Creativity, Attention Deployment, and Equilibration

University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI Open Access Dissertations 1985 Creativity, Attention Deployment, and Equilibration Joseph R. McAllister Jr. University of Rhode Island Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/oa_diss Recommended Citation McAllister, Joseph R. Jr., "Creativity, Attention Deployment, and Equilibration" (1985). Open Access Dissertations. Paper 964. https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/oa_diss/964 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CREA'I'I VITY, ATTENTION DEPLOYMENT, AND EQUILI BRATI ON BY JOSEPH R . McALLISTER, Jr . A DIS SERTATI ON 8LJBMITTEDI N PARTIAL FULFILLl-1El.\J'l' 01'' Tl:iE REQUI REMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOROF PHILOSOPHY IN PSYCHOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF RhODE I SLAND 19 85 Ab stract This theory inv est i gat ion for understanding creat i vity from dive rse using of unrelate d investi a variety Three theory of scientific relate the findings perspec tive Se lecte ic areas are of creatives creatives revolutions from each of were a n attempt to io na li ze the operat and Equa l, Instruction these congrue der ivin g wit h the nce in more areas of see mi ng ly wit h a detai l: and , and is Kuhn ' s made to to a Piagetian . A served as p resente Pri mary , and s related in constructs of Reco g nizin g wor d s fro m a related to the of mo derate of sche me , and and res pec tively. d under Exclus to was de veloped Piagetian as meas ures ac co mmodat io n , were task an opera ti ona l measure Recogn i z in g words d words , served students recognition acco mmodation. scheme ass imilation. Words among An att empt 104 undergraduate word extensive and schizophrenics . p ic-type unrelate d stu d ies , similarities and Piagetian reviewed cons idered tachistosco des i gnated are of on creativity. Subjects a ss i milation i es , namely , t he ir creativity. between i v i ty. of met hodolog of dep loym ent d ifferences relevance ng a common link gations subtop the orientations d e monstrati theory attention creat theoretical purpose Piagetian examines the three iv e attention propo rtio instructional conditions n of attention sets: . s ub jects • were directed also completed decrement used as to g ive t he Muller effects of the Cre a tivity the Unrelated words Exclusive instructional Exclus ive condition than a suppressor variable charac with to - Lyer attention Piagetian are creativ Results i ty to to and sti muli a r e i ncons ist ent high - creatives are e and of was any of the Under the more d words e ith er acte d as Primary power of th e Unrelated creatives may be toward . of and recognized attention significant low levels Performance creativity or on the the . offering incidental creativ number Primary Re late dis cre p an cies as the and comparatively measures seen vie w that a cco mmodate of expectations moderate . suggest levels deployment also predictive effects was Creativity condition. Exc lusiv the the . r ecogn ition attention under trials The No relationship lo w creatives was unrelated Results between did by high attention Muller Equal The suppressor discrepancies of a nd the , increasing t erized bo th . ts . with , high - creatives Sche me words words . associated con d itions. the over - Kogan tasks under creativity under conditions were recognized i llusion of accommodation Wallach scores words . Subjec - Lyer illusion measure using word - ty pes Unrelated of an additional between vs. 30 tri a ls in the was assessed found Scheme su pp ort for a relationship l earn i ng , and it y is d i screpant rel a te d to with f or the an ability one ' s expectations with t he hypothesis that characterized by greater atten tional to . capacity than low-creatives. Implications accommodation course experi process events of _ of to relationship are discussed progress. design by which are anomaly scientific mental the which high-creatives discussed. might between in creativity relation Mod ifications further of explicate accommodate to to the the discrepant and the V Acknow led gments I would like to fellow graduate p l ayed in my education thank students, Fo l kers programs , to Joe analyses , to George for i ng me up and I would for convincing me that, does Kulberg rather than assista n ce at floundered a littl Dr . Will for every phase the Dr . J ames have l to isti cal Steve Colucci Goodwin to for and for , one ' s interfere my major with one . , this to al l, their the might :Eor his notion for t hat theories I am grateful to support , and t heir pro ject her I am no less qua int , Dr . migh t have ' s folklore listening, education this Wit hout p roj ect as a result. for professor in g me to pursue department in grad u ate t, on stat ivit y research traditional iam Vosburgh encouragemen computer Twa i n notwithstanding encourag rich of thank gratefu a more and Most to . hold i ng fast a place the th ey up wit h me . neces sarily , for e less to Mark I am especially Janet I am indebted Brown , and putting i n creat not one ' s education for like my interest a r, advice DuPaul , Judy , my role with his teachers essential assistance Ross i for also the I n particul his fostering schooling for . Charles putt some of my best been grateful to adv i ce , and t here and my family, have is sti l l i deas . for pa ti ence . their vi Table . . ... . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . .. .. . . . Abstract of Tables and Figures ......................... . Intr oduct ion Schizophrenia 21 29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . and Predictions .. . ... .... .. .. .. ... 29 35 45 49 .. . .. .. 5~ .. ........ .. .. .. .. .............. .. .. .......... 61 s . . . •• •. .. . . . . . . . . •• •. . .••••• . . . •••. •. . . . . .. • . • • • bl 61 64 . . .. . .. .. . . . .. . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . 72 subject .Materials . ................ ...................... . Procedure ...................... Results viii 1 2 7 Behavioral Similarities and Differences Between Creatives and Schizophrenics....... Attention Deployment and Creativity.............. Creativity and Incidental Learning............ Method V 1 Statement of the Problem......................... Review of the Litera tu re......................... Piagetian Theory and Creativity............... Creativity, ~orma l Science, ana Scientific Revolution...................... Creativity and Schizophrenia..................... The Concomitance of Creativity and Hypo theses ii . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . ... .. . . . .. .. .. . .. . . . Acknowledgments List of Contents .. ......... Creativity and Attention Creat ivit y and Performance Attention Deployment and i'1illler-Lyer Discussion Creativity Modification Task ........... Deployment ...... ... on the Huller-Lyer Performa n ce on the ..... Task . . . . . . . . . ... . . ... . .. . . . . . .. . . . . ... .. ...... . ............... and Accommodation to Discrepant of the Assimilation/Accommodat ••• Events i on 72 80 84 &5 85 . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. .. . ... . . .. .. . . .. .. . . 87 The I1i.iller -L yer Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Creativity, Accommodation, and Scientific Progress 97 99 Balance vii Limitations and Directions ........ References Appendic ies .' ........ for Future .. ·..... ... Researc h .. .. .. 103 ............... 113 . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . ... ... .. . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . A• Raw Da t a B. Tables . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .•... . .. .. •... .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. ... .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . . c. Mat ched Word Lists D. I nstruct E. Li stings ions Frequency Data . . ..... . .... . . .... ............ ..... ... ..... .. of Computer Programs .. .. .. .. .. ... ... 124 1 24 134 140 1 44 150 viii List of Tables and Figures Tables page 1. 2. 3. 4. Means and Standard Deviations for Transformed Recognition Scores .. ........•................ 74 Analysis of variance Summary Table for Transformed Scores: Total Creativity By Word-Type By Instructio!'l ........ ... .. .... .... 75 Loadings, Canonical C~efficients, Standardized Coefficients, and R with the Opposite Set Variables for the First Canonical variate 78 Regression variables Coefficients in Predicting of of the Attention Pattern Meanings ... .. .. .. .. .... ........ ...... .......... 81 s. Means and Standard Deviations for Word Recognition Scores ........................... 135 6. Summary Table of the Between Creativity Scores 7. Test 8. Summary Table of the Between Creativity 9. Correlation and Attention .. .. .......... ...... .. ............ .. Variables for Canonical Measures Trend over Miiller -Lyer Canonical Measures 136 137 Trials Correlation and Slope Scores Summary Table of the Canonical Correlation Between Attention Measures and Slope Scores 13 8 13 9 Figure 10. Mean Error Trials Score on the Muller-Lyer Task Across .... .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .... ..... ... .. .... . 82 1 I ntroduct Statement of · After th e Proble more creativity, than m 30 years no adequate of i ng or withstand empirical scrutin y. creativity appears splayed or less, d isc e r ned. in this researching certain s~ction offered as seemingly a r eas a po ssi b le unrelated are styles of and the between ifuen this in of of theory juxtaposed it is comple menta r y theories p oints of focus greate . can literature on be i s reviewe of review, d equilibration consi is de ri ng Kuhn's and tne are f ic evident consi essent theory that creativity The i ntention d i iferences r evolutions 's theory at t ent ion each the Piaget t h re e su o to p i c r detail. and scienti or literature commonalities gene r al illustrating and the ab l e t o i n creativity. i nd ivi duals theory for fr amewo r k for sch izo:fJhrenics, pu r pose h is and si mil arities creative Kuhn 's for to in even . contradictory. unifying revolutions, i ves Therefore, P i aget ia n t heo ry studies considered scientific creat the stuay .nas oeen po rti on o f the and In addition framework creativity tr ends A select fai rl y intensive theoretical understand Neverthe i on of the b etween de:fJlo yment de re d i n turn is i al . in troauced s i milarity equili t wo can , a l be it on b ration. be cons i dered wit n d i verging i n compar i ng th e 2 characteristics groups of is to hypothesis to differences for among these int e rpretatio n of creative of Literature of the incited about of res earch a qua rter of the sty l es unusual individuals J.P. a century creativity d ifficulties i n defining and study attentional is a for Gu il ford in c r eativity res ear ch in squelched and much of (1 950 ) l Association so , however, appa rently may , an alternative propensity Psychologica of the . address American a flurry their " processes - -t hat creative perturbations The presidential the Likewise on the of manifestation Review . " normal cons i dering sim il ar i t i es proposed style to for is , and equ il ibrative groups als accommodating before in literature deployment behavioral for behavioral the individu attention , creative a framework a ccount differences of provide that be used sch i zophrenic . Over has the in that continued last decade again or waned. meas uring creativity the iasm enthus 1950 The have for this area of . Although forward, few have the research any theoretical research numerous theories proven to in creativity position on creativity of be fecund. would . would For creativity appear the seem most to be have been In fact to be ungrounded part , the put bulk in , existing independent of of the 3 various theories of impression gleaned since is 1950 bivariate last to observea dwindle spite which of have well. and of years research collection coherence and of . bivariate As Stein twenty the wide range of associated profile adequate creativity disjointed unity , the F..nd over studies Heinze the has (1960) ago , that might be regarded in one way or as important in a stuay or any individual - - h is , his childhood , his adolescence, his adult his intelligence , nis verce~tual process, l em- solvin<::J behavior , etc . -- r1as been considered study of the creative ind~vidual. (p . 2) been acceptable of succession as than Everytning another heredity personality, h i s prob in some a survey lacking , this more Consequently a somewhat studies begun In from of few years creativity. of delineation characteristics with the of creativity, creative the and neither individual creative a b ilities an nor process has an yet to emerge. An attempt select will group possible creativity common thread subset of the Many which research from reached the and a wide individuals for seem environmental . to exhibit events of that More and in review to tie differs creativity a . approached backgrounds employ from a that of less , creative a receptivity other a together conceptual people a su g gest who nave specifically which to then to theorists that style paper thinking variety conclusion individuals this may serve and cognitive/perceptual creative in studies investigators creativity have of be made p eople or an attraction woulct tenct to 4 find disconcerting. essence of To rrance creativity recognition lies "sensitivity to a fundamental find or construct Barron research 's order individuals, that and as ymetr ical explanation, Ba rron more stimuli, complex be evoked and blot details Ba rron, than t his strong into are studies that more much more are yuration" to ts . methodology developed subjects achieve subjec the by Asch difficult In addition (e.g., conformed any (p. 153) . responses the image" to individual's and , using 1 9 56) , Barron to of that According creative most " {p . 153). than integrate creative to to (1 958 ) concludes less the the able synthesizing reflects the when viewing li kely his By way of , 1961). Ro rsc hach , Barron from than satisfying confi to . comprehensive, ordering creative are ability to prefer extent comparing the creative tend Holland y, s uggested "one far-reaching found of , t he has in pa rt in d ivi duals groups tendency need 1971; by a simpler indi vidua ls (p . 153) "v ery several defects a chaos derived a greater new order low creative original to creative that Summarizing been (1 958 ) proposed " an e le gant could apparent "t he S i milarl is creatives 1958, synthesize (1970) preferences indicating ( Bar ron, of have aesthetic noncreatives hign out that . as exhibiting of creativity conclusions on the to (p . 42) . an d Barron property asserted a sensitivity creatives prob lems," that has element" (1 9 50) portrays complex in of a disturbing Guilford (1962) g rou p cons e nsus the (1 9 55 ) less 5 often than d i d noncreatives. creative subjects contradiction at felt of the more inherent noncreatives process were in of findings are by Taylor dispar between i nner tension can r esulting "eit her the with reoganizes world resulting ' inclined are Schaefer an (1973) experience --as According to and to g to the utilizing values of reached the same conclusion. Schaefer 's studies selected the to the with ment person his by the creative have more creative ment. b oth and referre pe rson. is able within Cr• 12). to himself 'through Schaefer creative number d internal creative dispositions The more . less individual checklists, " ( }?. environ external the alters personal are whereas (1968) a greater when a two mean s: subjects integration" adjective of or of and that organization experience"--both e, p osition perceptions be altered MacKinnon, some kind one creative characteristic the exists, congruent and i:'lacKinnon instanc with worlds via environ "a thii suggested personal being "co nflicting effect research willin "openness tolerate the in the 163) . environment, Taylor, reorganize more his whereas through and a new environmental to wit h the consistent reduced social Ba rro n , the order (p. outer environment in rding to people to the the maintain who has alters deal evidence, and be to nonconformity, also ( 1976) person correspond or the to judgementll advocated ity to of correct Barron's able their obliged exclusion cost According ha s subjects of adjectives in 6 as self descriptive Furthermore, well as the creative favorable question greater creative a more as veridicality evident Bruner possesses a less and broader of materia do noncreatives. l than anxiety to new material relate are Finally, creatives summary surprisingly as than did the incongruous into the lance" to (1968) suggests tolerate , the Echoing the inco mpleteness." unsettlin and provide the . has life that on the the the to inner r and encoding learned (p . 111). comments or for "ca pacity of the me creative for previously to the systern vein , Heis t tne io n of that categories discussion connection with percept reported by disorde (19 62) preceding d irect has on the concurs in the above , Heist "challenged the (1973) richness turbu Stein's for of the psychic expressed creatives creativity effectively and the sentiments descriptive stereotypic In a more p syc hoana lytic express unfavorable perspective cognitive incor po ration and subjects. more self cognitive Bruner mation at tempted selected creativity, individuals. in div idual infor females creative subjects. taking of d i d less adjectives noncreative vfnile of than section affinity of g serve as a that follows: One might say that homeostasis has been disturbed , that there is a lack of closure or that there is a lack of satisfaction with the existing state of affairs . The creative indivi dual may actively seek to disturb the equilibrium he previously attained o r he may be res pons ive to disequilibria already existing in the environment . (p. 86 - 87 ) a 7 P i agetian Stein writ Theory ' s observa i ngs passage Crea ti v it y tio ns on cogn itiv from thinki and a r e re markab l y cons i stent e eq uilibr P ia get a tio n . (1977 a ) illu ng , an d even wit h Piage t ' s The ju x t apos itio s tr ates i n t he terminologies the n of co mmonalities emplo yed : At taine d equilibr i um is lim i ted and restrained, and there is a t endency to go beyond it to a better equilibr i um .... In other words, equilibration is the search for a better and better equ i libr iu m in the sense of an extended fiel d , in the sense of an increase in the number of poss ible compositions , and in the sense of growth i n coherence. (p . 12) The recognition and "nonba lanc e " p l ays equ ili brat explo it ation a central of i ncongru ro l e in it y or Piaget ' s conce p t of i on: One of the sou rces of prog res s i n the development of know ledge i s to be found in nonbalance as such wh i ch alone can force a sub ject to go beyonct his present state and seek new equilibriums. (Pia get , 19 7 7b , p . 1 2) Thus it may be ada p tive onl y t ole-r :ctted For with g cognitive ' s " schemes ass i mil a t ed essentia ac tively in to ll y means ") those i ng elements to be not sought. P i aget , env iro nmen tal ex istin organism but f or d i sturb events s tructure s of t he i n orde r for structures int erp r et ing must the . or be co mpa ti b l e organism events to (t he be "Ass i mil a tio n construing external a in 8 objects and and events fa vored p . 7). in terms ways of thinking When , on the entirely compatible are nonbalanc e and to complete equ ili brat in order make environmental po ssi b le. are is the is, events and su bsequent of resolve. In general , P ia g et can i nvers be fore h is p rocess as a k in d of i n neutralizing Re ci p r o cit y , on the sc heme to tne ion and novelty disturbance , and organism, or inc ongruity organ is m toward whic h he refers The two types of r ec i p rocit y. I nve rsion the d ist urban c e . of begun to (Inhelder, t o t he refer " which to t h is succeeds 1982 ). hand , cons i sts accom moda t e it , be i ng drawn g be no c hange wh ic h the o r denial e l ement " (Pia get , 1977b , p . 26) . i ndividuals could "c ogn iti ve r epression other p resentin l y make ass i milation dea t h , Piage t had the the a state . cancellation Sh ortly the by compensation are of the wi th scheme (1 977b ) recog n iz es two way s i n wh ic h be managed as method s of ," a new , more bf mod i fy i ng the Change, "non balance results m th en achieve accom modat io n there (Ge be r , 197 7 ). the are pro ces s of process co mpatible co mpen sations of the the 1977 , events schemes, , o r to l y available (Flavell, The organis more mot ivat ed to con sists existing it source nonbalance to with i ~n , through Without deve lo pment things" hand , environmental equilibrium that to own present disequilibrium. restore accommodation, one's about other not attempts of of initiall Per haps " mod i fications y disturbing creative d istu rbances , te nd to 9 utilize i n version relatively more indiv i dual s. l ess likely to it This to labele cognitiv re-e q uili state, b ut to creatives equ ili brations toward integration. whether followed Conflict arisin g inter of an imposition person They are at a synthesis wh ile , concurrently manage by way o f be what P ia ge t has i mpo rt an t form attaining au gmentat ive their d i sp ositio by su b se quent resol ut i on and of of , 19 82 , p . 42 ), for or , ; t hey (Inhelder account na lly more , ambiguity , and anomal y , f rom th e environment, a challenge fo r the n are less creative . bu i ld environment to def ine a structure he re d it a r y nor the a re le ad ba c k t o a p revious , complexity and more ·whe n asked to adept crea~ive whic h achieve " "an ada p tation" more to would not l e ss . structures i bra tion, , t h i s mi ght conflict those does a better are data The result which of information wh i ch others equil reciprocity in d ivi d uals e structures information b ration d ant n of d "au gmentative ic or expectations of d iscor . and creative d is miss beliefs re pression often charaterist that or a modificatio cognitive If their and existing accommodate is implies make use producing less t han overlook with likely often to conflicts of relatively in creativi that is t~ no t preformed so ci a l en vir onmen t, " ( Evans , 1 973 , p . 