Means:
- tool innov develops with age
- possible that the ability to identify helpful characteristics of potential tools is quite sophisticated and feeds directly into the ability to innovate tools
3: Convergent thinking
What affects children’s convergent thinking?
There are barriers to convergent thinking.
> One barrier is functional fixedness.
- A cognitive bias where individuals find it difficult to think of ways of using objects that differs from their traditional use.
- Particularly relevant in tool-use tasks.
…One potential reason is that accumulated knowledge of object function is activated after a demonstration.
- This creates an impasse because potential alternative uses that may have otherwise been easy to access and generate are blocked.
3: Convergent thinking
Does functional fixedness vary depending on age?
Key question: does demonstrating the function of an object prior to a problem-solving task inhibit performance?
Study:
- 120 kids (aged 5, 6 and 7 years) given a demonstration of typical function of objects e.g. pencil, straw (experimental condition) OR presented objects without demonstration (baseline condition).
- asked to solve problem, critically, one of the demonstrated objects was the target object which they would need to use to solve the problem.
- measured latency and the number of children who selected target object.
Found:
- 6&7yo less likely to select correct object in demonstration condition compared to baseline condition
- 5yos seemingly unaffected by demonstrations (no significant difference between conditions).
Means:
- 5yos less susceptible to functional fixedness than 6&7yos
- possible that 5yos conceptualise objects differently; might see them as a means to achieve a present goal whereas older children see objects more in terms of their typical or intended use.
3: Convergent thinking
Summary of CT
- Convergent thinking (CT) is the ability to reach a single solution to a problem.
- It can be measured using the RAT and insight problems in adults and older children.
- For younger children, physical measures such as tool-use tasks are seen as a good measure of convergent thinking and problem-solving.
- Using these tests, we know that:
>False memories can prime better performance in the RAT.
>Children as young as 2 can spontaneously use tools to solve problems and children from 8 years and above can go one step further and innovate tools to help solve problems.
>Functional fixedness can be a barrier to problem-solving for older children.
4: Applying Creativity Research
What is creativity training?
- Heavily invested in by business and education (for example, gifted and talented programmes).
- Can be used for adults and children.
- Wide range of formats and delivery e.g. lecture-based, computer-based, groups.
- Can be more general or tailored to a specific context (for example, creative writing).
4: Applying Creativity Research
Is creativity training effective?
Scott, Leritz and Mumford (2004)
Study:
- meta analysis examining effectiveness of creativity interventions
- looked at studies that assessed various training programs
Found:
- programs were generally effective (mostly medium effect sizes).
- They were effective for children and adults.
- Effectiveness varied depending on focus of training (e.g. divergent thinking and problem-solving was most effective) and participating groups (e.g. male participants, organisational settings)
Means:
- Programs can have pos. influence on creativity
- programs that emphasise cognitive or heuristic approaches seemed to be more effective compared to more abstract approaches e.g. imagery
4: Applying Creativity Research
Why does research matter in creativity training?
- Knowledge about the cognitive processes underlying creativity also feeds into creativity programmes, (for examples, optimal delivery methods, focus of training).
- As we learn more about creativity and factors that influence creativity, training programmes can be revised and improved.
> Defeyter & German (2003) showed that functional fixedness can be a barrier to problem-solving because it can block alternative ideas.
- possible to design a programme that teaches techniques for overcoming functional fixedness.
4: Applying Creativity Research
Are humans the only creative species?
Creativity is a defining feature of humans, but we’re not alone!
All of these animals have been observed using tools in some form, both in captivity and in the wild (chimps, gorillas, crows, octopi)
Comparative psychology is the scientific study of behaviour and cognition in human and non-human animals - where we see similar behaviour, we could extrapolate that there is a biological or heritable basis to that behaviour.
4: Applying Creativity Research
How do children compare to other species of great ape in problem-solving?
Hanus et al (2011)
Study:
- Chimpanzees, gorillas, orang-utans and human children (aged 4, 6 and 8 years) completed variations of the Floating Peanut Task.
Found:
- Older children performed better in the task.
- chimpanzees and orangutans better than 4yos but worse than 6 & 8yo
Means:
- Might be a biological basis for tool-use in great ape species, but human tool-use may become more sophisticated as they develop.
- Note: procedural differences to make the tasks accessible to different species.
4: Applying Creativity Research
Why does comparative psychology matter in creativity?
- Comparative psychology allows us to see the commonalities and differences between species.
- In terms of develop psych, it can show proof that complex cognitive skills are heritable and it also tells us which skills are uniquely human
- Can probably say that problem-solving (especially manifested in tool-use) has some biological basis, though humans are more advanced innovators.
- Can learn a lot from the behaviour of other species.
> The GATTeB was based on behaviours that great apes have been observed doing in the wild.
> By looking at other species, researchers have been able to create measures of problem-solving that work with young children – this helps us learning more about the emergence of convergent thinking and problem-solving!
Summary
- Creativity is a multifaceted concept that can be measured in different ways, including divergent thinking and convergent thinking tests.
- There are many measures for creative thinking and some measures are suitable for children as young as 1-2 years.
- Research has found a variety of factors that could related to creative thinking; neurodiversity, parent creativity, age, functional fixedness.
- Research can inform creativity training (and that training is effective!) and creativity is not a uniquely human trait, although we have more sophisticated skills compared to other species.
