1. Theoretical Background
Structural Equation Models of Divergent Thinking and Creative Expert Performance
Donggun An Youngmyung Song Martha Carr
University of Georgia
University of Georgia
Athens
Aims
The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of cognition, motivation, and personality on two creative outcomes: divergent thinking and creative expert performance. It was hypothesized that the two outcomes would differ in the influence of the constructs of cognition, motivation, and personality.
Theoretical Background
Method
The debate on the nature of creativity, whether creativity is domain-general or domain-specific, is on-going (Bear, 1998; Plucker, 1998). The two approaches reflect two distinct theories of creativity with different measures of creativity (divergent thinking and creative expert performance) and different cognitive, motivational, and personality predictors of creative outcomes.
Proponents of domain-general creativity assume that general intelligence (e.g., Nusbaum & Silvia, 2011), creative behavior (e.g., Milgram & Milgram, 1976), and creative personality (e.g., Carson, Peterson, & Higgins, 2005) predict divergent thinking. In contrast, proponents of domain-specific creativity assume that expert knowledge (Weisberg, 2006), motivation in the form of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, self-determination, and self-efficacy (e.g., Rhoades, 2001), and creative personality (e.g., Meneely & Portillo, 2005) predict creative expert performance.
While research has been conducted from each perspective independently, no research has simultaneously compared the two approaches of creativity. One step toward unifying the two viewpoints is to determine whether there are common constructs that predict both forms of creative outcomes. Thus, this study included measures of cognition, motivation, and personality from both perspectives to test whether separate models are needed.
Participants: 143 undergraduates (58 men and 85 women) enrolled in an introductory educational psychology course
Measures + Procedures:
The students were assessed in the classroom at the end of the semester on
1. general intelligence (IQ)
2. expert knowledge
3. creative behavior
4. motivation
5. creative personality
6. divergent thinking
7. creative expert performance
Results
Discussion
Structural equation modeling analyses showed that the overall fits of the two forms of creativity models (divergent thinking and creative expert performance) were very good The results indicated that general intelligence and creative personality, but not expert knowledge, creative behavior and motivation, predicted divergent thinking. However, general intelligence and expert knowledge, but not creative behavior and creative personality, predicted creative expert performance. Motivation predicted creative expert performance as mediated by expert knowledge.
General intelligence and creative personality are important for divergent thinking. This finding replicates previous research (e.g., Nusbaum & Silvia, 2011; Carson et al., 2005) but extends it by simultaneously considering other factors. Creative behavior is not important for divergent thinking when general intelligence and creative personality are considered at the same time.
For creative expert performance, expert knowledge and motivation are important. This finding replicates previous research (e.g., Weisberg, 2006; Rhoades, 2001) but extends it by simultaneously considering other factors. Creative personality is not important for creative expert performance when expert knowledge and motivation are considered at the same time. In conclusion, the two forms of creativity are very different outcomes.
Model for divergent thinking (*p < .05, **p < .01)
Model for creative expert performance (*p < .05, **p < .01)