1 24 ) . development acc o mmo dat i on is and the modificat pr i ncipal Piaget r eplie d, , ne it her no r in the " it in phy sical P ia 9·et ' s wr iti ngs i on of structures mechan ism in suggest t he is format on that i on of 10 nove l structures . wit h existing At tend i ng to structures and reorgan i ze a l l relevant which nove l s tru c tur es Ac c ord i ng to acco 1nrnoc1ation " their and ra tio are t seen ' s i nteract i on with c e ntral hypothesis of achieve as cou l d all eq uili s are um : creativ br iu ms. d e fec ts ;" under crea tiv es the it is the favor es What others " re c o gn itio of have n of ab le r e ferre to d to disturbing for d isor de r and i n co mpleteness an incli na tion toward are , in a sense , more vulnerabl " e even ts. as Piaget in viewed e de ve lop men t , one to events, ga tio n that t i ppe d in "preference appropriateness Attempts investi in are be subsumed of an essen tially g forces of d i sequ ili br iu m and ultimately environmental cogn itiv Gi ven th a t assim il ation en vironmental this act i v i ty , t hough seduced and I nsofar all eas ily y to disequilibri to virtually and are " s e nsitivit ," assimilation as ba lancin Consequently bet ter elements mechan ism t hrough creative dua l s , t he scale a sta te the da t a to for acco mmoda tion. into in may vary " ( p . 7 08 ) . are is pan t at t a i ned . organism indivi ion ( 1970) , both presen a c co mmodat ion wh ic h i s d iscre th en us in g t hat i nformat Piaget are that as mi gh t question app l y i ng Piagetian id i ographic relate Piagetian in d iv i d ual differences variations i n the have attainment a nomothetic line of th e ory generally of the theo r y o f t he theory in q uiry to creativity t o q uest i ons focused various , 1969 ). ( Barron of on age d evelo pme ntal , 11 stages (e. g ., r ece iv es Elk i nd , 1971; li ttl e note Neverthe of ep ist emolo g ical conti i n t he les s , Piagetian wit h -a theory creativity of hence assertion t hat (p . 50) . Moreover ac co mmodation a c t i v it y , the across creati are rel ative does , nor theory to , only v it y i mplicitl p resented has i n the not aspire present an elaboration y ( and , in cognition the writi ng s of developmental the last Piaget the p rocess l eve l. g rowth d eca de or illustrating and are individual accommodation although in all of t he two the es a novel departure of recent ontogenetic references a ' s (1 980 ) present a radical concern over rol e of to p r opose may be mor e r ead ily writ i ngs is i,ios , 1 9 78 ). contributions Althou gh Piaget for wine d ic note d that both . individuals. i nve sti g ation Piagetian i n tert & own sty l e of (1970) Piaget i nvention Bringuier ha s his , Piaget and the c oncu rr ed with "eve r yone of ~reativity and ( Roy c e , Coward , Egan , Kessel , P iaget Th is of genet novelty differences may vary the i on wh ic h P i aget , knowledge , whil e neve r emphasizing cognitive writings Within Furthermore assimilation a quest i s ine x tri cably . pe rs pe ctive i nvo l ved 1 9 78 ), voluminous theory nuou s reconstruction, always Zigl e r, the theory fro m theo ry of years , explic and his cohorts. identified itl y ) wit h a of know l edge , h is two contai l i nk between involved his n nume r ous v i ews on in creativity at every " 12 Piaget (1972) epistemology the of their tq the i mpor tance. Br inguier, the suggests peripheral to a theory of ic purpose knowledge forms , ... up to of is genet central kinds the writings as its " ( p . 15). that "Piaget develop as various , and This issue of Piaget Accord in g to 19 80 ), most has elementary thought characterization primary of most scientific undertaking which "t he origins with including not his , an endeavor study starting describes creativity , rather Gruber the psycho of creativity" , it (quoted logist is is of in who has done (p . 67 ). If you consider creative thinking as a develop ment that takes a long time and br in gs forth new ideas , it is very si milar to the proces s of the child constructing his world, his thoughts , and his ideas , because the child does not learn simply what the adult te lls him , he reinvents. It ' s a kind of creativity. (p . 67) Inhelder (1 982 ) has disequilibration preoperat in his i onal elaborates fill h is the does not i nd ividual disequil ibrium ingenious do es own schemes not creator offer provide writings creative scientist , a cognitive obstacle to overcome and . obstacles creates 1982, p. 412). to invent new obstacles " it d istur in ward, is h i m to be subject ments to bance , the the seeking nature new p ro blems , even for the "\ •Then the sufficient scne mes , for pla ce d on , the new instru may tur n attention among Piaget both to gaps " (Inhelder, environment creative "I n working emphasis For the repre~ents . the later ch il d and disequilibrium surmounted noted conquer if of the r ea lity " (p . 412) . 13 P ia ge t states that for augmentative the early as of ( Piaget rel e v ance a·nd t he q uest evident o f intelligence thou gh t" on the study of nonbalance equ ili br iu ms are i f ic elaborated the effects development i n scient to the "a t a ll i n the in child as in wel l , 1970 , p . 7 09 ) . Piaget of h i s wr iti ngs creativity lev e ls, on equilibration an i n t erv i ew with Bringuier (1 980): I used th tru e for theo r y : adapt it ad ju stment situations It refers e example of the infant , b ut it ' s also the schol ar a nd the scientist . You have that ' s an assi milatory scheme . You can to ve ry diverse si tuations . . . . The of t he assimilatory sche me to all these is accommoda tion. (p . 43) i s i n t e r est i ng to to th e process of note , for decentration ob j ec t pe r manen c e ac c ompl i shed and eighteen Revolut the i on '" the same what ( Piaget , 1 970 , p . 705) . progress to as the uu m, Piaget illustrate the ongo i ng battle t o as as t ronomy is util concept of one of Cl ear l y , for Piaget existence , of d i scove ri es necessitate i nvoke overcom i ng " t he bas i c obstac end of i zes the sc i ent i fic egocen trism: successive of l e to . latter ( 1972) with Both development ' Copernican ' s revolutionary . P i aget chi l d be t ween twe lv e i ndependent " (p . 135) , egocentrism the the a " veritable processes ( 1973 ) refers Lookin g toward contin of scientist f undam ental Piaget by the of the age and months ch il d ' s acc ep t ance ob j e ct s and examp l e , that a the developmental history p r ogress "The whole l iberat of i ons astro as an history from n omy of successive 14 centering s " ( p . 82 ). Each represents an augmentat e g ocen tric e l eme nts , albeit pre vious equilibrium eq uilibriu equilibrium Piaget wit hin the , only also taken explanat i on for the thro ugh the French is d ue wha t amounted to ge ometry " b ecause d i ffe r e nce between expressing t he ' l anguage ' of Euclid (Pia get , 1970 , p. 709 ). construct of s tructur at im, " Riemanian to ' understand an augmented r e lativity a d i seq uili for anothe of ( or t he r striking others had relativity . He speaks , Poincare, theory of there as re lativit y to was no tr ans l at in g ) phenom e n.ct i n Rie mani a n [sic] in, as of a poss i b le where he t hought geomet r y " i n contrast , uti li zed an i nstrument ' t he relations the of be tw een space , Fo r E i nste in , Rie mann ian bri u m wh i ch even tually equ ili br i um inclusiv , whereas new new of accommodation E i nste speed , and t i me " ( p . 7 0 9 ). ge omet r y produced as statesman r i ng the i an or space the the ei n .' s elu ci da tion accommodation t o a failure Riemannian of of deve lo pments theory of mathe mati c i an and n a rro wl y mi sse d discove the (1 9 70 ) presents how the having in when ' s accomplishment p rocess containing components presented Piage t E instein too than course Einst g. Piag e t d i sc u s ses deve lo ped of up the tim e i n space t h eory b ed. o f p hysics. of de - c e n terin refined bec ome e vi dent has example , it Tne egoc e ntric i n turn , d istur of fa il ed . more is, field relativity iv e equilibrium . m, however new d i scove r y or e of Poinc a r e either the theory led to of no d i sequ ili b ri um 15 was produced or the in the confrontation disequilibrium Poincar~ , Einste geometry and equilibr wa s · resolved i n was a b le thus was i um that is other si de of developments science has shown (Other inter phy sicists Rafel , Illia , Co rreeras , 19 80 ]). relevance for a l l sciences the He po ints to Piagetian construct view concurs a strono i fic "tak in g i nto ctive progress of the are pe rc eptual are contact phy sicis phe r of , and o f relati i n clu de Rolanao Piagetian h i s tor y and t s who scie nce . wit h P ia get that theory development ha s of in pa rti cula r . v it y and acc oun t the observer t he the that abstract natural to wit h h is Bohm study study of l earns of scientif the to of o f ind i v i dua l gene r al extentions environ t he of p oi nt t he prin ci ,t?les the and yo un g child s p ecial " ( p . 223) . pe rti nen t to , and hen ce " The most by which ted cognitive o f de - cen te ri ng a s t wo manifestations for investigations phys icist be t we en the my and phys ics ' s theory deve lop ment creativity: p rocess the , the a s a ph iloso wii: h Piage t ' s contention cognitive scient for of Unl i ke aug-mented o n e o f se ve ral collabora , Rie mann ian ' s t heo ry oi Bohm sug g-ests Einstein and perspe th~ , Pri gog i-ne , Garcia study , b ut necessity Piaget who h ave [Bringuier the in . to t h e fence Piaget Bohm is es t inversion para llels and In fact, an generate observed Rie mann ia n geometry accommodate phys ics . also . to v ia modern Bohm ( 196 5) has development to able Comin g fro m the in with ic ver y same come into ment " ( p . 223) . of 16 More recent beg un to l y , several explore alluded to in attempted to creative in to cr eat i vity detai e Pia get ian as si gn ific a nt emerge i ll ustrates can be are how the v i ewed Gruber , for constructs in i n the examine a P ia getian and theory i n that specifically withiri it of creativity r y of sci ence . first expression . of . Gruber is by wh ic h si gn i ficant . development of arisen Hi s case study t h e t heory of through the , has study i ng i s t-he the have example histo framework disseminated as having ' s collaborators 1 the man i fested int ere ste d in t he mechanisms i deas Piaget wr iti ng . u tiliz ' s wor k is pub lication greater Piaget's thinking Gruber of original app roac h evolution process of equ ili b ration. In the Darwin , Pi aget appl icati the forward face on of as at " Gruber this the the theories has the great io n in t he of cre ati ve process " ( p. Gruber concerned Br in g ui e r, science today , "but 's of of scientist showing work of us of the ep istemolog a great me rit as l study y "to " (p . that we a genius as well wh ic h is i tsel f a . with to the emergence in genetic creative viii) " ( p . 36 ), a c hange under t aking menta l deve l opment 1980 ) refers (1 981 ) v i ews the event Gruber pr inci p le s of beg in n i ngs is s ( 19 8 1) b io graphica of quest the Gruber' d escribed deve l opment vii ). to as what P ia get " the principal g enes is of (ci ted problem structures o f a new idea , not the proper ti es of in as in . Gr uber an isolated s ome larger men tal 17 s tructur e of process of cons tru cting the wh i ch it imp i nged those i dea s c hemes schemes alteration is to of capable of the , a proce de l icate ass i milation of to Gru be r ' s e xpos ition reveals 24 8 ). a new t heory scheme is , of course " {p. is i n respo n se to be the a part new data of in s s of acco mmodation the development b etw e en the the alter order a s s:i.rn:il a t i ng t h at consistency of Gru b e r, a matter attain bal a nce and For data i ng for . The wit h the new . of new i deas ongoing processes accommodation: The perso nal know le dge packed i n to an abstract i dea i s put th e r e by the growing person himself , throu gh his own a ctivit i e s, assimil a tin g what he can into e x i st i ng structures a nd there by str eng t hen ing them , o ccasion al ly not i cing anomalies t hat requ i re the revision of th ese structures to accommodate ex perienc e s th a t wou l d otherwi s e not find a stable place . ( p . 254) E l aborat addit i ng sche mes i onal re l evant However , sche mes encorporate structures presenting of that structures this of g enerally a mat t er i nformation are radical modifications same is general i nto without thos e str u ctures stimulus . Gruber if it is indicates p a r a do x f o r sc i en tific . necessary s t i mulu s may inh ibit ass i mil at i ng existing sche mes . l y t oo c i rcumscri l y new ideas wh ic h are of some b ed to substantial Consequ e ntl y , the v er y for a ny understa th e v e ridical inconsistent nd ing a s similation wi t h t h ose the p ossible inquiry : c onsequ en ces The working s c i ent i st cannot do wi tho u t t he ability to ass i mil ate wha t is a l ready known . He needs this not on l y in o r der t o get started on his scientific ca r eer , b u t da il y i n the li fetime pursuit of i t. On t he other hand , overgrown respect of what i s of 18 known and too only to sterile The li mitat checked i mposed of Schemes satisfy of the Adaptation need through io ns which mi ght d or assimi e ven t h e face structure inhib (Gruber, 198 1, of objective p . 115) . i n Br i n gu i er , 1 980 ), somet i mes even especially a theory work " ( p . 8 7); n i ce l y into The i s apparent conflicts " one . with activity can t he syste for The tendency , schemes modera t e be destabil happens are t hat . Thus , e xisting change words indi vidual of (cit - - a child a concept r ecognize " Piaget s ly r epresses to i z i ng either , inhibits ' t want As the structures i st -- constructs doesn 1 i mi ts . cont i nui ty . existing , he unconsciou a given . l'lov e lt y , the " when the significance nature unceasing or , in the a scient in and schemes I t would i ts change it s recognition and has often require l a t ed into i ts t and , it avoided a lso overhauls Therefore a re partially Th -ro n gh be ive virtually . lead in g data. v e order resisted neg lecte in z e d though bu t extensive " observat conflict accommodation t o preser occurs . i on can conservat orgarii alterations, are that a r e essentially foundation fit accommodatiol'l , oversimplificat , however, n g it by assim i lation b e ,na,'l.e c ·) ,1s i.sb=m t with appear and ions by th e process accommodation can muc h ti me spe nt ma steri pedantry. (p . 72 ) ed or or t heory , what doesn wha t doesn 't 't m" ( Br i ngu i er , 1 980 , p . 87 ). c r ea tivit to t heory y and sc i entif avoi d informa or scheme will i c prog ress tio n wh ic h serve to 19 maintain that novelty, discovery, prerequisite to seek scheme, to out and discrepancy an d creativity. creativity engage . Creative accommodating to information equilibrium . to Their new , discrepant of individua Gruber's of on~ the . opposed Moreover point" illustrates one he p roposed Lacking the notes to reject capable , using of the an augmentative perturbations and may enable creatives is Darwin tneir com~romising to inaccessi reveals ble that achieve to less " by immediately to incomplete , namely, knowledge aspect the source of genet Mendel , Darw in was unable avoid . to this writing the aware of facts or pitfall in a memora ndum about Gruber's Darwin of as y and " (p . 239). Furthermore, which i ncong ruit such theories to preoccupation was keenly events sought extent with Darwin cherished actively the scientist unpleasant (p . 239) . the be more without creative one's such accommodate one -' s cognitive others which of to any to l s. forget , Darwin , a conflict information to own endeavors the for cognitive bly his with affinity Gruber "tendency ideas achieve biography indisputa discrepancy to of be an inclination seem to whicn information a structuring creative individuals reconcile expense conflict, revamping information discrepant seem to co g nitive or the Conversely would by modifying structures ability bu t may do so at work was totally theory of genetic of absorbed evolution as variation. ics previously explain the means explicated through by which 20 individual variations Accord i ng to inhecitance Gruber ideas had been years , he delayed announcement indulging in his ng n ess near obsession creat to of sc i ent i fic section that of reason . i ntent to pub lish habit was engrossed theory with of disequ evolut mechanisms for h i s hesitance for i on . the of by Wallace Ra t her 's than or min i mi z i ng anoma li es h e He exemplified d i s c repan t st i mul i and t hought of Darw i n ' s a n umber i gnoring with i l i brium to the the characterize . (1 98 1) and bet1r, een of . the prodded . generated Al t hough developed unt il ubi q uitous for evolution fully i ve individual s i mil ar i ties primary accommoda t e to Bot h Gruber new spec i es are p ub lishing of his willi the theory es , Darwin perceived the of virtually in the and , Darw i n ' s concern was one in pub li sh i ng the amb i g uiti occur Piaget revo l u t ions . fol l ows to Bohm (1965) noted ' s works T. and An at t empt further exp l ore s. the Kuhn ' s theory wi l l be made t hat in the re l at i onsh i p . 21 Creativity , Nor mal Science Bri ef ly theory of s ummar i z ing , Kuhn scientific accumulation i nformat stages a r e said throu to pass . S ci en tific in wh ic h notions organize and gh wh ic h a l l sc i entif At th e heart def i ne p ara d ig m represents d i s ci pl ine refers as to and of the a per i od of of Once the implications not the flesh of out scientists t he s ci en tist puzzles io n of f ir mly implicitly the legitimate , and inv est i gat ion . i gm can to the t he que sti ons S inc e only be consi dered in Kuhn o pera tion by the , and questi the tested , a g i ven ; the is parad answered to i gm . "puzzle so lver within The paradigm wh ic h are v ast is a paradigm wh ic h wi ll , the a t ers . i gm becomes i gm . those of wh ic h i s be an eff icient me t h odo l og i es ser ves exam in ed and suggested parad the The lis hed , it are The parad i s to a th e ti me . estab i gm that i ons is that i gm is a stage be in g posed , addressed pec uli ar ctive it s par~ne wor k in g within ramificat l anguage parad i gm is of d isci p li ne . mo s t of pa ra d i gm it se lf. j ob o f the the sciences parad l i n ear i c d isci pl i nes def inin g elements sc i en ce ," o f t he parad objective or perspe dur in g wh ic h a parad "normal characteristic the spec i ficat stage a of Kuhn ' s th eo ry a scientific b oth the on i on a r e rej e cte d i n favor pa r ad i gm, t he p rev a ili ng t heory to Rev oluti (1 9 70a , 19 7 0b ) offers p r ogress of ser i es of , and The ," the specifies be considered wo r thy ons ma jorit of suggested y of by t he findings 22 are consisten t wi th i ncons i s t ency methodologica a lto gether is l flaws vie and the course . continues l represent or i s ignored revo l utionary io n . of that " novel syntheses , until of Kuhn serves account for the the i l i ng the anomalous l y replace anoma l ous to normal marked then it and new , data as wha t its sc i ence anomalies follows become aga i n . to revolutions (1 9 7 2 ) has h i s own work the appears P i aget ' s theory , P ia get bo t h theories " in preva il y all , of s ci entific In fact as to be accep t ed , the A return ana lo gous s i mila r i t i es between states . once Kuhn ' s theory equilibrat I f the for cannot of debate battle eventual necessar phase apparent in many respects ." account not i gm that iv e t heories t o this In order m must parad Al ternat t heo r y will encompassed generally . science . produces i s a renewal Kuhn refers as muc h , though predecessor the to be unab l e to pre - eminence paradigm with " revolutionary c ompet i ng paradig the The occasiona of norma l science The result data , an a lte rnative well to i ngs pa r ad i gm itself acceptance per i od of a t tain shortcom inconsistencies on the paradigm l y thought or be dism i ssed . for i gm, as we ll . . anomalies focusing parad general Eventually easily the represent generation many of to of knowledge the same noted of Kuhn . attempts be of himself and that to functions Piaget a c count . the for The as the 23 scheme to of Piaget: existing provide information additional , as information delimit doing both what novel , determine (Kessen, is ideas " the well range and the within integrated be enterta of organization as a framework acquired can and which ; both i ned , and , in knowable so unknown " 1966 , p . 102). Norma l science congruent with Piaget: as the depicted process new information current knowledge modifying the knowledge to on the structure other discrepant is any acquired of the significant that data goes information cognitive and of mere requires structure of i onary science accommodation process beyond b ed by ex i sting Revolut the a manner new information previously to the the the degree. in as descri with without hand , corresponds new , incongruous assimilation consistent organization data , in additional of by Kuhn proceeds acceptance to of accumulation the of a reorganization of structures: Con t rary t o t he preva l en t imp r ess i on , most new d i sco ver i es and theor i es in t he sc i ences are not merely additions to the ex i sting stockp i le of scientific knowledge . To ass i mi late them the scientist must usual l y rea r range the i nte l lectual and man i pu l at i ve equ i pment he has previously re l ied upon , d i scard i ng some elements of his prior bel i ef and practice wh i le finding new s i gn i f i cances in and new re l a ti onships between many othe rs .• • . The o l d mus t be revalued and re - ordered when assimi l a ti ng the new. ( Kuhn , 1976 , p . 