CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE
TRAINING CREA'I'IVI'I'Y
)1
AND LOCUS OF CONTROL
A thesis submitted in part.ial satisfaction of
·the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts ln
Psychology
by
David Bruce Cook
_./
January, 1978
I
'
The thesis of David Bruce Cook is approved:
'RQJ'qev7Moss .
IDee Shepherd-Look
California State University, Northridge
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES.
iv
ABSTRACT.
v
INTRODUCTION.
1
Statement of Purpose.
1
Review of the Literature.
1
7
METHOD.
Subjects.
7
'Measures.
7
Procedure
11
16
·RESULTS
.
DISCUSSION.
23
REFERENCES.
27
APPENDICES.
30
A.
Tests of Creativity, The IAR Scale.
31
B.
Creativity Training Procedures.
38
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table
1.
'.
\
2.
3.
Means and Standard Deviations of the
Wallach and Kogan Tests for each Group.
19
Analysis of Covariance for Wallach and Kogan
Pretest and Posttest. . . • • . • . • • . • . •
20
Tukey's Specific Comparisons Between the
Differences of Adjusted Means for Each Group.
21
iv
ABSTRACT
TRAINING CREATIVITY AND LOCUS OF CONTROL
by
David B. Cook
Master of Arts in Psychology
The purpose of this study was to design and evaluate
i
I creative
performance training procedures for use in an
/.,el·ementary public school and to explore the relationship
l
j:between locus of control and creativity training. It was
•
~.,hypothesized that students receiving training would imi
L'Prove their creative performance and that as a consequence ·
'·'Of tr.aining, students maintaining an internal locus of
•control would improve their creative performance more than
students maintaining an external locus of control.
Three intact sixth grade classes with 24 students
each served as subjects.
One class received training
conducted by the teacher as part of normal course work
for five weeks.
groups.
The other two classes served as control
The class rece·iving training significantly im-
proved their creative performance as measured by two
Wallach and Kogan tests.
Students maintaining an internal
v
•..
locus of control as measured by Crandall's IAR scale dis. played significantly higher creative performance after
training than students maintaining an external locus of
control.
It was concluded that the creative training
procedures were effective in improving creative performance and that students maintaining an internal locus of
control were able to benefit more from training than
students maintaining an external locus of control.
vi
INTRODUCTION
Statemen-t of Purpose
The primary purpose of this study was to design and
1
evaluate integrative creative performance training procedures for use in a public school.
The training proced-
ures were adapted from previously published training
programs and tailored to be used by a public school
elementary teacher within the context of the normal school
curriculum.
The secondary purpose of this study was to
explore the relationship between the students' locus of
control and their ability to improve their creative performance as a consequence of the training procedures.
Review of the Literature
The psychological study of creativity and divurgent
thinking has stimulated a concern for the lack of formal
attention given to developing creative potential in public
schools (Torrance, 1962, 1970; Wallach & Kogan, 1965).
As
a consequence to this concern, several methodologies to
improve creative performance have been developed; most
notably brainstorming (Osborn, 1953) and synectics (Gordon,
1961).
Parnes (1967) has published a review of training
procedures along with his own training program.
The development of these procedures initiated
1
2
numerous studies concluding the procedures were productive
;in improving creative performance.
Typically, though, the
:training procedures have been utilized for special groups,
such as gifted children, or under workshop or laboratory
settings.
From the plethora of publications involving the
design and evaluation of these procedures one would expect
:that training creative performance is either specific to
!the experimental situation or is easily learned.
Because
ithe research has been carried out under conditions other
!
1 than
I
the common dynamics of the public school classroom,
\ the training procedures have not yet been evaluated under
1
!
the circumstances most appropriate for widespread utili-
j zation.
The primary purpose of this study was to design
l
!and evaluate training procedures for use in a public
i
!·school classroom.
The program was designed so that there
1
l
jwas no in-class intervention on the part of the experi-
, menter and that the procedures could be adapted to the
; normal class curriculum by the teacher.
The first
hypothesis of this study was that students who received
the training procedures would improve their creative
performance.
Characteristics attributed
to persons who maintain
an internal locus of control or reinforcement have also
been attributed to persons who have been identified as
being creative.
Internals have been shown to resist the
influence of others more than externals (Gore & Rotter,
3
1963; Oziel, 1972).
Internals have been described as
being less conforming than externals (Odell, 1969).
Studies of acknowledged creative persons have described
them as being less susceptible to influence than others
and to be less conforming (Barron, 1953; MacKinnon, 1962;
Schmidt, 1973).
Studies using the various creativity
tests have reported a positive correlation between resistance to social pressure and creative performance (Long,
Henderson & Ziller, 1967; Torrance & Damv, 1965).
DuCette,
Wolk, & Freidman (1972) explored the relationship between
locus of control and creativity.
i
Using Crandall's
Intellectual Achievement Responsibility Questionnaire to
l measure
I
locus of control and Wallach and Kogan's Pattern
l
I
!'Meaning Test to measure creativity they found a signifi' :cant main effect for locus of control where internals
I
! gave more creative responses than externals. Their sub1
jects were 40 lower-class males between the ages of nine
and 11.
Other investigations studying locus of control have
:reported ·that persons who maintain an internal locus of
control tend to explore and attend to information more
than externals (Seeman, 1963).
Internals have been shown
to be more ready to search for information in experimental
tasks (Davis & Phares, 1967; Lefcourt & Wine, 1969).
Lefcourt (1967) found internals were more aware of
challenges inherent in specific task situations.
4
Creative performance training procedures are typified
·by their demands placed on the subject to explore and
iutilize information for the purpose of putting together
new or unusual cognitive associations.
If persons who
maintain an internal locus of control are more likely to
search out and attend to information more than externals,
I this suggests that students who maintain an internal locus
1of control would be more likely to improve their creative
'
! performance
!
!of
vis a vis training.
The second hypothesis
this study was that students who maintain an internal
Il locus
if control would score significantly higher on the
I creative
performance test after training than students
I~maintaining
i
an external locus of control.
I To measure creative per~ormance portions of Wallach
land Kogan's creativity tests were employed in this study.
I Guilford (1959) developed a battery of tests to measure
creative performance but these tests were found to be
; correlated with intelligence (Thorndike, 1963; MacKinnon,
1961).
Wallach and Kogan developed a set of measures
; which they reported had high inter-correlations, high
reliability, and were not correlated with IQ scores.
They defined creativity as a bifurcate associational
construct in terms of associational fluency and response
uniqueness.
Their defipition emphasizes the ability of
an individual to produce both a large number of cognitive
associations in verbal and non-verbal situations.
5
Kazelkis, Jenkins, and Lingle (1972) compared the
tests of Guilford, Torrance, and Wallach and Kogan under
•common administration procedures and concluded, using
oblique factor analysis, that the Wallach and Kogan tests
measured a factor separate from intelligence.
There have
also been several published studies concerning the validity
iof the Wallach and Kogan tests (Bartlett & Davis, 1975;
)cohen, 1974; Kogan & Pankove, 1972; Singer & Whiton, 1971).
i
These studies all suggest that the Wallach and Kogan measures are valid, and there have been no published emperical
studies questioning the validity of the Wallach and Kogan
jmeasures.
j
In administering divurgent thinking measures, several
L-studies have found that the instructional set or other
lcuesgiven to subjects prior to administration signifi'
jcantly affects scores.
Instructions to appear creative
.or original tend to increase the scores on tests (Gilichrist & Taft, 1972; Oziel, Oziel & Cohen, 1972).
Sub-
:jects presented with examples prior to administration
also tend to perform better on divurgent thinking measures
(Harris & Evans, 1973).
However, a study by Gerlach,
Schutz, Baker, & Mazer {1964) found no significant differences due to an instructional set to appear creative.
One could argue that increased performance due to training
could be due more to the development of the appropriate
instructional set than the skills developed by training.
6
The potential effect of an instructional set to appear
creative has been ignored by previous evaluations of
·training programs, and a design was used in the present
I
study to control for the effect.of instructional set.
METHOD
·subjects
The subjects were 72 children, 38 males and 34 fe!males, in the three sixth grade classes of a predominately
!White, middle-class, suburban elementary school in South!ern California.
Their ages ranged between 11 and 12 years.
!The experiment was approved by the local school board,
i
!principal, sixth grade teachers and their classes.
Twenty-
j
i
I
four students were selected from each of the three classes
! for
data analysis on the basis of completing the pre and
liposttest
I
l Skills
and having taken the California Test of Basic
(reading) a year earlier.
Where more than 24
l
!students
met the requirements stated above, students were
;
;randomly discarded from data analysis to obtain equal
Lnumbers per class.
Two Ss were randomly discarded from
Group 3 and three Ss were randomly discarded from Group 2.
The mean CTBS stanine score in reading for the subject
sample was 5.89 (SD=l.82).
The mean stanine scores for
Groups 1, 2, and 3 respectively were 5.2 (SD=l.4), 6.6
(SD=l.9), and 5.7 (SD=l.8).
Measures
The pre and posttest measures of creative performance
were composed of split-halves of Wallach and Kogan's
7
8
Pattern Meanings Test and Alternate Uses Test.
Wallach
:and Kogan reported Spearman-Brown split-half reliability
:coefficients for the Pattern Meanings Test as .93 for
·fluency and .88 for uniqueness; for the Alternate Uses
Test as .93 for fluency and .87 for uniqueness.
The
· Pattern Meanings Test is considered a non-verbal test
jwhich requires the subject to state all the possible
( things a drawing could be.
'
There were three drawings
each on the pre and posttest.
The Alternate Uses Test
requires the subject to state all the possible uses a
icommon object (i.e., a chair) could be used for.
jwere four objects each on the pre and posttest.
There
Each
j test i tern •11as scored for fluency which is the total num-
,
-
\
(ber of responses made and uniqueness.
l
Wallach and Kogan
;defined uniqueness as a response occurring less than five
l
I per
cent of the time out of the total sample.
Torrance
(1965) established a five per cent definition following the
rationale that with a large sample one occurance tends to
emphasize exclusiveness rather than uniqueness.
To arrive
at the total score per subject, fluency and uniqueness
scores were summed.
To assess locus of control, Crandall's Intellectual
Achievement Responsibility Questionnaire (Crandall,
Katkovsky, & Crandall, 1965) was employed.
The Intell-
ectual Achievement Responsibility Questionnaire (IAR) was
selected because of its applicability to the age group and
9
. appropriateness to the experimental setting.
I
The IAR is
composed of 34 forced choice items regarding experiences
·and outcomes commonly occurring within the child's environment.
Each item choice attributes an achievement
·success or failure situation to either the behavior of
the subject (scored as internal) or the behavior of
I
i another
(scored external).
The IAR was scored for the
j total number of internal choices selected by the subject.
(See Appendix A for a copy of the measures used).