42 ) Ebth the accommodation acting in revolutionary can response be to seen period as anomalous self and the process of - corrective mechanisms or discrepant st i muli the , 24 (Gruber of , 1981) . significant of inadvertently cognitive requires 1970a , p. 52). seemingly trivial (1969) observed become famous most Th us the course salient revolutions are relatively scheme , as in the theory of case relativity inconsequential of are Piagetian theory Piagetian theory brushed - may have li mitation of Kuhn ' s theory has of to . As Smith science men have ignor e small ' nuisances , some significant differences Kuhn and that concerns of Piaget. the discr epancy. rare events resulting to the ubi qui tous to by the of the minor, pe rhaps scheme. Kuhn ' s theory striking. what and Moreo ver, when construed for of is only between and arly in a ' s deve lopment in of Scientific modifications E instein ' One of frequency Acco mmoda tion ma jor , the i r set " (Ku h n , " (p . 177) . relevance bee n leveled rules aside numerous creativity- criticism to , th e para llels - - pa rticul of great history , or may result are set potentially the , alterations Ne verth e less one attending reva mped discipline. and may involve "Produced of or compar ison adaptive consequences distinctions anomaly the another of with . under be refusing pe rspective in recognition of , " throughout encounters totally results , the elaboration anomalies are , of the more the simply Piaget s tructures of us wou ld have There the events by a game played assimilation between Kuhn and anomalous reorganization that For both as a theor some have scientific on Kuhn ' s theory revolutions seen y of as a . Much regar d in g th e 25 origins of a revolution, for monolithic and restrictive co mpeting parad i gm ever if as hope the paradi<;:Jm Kuhn claims to gain 1970 ; Lakatos , 1970 ; Watkins , 1970)? address this issue l ength suggest that individual responsible for-the According to invention [are] the science (1976) quant anomaly 269) . related ities to of of ns, scientists it to ma jority of and fruitless the be without which would appears deployment of toward perceived is tne As h arx equally ti1at creativity is i0i.1ate anomalies, and that i n scientific , nonetheless , for with ( Kuhn , 1976) . scientists ot component encountered d iv er t nor . be and advancement d is proport a key concerned the sufficient be undesirable anomalies would it cnaracteriz;e tra its, need " (p . thinking for scientists anoma lies lea d nowhere and t hem , to Alt hough be overly all these s that possible divergent consider all attention perception i al not and.- thinker qualities wh i le " aiscovery divergent not does i gms . open - mi ndednes may be necessary , "not (p. revo lutio be But observed closely triv thinker. possessing creative" are 1970b) not in pa rt, to , the bend , Kuhn do es of parad and define those , Kuhn does individuals flexibility possessing to are, , any (Feyera (Kuhn, overthrow revolutions divergent , he imposin':, , how could While p rerequisite i ndeed Sc i entific attention the that as a foothold d ifferences (1976), , or individuals great eventual Kuhn characterize 42) . at is anomalies. by the The vast scientist 'l'hei r pursuit from all their are woul<i more 26 mundane , more quotidian Kuhn be lieves the , most parameters of disadvantageous scient i sts could normal have sens i t ive not may be revolutions . it wou l d be a small percentage concerned without If , as occurs within of the p ri mar il y with a cadre of anoma l y , scientific somewhat , as have achieved creat ivi ty in lies in the course creative revolutions nature for is to in Kuhn suggests in of , anomalous science data who pursue , the tendency to anomaly anomaly into the creativity . nature as Yet creativity the is two concerns are differences in attend to , and others con t ribute isomorphic creativity to . are make sense . Those the cont inui ng , wh i le science lay groundwork for occasionally of versa) overlook to but responsible of normal the such, v ice per i ods , and of relevance ( and creativity io n wh ic h most during revolutions of that individual the However , Kuhn may Bohm , Kuhn ' s pr i ncipal of extent d i sregard of a revolution. the done . progress study in format to scientific the that manifested accretion sc i entific m that scientific insight not the p roclai for to have significant in to necessary Like Kuhn ' s theory advances a re lo g ical so do in g . of apparent: tauto Kuhn seems some i nterest those science , then than Yet of science occur. i nd ivi duals in clined more to normal bus iness science anoma li es . creative for the within with i n a d i scip line als It of to paradigmatic in d ividu tasks succeed future in in ducing 27 Corning from radically Piaget have both reached aspect of creativity for developments , i s the to t he discrepant achieve creat Piaget that infor major eluc i date an element dispos their accommodate use those preta l iterature of on studies i ndividual st i muli to openness to the disconcert in the first of be , at least a super io r ab ili ty a c commodate I n the creat i vity been included mi n i - theory theoret creativity cited i ca ll y , subsumed possessed here whi ch wi ll section i nd i viduals be , two subtopic reviewed becau se r esear serves in g -- al l -- can of to . fo l low in g sections research mity , unde r th e construct by creative to perturbations attend (i . e. , stimuli Nonconfor , attraction to c it ed , . t he correlates of may serve the creative t o anoma l ous experience data tio n of d i s c repan t wi th one ~s expectations) to or o r gan i zation theories each the be I n add iti on , th is respective iti on of then inter the wel l. common to to scientific veracious This with a salient i den ti fy anomalies and ma tion. , Kuhn and wh ic h seems all to above , as io n of and capacity i s congruent i v it y c i ted namely , the of comp l e t e , more i nterpretat to fruition acqu i red Kuhn and con clusion wit h expectations a more p reviously the perspectives , a characteristic fundamental events d i ffe r ent to illu . These ch i n each mi na te areas within two areas has produced some aspect of have a 28 creat re l ate i v i ty . the eq uil ibrat After each mi n i - theory i on . review to the an attempt Pi agetian will theory be made to of 29 Crea tivit This chapter addresses commonalities of that i on of a d i scuss between d i stinctions The first between schizophren sect i on reviews c r eativi t y and the high of Consideration and psychopathology psy ch o l ogy . associat io n between was Plato d i vine creat madness " ( Rot henberg were in what " Great Wits pa rtiti ons the are expressed may be the Bounds to clar i fy individuals on the . relationship The second schizophren it y and section ic s . Sch i zophren ia re l at io nsh i p be t ween a recurrent earliest i vity and psycho l og ic al process by Dryden divide in known near it y phenomen o n i n , 1 9 7 8 , p . 17 2 ). best creativ known proponent " creative su r e t o madness do their . and been the , who v i ewed sent i ments century has Perhaps erature i s hoped behav i o r a l cha rac ter i s tic s Creativ the help low creative schizophrenia spec ific of lit It d i fferences ic s will and the man i fes t ed by bo t h creatives The Concom it ance sch i zoph r en i cs . s i mi l ar iti es and between deta il s some of r epor te d beha vioral and the and Sch izo ph re n i a the creatives creatives the y and the quote of an d i sorder as possess i on by S i milar seven t eenth on the sub j ec t: al l y ' d ; And thin " (1 68 1/1 958 , p . 22 1). The 30 f i rst systemat t he end of i c exa1t1i nation the nineteenth Lomb r oso ' s The Hind i n t e ll ectua noteworthy posit i on with because he :f?recipi rela were among genius and with the i n 1 891. ~ublication Like , Lomb r oso asserted concom i tant . Lombroso he empir i cal data (Cropley & interest i n the i ntense between his tloo<i " of gen i us critics insanity was the and were first insanity d i ametr genius is to support subJect his , on che (Andreasen , 1978) . ( 19 1 2) who argued i cally and S i kand , 1973") , and boox:s was Jacobson of nis that that a " ve r itable t ionship to1.;;ic d.l:J.i:Jearect towara , in generated t a t ing Chief Genius l p r edecessors , however the century of " menta l abe r ration" of opposed that (Cropley~ S i kand , 1 973 ). Research to suppor not been creat conducted t Jacobson unqualif i vity psycholog se between was examined only ," longitudina l stuay to be at large stereotype of the Prior ," of via "eminence gifted chilaren to gifted to point that mental ." in time , the child as 'l'erman • ~ gifted health as disorder such (Terman~ Terman ' s work has 1960 ' s was relation constructs or evidence . that tenaed support midale in to that has and psychological indirectly susceptible p6pulation the creativity " genius century , a l though d i rectly . substantial less twentietn oefore examined relationship offered Not disoider " giftedness the ' s position i ed . per i cal in 1959) ind i viduals problems served deficient Oden, to in tended than the undermine some other the 31 area . It shou l d be noted ex tr eme l y intelligent above reported by Hollingswo has critic i zed to t he sole Te r man found adJustment popu l ation for criterion (I Q Terman ' s study hav i ng an overrepresenta i nd i viduals of th e d i ff icul t i es , a f i nding rt h ( 1942 ) as wel l. mi ddle - and upper - c l ass as that i nd i v i dua l s in h is 1 70 ) t o be prone been , howeve r, , and g ift edness . tion for of re l iance Fur t hermore on IQ , wh il e Ter man ' s stu dy seems to i ndica t e t ha t there i s a negat ive correlat io n betw e en gen iu s def i ned as h i gh I Q and psych i atr i c ill ne s s , i t has also i nd ic ated that p eople with hi gh I Q' s a r e no t necessari l y artistically or s c i entif ic a ll y crea tiv e . ( Andr e a s e n , 19 78 , p . 3 ) It i s therefore inappropriate to re l at io nsh i p be t ween creativity on t he bas i s of A more reported although recent eminent i nvest i gat i on ( Goertzel s i mil ar to peop l e often persona ical to the d is o r der t hose & Goertzel o f Terman . , 1 962 ) A lit y character exh i bited i stics unusual t hat and , psy c hot ic breakdowns u n c ommon . Despite tenable in forth have and psycholog as l sur vey o f " emi nent " i ndi vi dua l s i ndicated eccentric were conclusions Terman ' s work . f in d in gs b i ographica draw ac cu mul ating its or i ginal by Lombroso not faded who l aments creative form , the Jacobson away ent ir e l y . tha t person and evidence " it has degenerate not neither t wo extreme a t the turn In one camp been to that of pos i t i on i s posit the i ons put century i s Chal l em (1 9 78 ) uncommon to observe a s c h i zophren ic s t a t e in a which 32 creative expression opposite extreme who contend between cannot is that the and Polemics " seemingly people unfounded on creativity espouse complex research 1976) . has view to recognize individual is psychotic" (Cropley between links nature creativity between discussed with (1975) found investigation detect of papers and clearly Sikand & .McGie , and pathology that the discriminable , 1973 , p . 462) . Before similarities and two and psychological group further research are literature, no incidents high disorder, control previous successful strikingly personality findings the other differences hypothesized disorder will Andreasen and be . Consistent Cantor the between Dykes in common , but & recent disorder 1960; schizophrenia, creativity of creativity nonetheless of and (1975) are theoretical & Heinze, characteristics the ill relationship recent " that creative considering mentally majority the in certain the of (e . g. , Stein been the Bion similarities and psychological may have from and , the The trend studies apparent and The " (p . 226) . investigations two constructs " (p . 272) . by Schubert notwithstanding a more accomplished represented some creative superficial be matched and intriguing, of schizophrenia writers. rates of They alcoholism and affect for age , education replication particularly an did , however , , cyclothymic disorder are in as compared , and sex . called to v,hile for , the so when viewed in a 33 light of recent research characteristics Chaplin of , and have more is also ev idence recall of the Barton to self that creative in d ivi duals the ion world others; as that liability enhances mi ght veridical to ability derive to ignore. depressed are more accurate Cra ighead from accept In the to potent information wh ich likely to might be thr eaten Consideration the of speculative A second genetic this area level until area of link s between a link was higher than first usual will has . One seem related to wou l d re press are infor an or down and mation wh ic h i ng . be research limited is to undertaken . on possible and psychopathology by Galton mental seemingly may be focused a t wh ic h some necessarily further is to individuals in g or disturb creativity of which to and available defenses ac co mmodate in qu iry postulated rates themselves others ion and into which benefi the in forays creative ial in Perhaps commonly on but of depress too their iv e ep i sodes one may be more otherwise not There own responses i on about in and , 1 979 ) . use popu lati depress state their Abramson are , 1977) a characteristic the individuals controls. perception that depressed than informat general speculate able of possess the found , Misc hel , ions ab le t hem that they in & are sources Lewinsohn between ( Alloy around . - percept & contingency outcomes depress the ( Ne lson obtained personality depressed realistic of the (1 980 ) have feedback judgements into . Such (1 892 ) who observed illness in the families of 34 g e n i uses . Mo r e r ecen t ly , a study ma n i c - depress iv es and 19 7 0 ). of i n t e ll ec t ual those or h i gher relat i ves fam il ial those of l eadersh a c ont rol l ogy . genet i c l ink the The r ate t he b i olog i ca l or i ve group . be t ween creat i v i ty s pe c u l a ti on that ana l ogous occurren may be ma l adapt to St ud i es ch il dren and p l aced fo r or hobb i es . of psychiatr i c i l l ness than in t han t he in the i r t he b i o l og i ca l paren a l so h i gher Mc Ne i l t s of ra t es fo r adop ti ve pa r en t s o f a mode r a t ely demonstrat of i n g a genet t h e re l ationsh ma l aria i c ass o ciat i on of manifestat to the i s , c rea ti ve b e ha v ior an o t he r wi se i c pred i spos iti on (Hamer J a r v i k & Cha dw ic k , 1 9 7 3 ; Dykes & Zub i n , 1968 ; & McGhi e , 1 9 76 ) , i ons of i on i p may be i mmuni t y and a n emi a ; tha t t he adap ti ve man i festat Next , beha vi o r al a l so mothe r s , He st on (1 966 ) found for t h e na tu re c e o f sic k l e c ell i ve genet " {p . 42 ) and psy c hopa t ho l ogy ha ve led tha t between " a much c r eat i v i ty c r ea ti ve people h i gh l y c rea tiv e gr oup was e i ther creat . exhibited between r ate b i o l og ic a l pa r en t s of of (1 9 75) Can t or c r ea ti ve inte r ests (1 9 7 1 ) f o und a mu ch higher t o be a Two adop tio n stud i es s c h i z oph r enic a much h i ghe r ra t e of adop ti ve parents . found i ve disorder I n a samp l e of nor mal ad opt io n by t he ir the and affect group i n I celand writ e rs of of i p c ap a cit y " ( Kar ls son , creative p r evalence p o in t t o a poss i ble psychopatho of r elatives re l at i ves Con verse l y , i n t he Andreasen s t udy , the than t he sch i zophr e n i cs d i sp r opo r t i ona t e number " supe ri or of the r ep o rt ed 35 s i mil ar iti es be t ween considered ·and S i milarities Creat i ves and and Sch i zophren and Magaro (1 976 ) have creativity offered by Medn ic k is of h i erarch sch i zophrenia i es dep loyment of and emp iric al ranging Creat atten i ves & Hasenfus chronic normal and & word artists smooth associations sch i zoph r en i cs basa l l evels cons i dered of stimu li rese mble pursu Bot h tend i t eye indicat are & same as his flattened assoc i a t ive of There is a t he a tt en tio n " no r ma l " i cs have results & toward ( Crop l ey Furthermore in common in a wi der McGhie , 1 9 76 ; overinclusion and ( Hasenfus & & Sikand on Magaro ic s in that and by h i gher a p reference movemen t s , a trait , 1 973 ; , creatives characterized i ve of nonvolunta i ons . Magaro , 1 976 ) and bo t h arousal sch i zophren of sch i zoph r en ic s are l even t s ( Dykes Maga ro , 1 976 ) . amb i guous and t heory i a ll y t he suggests schizophren ( Hasenf us the associat ti on wh i ch apparently tasks em i t unusual involve f r om those and S i kand , 1 9 73) . categorization that essent creatives d i ffer samp lin g of environmenta Cro p ley noted da t a that of tha t both . b oth ic s in unusual strategies individuals wide : resulting grow in g body similar wil l be Di fferences Hasenfus theory schizophrenics . Behav ioral Be tween creatives for , 1976 ) . b oth complex Creative exh i b it wh ic h has r y attentiona than poor bee n l sty l e 36 (Frost , 19 8 1). I n the early movemen ts , Ditchburn i mposs ible the that stimulus comparatively greater regular re po rt ed that st i mulus , th e nerve to . of eye psycho mean in g put As was noted from proposed ability to may be t hat in bas ic screen creative central or r elevant out the peripheral 1976) . In other aspects deployment creatives this same is in deb ilitat ed by an attentional p . 51) whereas of the creat the . do creatives able to " (Dykes has & . It on the McGn i e , ranging in flexible under the screen 0c , wide is to focus (Dykes The schizophrenic iv e individual have ana mechan is m " which stimuli At stimuli environment attention in g? relates necessary . in t ne the i ng mechanisms and " a r e easily schizophrenics when app ro pr iate irrelevant and process is the is expansive only inhibiting in overabundant involuntary emp lo yed from out when this attention , both difference i ndividual words, rex l ect How then process i zed visual ~erna ~ s tne , creatives . is eyes . creatives i n information One hypothes the tnat creatives schizophrenics selectively the forwa rd by Piaget differ . vision qu ickl y " accommodate of of above , however t wo d iff e r ences been eye eye a constant dep ict ed by Ditchburn schizophrenics least to speculate ability sense and the movemen ts phys iolo g ical discriminated movemen t of One mig ht accommoda tive t ha t when subjected cells rapid lo g ic al on staccato (1 955 ) discovered without Ditc hburn research , while control in and is precludes him McGhie , 1 9 76, the ability to 37 retain to and ut i l i ze stimuli others (De llas A second creatives the exposed as creatives are The to all dea l wi th must i n assimilation be twe en assimilat d iff erentiating profiles singly and . somehow ana sch i zophren i c groups framework? in the Wi th regard to , the adaptation the avoid an in efficiency ongoing construct or d i fferences , in i nteraction Upon first appropriate , and between does construct schizophrenic i on or accommodat differences level the co ll ectively . a more be At some reflect of the , creative assimilat wh i ch we differences variations i on would may seem either to and accommodation normal r be r edu ce d and similarities reflect than normals to bette " (p . 74 1). io n consists ins pect i on , adaptation for information Di fferences i on and , 1 979 ) of are processing i ng i nformat Adaptat ar e attention , a c commodat i on , or , taken i on . to they ~ cr eat ives must a Piagetian process. of process of , and wit hin equ ili b rative adaptat i ent i s that ability which ranging of " which pa ttern characteristics manner flood effic , creative conceptualized irr e levant suggested in their differ the , a flood this among normal these t he i r wide overwhe l mi ng overload How can be "co gn iti ve econom i cs " ( Michel t o allow otherwise been i nforma ti on to sch i zophrenics exposed simplified has d iffer of a resu l t of and prepared which schizophrenics abundance dep l oyment . to Ga ier , 1970) . & d i fference and process wh i ch may appear have i on taken creatives a certain 38 p ri ma fa cie app eal . We t end exh i b i t i ng s uper i or cogn i tive c ons i s t en t wit h a g l obal wit h d if fe r ences i n adaptat super i or i ty charac the disadvantages differences To eq u ate it at creat i v i ty odds wit h the Moreover between creat iv es account for t wo groups s u ggest t he and that i nd ic ates of advantages op i n i ons one t ed , one be c a tegor exp r essed normals , the are i cally advan t ageous and sch i zophrenics are wi th One wo u l d not s uper i o r t o no r mals more d i ffe r ent i a t e creat those in same i ves from at t emp ti n<.:Jto account among sch i zoph r en i cs mus t be mor e c ir c umsc ri bed I s i t poss i b l e t ha t one adap t at i on , e it her to the s i mil a r it i es and d i ffe r ences crea ti ves , no r ma l s , and spe ci f ic, unaole wi sh to to t han of the ass i mi la ti on or i s adaptat c es the c es between char ac ter i stics t he pat t e r n of o re p l ace wou l d seem d i fferen r e , any hypothesis . by Kuhn . r en i cs exhib i t some of for uncter wou l d expec t cong ru ent hypo t hesis s ch i zoph r en i cs . thought t ha t migh t hypo t hes i ze t ha t d i fferen s i mi lar i t i es Therefo t he except adap t at i on , ye t schizoph norma l s . , t ha t In hi s wit h adap t at i on wou l d theref and adap t at i on construct , i . e ., i on spec i f i c . tne As i ndica i on to , wh i le is i ve ind i v i dua l s , Kuhn concludes s. adaptat Kuhn disad van t ages fa r outweign in But as s i tuat and creat unusua l c i rcumstance as ab i l i t i es , a vi ew wh i cn i on . advantages t er i st i cs of cr ea tiv es sup e r i o rit y i n processing i s re l a tiv e and ana l ys i s o f the t o th i nk of i on . t wo componen t s of a c commodat i on a l one , 39 migh t p r ov i de a su f f i c i ent and more fo r t he at t en ti ona l s i mi l arit c reative , norma l , and adapta ti on , it i nvoked have the one ab i l i ty to ass i mi late ass i mi lat i on d o es does not r econc i le cha r acterist the i c which more creat apparent seems li t tl e l og ic a l just wi th c r eat i v i ty . If i f i cat i on for d i fferen c e c omponent wou l d seem i n a l a r ge r q u ant i ty of for hypo t hes i z i ng t hat has any usab l e i nfo r mati on one creativ the sch i zophren of , then of ivi ty l ates def i n i t i ons in creat i ves ana appears to tak i ng i n i ndiv i dua l an a b ili ty But i s there st i mul i one level? would of i c s . It a behav i o r a l an t o imply amount assimi for t o t ake any ass i mil ates The quanti seem to intelligence bas