The pretest was administered to each of the three
; intact classes on the same day by two testers.
r
\
After
entering the classroom the teacher of each class intra-
jduced the testers by telling the class they were present
'
l
j·for an important purpose and to cooperate with them.
l
I being
l
After'
-
introduced the following instructions and procedures
\were
carried out separately for each class:
I
"Hello, I am Dr.
-----
from CSUN and I have some
,exercises here I'd like to have you do.
Dr.
----
your principal, and your teacher have allowed me to
do this.
This is part of a program a student of mine
is doing to see how well students in the sixth grade
might be able to answer them.
The exercises are a
lot of fun, they are made to allow people to use
their imagination
tests'',~
~n
answering them.
They are not
and they will not be graded."
The test booklets were passed out to each student and the
l
10
instructions for Pattern Meanings were then given:
"Here is an exercise where you can feel free to use
your imagination.
In this exercise there are three
drawings, each on a piece ofpaper.
After looking at
each one I want you to write down on the paper all
the things you think the complete drawing could be.
Here is an example (drawn on chalkboard)
\
/
'
What could this be?
£rom the class).
/
(Three responses were elicited
Yes, those are fine.
Some other
kinds of things I was thinking of were the rising sun,
;a
·;porcupine, eyelashes, and· a brush.
sthere are lots of other things too.
. :ready .know what to do.
And probably
I see you al-
Okay, try to think of things
the first drawing on the paper could be and write
~,down
your ideas on the lines below.
-±he drawing anyway you like.
You can turn
Don't worry about
.spelling or writing neatly, the most important thing
is to imagine all the things the drawing could be
and write down your ideas.
Take all the time you
need. 11
The students were allowed five minutes per test item, at
the end of which they were told to turn the page and work
on the new one.
During this time the two testers answered
any questions and gave help on spelling where asked for.
11
After the three Pattern Meanings items were completed the
,instructions for Alternate Uses were given.
The instruc-
:tions were as follows:
"In this exercise on the top of each page you will
find the name of an object, any kind ,of object, like
a light bulb or a table.
Your job is to write down
lots of different ways that the object can be used.
For example, think of string.
You could use it to
attach a fish hook, to jump rope, to hang clothes
on, and to pull down window shades.
more you could think of too.
you to write down your ideas.
There are many
Below each word I want
There are four ob-
jects named on the four pieces of paper.
~don't
Remember,
worry about spelling or writing neatly.
Go
:ahead now and start. on the first one."
I
I
!The class was allowed five minutes per item and the testers·'
'''
:·helped students when asked. At the end of the exercise
ithe test booklets were picked up and the class was thanked
l for completing the exercise.
During the testing the
. teacher typically remained in the room and either assisted
students in spelling or went about other duties quietly.
The testing atmosphere was kept orderly by the testers.
Procedure
One of the sixth grade teachers was recruited to
incorporate the integrative training procedures into the
normal class curriculum.
The other two classes were
12
. randomly assigned to two control conditions.
Group 1
:received the pre and posttest only, and Group 2 received
· the pretest and was administered specific instructions to
l
appear creative
prior to taking the posttest.
The class
'receiving training, labelled Group 3, was administered
the pretest, followed by five weeks of
tr~ining
procedures,
I
/and then the posttest.
One week prior to the pretest a meeting was held with
the three teachers explaining the purpose of the study and
describing the exercises used in the pretest.
i
A schedule
for administering the pretest was made at this time so
!
,lthat testing could take place on the same day.
This meet-
I
f:ing lasted approximately 20 minutes.
l
j
I
Following this meeting the teacher of Group 3 was
!briefed on the training procedures.
The training pro-
!
jcedures were brainstorming, problem solving, attribute
'
:training, and art activities requiring divurgent thinking.
: (See Appendix B for a copy of the descriptions of these
iprocedures given to the teacher).
The teacher was also
; given the books Encouraging Creativity in the Classroom
·by Torrance and Creative Behavior Guidebook by Parnes.
The teacher was told to skim the two books, review the
five procedures, and think of ways she could implement the
procedures into the current curriculum.
She was told not
to experiment with the procedures in class until after the
pretest.
The teacher was instructed specifically not to
13
employ exercises resembling Pattern Meanings or Alternate
;Uses.
A meeting was held with the teacher of Group 3 after
the pretest to discuss ways in which the procedures of
brainstorming, problem solving, and attribute training
could be integrated with the class curriculum.
Strategies
]of implementation were discussed for the first week.
The
i
i teacher was also coached in ways to encourage original
ideas and reinforce original behavior in the classroom.
The teacher was told to keep a log of the ways the pro. cedures were used and the number of times a day she re-
I1 1n
. f arced
'i
'
i
I
I
i
1
. .
.
or encouraged or1g1nal
1deas.
For the duration of the five week training period a
weekly meeting was held with the teacher to review what
she had done the previous week and discuss activities for
the next week.
These meetings were used also to thank the
teacher for her involvement and to encourage the teacher
to continually reinforce the class for original behavior.
The meetings tended to last approximately 20 minutes, and
this was the only contact with the teacher during the
training period.
The strategy of the training was to present the class
with opportunities to generate ideas with deferred judgement and·subsequently reinforce their behavior.
During
the training period the teacher used the brainstorming
and problem solving procedures three times a week.
Attri-
14
bute training and art activities were employed by the
teacher once a week.
According to the teacher's log, approximately two
hours a week of class time was devoted to the specific
·use of the training procedures.
The teacher reported
reinforcing the class for original ideas whenever possible.
On the day of the posttest, due to a conflict in
schedules, only one tester of the two present at the pretest administered the posttest.
The procedures for post-
testing on the Alternate Uses and Pattern Meanings for
Groups 1 and 3 were kept identical to the pretest.
The
procedure for Group 2 was identical except for the administration of the instructional set to appear creative.
The introductory instructions given to Group 2·were:
I have some exercises for you to do, very similar
to the ones I brought before.
Do you remember?
This class did very well on those exercises.
You
all had a lot of ideas other classes didn't have.
I think this class can do even better on these
exercises and I want you to do your best.
The same specific instructions and examples were given
as to Groups 1 and 3.
After the example was given the
following instructions were given:
Remember, I \.vant as many ideas as you can think of.
I really want you to use your imagination and be as
creative as possible.
Your ideas cannot be right
15
or wrong.
Every idea is good, and the more ideas
you can think of the better and the more unusual
your idea the better.
So, write down everything
you come up with.
The IAR was verbally administered by the tester after the
two Wallach and Kogan measures were completed.
Adminis-
'
i tration of the Questionnaire for all three groups was
i kept identical.
The students used the backside of the
!Alternate Uses booklet to write down their responses.
i
i The students were told to write down the numbers from one
.!
I
to 34 on the paper.
After this was completed the follow-
ing instructions were given:
I am going to read you some statements with two
possible answers.
~and
Some people agree with one answer
some agree with the other.
the answer you agree with.
I want you to choose
Whichever way you answer
I am sure that probably about half the class agrees
.with you.
Each of the 34 items of the IAR was then read to the
class and the class was asked to write an A if they
agreed with that response or B if they agreed with the
later response.
twice.
Each item was read slowly and repeated
At the completion of the IAR the booklets were
collected and the class was thanked for their cooperation.
This completed the posttest •
. ·~-- -----·-------··-··-------~-~--~--~-----·----------~·-·---'-"""'-------~- ---~--
RESULTS
The first hypothesis of this study was that the
training program instituted by the teacher of Group 3
!would increase the creative performance of the group as
!measured by the Wallach and Kogan tests.
The means and
standard deviations on the pretest and posttest are
presented in Table 1.
Because intact classes were assigned
: to treatments, an analysis of covariance was performed
/ on the da·ta.
J
iate ..
.2.
The pretest scores were used as the covar-
The results of this analysis are presented in Table
Significant differences were found between groups on
the covariate, F (1, 68} = 103.00, p<.OOl, indicating
significant differences between groups on the pretest.
As predicted, the analysis also indicated that the main
effect between groups was significant, F (2, 68)
£
=
23.93,
<.001.
Table 3 presents Tukey's specific comparisons be-
tween the three Groups and their means adjusted for the
covariate.
Group 3 significantly increased their scores
on the posttest over both Groups 1 and 2.
There was no
significant difference between the posttest scores for
Groups 1 and 2 which suggests the instructional set
given to Group 2 prior to the posttest was not instrument-
17
18
'al in increasing their scores.
Group 3 increased their ratio of mean original res:ponses to mean total responses from .10 on the pretest
:to .27 on the posttest.
For Group 1 the ratio was .10
:for both tests, and for Group 2 the ratio for the pretest
was .19 and the ratio for the posttest was .21.
The second hypothesis of this study was that students
who maintained an internal locus of control would score
: higher on creative performance after receiving training
Ii
i than students who maintained an external locus of control.
i To
test this hypothesis scores for Group 3 on the post-
j test and the IAR Questionnaire were compared.
'jma1.nta1n1.ng
. .
'
Students
an internal locus of control were defined as
I
;
I scoring in the upper third of total scores on the IAR;
!
jand students were defined as maintaining an external locus
f of control who scored in the lower third of the total IAR
I
scores.
Scores on the Wallach and Kogan posttest were
compared between the students identified as maintaining
an internal locus of control and the students maintaining
an external locus of control.
As predicted, students
maintaining an internal locus of control scored higher on
the posttest than students maintaining an external locus
of control, t(l 4 )=2.19, E<.OS.
The same comparison was made for Groups 1 and 2.
There were no significant differences between scores on
the posttest for internals and externals for either group.
19
Table 1
Means and Standard Deviations for
the Wallach and Kogan Tests
Group
M
I Control
31.5
10.9
29.5
9.8
Control Group 2
49.9
21.9
47.5
18.7
Group 3 42.2
13.1
62.2
24.5
Group
I Experimental
i
Posttest
SD
M
1
I
I
Pretest
SD
..L
20
Table 2
Analysis of Covariance for Wallach
And Kogan Pretest and Posttest
Source
df
\covariate (pretest)
1
17390.32
103.01
.001
lI Error
2
4040.46
23.93
.001
68
168.83
j Total
71
520.44
MS
F
i
!
I
l Groups
i
21
Table 3
Tukey's Specific Comparisons Between the
Differences of Adjusted Means for Each Group
Control Group 1
Control Group 2 Exp. Group 3
(Adjusted M=37.66) (Adjusted M=40.22) (Adjusted M=
6J.. 38)
j
! Group
II
1
Group 2
Group 3
*E. <.01
2.56
23.72*
21.16*
22
As a post-hoc evaluation the scores on the IAR
Questionnnaire were subjected to an item analysis for the
total sample.
The item analysis was carried out to
evaluate the degree to which the items of the IAR discriminated between internal and external locus of control.
Out of the 34 forced-choice questions, nine questions were
answered the same way for 85% of the sample; and 14
questions
~tvere
answered the same way for 75% of the sample .
.I
~
-~~~---'--
~
.,.--~_:__-
-~----------
-~-
--
DISCUSSION
The analysis of covariance on the pretest and posttest Wallach and Kogan measures supports the hypothesis
that the training received by Group 3 was effective in
! improving
their creative performance.