i s t y of be mo r e than of i ty . Indeed , it ass i mil at i on can and the can asso ci at i ng ass i mi lat i on i nfo r mat i on . bear i ng on creat rela t ed to and ass i mi lat i on i nvo l ves i on in t o ex i s ti ng schemes d i rectly t ion Moreove r , there i nformat d i rect explana i ves . i cs cons t ruc t of be adap t ive deb ili tat i ng i n sch i zoph r enics be i nforma ti on t han pa r adox to De s ugges t tna t sch i zophren t any d i spar i t i es be t ween As wi th cha r ac t er i st i cs . Fu rt he r mor e , the no t sugges ? among how ass i mi lat i on can fo r sch i zoph r enic no r ma l i nd i vidua l s . obv i ous i c groups see wou l d no t wi sh to exp l ana t ion and d i fferences sch i zophren i s d i ff i cu l t to t o account Cer t a i nly i es pars i mon i ous that may be that be accommodation equated is indi v idual wi th more i ntel pertinent d i fferences l igence to , in level in general of , 40 creativity. Intelli g ence an d assim il ation as dependent on the store of the ability and accommodation to e mbracing and ava il able information. both seem of information at variance is not that assimi creative to creativity, · is not it is to it is assimilated in volve and see k in9 with on Creativity the one's out ana ex pe ctatio y is an i ntegral co g nitive ciivorcect ns part activit for the to fro m independent of of y. Data wnich individual. in accommodation, appear But not be mos t directly related to y level. quant be addressed if explanation creative for all i ty creativity, how is of more the is Certainly not stimuli. selective environmental meant to Attention processe s. events be put quantity to account with the to i dea su gge st a s mall be attended of must fo rt h as an of for sti mulation t h an to findings to a re pr opo rtion such ex~erience "op enness th a t creat to o~ intelligence openness and perception Only can the to creativity experienced characteristics related i t possible and hyperarousal? is re p orted directly associating experience" sti mulation And , if is as those of accommodation individuals. experienced all is creativit on is differences that lation no meaning The issu e of still that i n all has individual assimilation, (n or Assimilati as creativit say process in tel li gence ). to additional both . be seen be liefs. This the acquire i nformation can i ves to are O.J:-'en inher en tl y of and p rocessed. Nor 41 does " openness creatives it t o exper are able may be that wh ic h they experience creatives are creatives to ie nce " necessar are open more d i ffer " open " and il y i mpl y that in others than t he k i nd of are not. to pe rtur bat ions , to p ro du cin g events wh i ch o t hers others are . exper I nstead i ence Spe cifically , to , d ise qu ili bri um- in c lin ded to avo i d o r mini mi ze . It quant may also it y of data res ult i ng from pe rt urbations appear to st i muli nature quant it of . Thus of exp lan a tion enter stimuli i ates the could than creat effects suppor including normal individual d if ferences reverse stimuli process i ng quant factors in g s i gn i f i cant pe r turbat references to of ., for i ng st i mul i. data , par ti cularly when i nvo lv ed , without ion s . Consequently ac co mmodat i on may be seen exp la na tion the ry , i.e li br iu m- produc of are engaged in assimilation claim~ range of f ac t , t he q u an tit y of form t the may , when , in for i ties i mon i ous normals canno t p r ov i de a sat i sfacto i n vast pars accommoda t e to eas il y be mi sat tri bu t ed to One may take of incor po rat e stim uli the in t a i n , creatives i ves of d i sequi construct y to and not at t ent i on to encounter differences y to ab ilit d i ffe r ent ial selective ab ilit their cannot i s no t poss i b l e to ity the t he stimulus tha t d i fferent accommodation But of in more apparent may actua ll y be an art if ac t s in wh ic h others individuals that experienced Because take i s the t he case d ifference . i nf or ma tion it be as c r eat ivit y than ass i mi lat i on . , the a more any construct . · 42 Horeover the , assimilation interpretation s tated of previously utilizing it cognitive , creat is structures l at i on tends outside e l ements ( Piaget It would itself, compatible with able the observed and schizophrenics difference bolster i on can and groups without schizophrenics individuals schizophrenics is assimilat its~lf no reason " to of i on nor explanation d ifferences between will the that one ability to of to of pattern of i ve , schizophrenic, on any p rocess back t he process amon<:J creat the for creatives now turn or not rel y ing in their incor po rate into process elucidate differences argument was noted to to an adequate whether be used of creativity. The d i scussion component the It . and examining simi ·larities normal to provide is, nature the neither similarities accommodation, accommodat with reject state , there associated and , "an y sche me of Therefore that present its in to or to As attending that differences contrary herein. overlook the feed appear is others In contrast to to be adaptation normal . individual assimilation involves with , 1977b , p . 7) . suspect to which some extent, contained i vity inconsistent assimi and creativity information because is , to individual assimilation to . above the . Similarly accommodate would assimilate , how can to not information wish to more it attribute than can be that unavailable to 43 others? have Inhelder noted the (1 976a , 1976b) peculiarities of "p re- psy chotic" is particularly acquisitions" schemes there schizophrenics little stimuli can producing with resistance ·schizophrenics or cognitive than those of the irrelevancy of undermining cognitive able " or would activity Perhaps the ill - formed "irrel evant that " be dissonance may encounter is little structures creatives the of of the tend with quantity of avoid stimuli those dant stimuli are already from are that of normal stimuli or apparent to perhaps creatives characteristics respect to way li mited suggests of discrepancy with that ~o incongruity again attentional degree overwhelming structures schemes This be li eve in any accommodate to a stimulus d iscor to in comparison structures, or avoid the are the to related to no reason creative. Low creatives existing to and cognitive of less may be less than fail so d iffuse dua ls schizophrenics experienced with 254). hand , there between and . le ad to , 1 976 , p. that nebulous better differences schemes stable On the · contrary, f lexible, groups not " discrepant indivi structures impaired. creatives of Stimuli the other more the "regulation does processes . On the the which other from their are conflict. for equilibrative and (Sch mid- Kitskis of is rdant (1976) in the children: disco and · Schmid - Kitskis the operative which conflict a r ealistic structures. , possibly confounded. fear Schizophrenics because their Creatives of 44 actively seek with their those discrepant schemes schemes normal . groups apparent in that irrelevant ability of incongruous, there , makin g the to structure and discordant terms, it disequ m but that to achieve the the cr e atives perturbations schizophrenics are , the by an equally central pr ocessing overwhelm fodder of the able resultin matched is unable in g to cr ea tive , ions . a re exposed appear are that both creatives to normals to by go on the reestablish an y e q uilibrium to a cco mmod ate to and d isequili to . allured ar e able whereas an to sensitivity is structures to assimilate b ria. sti muli performance . of "is -I n not [t he ] (Leh mann , 1 966 , p . 406) . schizophrenic . pre - existing ion, nor mals ze the mat ion , relative extraordinary apparatus" and utili g f ro m constant. extreme the and phre nics equi li brat may be to What equilibrat onl y the augmentative schizophrenic Only would from a:i:tention . it to d iffer p hrenics with schizo infor I n Piagetian ilibriu it augmentative creatives of schizo in teg rate modifications data creatives to creatives incongruous synthesize attempt greater from by achieving abundance give creatives to Both and b oth or and necessary Schizophrenics differentiates the sti muli may be t he intellectu·a1 Hhat 45 Attent Puttin for the g aside moment, attentional will ion creative research processes be considered the t heo ry of attentional and and of high Creativity schizo examining _t->h r en ic equilibration and to s i milar differences the i ndividuals wi ll to account found in iti es low creative An attempt nex t. characteristics in dividua be made for in the studies utilize u nusual of creative ls. The preceding differences d iscussi between l differences in d ividuals, and ba sic cognitive dispositional on s uggests creatives fun damenta to Deployment and between that these stylistic i n addition to , there are schizophrenics creative and d iff erences relate and perceptual or that, p r ocesses l ess creative more than to d i rectiy mere characteristics. Creative J:>eO!Jle view th e wor lct ar1a react to it unlike most of their ~eers uo, not because tney are eccentric and strange, b ut because they p roc ess infor mat ion differently . (i-lartindale, 1975, p. 50) The contention that the differences characteristic of accommodate which to enables diverse in creatives theoretical can to less of the section positions from seemingly utilize g ies an ability inte ad d cre d ence rr elate . deriving to to information in dividuals and follows g unrelated and cre ative methodolo tnat processin result or creatives a variety in information unexpected inf ormat io n -than utilizi'ng advanced the more Studies froh1 is 46 proposition that infor fro m their mat ion people. creative In a study found evidence ideational more children task testing , on the cue - ric h testing Glover written of essay Both . the the writings of the " logical intrus the writings were defined with the expressed as passage not in the concluded that are essay and summary creative " sentences but that essay" on an environ in a ment than o± less ennancea cre at ive tne by logically creative noncreative Two separate suggest asked to students a basea on the fantasy" passages and fli ght of fantasy subjects were found to contain fewer " inco r rect subjects. that were contained logicall incorrect intrusions not with mation " ( pp . 94 - 95) . Glover et individuals more to d irectly intrusions infor information than y congruent information are more intrusions" Logical . wr ite of congruent p assage pas sages undergraduate were whereas new , incidental subjects (1 969) pe rfor mect better (1980 ) examined a " flight of noncreative presented relate Bruning , subjects i ons " and i n the " sentences was not and noncreative an essay summary creative Ward 1he performance hand, , Zimmer , and reading do less environment. by creative After a cue - rich room. more children, children in other than school creative fluency utilize environment of nursery that austere i nd ividuals existing were al. likely to schemata than individuals. studies that with creative undergraduate students in d ividuals make better as use 47 of category than information in creative subjects do less subjects with words will eating") prior to that battery high solving Differences ma les in were creativity set , whereas the of to Rainwater anagrams the females the creative ( 1976) of low - creative subjects. o f creativity and, more related strongly by males than Rainwate effects the to utilization by females. low creative the mea sure discriminator of of that the a ~reduct of an . similar 1:.0 The -solution was enhanced solutions in as may be information Mendelsohn as than anagram and r su ggests r esul ts subjects anagram indicated of hi~h hypotheses obtained category f ro rn the utilization better subJects male tests Results RAT employed . Associates controlled. replication. however number the the anagrams. set between multi ple by creative total at GB was the in a pa rtial information, and of to do with Remote 1971) . with "some the the adept the in maintain Mendelsohn both utilization with superiority with problems (1 964 ) p rovided have se statisitically greatest utilization ability even per will them more subjects, ability ot hers (Guilford, are anagram (e . g., Medn ick , 1967) (GB) of Rainwater sets using & creatives low creative . presenting was assessed Guilford set and (RAT) ( Mednick solution solving be animals Creativity Test problems the did used Rainwater the study of by category i ncrease by mid - or RAT as , the category o:i: of not generated tnose a measure RA'l' was information 48 In add i t i on to Mende l sohn from i nc l uded ne i ther Knowledge of subje drawn of c ts t he sub j e c ts that he category was refers i nfo r med t hat fro m either were solution of neu t ral anagrams ca t egory i nfo r mation so l ved ca t egor i es i nformat i on . neutral anagrams an equal subjects anagra than of did tota support wou l d be less to for the so l utions creatives. able as indicative to consciousness i evable enterta for sub j ects Mendelsohn from the the the i s that the . which creat to cons i d er interprets at t entional allows i nforma ti on from that t he t wo , and , accord iv e neutral He concluded Mende l sohn a greater fewer , res u lt i ng i n i ng to them the the capacity i n mul ti p l e , si multaneous more the two g r oups . search solution individuals , an ability form i ons we l l . of group i nhib i ted r med sub j ects simultaneously anagram Creative uninfo overlook a b le as i es group sub j ec t s wi t hou t such l i ke l y to are results did hypothes creative al t ernate another some of anagrams his l ess i es that . Sub j ec t s who re c e i ved more for we r e wou l d be i nforma t ion . . , ; one words , and two categor l solut ms than categor retr than found creatives are of that Howe ver , i nfo r med sub j ec t s solved number Mendelsohn the know l edge anagrams specified " neu t ral " anagrams mentioned , the sets was man i pulated no category , i n general as some of two categories two of anagrams to i nformation received respective f r om the an equa l number set -- what of from found anagrams Mendelsohn streams to in of " acqu i re environment , " in 49 (p . 361) than less A variation results that creatives theory more rapidly i s also both it eye Fr ost rapid individuals . Creativity and attentional the attention related of creative to creat a permutation creatives are i on is i ves environmental y and to or hypersensit that high 1) de t ect events consciousness c h cited above exhibit a individuals. , on smooth artists suggests the i n creative learning of the creatives significant , and , 2 ) to another deviant of the process more seem theory l events likely to styles would environmenta but appear attentional learning are a re a in l earn in g would an extention i ve to is researchers Inc i dental individuals. represent of i on in "normal" , incidental ivit focus Learning has Logically i s that schizophrenics shifts i ncidental be creat creative of . and than The construct creativity suggest in Incidental attracted ng attent (1 983 ) , in particular movements of of wit h resear i ves the the streams sh ifti stimuli data shifting consistent creat to of occurrence that of sensitivity research pursu rapidly concept that greater at of wit h the simultaneous people indicating consistent facile . ' s interpretation Un li ke the , the creative The i s equally . individuals of Mendelsohn are attention creative to that . The than less nonsalient and integrate those 50 ev e n t s i n suc h a mann e r a s t o a llow for l a t e r re c a ll and u t ili za tio n . La u ghlin (1 966 ) h as not ed the si milarit inci den t a l l ea r n i ng a n d Mednic k ' s t he o ry y be t wee n o f cr ea tivit y: results wou l d seem to indicate that creat i vity and incid e ntal l earn i ng involve the same basic underlying process of bringin g apparent ly irrelevant or unrelate d i deas into contiguity or association so that th e relationship be t ween them is strengthened. ( p . 119) Us i ng t he RAT, La ugh li n fo u nd s i g ni f ic a nt cr ea ti v it y gro ups crea ti ves of ou t s c o r ed me d iu m and wit h I Q emp l oyed s t udy on a measure as a c ov a r iate (L a u ghli n , Dohe rt y , i n ci denta c e s among l l ea r n i ng . . I n a l arge cr ea tivi sepa rat e ANCOVA ' s . Cr e ati v it y was s i gn ific both i nten ti ona l le a r n i ng wit h I Q as a cov ar i a t e . pred i c t o r of of d i st i nct each task of to the are , sub j ects were three i on of ies . presen the among p r ese n ted f i nd another other in a to bo t h y sc or e a s be t ne I Q was the i n t ent i ona l lea r n in g . sim il a rit RAT, sub j ects i nstructed i ng wit h c r ea tivit inc i den t a l l earn i ng whe r eas The pr i nc i pa l li mi tat the measures an tl y r e l a t ed t o Cr ea ti v i ty , howeve r , wa s found be tt e r pred ic tor i n the and S i mil a r ly , I Q wa s s i g nif ican tl y r e l a t ed to i nc i de nt a l a n d i n t en ti ona l learn be tt er as dependent ty were c o v a ri a t e . ea c h u sed r ep li cat i o n i n t e lli gen c e sc or es i n ci denta l and Hi gh lo w cr ea ti ve g r o up s , even Du nn , 1 968 ), & differne word Laughl i n stud i es t he meas u res wi th se t s of tha t is emp lo yed . On three somehow wo rds of and re l a t ed t o On Laughl in ' s i n t en ti onal t ed wi t h sets l i es s i x wo r ds l earn i ng and 51 words of and the task, asked six to in the su b jects i ng each from set i den tify is learning that are apparent actually three among the underlying the attem p ted to subdivide focal first p resen ted while another were Fo llowin g the ten of recorded we re words list the asked word pa irs. and to It i nc i denta l , rat he r than any means of commonalities construct lear ni n g has i nto two more d ep lo yment , pe ri phe ral _learnin (1 966 ), a p rinted of to task words of p rinted " inter subj ects . f e rence not i nc i dental by e x amp le , subjects of words to on the to c onta ine d in were " words , and encountered recorder . pr inte d list were Unbeknownst we re memo ri ze on a tape su bjects wo r d s , ten s p ecific In a study concentrate were had g. was playing memoriz at i on task, solving for list words instructed of and ns observed on incid ~ntal the with t h e solution memor ize d li st rch Gris wold an anagram t h e concepts, of over l ap i n the incidental g roup Subjects with resea of a~tention and two woras constructs. of Mendelsohn l earn i ng words t he learning, variabl,es Much and four intercorrelatio a product wit h four int en ti onal t o recall with , intentional the learning the associated li nk in g eac h of these the mea suring aspects Foltowing associated i vity concept p rese n te d wit h the t h e conce pt creat the conce pt , asked not possible · among set . were exem p lify the i dentify pre s ented the the su b jects, prev iousl on tne ta~e the remaining i n the y ten . 52 memor i zat i on task i nc i denta of (i. e ., l learning anagram subjects neutra " was operat s oluti ons from been i nciden learning" solutions from each case , the used as t al words on t he number a covariate of to io nally words had previously "peripheral l words ) . on the as pr i nted list to was the taped "f oca l def i ned instructed l for the number to attend wh ic h , wh il e number of " interference " neu tr a l" contro 'l'hus anagram " list . In anagram solutions was anagram solv i ng ability pe r se . Results and of this occasionally cues the use s i gn i ficant s i gn ific creat was obtained ( 1971): ivit y score cues not study by Mende l sohn separately of cues in samp l es was use to l cues found The use (1966) . b oth been in creativity but of peripheral cues no use pattern of of and l y re l ated Creativity Griswold so lvi ng anagrams the of peripheral samples and by Dewing , data inconsistent though between re verse s i gnificant the results Battye to cues the . were was assoc wi th in only one associated of use above Mendelsohn is and the each poss i ble Gr i swold incidental confounding the the t wo wit h attempt t o address learning effects this of In a on two samples i ated focal . A prob l em common to cited . have Mende l sohn , i n a study was focal ana l yzed to was , however but . l ..1 related creativity creativity research of pe ri phera an t relationship and focal of contradictory (1 964 ) found t o be line s tu dy of IQ . i ssue by use 53 including their vocabulary analyses. RAT (the into it equal such from RAT scores the may well their the study, the creativity for use in Torrance and Battye the resulted it 1964; study of oecause be RAT for of French, the (p. faulte no means possi 215) . d: (TTCT) and 1978) , in for b le And by Dewin g an d Batt y e similarly Guilford use unsuitable of Yamamoto , 1965; contained mean inflation level" selectea Thinking GB: "i n 427) , a procesure the vocabulary can y in artificial rejected study measures study selectivel sorae subjects "was particularly Griswold of are creativity. (1971) that of (p. in the to Battye 1973; bot h the t h e GB are Wallach, 196 8 , , 1971b; Guilford Further more , the of controllin & Dewing g for t he IQ, should be noted Barron - Welsh of creativity that levels" with . IQ (TTCT: Christenson, It three of Creative Wodtk~, effects the their Test correlated 1970; produce scores the subjects to maximum differentiation to effects yet divide chose in and stu dy) as and [confounding] this to evenly authors b le vocabulary the noting Mendelsohn in varia consideration have and used the attributable Dewing because possible Instead among effects an independent creativity was not a fashion which of cells. eliminate as Unfortunately, measure correlated, level correlates . Art that scale The BWAS is with creativity Mendelsohn and Griswol (BWAS). as an a dd itional a test of artistic cri t eria bu t d used measure p references is app ar ent l y 54 unrelated t -o IQ ( Wallach associated with the , 1971 ). use of Scores ne it h er on the · BWAS we re focal nor i:)eri_:?he ral cues . Another concerns issue the inc i dental and the learning, then to resultant be the intentional , not incidental learning n ing , where which ·th e task at hand the is not which incidental. is the readily . b etw een the learnin in suggests that use, or at ter m focal incid when the l ea st t h an is (p . 