Besides increasing
i
1
I their
total score on the posttest measures, Group 3 also
1
l
I increased
their ratio of original responses to the total
i number of responses.
i
! ef£orts
This finding suggests the teacher's
to reinforce original ideas was effective.
l
!
I
I
Due to the design of the study, limited by the
~permission
obtained from the school board, the effect of
j ±he teacher was not controlled for in the design.
~
There-
fore, one could argue that the increase in creative performance was not due to the training procedures but to
the characteristics unique to the teacher.
Yet, training
on any subject is dependent on the ability of the teacher
to communicate the principles of learning to the students.
Given the motivation of a teacher to instruct the class
in the principles of divurgent thinking and the requisite
skills to communicate these principles, the results suggest creative performance is a skill easily learned.
This conclusion is consistent with previous studies employing divurgent thinking methods as training procedures.
23
24
The results from the analysis of covariance suggest
that although Group 2 received specific instructions to
appear creative prior to the posttest, these instructions
were not instrumental in increasing their scores over the
pretest.
Since Group 2 did score significantly higher
on the pretest than the other groups and considering initact classes were assigned to conditions there is the
;alternative explanation that the lack of increase is due
ito the effect of regression towards the mean.
However,
l
'
;since Group 1 and Group 2 displayed a consistency of
I
;results between the pretest and the posttest this suggests
!that the Wallach and Kogan measures are reliable over time
1
land that the instructional set to appear creative was not
I
! effective.
!lach,
This finding confirms an earlier study (Ger-
et al.r 1964) that test directions to appear creative
f
l
(do not provide sufficient cues for Ss to score signifi. cantly higher on divurgent thinking measures.
The results suggest that instructing students in
i
creative performance does not necessitate special programs,
special curriculum, or expensive materials as is often
suggested.
The procedures of brainstorming, problem
solving, and attribute training can be effectively intergated into regular coursework and offer the class an
alternative to methodologies based on drill and right
versus wrong questioning.
For Groups 1 and 2 there were no differences between
25
internals and externals on the Wallach and Kogan measures.
These results are contrary to the results reported by
· DuCette et al.
{1972}.
A possible explanation for this
difference may be the difference between the socioeconomic
class of the two samples.
Whereas DuCette, et al. studied
lower-class children, the subjects of this study were
!middle-class children.
Further research is needed to
jclarify this difference in results.
,
!
Persons maintaining an internal locus of control have
previously been described as being more aware of infortmation and more willing to search for more information.
i
The results of the t-test for Group 3 support this des-
!~cription.
I
Through training, which emphasizes the ability
!·,to explore and utilize information in new ways, internal
I
Lsubjects were able to increase their performance more than
;
t
!,:external subjects.
!
Thus, the relationship beteeen locus
~·of control and creativity may be developmental where in-
; ·ternal persons are more likely to develop creative beihavior than external persons.
The interaction between
locus of control and creativity should be examined to see
if intensive creative training would promote an internal
locus of control.
As of this time, locus of control
measures are not sensitive enough to register a change in
control.
The item analysis of the IAR indicated the Questionnaire was not as sensitively constructed as the Rotter
26
I-E scale for adults.
When the IAR was published an item
'analysis was suggested for future research but no further
'published attempts towards refinement were made.
In devel-
oping the Rotter scale, Rotter rejected potential items
in which one of the pair of forced choice items was chosen
more than 85% of the time.
Employing this criterion to
;the IAR with this study's sample, nine of the Questionjnaire items would be rejected.
This finding gives evidence
that the IAR could be strengthened beyond its present
capacity to discriminate between internal and external
!locus of control.
;
REFERENCES
Barron, F. Some personality correlates of independence
of judgement. Journal of Personality, 1953, 21,
287-297.
;Bartlett, M. M. & Davis, G. A. Do the Wallach and Kogan
tests predict real creative behavior? Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 1974, 39, 730.
!Cohen, S. Exploratory task behavior and creativity in
young children. Horne Economics Research Journal, 1974,
2, 262-267.
Crandall, V. c., Katkovsky, W., & Crandall, V. J. Children's beliefs in their own control of reinforcement in
intellectual academic achievement situations. Child
Development, 1965, 36, 91-109.
w. L. & Phares, E. J. Internal-external control
as a determinant of information-seeking in a social
in£1uence setting. Journal of Personali~, 1967, 35,
'547-561.
j~avis,
1
l
;
I
l
i cOUCette, J., Wolk, s.
·
I
& Friedman s.
Locus of control
-and creativity in black and white children. Journal
of Social Psychology, 1972, ~' 297-298.
:Gerlach, V. S., Schutz, R. E., Baker, R. L. & Mazer, G. E •.
Effects of variations in test direction on originality
of response. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1964,
55, 79-83.
Gilchrist, M. B. & Taft, R. Originality on demand.
Psychological Reports, 31, 579-582.
Gordon, w. ,J. J. Synectics: The Development of Creative
Capacity. New York: Harper and Row, 1961.
Gore, P. M. & Rotter, J. B. A personality correlate of
social action. Journal of Personality, 1963, 31,
58-64.
Guilford, J. P. Traits of Creativity.
In H. Anderson
(Ed.), Creativity and its Cultivation. New York:
Harper, 1959, 142-161.
27
28
Harris, M. B. & Evans, R. C. Models of creativity,
Psychological Reports, 1973, 33, 763-769.
lKazelsk.is, R., Jenkins, J. D., & Lingle, R. K.