46 1 ) . enta l ·learni on a particular be the of subjects incidental. Each so me hand" definition has g. information proble1 n at occurred , from se p arate irrelevant knowledge e of not the y to What p revious studies deficient (19 8 1) may actually of relationship inc i dental attention learning t..1-ie relevanc these an acceptable their l earning the into an oxymoron; focus acquisition in n of is instructed trai solutio above definitions of appears seemingly cited may stem , in part a "tendenc ' s statement to to peripheral has tt1e wou l d appear each learning Barron and for incidental the and individual Barron regard find i ngs operational in constructs to , more the t h e construct respect. necessary If of derivative creative the incidental focal · significant attend of with bifurcating components, to utilized findings creativity of efficacy learning Equivocal the relating are sti mulus At t h e ti me of was clearly be en called focal a me asur e of transfer is applied previously apparent ng to a new task l e arne d material . of to I 55 The lack pe ripheral of consistent incidental definitional another characterized as interference II are and differences in the schizophrenics, the construct p re v iously, schizophren schizophrenics the creative respond subjects out Mendelsohn the role cues. anagram One group infor mation . and to screen Perhaps some of lear n in g studies their which have been the attempted ability explicitly to evaluate by mani p ulatin re garding g the "inci de ntal" was infor med that sa me words that • Another Because subjects cue words creative abil _ity and exercise (1972) were g iven "are 228) the incidental learning of subjects solutions memorized " (p. between and Li ndholm su bjects to ." of incidental infor mation and incidental between when necessary. , sti muli as "distractors of creatives is that , unlike may pos sess demands stimuli tion When v1ords. As alluded d istinc styles above , of words and of the peripheral in the to experimental to screen labeled ambiguities stimuli cited of si milarites styles become evident. out overabundant studies in light atte n tional , creatives to cue words were considered ic attentional r elate to or "distractor" II an hypothesized regard to one list The peripheral instructions learning of the to attend list. with may also In all were instructed ignore those learning confounds. subjects findings and anagram group some of the you just received no such in fo r med of the solutions solved relationsh no more ip 57 Like the literature research on the indicates that receptivity creat accessing words, viewed and attentional i ves by seemingly noncreatives , and accommodate to creative Piagetian schemes et to . Results subjects stimuli The terms . readily categories i nto stimuli indicate to . the a·esignated creative discrepant are t han able of by i n the are less attention into words words that to overlooked d schemes, scheme which then on of translated The categories are suggests stimuli in In other a state employed may be considere assim i late constitute into are and theor-.1 , research prompted may be al. accommodating creative . in n. individuals incidental high structures creative inc i dental terminology respective words of the Furthermore, informatio creatives literature .Mendelsohn attemt that individuals deployment of . Piagetian easily a greater existing light , subjects lo w creatives that the schizophrenia creative . utilizing more disequilibrium the events into sty l es of are of have mo re a dep t than in and i ve individuals new i nformation l ater creat styles environmental appear integrating the attentional to creatives on cr_eativity utilized words which schemes. by within subjects The neutral discrepant with subjects are sti muli than t he mor e caf)able a re the less 58 hypo thes es An attempt some of the the was made issues framework creative raised of prov i de a more i zed auxi li ary assimila tion/ in dividuals Specific not of i gat i on to address The intention the and their that of than average accommodation i s related measures was to hypothesis by higher was that a d justing to . It measures assimilation creative was of . An i ndividuals a r e mor e personal accommoda tio n balance than are less creative . was pred ict ed that two d istinct sub j ects operational attempted br i ef l y presen to recognition i nvolv in g the scheme . It exceed creat of ivit measures recognize t ed words . be no differences would to ns Predictions It the . iu m seeking hy p othesis of t heory creativity but capable i nvest i s characterized that accommodation this d ire c t testing of disequilibr hypothes Pred ictio by t he Mende lso hn stud ie s wit h in Piagetian thinking levels in and It high words from was ant ici pated low creatives three different and that low creative a designated of those words , however , that in be related of accommodation was predicted between assimilation y would recognizing . to F ir st , types of there would subjects in scheme , a task into high those a prescribed creatives woras wh ic h 59 are rela t ed to wor ds , t a s ks the scheme i bed scheme . accommodated The ab il ity re l ated was tested sub j ects . or atten ti on to all creat i ve subjec the respond t o the i on . other t hat wh i ch sub j ects . on scheme appropr words t her. maximize to the unre l ated set instructions and between the emphasized ; sub j ects were tha t wou l d be , when g i ven (" give that words than eq u a l high i ns t ruct i ons of by i n t he low creative to be re l at i vely i ng an i nabi lit y to thereby i on balance ins t ructiona and I n contrast was expected to and no t subjects hand , was expected ins t ruction i on that ac c ommodation it respond and i ately low c r eative cond i t i ons , indicat One add i tional accommodation at i ng stimulus The performance ass i milation/accommodat i ate rate focus words "), related , on the across to t s would condit constant These to elim i na t ed altoge more mode r ate ic a ll y vary i ng i nst r uct i ons wou l d respond i ntended intermed of by othe r words , i t was expected i ns t ruct i ons i zing st i muli ass i mi lat i on/accommodat be t ween h i gh and mi n i mized sub j ects the When i ns t ructed sub j ects previous the by systemat t o be distracted recogn to i llu s i on - produc t o ad ju st balance i on to Second l y , i t was ant i c i pated t o an differences re cogn i z i ng unre l ated d i sc r epany , r espe c t i ve l y , wit h t he c r ea ti v i ty wou l d be creative in requ i r i ng accommodat and h i gh l eve l s of prescr and alter the . l condition conditions assimi i nstructed served descr l ation to i bed wi thout as an above . exc l uding g i ve t he i r 60 attention other pr imarily words. This may poss ibly three possess familiar red existing knowledge creative lity pant that . The expectation su bjects faced ·con dit ion, relate . then d and with with b ecause to the the new alreaay is to relate the knowleaye valid data expectations was that, h i gh creative unrelated tne val i d it y of of existing d iscre more ded of knowleage is " attention recognize body structure possibi inclu may be analogous The task the the which "e xclusive the was overlookin'::i external by a scientist to to excluding encountered set g reatest scientist. new information less the r elevant to the without wordi:; without Thi s condition encounte i nfo r mation scheme instructional conditions. situation would to words as may be or with in the subJects than would it bl Method Subjects Sub Jects were volunteers 45 ma le recruite Subjects receive seniors Forty 30% were . pe rcent Subjec ts pe rce p tion were the told and br i ef ly on a video screen all completed were 21 years they . tasks were pat in g in subjects juniors words were , and 9% were . 20 years ola . pa rticipating in when flashed of a s tu dy would were (Co p ies contained under . the student of the SubJects . lo gy course ola . one part recognize the are of the subject t hat to forms par tici , 14% were that attempting debr i ef ing percent above involve had for s tu den ts , psycho was a nonmatriculating of study cre d it sophomores were unde rgraduate an introductory - nine One subject S i xty - two pe rcent Eleven 59 female d from d course investigation. freshmen, and debriefed the in Appe ndix very after consent and D. ) .Materials Word derived recognition in part his investi and indivi A word fro m methoaologies gation dual tasK . s into the differences Mende lsoh n studies , subjects recognition employea relationshi in required was by Mendelsohn p between attention were task creativity deployment to solve . In the anagram in 62 problems . A simple word investigation rather than to mi nim i ze the l1uller etfects - Lyer Mul ler - Lyer was developed. in Appendix for measure assessing Line IQ frequent . ( e . g ., tests correlat with necessary are merely to have shortcomings used to the I I co mpu ter program is given ivit Wallac h the creat of criteria extent plaguing other the i ty , were the four between used to to the scores otten extent " creativ (Wallach tests tests. Several , i ty " , ( W- K) methodological creativity and iv ity same which - Kogan tasks. creat I Q is intelligence The Wallach many of the test , and because overcome t asks creativity ta pp i ng general , 1 978 ) . and ver ba l creativ from each the a i n previous correlations que stion task and Wing , 1 969) , su b Jects & i vity use d as Mean ings AS io ns between the were measure y. by Wall ach uses and Pattern cr it eria to 1 968 , 1 970 ; French seem Apple fluency it ems selected and creativity is i n order the adapted The Al ternate creat l y approach correlated it of this . the tests ideational were three Because tests task of presenting li sting Four .Meanings i gat i ons comp l eted A means y Tasks . measu r e figural i nvest skills in E, Sim il ar iti e s task to was used solution on a CRT using of creativity whi l e the verbal A complete Crea tivit Kogan task an anagram of t ask . illusion recognition 63 studies have tests . demonstrated , one a r e d isti verbal n ct (1 97 1) and from Crop le y & Naslany cites var i ous several validity separate test studies f i fth be t ween the g ra de rs c r ea tivit s t udents o l ds students ( Wall ach & (Lin demann F u llagar & re po rt ed lo w correlat i ons of wh ic h may be a ttri bu t ed to pro c edu r es recommended "te s t - li ke " adm in strat obtained . Ha l lach ana r ela tio n s This has he l d Kogan , 1 965a , 1 965b ) , for & Wing , 1 969 ) , for ( W. Ward , 1968 ) , and Ward , 19b7 ; y mea s ures i n t ercor were ( Wallach factors t he W- K measu r es that IQ meas ure s wh il e significant for W- K two these (J. scores the & Fo r man , 1 977 ) . using measures of into f i gu ral , and that , 19 69 ; McKin ney among th e cre a tivity ye ar one int e lli gence fou nd no relationship college factorial Ana l yse s show te s t results factors true the for South , 1975) . be t ween the seven Afr i can and h i gh schoo l A few studies W- K t a s ks and dev i a tions i ve procedures have I Q, most f ro m t he test by Wallac h and adoption ( e . g ., e i yh t i ng of mor e Ve r non , 1 9 71; ~ . War d , 19 75). The W- K tasks d ata. Whi le ex tr ac urri s i gn i f i cant have there cular acc ompl i shments ivi ty s co r es ( Wall ach between c rit e ri a have & Be r ge r , 1971 ; Ba r t l e tt betwe en i n h i gh school be t ween i c attainments Pos iti ve cor r e l ations creat accumu l a t ed aaeq uate i s no relationship cor r e l a tions many nonacadem o t her also & found IQ ana , t he r e are on the W- K tasks and Wi ng , 1 969 ) . t he W- K t asks been va li d it y and nume r ous (Rotter & Davis , 1974 ; Wall brown , Langland & , 64 Huelsman , 1974) . The internal substantial. Wallach correlations split and . 87 for to the the tenth of grade) of the val i dity of stable As Wallach (1971) ideational warns of the the both , not dangers of y. on the W- K as compare creativity . interval W- K tasks creativity . are pe r se . not creativit abilities measures verbal are of data and fluency correlates ~ever t heless favorably other a measure Wal lach ; necessarily , the an in dica tor with for and tw o c onstructs ideational fifth McAll i ster the of . 82 as evidence equating correlates validity , the a (1972) (fro m the an 18 month of and Pankove as well . - item of be tween figural observed inter and Maslan y stability tasks is (1 971 ) re ports Kogan W- K tasks over fluency . lon g term tound re por t coefficients tasks the be moderately of W- K tasks . 8 7 , and Cropley respective (19 8 3) also the . 70 ' s , Vernon for predictive Kulberg middle KR20 reliability ev i dence the the of and Win g (1969) reliability re po rt offer to in - half (1969) consistency reliability ot certain measures anct creative of Procedure Word recognition were of administered an Apple II tas ks. to computer subjects . The word indivi recognition dua lly tasks throu gh the ( The p ro gram ut iliz ed is use p resent ed 65 in Append i x E ) . 12 words of the Subjects pr i or words to i on of subjects to become du ration of t he at trial example the at experimental subjects i onal third trial criter for each were pe riod words . I f the , then the the equally third t al cr it erion was not t he trials length 40 s ). word , then to first on the of the trial. and had the reached percent trial An 8% on the not which occur n Engl i sh . in each allow more reached lists the of three i dent ifie d for subjects pr i or to the 48 g were composed of than one time per of words lists a scheme of readin Th r ee categories within a scheme to viewed Lists of words of - six , subJects consisted An example al l ow trial. category list. to a criterion proceeded subjects a time . experimental identified second at was 100 reach on t he •ren eighth correctly sufficient nouns the fai l ed to on the represented the in level the i n writte the criterion wor d (a pp roximately n words through used of The word . Seventy of . example regardless it experimen p rocedure experimenter F i ve percent concrete first a subject eight a tim e of singu lar, millio If i on after In the words . 13 % reached . the 27 msec trials, reached addit the for , one l y dec r eased the list trials. screen was gradual to an example experimental was decremented least attempt the to on the acc li mated was repeated third of flash the was reached exposed flashed flash p oint l eve l of of the The duration which start we r e then The durat msec . the were that presentat whic h was utilized . One was i on of i s " words the 66 that are the the names l ist , subjects relate d to each A second words that scheme For " wool ." The third were represent wh ich i dent ifie stimuli t he e ease relativ accommodating than the assimi discrepancy th e woras in Appendix ," and ot to words eac h other we r e int ended y discrepant words with fun ction with scheme should has to the Perception to t he ed as scheme. determine were r e late of . in l , subjects rea d ily t he tne d words scheme s h oul d be pr i ma ril y a funct categories of occurrence compiled scheme. " s cheme , scheme word ; in genera hand, that or a subject was i on of . The three da ta the are " list "tail scheme the words t he specified discrepant words . each of unrelated with more in consisted mode ratel d if f iculty unrelated l ation frequency or other words of animals. with the the of "hoof ," r e l a te d to accommoda te words , on the names of the of animals significantly t o the to to of were were of expected category presentation some members included either the i nc lu ded words wh ic h were The degree the words d scheme , whereas which a re t he names to stimuli " that actually are unrelated Words of not that of re l ated Pr i or to some way associated t ha t were th e " words wh ich they cate g ory in ." informed other; were b ut animals we re examples of of by Carrol and C) . their of in words wr itte , Davies r es~ect In addition, were mat ch ed for n Engl i sh using , and Rich man (1 9 71) . iv e frequenc i es each 1 6 words set fre quency of are (Lists p re sented wit h in a 67 li st contained a rra nged the same wi th i n the orde r wh ic h was the number of list according same for screen spe ci fied , one at for approximately the subject exper the a time. recorded the i menter presentation of each say word the the word success pe r mitt ed subjects whatever distance comfortable order . from Words whi ch was i nitially s i milar suggests significant in the wor d recognition that flashed the results task to each aloud of flashed screen i on of . the prompted the The hand - held found . or der at most in sufficien random which The successive in a word An n themselves they the on the on the l padd l e . procedures is wor ds , i n a p r edetermined of list random i ve wor d by pressing screen i ndependent appeared of The s u b J ect to pos itio the were list presentat response. were . was visible but to n on a hand -h e l d game contro control the After Words a p re de t ermined above -- whic h were 27 msec . to . 36 words - - 12 from Each at t empted letters subjects of v i ewed a ser i es of thre e categories to a ll Fol l owin g t he presentation subjects to t al t he words use a variety of of s t ud i es tl y re li ab l e for be obta i ned ( Rumelhart Si p l e , & 1 97 4 ). The presentat superseded stud i es of i on of by a mask , as ( Kahneman , 1 968 ) . 11 X ' s enclosed f l ashed wor d . It each is flashed often done The mask with i n a box was v i sible word i n word cons i sted and cen t ered on the was preceeded screen and recognition of three over the for li nes 68 approximately 54 msec presentations subject , util addition to are based " words of the in the that are the subject by the to were to were drawn g ive l ess equal told most to the flashed the l atter subjects related of when that their Under were " third list was " scheme . to each the subject were t he one to to viewing the number list . of t he They the third instructional were viewed the list Under i ns tructe words and d and more fewer condition their , words words . former of and flashed that all were words told give the Furthermore r e l ated were to of related , subjects the read , subjects t he unrelated to attend presentation the from they should were condition drawn to which subject prior and words. instructions Instructions attention as In on a "words vehicles ted . animals the of how the an equal instructed words in condition unrelated . of trial was based presen at tention t he related words names names were Under words from the each three d. instructional the the g ive unrelated a second superseding procedure " scheme , and experimenter instructed subjects and for lists was p resented. wo rd lists. the two regarding respective to list the differed g iven when it are lists trials were a list foods de termine The three to that of wh ich randomly word remaining names on a " words subjects preceeding d t he experimental a different the the The order was repeate i zing scheme , one that the . Each times in both of from , attention , since most to of the 69 flashed only words wou l d be selected a few would fact , an equal unrelated number words obviate i ng abi l ity f i rst and third except their instruct words . less that i ons prior equivocal condit each in subject t he word , subjects the Muller illusion length each the trial length task - Lyer illusion constant the right . Subjects of the exposed line right to to The two (1972) rece i ved to the establish a set , whereas the screening l imiting . or The order sets of all the length for of which randoml y for Appendix D. deployment presentations line all in was attention The left third instructions in . segment trials . of The the initial was r andom ly determined use d a game control line the exposure 30 successive segment . subjects i s presented Following and Lindholm initial of rendering . and instructional task to . i ncluded investigations instructions ed the were was of of to recognition learning was intended a measure response - Lyer their In trials were investigation learning A complete Muller of as receiv determined. task incidental three comparable and words , and i nstructions Mendelsohn condition i on was used attention were to words words . the incidental in present The second of in previous the related unrelated each of of cond i tions in the words , related in sets evident employed study flashed confounding screen the scheme differing the cond i tions from of were The three to be taken from segment paddle unt i l it to appeared for adjust to be 70 equal in length to the l eft lin e segment pressed a bu tt on on t he padd l e , record lin e as set segment of completed by t he the thirty at d i min ishe d over tri to Creat ivit recogn i tion given the i ns tructi room . emphasize tasks words . dec i de you are finished and and that enhanced when t he ta sks one ." as of are adm i n i s t ered the another had you i on to no lik e . another was made to and between validity to quest . to t he tasks long r esults connections s were d i rected An a tt empt t est word g i ven as the wha t appea rs measures name l y , t he , sub ject that te st -li ke situations in d ic a t es and g iv en in from i a lit y of re search " was also n o f the were ques tio n for or score task in d ic ated forth n rec ogn i zed . Sub j e cts ons line i nve r se l y th e co mpletio and t he confident i l lusio be t he s. inve s ti ga tion, th e tasks i ns tructi of wit h t he o t her this go back tasks to Mull e r-L yer mi n i mi ze an y s i mila r i ties creativity in After the then typically t en minute T"hi s " slope Unrelated . length Sub j ects of the correlated "Wor k on each to . to expected on completing Enc l osed you and creativity ons free and five effects a l s was y tasks t ask ti me li mit: unt il the emp lo yed n u mbe r of Re la ted Feel s in be negatively accommodation i ng the length l a t ed wit h cr eat i v it y . expected of trial wh ich The sub j ect and gene r at i ng a new right random l y determined The rate corre subjects . to t he P r ev ious W- K t asks is wit ho u t ti me li mi t s be a nona c adem i c , nonevaluative 71 conte x t (Boers ma & O ' Br yan , 196 8 ; Vernon , 1 9 71 ; Van Mondf rans , Feldhusen , Treffinge Ha r g r ea ves , 1974 ; Wal lbrown wer e r em in ded i ndependent subjects of l y and who had J t he & r, & Fe rris , 1971; Hue ls man , 197 5) . i mpor tance of of not d iscus sing not yet completed ·Sub j ects workin g on the the the tas ks with tas ks . tasks any other 72 Results Results of pertain variables : deployment first and the attention task Creativity attention to level third section a total the repeated creativity distribution of chosen to p roduce groups The creativity · sect i on examine _s the on the between Nuller - Lye r task . iour The measures - Kogan tasks High -, creativity between of sex , word - type , with were the su mmed to Med ium -, and by trichotomizing identical creativity the Cutpoints approximately with total ( Winer , cr _eativity were scores. groups variance . identified The mean of factors set , and individuals . task. between on the score. were total separating - Lyer relationship Wallach groups so as sets Deployment , instructional the three attention relationship performance assess from among and performance and Low- creative different r-1 uller second the d eplo yment . Sco r es -without the relationship Finally, the two being obtain the , a 2 X 3 X 3 X 3 analysis was used creativity scores, the and Attention Initially latter . in ps creativity deployment i s considered and the between - Lyer relationshi from deployment; relationship 1971) data addresses attention the creativity data , and section Mi.iller to were equal scores score size i nto was 62 . 23 73 with a standard deviations dev iation for the 57 . 97/4 . 67 , and Low- creative Related word three attention Ce ll recognition scores no significant pooled into test for the in in ly, a data resulted cells: standard Table 1. variance effect and mation The s ummary transforme main a significant interaction main table using the effect squared the d scores is for for other presence = 4.95 were of of , p < . 01 . . Sq uaring variance Ce ll are means presented 3 X 3 X 3 ana lysis presented was word-type crea t ivity sex Har tle y ' s F - max scores word -t ype between these data was attempted of effect of Homogene it y homogeneity the ons for any of variance. indicated for of Consequently, adequate dev i at ions , and dev iati F - max (27 , 33 ) = 2.51 , p > . 0 1. on the the sex F - max ( 27 , 33) in A s i gnificant Neither no main was assessed transfor in s tru ct i onal 5 of Append i x B . between Results words , combination Table factors. variances: scores across and c e lls (Wine r , 1 97 1). heterogeneous and attention standard each revealed of Scheme The three and a 3 X 3 X 3 analysis across Consequent were means int eraction or combination variance 86 .3 0/ 18 . 09 , , Pr im ary presented factor of standard High - , Med iu m-, d words. Pre li minar y analysis and the categories Unre late Equal are were and , respectively. attention. factors Means groups . 71 for Word - type were Exc lusive the 42.06/6 words , and conditions 21.41. resultant groups The three of nor in found and any Tab l e 2 . along instruction. of ot the wi th 74 Table 1 Means and Standard Deviat io ns For ·Transformed Recognit ion Scores : Total Creativity X Word - Type X Instruction Creativity Low Word - Type Level Medi um high = 33) = 32) . (n = 35) Scheme 100 . 40 ( 4 1. 06) 92 . 00 (33 . 65) 97 . 82 (3 9 .3 9) Related 85 . 50 (44 . 10) 74 . 43 (3 8.04 ) 79.61 (37 . 11) Unrelated 68 .66 (42 - 29) 55.77 (32.61) 62 . 85 (43 . 91) (30.66) (35 . 83) ( 41. 02) Related 79.88 (41 . 78) 73.86 ( 35 . 88) 86 . 97 · ( 46. 12) Unrelated 47.56 (37 . 24) 46 . 97 (35.87) 66 . 21 (34 . 32) Scheme 98 . 94 (35.30) 93.86 (41.32) 107 . 20 (29.10) Related 78.19 ( 41. 40) 73 . 97 ( 4 1. 70) 79 . 52 (40. 8 2) Unrelated 48 . 16 (36 . 63) 49 .5 4 (38 . 28) 68 . 64 (43- 01) (n (n EQUAL ATTEN'l IO N 1 ----------------------------------------------------------Scheme 105.70 103 . 20 103.90 PRIMARY ATTENTION EXCLUSIVE ATTENTION 75 Tab l e 2 Ana l y sis of Va ri an c e Summa r y Tab l e o n Tr an s f or med Sco r e s: Total Cr eat ivi ty X Wo r d - 'I'ype X In s t r uct i on Su m of Sq u a r es D. F . 151 03 . 80 2 755 1. 92 7 3 1 4 3 9 . 96 97 7540 . 62 783 . 0 1 2 39 1. 50 0 . 36 632 7 . 40 4 158 1. 8 5 1. 46 2 1 00 10 . 67 1 94 1 08 2 . 53 279480 . 00 2 1397 4 0 . 00 374 1. 1 2 4 9 35 . 28 Er r o r 14852 1. 23 1 94 765 . 5 7 I X W 6937 . 2 1 4 1734 . 30 3 . 13* I X WX C 4226 . 62 8 52 8 . 33 0 . 95 2 14985 . 75 3 88 55 4 . G9 So urc e Cr e ati v i ty Error In s tr uct i on (I) I X C Error Word - Typ e ( W) WX C Er r o r * p **£< < • 05 . 00 1 Mean Square F 1. 00 1 8 2 . 5 3** 1. 22 76 interactions with . OS level main for of probability effect all for possib As expected, most Results of significant the attention words was attained 97 ) = significantly attention groups a priori the . significant and instruction of detecting and words in the the words the . words the least under the creativity word - type , instruction attention seen to the for , and the , an alternative procedure evaluate the between Primary Low - creative signif between for word - type i cantly word - type most factor of . interaction a three i zed word - type , alon g with account creativity words : F(2 , recogn differ found a significant , or group not effect difference Unrelated under did Therefore relationship no numbe r of Med ium - and observed with reveal Primary found two groups , would chances the i on of interaction associated Unre l ated However , a significant did effect variance word - type . than The powerful on the Unrelated groups The High - creative The latter the were Unrelated condition Scheme creativity Under recognit . os. more the compar i sons across recognized 3 . 10 , p < p < . condition. in to the the differences > Related> find at - up tests Scheme , and , no differences Related follow significant tended differences condition indicate recognize recognize sign i f i cance A pr i ori subjects to to . l e comparisons: all difficult reached word - type difficult Equal creativity the Renee between way interaction are minimal was undertake creativity the and between . n to the . 77 attention measures p ree mptive , one that e of the influenc is less su b j e ct word - type to effect the within the ANOVA model . A canonical 1 980) was pe rformed P6M program 198 1 ) . four of creat ~a ll ach.and tests desc r ibed d eri ved the fo ur subjects with an~ three from Standardized are p resented at variate. i n Table Only s ubstant i al figural of t he crossi scores l atter e , the , two s et de.t:Jloy ment thre e wor d -t ype . tclsk s The second Because analysis le ve ls data was perfo on r med . (see wa s ob t a i ned Table 6 , . Ap~end i x B) . for 3. All from the four Mean in g s , however to eigenvalue creativity loa d in gs on the the is found for va ria bles creativity , makes determ the the Loaa i n~s significant a i nat i on of . pattern the two a r e . attention ng the un i que contribution A d if ferent from t he former creativity conditions mode rate Pattern ( Dix on , As no te d above , the nine Coefficients le ast usin g the Uses , S imilarities ei genva lue correlation exhibit of 10 0 su b jects and raw Gol d , & variables the while i ncomplet One significant canonical Alternate instructional were of of creativity consisted with variate : a s measures variables of (1 965a ) c ha rac ter i zed verbal of meas ures sets , a nd Li n e rtean in gs . Kogan of two consisted tasks .Meanings (Lind ema n , Mer enda , Bi o me d ic a l Co m1.mt e r Prog rams set i vity on on the the The first Pattern as correlati attention the 78 Table Loadings and , Canonical R2 with the Coefficients Opposite var ia b le 3 Set Loading , Standardized for the Canon . Coeff . First Coefficients, Canonical Variate S tan dz . Coe ff . Oppos~te Set R 1.051 .470* - 0.100 . 412 -----------------------------------------------------------First Set: Creativity Variables Pattern Line Meanings Mean ings Alternate .705 Uses Similarities Sec ond Set: .9 96 Attention .1897 -.0173 . 413 .0004 0 . 003 .374 . 375 . 0076 0.059 . 259 variables Equal - Scheme . 020 . 0288 0 . 061 .1 64 Eq ual- Re late d . 086 -.1 724 - 0 . 427 . 184 Equal - Unrelated . 081 . 0506 0 . 153 .2 58 Primary - Scheme -. 098 -. 27 12 o . 534 .2 03 Primary - Related -. 084 - . 1984 - 0 . 528 . 317* Primary - Urelated . 409 .2939 o .833 - 328* . 325 . 3477 o . 736 . 241 ted -. 005 -. 3150 - Unrelated . 385 . 2735 Exclusive - Scheme Exc lusive-Rela Exclusive * I: < • 05 . - 0.863 0 . 891 .1 43 .2 61 79 variabies. Few of variate. the variables The exceptions Primary and under the pattern Exclusive Unrelated attention conditions attention condition ev i dent when the standardized variables are exa min~d, the attention variables are the attention canonical variate In order to contributions was employed Nie , 1981) & missing data w~s selected in effect. as criterion canonical coefficients creativity canonical the canonical loading of coupled with Pattern the near y variable~ Weighted scores scores results were i nterpretat as in this contn for the .but ions to . been score , and on the deletion convenience of Meanin g score Alternatively used to . to canonical , the derive use But the the a score high of the unnecessary would other . l ik e l y yield the Pattern and ease R obtained on the p re d ictio the Meaning s in ion . The multiple on variate, weigh ts procedure , hence the .f:-l r ocedure pairwise have Meanings instance of regression 'l'he Pattern this Pattern the several to multiple standardized makes and selected zero of that variables t he predictor Meanings creativit same variate variable A different relative measure might words coefficients the with option both Scheme 'i,he SPSS New Regression was used the . the . a backward . , and unique attention of creativity, analysis making with under indicating explicate made by the prediction (Hull further correlated words Exclusive is attention are appear n of Pattern 80 Meanings score by the . 44 (E < . 01). Table for the attention variables make equation . prediction of Unrelated words attention conditions. words and creativity task. e ase suggests under ( Winer, 1971 ) over orthogonal the at ion there of the prediction the Equal the for Exclus exhibit under to are and ive significant , and the Scheme Exclusive over and components (Dixon, B). cluster as s of of in nature. using Task the the three Muller three - Lyer trials The figure anticipated, the illusion but A test the contained 19 8 1) bolsters At the of diminishing 10 blocks procedure of interpretation. i& nonlinear the Mul ler - Lyer 30 trials exposure, results 7 , Appendix the weights performance was some r epeated BMD package to two conditions on the averaged of present pattern attention contribution only the over with same coefficients under words was . Performance effect Table the measures nine attention loading were that the The largest Primary 1 illustrates Scores of variables Related groups regression a significant . under the Five three make condition Figure the the show a positive Creativity . deployment contributions creativity weights attention for 4 shows significant condition negative attention measures None of at tention nine that of analysis in program this :s suspicion p < . 01 l eve l of probab the trend of P2V of (see ility , · 81 Table Regress Va ri ab l es Var i able 4 i on Coefficients in Predicting Unstd of Pattern Be ta the Attention Mean in g Scores Std Bet a 11 Va lu e ----------------------------------------------------------t ed -. 809 -. 38 - 2 . 9 3** Primary-Rela Ex cl usive - Unrelated Exc lusive - Re l ated Primary - Unrelated Exc lusive-Sche Primary me - Scheme 2 . 78~'* . 679 . 407 -. 759 -. 377 - 2 , 54* .5 94 . 304 2 - 5 1* . 683 ,2 68 2 . 25* -1. 26 Equa l - Re lated -1. 02 Equal - Schem e - 0 . 55 Equal - unrelated - 0 . 53 * p < • 05 ** E Note. < • 01 N = 104 . FIGURE 1 MEAN EFFECT OF MULLER-LYER ILLUSION OVER TRIALS N co I- 22 w 21 w 20 u LL LL z 0 19 ::) 18 -(/) _J _J z ~ 2 17 16 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TRIALS (SCORES SUMMED OVER 3 TRIALS tACH) 83 a quadratic trend quintic function results of be the all all block of the of i . e ., indicates no change over i.e ., scores permitted for the creativity six the analysis slope significant leve l. task, scores task the trials . are each led Table correlations in trials as score the score six of zero of the slope separate curves across with set of second the s l ope trials set . diminishing B, No , indicating of of and Results obtained a function four variables 8 of Appendix were the slope . one the . Each particular was performed as on six subject t he effects the of the groups in of of A slope of based on a five - trial effect Using serving detai each by that constituting over would accurately score was based evaluated differences effect , for not slope for magni tude creativity canonical it line A high - negative comparison scores are the d iminishing correlation no significant illusion!s in measures the - Lyer no accommodation. A canonical the slope accommodation. the , a Regardless that of data a single slope - Lyer resp ec tive slope the i s aaopted fit. suggest was calculated rapid the score, strongly since a rapidly illusion, < , 05 of best the Muller six Muller E a function. segments indicative illusion trend calculate the resulting If line calculating of line the of 30 trials than 30 trials separate the by a linear Rather is test to over represented indicated. defines inappropriate subject of is the creativity of 84 Attention Deployment and An additional the six slope For this second set Appendix ob tain of B. canonical scores analysis Muller-Lyer ant on. measures are and -L yer Tas k wa s pe r for med with one set of measu r es canonical no s i gn i ficant dep lo yment on t he Miiller g as attention Resu lts No si g-nific illusi servin nine variables. r mance cor r e lation a g ain , the ed , in dicating attention Perfo variables for med the re po rte d in correlations relatio Tab le 9 of were nsh i p between accom moda t ion . to the the 85 Discussion The two ma jor considered sections . hypotheses separate ly In the first relationship between accommodate to in the examines between creativity and the er F inally, the of task of revolutions is e. in the to . to The the second relationship mod if y one:s Resu lt s on the the third results section. with d i scussed and Accommodation The central creativity stimuli thesis discrepant for this to in with Kuhn 's relation differences were to theory to highest level that more l east found in those of Events th i s investigation in , at recognize) Di screpant . high creative Unrelated words under attention stimuli discrepancy was that accommodate one ! s expectations hypothesis sub j ects to an abi lit y to significantly creative ab ili ty of i s related recognized the considered i ty theory. Creativity found per taining balanc consistency scientific Piagetian are abil d i scussed abi lit y to be on the the is will following findings and evidence investigation immediately events ass i mila tion/accommodation Muller-Ly two creativity the this section, d i screpant section of certain given intended from the to Sup p ort was subJects than did l ow conditions . Thus to (a nd/or to the represent designated scheme . 86 High more creative Related intended words to High than creatives d id creativity mad e no significant that , under variables. correlations with bet a wei gh t s are effect discrepancy , or indivi contrasted more , Related words of conditions regression and eq uation suggest that to appropriately most th e moderately p ortrayed words and by a suggests that h is/her it to r e l a ted for respons as functionally to is For with cre ativi not of extremely moderate the ty are th e attention c reativity, e to b ut l y high . discrepant the order zero The presence accommodation directly Exclusive words , zero moderate indicate serving correlations ly high. to and a re Re lated order seems Primary are negative dua l ' s propensity with both creativity words , zero suppressor the any attention ana lysis For and moderate is the with pr ediction prediction results and , Related suppressor which this instruction to regression conditions positive three be discrepancy relationship. clearly Unrelated in the The cannot The multiple attention the creativity stimuli l i near quite of for recognize , words Mor eove r , Re lated we ig h ts condition. between discrepant . of recognize contribution third association simple, level not to subjects found did beta expected creative lo w creatives u nde r two t he low also a moderate negative under were No sup por t was however. exhibited than represent expectations. words subjects stimuli rather to , per se , it is discrepant discrepancy 87 wh ic h is between most the number discrepant value is stimul of the score of of modifiy i ng their less high Unrelated words . unable to stimuli condition were , on the expected assimilation to in the to be most significant creatives the the absolute high . creative similarities schizophrenics, subjects would be more shift . be given subjects to Under other greater the recognition to high Scheme Related tends to fact , the support evidence the opposite from the and to be of attention creative and subjects to maximize between or Unrelated canonical conclusion. the words expected any differences of than instructions accommodation accommodation reducing to were Exclusive hand , the minimize was that appropriately was capable balance The expectation attention it words. In It Balance apparent and Low creative , thereby two groups to discuss respond equal make this discrepant which creative would that opposed distinguish sub j ects. requesting as assimilation/accommodation creative creatives and moderately Ass i milation/Accommodation between that The difference subjects. on theories predicted . discrepant , appears which the and differences creativity extremely low creative Based less of differences Modification the i ve of i recognized, either these from predict correlation High creative the 88 subjects appear Their attention It wou l d be creative to instructions scheme than d i d the unnecessary the if the demanding screening tas k had been of by the Sykes can the is Exc lu sive th e switch attent toward more (1 9 7 6) make the mode "i n cases ion condition greater Scheme , if the words . it had effic occurred . creative assimi l ative , i ent convergent " under cont i ngent . been , t hen have the a more performance ass i milation screen might where was not been i ve attention that on a more , " efficient to difficult sw it ch to these recognized may have the suggest to instructions subjects recognize failed As per also It subjects cont in gent Apparently . h i gh they . attention h i gh creative readily or that since subjects ' exclus and Mc Gh ie the attention condition subjects accommodative performance this creative to suggest Exclusive subjects i n order ns . u nder Pri mary man ner Exclusive high instructio words to the creative l ow creative words Perhaps to under under the the accurate inappropriate high words for Unrelated than words ions , the more under three . responded Unrelated i nstruct than t he lo w creative to Unre l ated instructions. over , the responded more le ss i n an by the consistent conditions s ubj ects screen have cond ition Exclusive unaffected In contrast recognized Equa l attention 55 ) . relatively d o appear Low creatives less was conditions. subjects person been performance instruction more to have approach " {p . the on making I ndeed , the effects 90 the as literature well. that indicat Moreove r, h ig h creatives events, an ability least es to find attentional can d istracti in high sufficien t ly dif ficult screeni like that and the another . in formation that, for to at co n trolling Martin least and the to "i nvoke the are of self methods reported l y used o ver stimulation -i mposed by high Unequ i vocab l e assessment require to the , high surfeit is al of hiyh l s, evidence the problematic . i nd i v iduals t hro u gh external means arous al" isolation creatives in of There i on is co rtic in onl y t he ability . any be def ici ent many creative l eve 1 of , drug s , and to was no t t ha t t h e highly individua that task t wo g rou p s may lie stimulat At the indistinguishable, exposed t he muse" "chang e their t he suggest are some creative .flood that Alternatively integrate they Alchohol t o reduce not for creatives relating (1 9 75 ) su gge sts dr iv en to to is l ack . The f irs t -, as pu t may i n fact probably which of d ale order This to p rocess is strategy. t he sch izo phrenic area , most . high schizophrenics, to il y control creatives d iff e renc es between creatives feel attention ng ability creative voluntar the hypothesis b e advanced in g section, for the appear can to schizophrenics ng e nv ironmental schizophrenics an ability in t he preceed creatives, screen explanations forward of of was foun d for strategy modification characteristic no su pp ort which two p ossible failure is are in ( p . 50) . among their in t he effort . of the sc r ee n i ng ab ili t y of s 91 high creative research subjects has d i ff i culty on t he been is will systematically hypothesis that When subjects g i ve eq u al attention d ifferences to between In contrast Unrelated , high words i nst r uct io ns a study would further i n wh ic h task shed further diverted by him. t hat wi th the although prov i ded low crea tives in light expl icitly whether informe utilization but of the support study , Mendelsohn creat matter d as to or found found . the t ed words . but link nature of creat Mende lsohn (1 972 ) use than the the cues explains d id (i. e. , of on cue i vity of subjects I n terms creativity between suggested task or not l are made more expl i c i t ). for 's attentiona solution whe ther the found . and Lindholm i ve subjects anagram were Mendelsohn man ce " ( p . 