Two alternative definitions of creativity and their relationship
with intelligence. Journal of Experimental Education,
1972, 41, 58-62.
Kogan, N. & Pankove, E. Creative ability over a five-year
span. ~hild Development, 1972, il, 427-442.
Lefcourt, H. M.
Effects of cue explication upon persons
maintaining external control expectancies.
Journal
of Personality & Social Psychology, 1967, ~, 372-378.
I
;Lefcourt, H. M. & Wine, J.
Internal versus external conl
trol of reinforcement and the deployment of attention
in experimental situations. Canadian Journal of
Behavioral Science, 1969, !, 167-181.
·Odell, M.
Personality correlates of independence and
conformity.
Unpublished Master's thesis, Ohio State
University, 1969.
Osborn, A. F.
1953.
Applied Imagination.
New York:
Scribner,
Oziel, L. J.
The Relationship between perceived locus
of control, resistance to demands for compliance, and
creativity.
(Doctoral· dissertation. Arizona State
University) Ann Arbor, Mich: University Microfilms.
1972. No. 72-23,389.
Oziel, L. J., Oziel, L. D., & Cohen, R. H.
Effects of
instructional set on production of creative responses.
Psychological Reports, 1972, 31, 93-94.
Parnes, S. J. Creative Behavior Guidebook.
Scribner, 1967.
New York:
29
.·Schmidt, H. E. Personality correlates of the creative
·
architecture student. Perceptual and Motor Skills,
1973, 36, 10-30.
'Seeman, M. Alienation and Social learning in a reformatory. American Journal of Sociology, 1963, 69, 270184.
Singer, D. L. & Whiton, M. B.
Ideational creativity and
expressive aspects of human figure drawing in Kindergarten-age children. Developmental Psychology, 1971,
!r 366-369 ..
Thorndike, R. L. The measurement of creativity.
College Record, 1963, 64, 422-424.
Torrance, E. P. Guiding Creative Talent.
Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1962.
Teachers
Englewood
Torrance, E. P. Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking.
Princeton: Personnel Press, 1966.
!Torrance, E. P. Encouraging Creativity in the Classroom.
!
Dubuque: Wm. C. Brown, Co., 1970.
i
!Torrance, E. P .. & Dauw, D. C. Aspirations and dreams of
I
three groups of creatively gifted high school seniors
j
and a comparable unselected group. Gifted Child
\
Quarterly, 1965, 9, 177-182.
l
l Wallach, r1. A. & Kogan, N.
l
'
•
Ch~ldren.
New York:
Modes of Thinking in Young
Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1965.
APPENDICES
30
31
APPENDIX A
TESTS OF CREATIVITY
Alternate Uses
Pattern Meanings
By Wallach and Kogan (1965)
Definition of Creativity
Wallach and Kogan define creativity as a bifurcate
associational construct in terms of associational fluency
and response uniqueness.
This definition emphasized the
1
lability of an individual to produce a large number of
!cognitive associations and a large number of unique
l
.
.
.
Jassoc1at1ons 1n verbal and non-verbal situations.
l
The
'Pattern Meanings test is a non-verbal test, and the
Alternate Uses test is a verbal test.
A.
Alternate Uses Test
The purpose of the alternate uses test is to measure
verbal production where the subject is asked to generate
possible uses for a specified object.
A subject's score
is based on the number of ideas generated (fluency) and
the uniqueness of the ideas (originality).
Uniqueness
is determined by the frequency of occurance within the
sample.
32
: Items:
!
i
; 1.
newspaper
5.
shoe
2.
knife
6.
button
3.
automobile tire
7.
key
4.
cork
8.
chair
Reliability:
Spearman-Brown split~half reliability coefficients (N-151) :'
uniqueness
.87
number
~93
B.
Pattern Meanings Test
This test uses visual rather than verbal stimulus
materials.
The subject is asked to respond to each patter~
~ cdrawing by giving ideas as tO waht the dravTing might be.
I It is scored on uniqueness and fluency as the Alternate
i! :Uses
test is.
Items:
1.
4.
2.
5.
3
.
,------ --;
nco o
j
6.
33
Reliability:
Spearman-Brown split-half reliability coefficients
uniqueness
.88
number
.93
(N~lSl):
, Intercorrelations among the four measures (N=l51)
1
1.
Alternate uses-uniqueness
2.
Alternate uses-number
3.
Pattern meanings-uniqueness
4.
Pattern meanings-munber
2
3
4
.67
.46
.29
.49
.39
.29
Crandall's IAR Scale
The subject's total score is the sum of the I scores.
1
1.
If a teacher passes you to the next grade, would
J.t probably be
a.
---I- b.
2.
When you do well on a test at school, it is more
likely to be
I
a.
b.
because you studied for it, or
because the test was especially easy?
When you have trouble understanding something in
school, is it usually
3.
a.
I
4.
because she liked you, or
because of the work you did?
b.
because the teacher didn't explain it clearly,
or
because you didn't listen carefully?
When you read a story and can't remember much of it,
it is usually
a.
- I - b.
because the story wasn't well written, or
because you weren't interested in the story?
34
5.
Suppose your parents say you are doing well in
school. Is this likely to happen
I
6.
a.
b.
because your school work is good, or
because they are in a good mood?
Suppose you did better than usual in a subject
at school. Would it probably happen
I
7.
a.
b.
because you tried harder, or
because someone helped you?
When you lost at a game of cards or checkers,
does i t usually happen
a.
I
8.
b.
because the other player is good at the game,
or
because you don't play well?
1
l
Suppose a person doesn't think you are very
bright or clever
I
a.
b.
can you make him change his mind if you
try to, or
are there some people who will think you're
not very bright no matter what you do?
If you solve.a puzzle quickly, is it
9.
-I-
a.
b.
because it wasn't a very hard puzzle, or
because you worked on it carefully?
If a boy or girl tells you that you are dumb,
is i t more likely that they say that
10.
--I-
a.
b.
because they are mad at you, or
because what you did really wasn't very
bright?
Suppose you study to become a teacher, scientist,
or doctor and you fail. Do you think this would
happen
I
a.
b.
because you didn't work hard enough, or
because you needed some help, and other
people didn't give it to you?
When you learn something quickly in school, is
it usually
12.
I
a.
b.
because you paid close attention, or
because the teacher explained it clearly?
35
If a teacher says to you, "Your work is fine,"
is it
il3.
l
I
I
l
a.
I
b.
When you find it hard to work arithmetic or math
problems at school, is it
14.
I
a.
b.
I115.
I
something teachers usually say to encourage
pupils, or
because you did a good job?
I
because you didn't study well enough before
you tried them, or
because the teacher gave problems that were
too hard?
When you forget something you heard in class,
is it
a. because the teacher didn't explain it very
well, or
b. because you didn't try very hard to remember?
I
i
Suppose you weren't sure about the answer to a
question your teacher asked you but your answer
turned out to be right.
Is it likely to happen
! 16.
I
---I-
I
117.
because she wasn't as particular as usual, or
because you gave the best answer you could
think of?
When you read a story and remember most of it, is
i t usually
I
i
a.
b.
a.
b.
because you were interested in the story, or
because the story was well written?
If your parents tell you you're acting silly and
not thinking clearly, is i t more likely to be
18.
!
I
a.
b.
because of something you did, or
because they happen to be felling cranky?
When you don't do well on a test at school, is it
19.
-I-
a.
b.
because the test was especially hard, or
because you didn't study for it?
·vlhen you win at a game of cards or checkers, does
it happen
20.
I
a.
b.
because you play real well, or
because the other person doesn't play well?
36
21.
If people think you're bright or clever, is it
-I-
a.
b.
because they happen to like you, or
because you usually act that way?
If a teacher didn't pass you to the next grade,
would it probably be
;22.
-I-
.23.
a.
b.
because she 11 had it in for you, II or
because your school work wasn't good enough?
Suppose you don't do as well as usual in a subject
at school. Would this probably happen
I
a.
b.
because you weren't as careful as usual, or
because somebody bothered you and kept you
from working?
If a boy or girl tells you that you are bright,
is is usually
,24.
I
I
I
I
a.
b.
because you thought up a good idea, or
because they like you?
I
I 25.
Suppose you became a famous teacher, scientist
or doctor. Do you think this would happen
l .
;
I
II
a.
I
I
I
I
b.
Suppose your parents say you aren't doing well
in your school work, is this likely to happen
more
! 26.
I
27.
a.
b.
because your work isn't very good, or
because they are felling cranky?
Suppose you are showing a friend how to play a
game and he has trouble with it. Would that
happen
a.
I
28.
because other people helped you when you
needed it, or
because you worked very hard?
b.
because he wasn't able to understand how to
play, or
because you couldn't explain it well?
When you find it easy to work arithmetic or math
problems at school, is it usually
a.
because the teacher gave you especially easy
problems, or
b. because you studied your book well before
___ ·-·····--·- ___¥()~_tried them?
37
.29.
When you remember something you heard in class,
is it usually
I
30.
a.
b.
because you tried hard to remember, or
because the teacher explained it well?
If you can't work a puzzle, is it more likely to
happen
I
a.
b.
because you are not especially good at working
puzzles, or
because the instructions weren't written
clearly enough?
If your parents tell you that you are bright or
clever, is it more likely
-I-
because they are feeling good, or
because of something you did?
Suppose you are explaining how to play a game to
a friend and he learns quickly. Would that happen
more often
:32.
!
I
!
a.
b.
I
ll
a.
b.
because you explained it well, or
because he was able to understand it?
Suppose you're not sure about the answer to a
question your teacher asks you and the answer
you give turns out to be wrong. Is it likely to
happen
l33.
l
l
-I-
;34.
a.
b.
because she was more particular than usual, or
because you answered too quickly?
If a teacher says to you, "Try to do bett.er,"
would i t be
a.
I
b.
because this is something she might say to
get pupils to try harder, or
because you work wasn't as good as usual?
APPENDIX B
Creativity Training Procedures
, Brainstorming
Brainstorming is a group exercise designed for the
students to generate as many possible answers to a question or solutions to a problem.
The basic element of
this exercise is the outpouring of ideas without evaluation
:while the ideas are being produced.
This element is called
!
I the
principle of deferred judgement, where ideas are allow-
1
; ed to be thought of and presented wi-thout t.he restriction
i
I
jo£ the value of the idea.
The operation of deferred
: judgement allows a greater quantity of ideas to be produced and often a better quality.
After the ideas are
generated, then the group evaluates and determines the
best possible solution or answer.
The four rules of
brainstorming are:
1.
Adverse criticism is taboo.
2.
Freewheeling is welcomed.
3.
Quantity is wanted.
4.
Combination and improvement are sought.
Brainstorming is used in the following manner.
a question or problem is posed to the class.
First,
For example,
"What would happen if the moon cpuld support human life?";
38
39
"How can we improve transportation to eliminate smog?";
:or "What would happen if parents went to school with their
'children?"
The class is then asked to come up with ideas
following the above rules.