365), of to when a "li nk between nature incidental more Unrela p erfor was was the is no interaction cues i zed subjects from i ncidental des i gn , a ma in effect g rou ps there high to words , no recogn low creative d i d not the y were and Unrelated subjects cons ist ent instructions low creative a subsequent , it explicit specific I n a p revious that given investigation and creative i ncons ist ent were attention t his are i v it y i s related and did instruction creat creative (1 976 ) conc lu sion p roc esses of Scheme high than Resu lt s of nature varied effects l ea rni ng . were Perhaps before issue. wit h the cues be possible undertaken. F i nd in g s on the found not and the the the 92 results in terms creative subjects multi ple streams Given the of and of 's . words for of each differences word -t ypes and the analysis any indication the latter creativity consciousness of high va~iance a main analysis tends and in consistent require effect were zero . effect to exhibit with should show and A main effect would a high value effect for great the across case. i ty . and for one Neither correlation g ives Instead, between - way instruction. results creativity may I f a creativity most of tne main att en tion to hi yh zero var i ate . creativity allow correlation moderate of most to a three ex p ect standar in aeplo y an i n teraction canonical . to g roups creativ word - type the of for equally wa s not for creativity the seem and p ossibly positive, the would suggest a main one ability canonical explanation p resent, correlations coefficient with some further variables variable the among creativity, that , the low creative to outcome of word - ty p e or Such word -t ype, The contention are maintain woul d result producing and nor of interaction word, instructions. of to predicted . capacity Likewise type between for be a ma i n effect irrespective condition. streams , the attentional of more i nstructional capacity of creatives should Greater recognition ability hypotheses invesigation c r eativity multiple the attentional consciousness. Mendelsohn present channel a greater Moreover, or d er one d ize d canonical of t h e rest would shoul d b e near indicate that a ll 93 nine attention same thing. variables If a substantial this were, were unique so , only contribution creativity variate. But, of is different. results variables of two to the obtained present the in time su b ject's task the is after the do with the ability words the list existence attention to account for to than of be played , they facilitates the the nature the were list i nformed words of had been words inc ide n tal able subsequent In subsequent withdrawn. have y recognize were or less recall to the initially subjects Unre l ated to to the the learning words ~rior words. of and when creative by the of of In the mat i on was relatea to may be · subject. stimulus are and notable regarding wi th how the to Most to the investigation ' s studies. subsequentl of list of this infor in may be that that the onsh i p .of communicated It manner suygests results p roces sed . the several be advanced , subjects differences studying pattern levels ' s studies role actual various exposure the the that make n of.the the initial Perhaps stimulus shoula at that between only the pred ictio The fact when information investigation relationship the the differs can words Mendelsohn variable above, relati in Mendelsohn t he stimulus measuring . between point to noted the reasons discrepancy one contributions creativity factors Several those as ion effects; deployment the quite make uni que i nteract in essence, words structure accommodation are prior to schemes to told in the a 94 unrelated the words. timing var i able the of . Future information insights the discrepant sensit present differences investigation than correlation to there variance the . First analysis of significant , and other words, related forfeited variable correlation analysis went hand, except to reduces deployment effect for word - type between by the in order to use creativity of the variance entire . an word -t ype in obtaining a , or word -t ype , correlation, on in the are was independent The canonical distribution the of differences as this for differences those the 1980), creativity Second , much information analysis utilized which of and is . a l., analysis The canonical extent et by the chance in canonical significant interaction unaffected of uncover the been While reasons instruction. the to to have (Lindeman main between creativity in the appears tendency undetected variance to of additional legitimate to powerful three-way creativity the several , the nature ANOVA model . on chance interaction a significant the capitalize which the accommodating in attention regarding correlation relationships anlysis was the are , nevertheless, canon i cal an independent and in using expectations. i ve to questions consider may provide involved correlation may provoke timing by subjects with mi ght i on as the processes The canonical more both received into ions disseminat Manipulating information stimu li i nvestigat of creativity 95 scores and Finally , the variance four was therefore creativity measuring the analy~is Factor analysis factors , one tapping (e.g McKi nney creat more and between Battye and fluency fluency variable is presence of other correlation deployment differences than a spurious of learning found to . should verbal evidence . one. the to In the relationship , nonverbal to be more and . low - creative two "total substantiating not . , figural than score, figural incidental high- tasks assumption the investigation were - Kogan in accommodation with (1971) between is these some canonical creativity obscured finding creativity differences the the ideational figural hybrid is the the in attention the associatea predicated are The canonical differences to is Both ~allach indicate why differences there . creativity, Using unclear that It that related , yet suggest verbal tasks on the tests an erroneous Forman , 1977). & closely been verbal i v i ty. is creativity of the ," may have It Dewing of ' scores su mmed score on the oi analysis creativity research ~rocedure. tne construct may have closely creativity be this suggests more four in subjects the same underlying that verbal all and previous procedure Using that suggest are . powerful used by summing tests assumption ., measure was obtained creativity on the a much more tests sensitive groups to than were measures. also interesting which virtually to note defines that the Pattern cr e ativity Meanings variate , 96 in this study four creativity that the the than merely illustrate the perception ., versus amount determined the recognized. the of of instruction conditions , the when subjects are the words . Unrelated Given the accommodation given fact recognize word being that recognition under somewhat instructions between creativit subjects words expectations powerful is The d ) largely nce s in the exp licit association , the require effect . influence with extremely . Unrelated t he stimulus d iffere remain to expectations accommodation the predictive order versus discrepancy of in the population, ability which likelihood words are wo~ds of entire of all miti gated to attend to y anci evidenced more accommodation whe n instructed to do so suggests intri possibilities for . Would subjects "expect styles? creativity? the If intervention unexpected so, what Futu re " alter would research subjects' the effect might the suggests utilizing potential the subjects' to Though types ng . to is of This on chance y level, . The degree the greatest Related extent Wing , 196 9 ). capitalizing in consistency procedure pe rtaini differences words & the of creativit striking (i.e (Wal lach with Some comments irrespective internal correlation variable rather Scheme greatest tasks canonical creativity power , has training attention gu in g to dep loyment be on assessed consider the effects of 97 "accommodation The r-·iuller tra i ning" - Lyer it the the on the proved in anticipated which decrement trials more - closely assumption and with to the performance on the any deployment results indication It is a relationshi discouraging relationship and/or of found nor attention poss i b le example, to over consistent accommodate exposures . Yet , nor was p be t ween and creativity p between attention While the invalidate creativity necessarily deployment for do not on a faulty -- is performance. they between do they function. repeated task across . relationshi Muller-Lyer and Mul ler - Lyer are deployment, any of show a pattern was based tend course in was would ' s effects subjects of It , the notwithstanding the was found . a curvilinear illusion that no evidence there I nstead that hypothesis illusion untestable function over the and be noted relevant hypothesis in the creativity must stated trials. was therefore hypothesis stimulus the of original -- nonlinear the effects resembles The decrement trials task , it evaluate across , the between was originally the linear Consequently to it that relationship MUller - Lyer impossible form performance. Task In consi~ering performance on creativity negative the and att~1tion mean that are unrelated for creativity to creativity accom modation. and Hul ler-L yer 98 performance not be to related It . purely each other or in more in Related relationship between accommodate to moderately d iscre in on the required in the One additional - Lyer tasks which su ggest s that More than one line so that t he po int The confounding . Several the with subject it appea red where it effects worthy sam ple to asked the the in " really" of pr ior nct fro m to acco mmodat io n order than ta~k. concerning volunteered of the one should le n g th to be the know le dge the the inf ormation on ma y not nature whether d isti the accommodation of note pop ulati equal would is of a lesser subjects regard to deployment is to ability the is ability that Perhaps task may suggests y and attention point Muller y naive - Lyer performance sti muli . p r_ocesses The complex words creativit mor e attention accommodative and are pro cess es operating y and the discrepant M~ller and kind. creativity stimuli The creativity - Lyer Unrelated p ant still d to wh ich Or the between relate p rocesses accommodative than highly relationship ent irel while and Muller and are accommodation. i p among creativit recognize occurring of level. quantity interrelationsh to to in creativity differ that two constructs related yet . nature on a co gn itive involved accommodation accommodative perceptual are d to levels may tap dep loyment the relate the aspects Huller-Lyer more to be may be that difterent , both have b een illusion adjust . the standard, sa me length concerning or . t he 99 illusion may have Muller - Lyer influe , Accommodation Differences to implications revolutions; for it help to parad ig matic clarify symbiotic shifts r e lationshi her to Kuhn within Normal creativity Instea adequate puzz le on each successive i nte resti ng to moderate discrepant required of Pe rh aps scientist the does the of of h istorical creativity may wi th i n t he clarify between require i ndiv i dual skills and su gges ted speculate t hat stimuli t he the creative puz zle-solvin the engaged g a c tivit attempts by high levels needs the by operating to ability the parad ability to may correspond indi v i du al d iscr epan cy , possibly with t h e scientist not d , the step represent so me s ynthe sis d by Kuhn , to (197 6 ), solving the achieve discipline. science . d iscr epan c y scientific i ndiv idual ex ists in of ana l y sis the p t hat or Ac cording to of o"f Piaget of p ropose the Progress lev e ls theory A Piagetian role i ng to lo w creatives and h igh perspective the pe rso n and his and Kuhn's of Kuhn . pertain Scientific may be possible dev elop mental orientation , and moderate results ways . betwee n high accommodating the the in un p r ed icta ble Creativity have nced to resolving i es of accommodate apparent the possess to elaborate i gm . It attend to in Nor mal of the is to sk ills sc ie n c e . Nor ma l to mode rat e conflicts wit h i n 100 the operat i ve parad unsuspected aspects accommodating relative i gm, or of to the l y mi nor data i nto the paradigm moderately science , on the able an orderly to findings c omprehens i ve theory. and may be necessary discrepant can t hat creat the i ve p r oduct anomaly only percentage can be that leads of the with is percentage sc i entif not of wil l not always Chance i ve abi l ity d i scovery . Moreover , creativity I n their continuing i al become preoccupied i nconsistenc with the to of creativi always extent individua as creat i nconsequent mor e accommodation lead the to which creativity Certa l s ever in the to a small . and ty to , at t ention productive creative routinely a new, to anomaly , it sign i f i cant may be into outcomes attention search apparently of ( 1976 ) suggests . , unexpected to i n th i s theory To the i c accomp l ishments ind i v i duals them advantageous time . i dentified creativity sma ll to anomalous dependent . process As Kuhn occur. hand , is before inherent . paradigm other of stimuli, accommodate be achieved creative process reorganizations s cheme/paradigm is the synthesize Major One implication In the integrate whole ; to inconsistent o n prev i ously disc r epant to being data . ad j ustments Revolutionary on i ndividuals by elaborating can i nly realize Zeitgeist fru i tion be seen only major may be as of can be counterproductive for perturbations distracted i es . tangents a . , creative by sp u r i ous As a result and dead ends. , they data may Lakatos and 101 (1 970 ) descr science i bed numerous whe r e exper evidence at data later are odds im ents with revealed Neverthless prerequisite to Occationa the for relevance of P ia get general , and i n d is covery synthesis help and the framework the deve l opmental sequence study of Thus within age mi lestones or on the at wh ich strates areas of It stage of study underscores cognition . for of the , in processes involved Furthermore the , the may expansion differences far , most differences illu Kuhn ' s theory room individual equal l i ttle i cular considerable on the rate to the with focused or be down on the Kuhn has It of adult , i n part of to in. . c onstructs constructs theory. have and research understanding i nd ivi dual come parad i gm . investigaation P i agetian to Piagetian invention illuminate examining the the or by a some money Piaget and the these or as an attempt comparatively to often anoma l y appears received of Piagetian to wit hin to the Most big . app lic abi lit y of Piagetian with in profound Fos t ering lay of theory attention . fail off - fertilization prev i ously to and will of some way i naccurate seen bets pay Piagetian wh ic h have of in be l y , it l ly , i t wi ll import be progress its history i ng theory. , attention can General The cross apparently scientific i ne to hedge lon g shot . produced to creativity discipl i n the a prevail mi s l ead i ng . tolerating instances components the research a Piagetian attainment of poss i bil i ty - specific the of mod i fying behav ior s 102 occur. However , Piaget processes that which is, These the are embraced remain accommodation Certainly to investigation to which to but which factors are in Furthermore, this relationshi p between creativity intriguing one, creativity . adaptation been either gated . def i ned remains those the to may help be seen . considered in and to is needed Nevertheless accommodation further this of research . . by determination relationship stages, and much additional demonstrate of is events clearly nature investi creativity when examining developmental generally ra~ely beyond that across equilibration involved one be envoked have anomalous other creativity. of dismissed, The extent also constant mechanisms proce sses or can is illuminate , the an the 103 Limitations This and Directions investigation attempted Piagetian theory of presented herein represent investigation and alternative that must be theories disconfirmed and qualified remains for support or providing the to reject . only Popper theory and subjected the has supported or to in data (1962) put favor a a single be offered theory for the that investigations the Research support can , only the satisfying to theory is suggested some preliminary forward. It secure of additional an alternative comprehensive explanation of . The problems creativity in attempting may be more faced in other tends to be creativity a higher a high level and less to difficult psychological research problematic be even possibility investigation subsequent of the This for work results be proven support offer the acknowledged a more data attain the because Future But because cannot . to ·creativity. explanations, spurious for the to of in areas. of precision; operational satisfying. ,n~n creativity is crossed with the constructs put forth by Piaget, specifying operational measures It definitions elusive inferred the is those ambiguity in difficult to constructs is utilized tend area of processing difficulties increase of '!'here and defining the than endeavors. nebulousness other a theory overcome research level than substantiate in exponentially . to 104 In the into the and present investigation selection of accommodation. because they two constructs or underlying constructs operational measure are not above studies can to re p roach. may be confounded readily assimilated the may be necessary that the the operative schemes accommodated stated to above, indirectly it is gain designating at subsequently all. not accommodation into a given some control or creating over dua l with modifications inaividual it to be stimuli only to necessary scheme. al:)}?ear the However, as be accessed ex per imenter to of would of p r e -existi for a given is the limited whether One way of Kno wing has ng sche mes , ascertain ambiguities . minimal the status schemes event of the these The problem some kn owl edge impossible is . in which a ~articular indivi can , the inherent assimilated. Because the is Therefore of information , if b e assimilated to and as the constructs another have the investigation issue that mation. well concerning difficult extensive as present extensive for must this , if information while same, infor investigator fact be tween observed by one modifications, assimilate the directly by the reJected Nevertheless hypothetical not structural scheme . In par t , this and were ponden ce with tenuous in went assimilation sets corres address of distinguish their s employed be inferred i s further adequately was too to meas ures alternative because attempting only acce p ta ble Several failed , much deliberation stimulus to atteILt.f:)tln9 by parameters of 105 a scheme which is permits more various the stimu ·1i approach its use of limits the generalized. schemes natura resemble schemes according limitations of attempting of any each -construct among the all measures . were su ggest s that a certain type accommodating the levels creativity. For operative informa of t ion scheme. Mult i ple appears measures fabr icate use be of more is and same would no utilize the . for the multiple measures int er relations support also rel at ionshi , the d specified for the h ips contention underlyin g prov i de a mean s of p between p resent creativity in vestigat may be mos t closely degree of disc repancy can , there the example creativity to to the measures . or is ta pping the of compensate p rovide t h e ran ge of accommodation to measure would a pproa ch has expectations Demonstrating Multiple delineating with . measures construct one this develop experimenter ·rn is schem~s artificially Moreover actually to scheme . on and operation schemes? to degree delineate resµlts do the constituti the artificiality which extent subjects One means and to l ly occurring that that extent the p resent However, , the the the was made to lists. of with in . First To what assurance of was taken word own li mitations assessment discrepant An attempt the schemes are that investigation. through accurate i on associated with accom..,1odat i on , na me l y , which is severely Acco mmodating to be to le ss direct may help to discrepant moderate or l y r elated clarify these l ow to 106 relationships. Similarly creativity may provide treatment and of what the the it measures measures as peers , behavioral , but self - ratings, may aid in treated . using the a global creativity. Using of evaluate this creative and creativity another only one and from the future one . of measures , advisors wh ic h are An assumption could No distinction Comparing creative of be was made , tor " scientific approach provide , or inventories creativity and to " the an opportunity groups task re li able creativity dimensional scientifically by a single include creativity might was to " creativity assumption. information other of . a multi- this accomplishment was that " artistic in supervisors aspects construct used an assortment of with verbal In include check li sts , or , between provide also of . measures to investigation as assessment verbal each provided to satisfying little constructs associated present been ratings specifying closely example have that may be propitious of creativity such the would approach and were suggest Wal l ach - Kogan figural most creativity respective investigations complete Two measures Results over measure ity. figural investigation. from a more of creativ creativity gained , a multidimensional of to artistically individuals would means . The population employed represents an a dd itional re l atively homogeneous in the present limitation. with respect inve st igation The population to age and educat was io n . 