If, for instance, one student
responds to another's idea with "that is dumb" or a groan
or d.issapproval the teacher would remind the class not to
! criticize.
l
i
1
!
Each response is written on the chalkboard
by the teacher or student so the class has a running list
of ideas to improve on or stimulate new ideas.
After all
I
l the ideas are produced and the class seems comfortable
; with the list ask the class to take time to consider the
responses and select the ideas which seem to be the most
appropriate.
Very often brainstorming can be the
a .larger project.
initial
step of
For example, brainstorming on improving
a product or services can be used to elicit ideas for
.letter writing or other projects.
Also, the topics for
brainstorming may be found within coursework or the
classroom environment.
Problem Solving
Problem solving activities often use either group or
individual formats using brainstorming and attribute
training together.
Parnes in the Creative Behavior Guide-
book published his workshop procedures for developing
problem solving skills.
He discusses four essential
steps in problem solving which can be taught to students.
40
These steps are as follows.
11.
Recognize the problem as solvable.
'a problem as aninsurmountablebarrier.
Often people view
By understanding
problems as ul-timately solvable, one can overcome this
impasse.
One can view problems as challenges which offer
an opportunity of experience that can be beneficial or
I exciting.
:b., or
instance, students can be asked to vlr i te all
the challenges facing them in life now, pick one that
seems important, and then list (brainstrom) ways of meeting the challenge.
i
2.
Recognize the real problem.
i ficult
I
j
Very often the most dif-
part of any problem is understanding what the
lproblem is.
Parnes suggests the person continually ques-
)
!tion the nature of the problem, broaden the nature and
i
! consequences of the problem, and work towards the best
I
i of
wording the problem to lead to its resolution.
instance, "How can we get rid of smog?"
T~Yay
For
includes aspects
:of transportation, factories, modes of energy utilization,
!
and city construction.
The initial problem of "How can
' we get rid of smog?" may be reworded into "How can we
design cit.ies better, improve transportation, and use
energy better?"
(Notice that attribute training comes
into play in this step.)
3.
List ·posslb1e solutions.
The next step is to generate
as many possibl.e solutions with deferred judgement.
Brain-
storming {group or individual) can be used to do this.
41
Particular attention is given to breaking habitual responses, looking at the problem in new ways, and studying
unusual expectancies.
A method to break habitual res-
ponses is to train students in forced relationships.
This
entails looking for similarities between dissimilar objects
(paper and soap).
One way to demonstrate the value of
;deferred judgement is to have students first list ideas
(that have critical significance and then list ideas de-
l ferring
judgement.
Typically, people will generate more,
i
i
:and often better, ideas through deferring judgement.
l
! 4.
Evaluate the list of solutions.
step.
The last step of
If no solution is reached it could reflect the
nature of the initial question, so the most appropriate
action is to return to step two.
Often in this step
people become aware that the initial question involves
the meeting of several criteria.
By focusing in upon
what criteria need to be met and what criteria are more
important than others, students can use the list of
possible solutions to find the best multiple-criterion
answer.
Attribute Training
The purpose of attribute training is to help students
see all the relationships between concepts by focusing
42.
'upon attributes common to the concepts.
There are three
ways to train people to develop and expand this ability.
These training procedures are frequently used in creativity
. .
': tra1.n1.ng programs to train people ;:.: see concepts in un-
;familiar or unusual, yet applicable, ways.
The first method of training is to supply a single
:attribute (something that moves on wheels, something that
!expands, something that is warm) and ask students to rest
!pond with all the things they can think of that have this
attribute.
For instance, in stressing the importance of
reading skills a teacher might ask the students to list
all the things that can be read.
The second approach for training the relation of
attributes to objects is to supply two seemingly dissimilar objects and ask the class to offer all the things
j the two have in common.
For instance, what are all the
ways a train and a car are alike.
Others are radio and
telephone, South America and the U.S., talking and
listening, numbers and letters.
With practice it has been
found this ability can be trained.
The third method is to list all the attributes one
object has and then generate all the ways this object can
be-used keeping in mind the attribute.
This method under-
lies the test of alternate uses so please don't use the
following items for exercises; newspaper, knife, tire,
cork, shoe, button, key, or chair.
For instance, to guide
and stimulate the ways a piece of white paper can be used,
43
.first the class is asked to list (verbally) the attributes
;of the paper, i.e. its white, has four corners, is thin,
has edges.
Then the students are asked to list the uses
these attributes have, i.e. lamp shade, sign at night, a
:judge of whiteness for other objects.
Being able to juggle the attributes of objects, see
'
!similarities, and ability to perceive attributes are
/important functions of problem solving, analogy problems,
·and other learning abilities.
Art Activities
One of the most connnon art activities used to train
!creative thinking is to supply the person with a figural
j
i form and ask the student to use that form for a basis for
i
Ijca.s many d raw1.ngs
.
.
as poss1ble.
.!
For example, a sheet of
lpaper is supplied with several well spaced circle •••
I
Q
~
.
@)
.f'1sh b0-0i
5pc"t'fljh'~
Another art activity conunonly used is to supply
the person with an uncompleted form, i.e.,
~... ~~-----·-·
/-)
/
and ask the student to draw a picture using the form and
write a story about it.·
These activities are essentially the same procedures
as attribute trainin<,:r procedures but in a non-verbal
44
format.
The student is encouraged to give full rein to
' his/her imagination and to play with the concept over and
:over again, using different viewpoints, and developing a
flexibility with the concepts.
Other ideas used are drawing an improved toy or
' other product, drawing an imaginary pet, and drawing
things which move or make noise (items with the same
attribute).