107 Consequently li mited range , the . Moreover, of creative popu lati on . in regard this research to o utstanding predom i nated speculate ate number accomplishments somewhat which individuals results sensitive technique wh i ch may have One further relates to subjects regard task sample the had population that the i n this group. of a more dist groups icularly nature of influ the enced not a whole . possess ing an creative abilities are Perhaps a study demonstrably i nct creative pattern would be One of a more to a sample ran ge . regarding they the as as compared a r estricted ed that may have creative - Lyer a state of outstand percentage , part .. Mul ler does wi th of characterize perhaps extreme concern indicat to of to this a g ive n subject pop ulation i ndividuals a l arger The use io n the wou ld p roduce . a populat of underrepresented i ncluded examp les in mat io n only some poss ible , and of expect not of no infor which sophomo res what by this be meaningful within and the ted exactly prov ide to is that specify is i on from would ab i lity it results publ is hed : results populat by freshmen , but tasks i ntended one abilities inordin are are sample to i s re presen ; no norms creative creative difficult abilities Certainly university is of the The Wallac h - Kogan the i s drawn . might it instrument respect the generalizability task the . were .. Muller sample As noted not ion prev iously entirely - Lyer performance populat task. and naive , some with Knowledge confounded of 108 results in expected the any gro ups d iff erent understanding either for on the limitations of be used of measures hypothesized un der l ying proved particularly as administered the subjects able the to still when they t hese attention were subjects may have is to confounded the . between the mu lti ple " approach Mod ific It measures been appears and recognized y of of Re lated The relative the s ; subjects words the t he tasks demand ing Scheme and words Unrelated and words wit h which may have underm ined readily of were ease who could ' ba lanc e Some subjects all, the subjects that sufficiently a tions mi gh t have Evaluating ic. not . , ' s effects emp loy measures resources. presented may res pond illusion investigation have ma jorit some Therefore ass i mil ation/accommodation most , if instruction . present problemat the to way of minimizing inadequate ' attentional recognize the was Given or appears of across a subject effects constructs. may not identify . However , a "shotgun connection modify its the information operates, measure in the the to one excuse used the groups wh ich construct. to of task. icular strengthened ability that knowledge factor Knowledge rep resented "actually" above, a part each cannot the figure using to of may be for Mulle r - Lyer As a llu ded equally ill usion , independent measures it compensate way the propensity results or ways . ly by th e respective to on the another been of how the attempt based different may have creativity the several effects utilized is of the i dentify , 109 Scheme, Rela t ed , and attend exclusively would be l ess assimilat instr to likely to of appa r ent approached The diffe type would of word . modify have no need Consequently to , they their balance the p r esent the ceiling in renc e may have i n response investigation to In the demonstration if This made the pilot Alt ernat possib to li ty subject. exposure further would be to a t which difficulties words woul d e li minate . Of course, the went in d if ficult to future than again lat encies the be used individual use w~s i n the . for the words require g i ven. latencies to subject concerns th~ir it research instructions presented. of the easier and might the through spec i f i ed criterion. task exposure a given and subjects the . subject repeated reach could categories once , r egard l ess indivictualize Train i ng tr i a ls time former, p roce dure more in studies may be desirable utilize examp l e , of the latencies not few subjects wora made pilot subsequent It three , subjects iv ely , re duc in g the task the only demanding Then, changes In the did training wou l d make the subjects . of the l atter they studies limited any exercise insufficiently studies. been . per for man ce. may have being between demonstration more task du rin g p ilot t r ain i ng p r ocedures for words uct io ns . was not the one i on/accommodation The problem the Unrelated Another for determine would each the recognize 50 %, Individualizing about basal d i fferences or ce il ing in the 110 exposure the time required is derivative words words . Therefore, differences is a possible to expect , individualizing account for Incidental the learning alternatives. mutually obtained and breaking These exclusive a Piagetian interpretation be possible to evaluate scope of possible research In this res p ect, may be more to in and the the , fro m the results and play necessarily compatible obtained. with in the per spective more the and field the to the it is t hree explaining of creativity. advanced inclusive. at It herein would many d ifferent small may was beyo nd the Meanwhile, of with It so as endeavor merits to such associated of f orth studies stud y of . creativity creative not summari z ing Piagetian comprehensive be put largely n. to . are fact, , that thinking be unlik~ly two the rela tive creativity. set are investigatio the d to investigation. research however in in this predictions perspectives existing levels fu tu re present t o assess theoretical pertinent design theories, the in of differential respective are, latency However , there would can pe rspectives and . creativity flashed consider be relate hypotheses results to latencies to g e of to per ceive differences would pertaining percenta measure latency words alternative ability be necessary that Consequently Several a given dependent unselected results the would recognizing influence recognize of it as no reason to child to the seem 111 advancement of radically The util i ty of the be more circumscribed. attentiona l styles for new paradigms inciden understanding ta l learning W'nile of its creatives major within disciplines. construct relevance is creative for clear, its accompl appears to studying the significance is hments seems more tenuous. The Gestaltist to that of particular the - scheme theories significant mental than the is or broken for set , Piaget into part for more accurate hindered icularly those Piagetian Add iti onal of research is needed be sustained break i ng what may follow . Interpretation i onal studies definitions to explo ration shortcomings operat -- a more sche me . as a preliminary Replication operational only on l y for veridical to may construct . Pia9etian creativity relating the However , schemes by methodological constructs. and /o r modi fied of served theory is , not , but i nvestigation static can of , more . of mod ification, integration detection merits two perspectives be a more set similar therefore r e l ative the the an explanation a Piagetian resu l ts to is of creativity between allows set/perturbation This study appears It . the Wh e r ea s the , and offers complete, the set respects discuss appears scheme. differentiation theory to difference be that of men tal in many l y d if ficult respective one construct , def i nitions using are del i neate of alternative called the of for . . parameter s of 11 2 the theory, applies. perhaps specifying the circumstances where it 113 References L. B., & Abramson , L . Y. (1 979) . Judg ment of contingency in depressed and nonctepressed students Sadder but wiser? Journal of Experimental·Psycholoyy General , 108 , 44 1- 485. Al loy, Andrea s en , N , c . (19 78). Creativity P s ychiatric Annals , 8 , 23 - 45 , and psychiatric : illn : ess . Andreasen, N. c., & Canter, A . (1975). "Genius and insanity" history in revisited : Psychiatric symptoms an·a family creative writers. In R . Wirt, G. Winokur , & M. Roth (Eds.), Life history research in psychopathology (Vol. 4) . Minneapol is: Un 1 vers1ty ot Mi nnesota Press . Asch , s . (1956) . Stud i es ot · independence anct conformity: minority of one against a unanimous maJority . l~o . 609) . Psychological Monograph s, 70 , ( 9 , \ihole Barron, F . (1955), The disposition Journal of Abnormal and Social Barron, F , (1958), The p sychology American , 199 , 1 50 -1 66 . Barron, F, (1969). cieative person and creative New York : Holt , Rinehart & Winston , 1969. Barron, F . (1971). lrn .eye more fan tastical. I . A. Scott (Eds.), Training creative York : Holt , Rinehart & lnnston . Barron, F ,, & Harrington , D, M. {1981) , Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review Psychology , 32, 436 - 476 . toward originality. Psychology , 2.!_, 478 - 485 , of , M. M., & Dav is, G . A , (1974), Kogan tests predict real .creative and Motor Skills , 39, 730, B~rtlett A imagination. Scientific proces~. In G , A . lJavis thinking. New Do the behavior? of Wal l ach and Perceptual Boersma , F. J ., & O'Bryan, K. (1968). An investi ga tion ot the relationshi~s between creativity and in telligence under two conditions of testing . Journal of Personality , 36 , 341 -3 48 . & 114 Bohm , D . ( 1965) ~ The special w. A. Benjamin . Bringuier , J . c . (1980). Chicago: Univers i ty . theory of Conversations of Chicago re~~ -1:_ -~~i t y . New York : with Press . Jean P i a g et. Broen , W. E . (1973). Li miting the flood of infor mation stimulation: A protective deficit i n chronic schizophrenics. In R. L . Sol so ( Bd.), Conte mporary issues in cogn i tive psychology: The Loyal Sy mpo sium . & tions. Waslungton : v . H. winston Bruner , J . s. (1973) York: Norton . Carro l l , J.B. frequency . Beyond the i nf or mat ion given. New Word , Davies , P ., & Richman , B. (1971) book . New York: Houghton, Miffl i n .-- Cha ll em, J. J. (1978). Casual notes schizophrenia. Orthomolecular on creativity Psychiatry, 2, and 271 - 274. Charleswo r th , w. R . ( 1969). The r ole of surprize in & J. h. Flavell cognitive development. I n D. Elkina (Eds.) , Stud i es in cognitive development. Essays in honor of Jean P i aget. New York : oxtorct Press . & Maslany, G. , A . J., factoria l val i dity of the tests . Br i tish J ournal of Cropley w. (1969) . Reliability and Wallach - Kogan creativity Psychology, 60, 395 - 398. J . . s . ( 1973). Crop l ey, A. J ., & S i kand, schizophrenia . Journal of Counseling Psycho l ogy , 40, 462- 468° Dellas , M. , & Gaier , E. L. (1970). creativity: The individual. 7 3 I 5 5-7 3 • Dewing, K ., _ & Battye, G. (1971) nonverbal f l uency. Journal Psycho l ogy , 1 7, 214 - 218 . Ditchburn, retinal R. w. action. Creativity and and Clinical Identification Psychological of Bullet i n, . Attention deployment and of Personality and Social (1955). Eye movements in relation Optica Acta , 1 , 1 71 - 176. to Dixon , w. J . (Ed.) . (1981) . BMDP statistical software, edition . Be r ke l y : University of Calif<)rnia Press. 1981 115 Dryden , J. ( 16 8 1/ 1958) . · Absalom and Ach i tOi )hel. In J . Kinsely (E d .), The poe ms of J'ohn Dr ycten ( Vo l. · 1). Oxford: Clarendon Press. Dykes, M., &McGhie, A. (1976). attentional strategies of cr eat ive norma l subjects. Psychiatry, 128, 50-56 . · Elkind, D. (1971). Two a pproa ch es to i nt elli gence : Piagetian and p sy chometr ic. In D . R. Green, M. P. Ford , & G. B. Flamer (Eds.), Measure ment and Pia get . Ne w York: McGraw-Bill. Evans , R. I.E. (1 9 73). Jean (E. Duckworth, trans.). A comparative stu dy of schizophrenic and h ighly British Journal of Piag -et . The Han and h is New York: E. --P. Dutton. i dea s. Feyerabend, P. K. (1970). Consolations for the special i st . In I. Lakatos & A . Musgrav e (e d s.), Criticism and the Colloqu _iu m i n the Philosophy of Scienc e , Lo ndon , 196.5. Cambridge: Cambridge Un iversit y P ress -. -- · Flavell, J. Cliffs, French, J. w. (197 8 ). Untitled eighth ment al measurements NJ : Gryphon. F·rost, L.A. (1981, April). The rel at i on ship between smooth pursuit eye movement , creativity and p syc hopatho lo gy . Pa pe r presented at the Eastern Psychological Asso ciation Convention, Philadelphia H . (1977). Cog nit NJ: Prentice-Hall Gal ton, F . ( 1892 ) . He reditar Company . Geger , B . A. genetic Glover, i ve deve lo pmen t. . Engl ewoo d . Inc. K. Bu res (Ed.), The y ear book . Highland Par~ y gen ius. (Ed.). (1977). Piaget epistemology . Boston: Lon don: the Macmi l lan and and knowing. Stud i es in Routl e dge & Kegan PauT: J. A ., Zimmer, J. w., & Bruning, R.H . (1980) . I n f o r mat ion process in g approaches a mong creat i ve students. Journal o f P s y c ho l ogy , 105 , 93-97.- Goertzel , v. · & Goertzel, em i nence . Bo ston: , PA. M. G. (1 962 ). Li tt l e, Brown . Cra dles of 116 Gruber , H . E . (1 98 1). Darwin on man . A psycholog of scientific creati v ity (2nd ed.) . Chicago of Chicago Press . Guilford, 5, J.P. (1950). 444 - 454 . Creativity. American Guilford, J. P. ( 1971a) . . Creativity tests Beve rl y Hills: Sheridan Psychological & Christ p between Behavior Hammer, M., & Zub in, psychopathology. 1 54 -175. en sen, P . B . (1973). creative potential , 7, 247 -2 52. J. (196 8 ). Evolution Journal of General Hargreave s, D. J. (1974). S i tuat divergent thinking . British P s ychology , 44 , 84 - 88 . Psychologist y , for children Services . Guilf ord , J. P . (1971b). Some misco nceptions measurement of creative talen .ts. Journal Behavior, 5, 77- 87 . Guilford, J.P., relationshi of Creative ic al study : Unive rsit . re gard i ng the of Crea tive The one - way and I Q , Journa , culture Psychology and , 54 , i onal influ ences on Journal of Education al Creativity and Hasenfus , N ., & Maga r o , P . (1976), schizo ph renia: An equa li ty o f empirical c on structs. Brit is h Journal o f P sy chiatry, 12 9 , 346 - 349 , Heist, P, (1 968), The creative Vintage Books. college stu den t. New York : Hest on , L. L, (1 966 ). Psychiat ric disorders i n foster reared ch i ldren of sc h izo pnren ic mother s. b ritish Journal of Psy chiatr y , 112, 8 19 - 825 . Holland , J. L . (1961). Creative among talented ado l escence Psychology , 41, 13 6-1 47 , Hollingswo rt h , L. Wor ld Book . Hull, (1 942 ). and academic . Journal of Children C . H ., & Ni e , N , H , (E d s.). New Yor k : 1-lcGra w- Hill. above 180 home perfo r mance Edu cati ona l I Q , New York: (1 981) , SPSS UPDATE 7 - 9 . l 117 Inhelder, B. (1976a). 1:>omepathological phenoMena analyzea on the per spective of developmental psycllology . In (Ects.) , B . Inhelder, H . H . Chi pman, & c ·. Zwingmann Piaget and his school. A reader i n developmental psychology . New York : -Springer - Ver lag. Inhelder, B. (197 6b ). Operatory t hought vrocesses in psychot i c children. In B . Inhelder, H. H. Chipman , & c. Zwi ngmann ( Eds .), Piaget and his s chool . A reacter in deve lo pmenta l psychology . l~e w York : s.l:-'ri nger - ver lag ·. I nhelde r, B . (19 8 2). Outlook . In (E ds .), Jean Piaget. Consensus York: Praegar. Jacobson, A . C. (1912). insanity. Medical s. Uodge l & C . Modg il and controversy . ~ew Lit erary gen i us and Record, 82 , 937 - 939. manic depressive Schizophrenia J arv i k , L. F., & Chadwick , s . B: (1973). survival. I n I-I. hammer , K . Salzinger, & s . Sutten ( Eds .), Psychopathology . New York : \d l ey . Kahneman , D. (1968). Method , findings, of vi su a l making. Psychological and and theory in studies bulletin , 70 , 404-425. Kar lss on , J. L. (1968). Genealogica l studies of & s. s. Kety (Eds. ), schizophrenia . -I n D . Rosenthan The transmission of schizoph r enia . New York : Pergamon Press. Kessen, W. ( 1966). The strategy of instruction. In J. Bru ner (Ed.), Lear n ing about learning. Was hington : Department of Health , ~ducation Welfar e , Office of Education . Kogan, N ., & Pankove five - yea r span. Kuhn , T. (2nd s. and , E . (1 972) . Creative abi li ty over Chil d Development , 43 , 427 - 442. (1970a). The structure ed.). Chicago : University of scientific of Ch ic ago revolut Press . a i ons Kuhn , T. s . (1970b). Reflections on my critics. In I . & A . Musgrave ( Eds .), Crit icis m ana tne yrowth Lakatos of knowledge . Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science , London, 1965. Camb rid ge : Cambridge Un iversity Press . 11 8 vs . innovation. In M. H . Marx Kuhn , T . s. (1 976) Tradition F. E. Goodson (Eds. ), Theories in contemporary p s ychology (2n d ed .). New York : Macmillan . The essential Kuhn , T. s. (1977). in scientific tradition and of Chicago P r ess . tention change. & . Selected studies Ch ic ago : Uni versity Lakatos, I. (1 970 ). Falsification and the methodoloyy ot & A. scientific research programs. In I Lakatos Musgrave (Eds.) , Criticis m and the growth of know le dge . Proceedings of the International Co llo q uiu m in t he Philosoph y of Science, London, 19 6 5. Cambridge : Camb ri dge Un iv ers it y P ress. · Laugh li n , P.R . (1966) . I ncidental concept tormation as a f unct i on of creativity and i ntelli g ence . Jour nal of Personality an d Soc i al Psychology , 1, 1 1 5- 119 . Laugh li n , P . R., Intenti ona l function of Personality Doherty, M. A. , & Dunn an d inciden ta l co ncept motivation, creativity and Social Psychology , , R . E' . (1 968) . for mation as a , and sex. Journal ~ , 401 - 409 . Lehmann , H. E . (1966) . Pharmacotherapy of sc hizoph P . H. Ho ch & J. Zubin (Eds.), Psychopatholoyy schizo ph renia . New York : Grune & Stratton .· re nia. of of In Lewisohn, P. M., I••'lischel , w., Chaplin , \v. , & Barton , R . (1980) . Social competence and -depression : The ro le of illusory s e lf - pe rce ptions? Journal of Ab normal Psychology , 89 , 203 - 212 . Lindeman, R.H., Meren da , P . F. , & Gold i R. Z . (19 80 ). In troduction to bivariate and multivar ia te anal sis • G enview , IL: Scott , Foresm an & Company . Lindemann, M. D., & Fullagar , c . J . A . (1975) inte ll igence in South Af rica n adolescents Behav iour a l Sci ence , 2 , 179 - 182 . Lombroso , C. Scott. Marti ( 189 1) . The man of genius nda l e , c. Psychology (1 975 ). Today, Wha t makes 9 , 44 - 50. Creativit y and . Jo urn a l of . Lon don : Walter crea ti ve peop l e differen t ? 119 McAllister, J. R., Developmental submitted for Jr., & Kulberg, J.M. changes in creativity. publication. (1983). Manuscript s. G. (1977). Factor structure McKinney , J. D., & Forman, the Wallach -Ko gan tests of creativity and measurement intelligence and achievement. Psychology in the Schools, 14, 41-44. IPAR's contribution to MacK innon, D. w. (1976). conceptualization and study of creativity. & J. w. Getzels {Eds.), Perspectives Taylor creativity. Chicago: Aldine. McNei l, T. F. ( 1971). the relationship menta l illness. Prebirth between Journal and postbirth creative ability of Pers ·onality, Theorizing. I n M. H. t--i arx Marx , M . H. (1976). Goodson (Eds.), Theories in contemporary' (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan. Mednick , S. Remote the In I. in of A. influence on and re corded 39, 391-406. & F. E. psychology A., & Mednick , M. T. ( 1967). Examiner's manual. Associates Test. At lanta: Houghton Mifflin, Mendelsohn, G. A. (1976). Associative processes in creative performance. Personality, 44, 341-369. Mende lsohn, G. A., & Griswold, use of inci6ental stimuli function of creativity. Psychology, 68, 431-436. and attentional of Journal B. B. ( 1 964 ). Differential in problem solving as a Journal of Abnormal and Social Mende lsohn, G. A., & Griswold, B. B. (1966). Assessed creative potentia l, vocabulary level, and sex as oredictors of the use of incidental proble m ~olving. Journal of Persona li ty and Social Psycholoyy 4, 423-43 . , Mendelsohn, G. A ., & Lindholm , E. P. (1972). Ind .ividual differences and the role of attention in the use of cues in verbal problem solving. Journal of Personality, 40 , 226-241. Nelson , R. ·E., & Craighead , w. E. (1977) positive and negative feedback, self and depression. Journal of Abnormal 379-388. Selective recall -con trol behaviors Psychology, 86 , of 120 P ia get , J. (1 970). Piaget's theory Carm ic hae l's manual of child Wile y . . I n P . h , ~u ssen (~a . ) , p sychology . i:~ew York : P ia ge t, J. (1 972 ). The principles New York: Bas ic Books . of gen eti c e p ist emology Piaget , J. (1973) Viki ng Press. P i aget , J Appe deve an d To understand is to i nvent . . New Yo r k : . (1977a). Problems in e qui l ibration. I n M. H , (Eds .), Topics i n cogn i tive l & L. s. Go l dberg lo pme nt. Volume I. Equilibration : Theory , researc application . New York : Plenum Press . Piaget , J . (1 9 77 b ). Press. The deve lo pment Popper , K, R. (1 96 2). Conjectures York : Ba sic Books . of and thought h . Re fut ation s. New Ra i nwa t er , J . H . (1 964 ). Effects of set on problem solvi in subjects of varying l eve ls of assessed creativity. Diss ertation Abs tracts International. 2 5 , 6753 , (Un i vers it y Micr oti l ms No . 65- 3066) ng Rumelhart , D. E. , & Siple, P, (1974) . Process of recognizing tachistoscopically p r e sented wor ds . Psy cholo g ical Revie w, 8 1, 99 -11 8 , Rothenberg , A . (1 978 - 79) . Trans lo g ical secondary cognition in creativity. Jou r na l of Alt ered Consciousness , 4, 1 71 -1 87 , Rotter p r o cess States of D, (1 9 71). The , D, M., Lan gland , L ., & Berger, validity of tests of creative think in g in seven yea r old children . Gifte d Ch i ld Quar t erly , .!2_, 273 - 278 , Roy c e , J. R ., Cowa rd, H ., Egan , E ., Kesse l, F . Mos , L , (1978). Psychological epistemology : A critical revi ew of t he empirical literature and the theoretical iss ues . Genetic P sycholo gy Monographs, 97 , 265 - 353 . c. E . (1 973 ). A five - year follow - up stua y of Sc hae fer, self - conceot of creative adolescent s. Journa l of Genet ic Psycho l ogy , 123, 1 63 -1 70, the 121 Schmid - Ki tsikis, E . ( 1976) . The cognitive mechanisms underlying problem - solving in psychotic and menta lly retarded children . In B . Inhe l der , H . H . Ch i pman , & c . Zwingmann (Eds.), Piaget and his school. A reader in developmental psychology . New York: Sprin ge r - Verlag . Schubert , D. s . P ., & Biondi , A . M. (1975). Creativity and mental health : Part I - The i mage ot" the creative person as mentally ill. Journal of Creative Behavior , 9 , 223-227. stein , M. talent. York: r. (~962). On the identific at ion of creative Ins . J. Parnes (Ed.) , Creative thinking Scribner & Sons . Heinze, s . J . (1960) . Creativit . Glencoe , IL : Free Press. y and Stein , M. I ., ind i vidual Taylor, I . A . ( 1976). An emerging view of creativity. A. Taylor & J . w. Getzels (Eds.) , Pers pe ctives creativity. Chicago : Aldine . . & . New the In I . in Terman , L. , & Oden , M. ( 1959 ) . Genetic studies of genius. Volume 5 . The gifted group at mid life . Stanford : Stanford Uni versity Press . Torrance , E. P . ( 1962) . Developing crea~ive thinking through school experiences . Ins. J . Parnes (Ed.) , Creative thinking . New York: Scribner & Sons. Van Mondfrans , A. P. , Feldhusen , J. F., Treffinger , D. J . Ferris , D. R. ( 1 971) . The effects of instruction and response time on divergent thinking test scores . Psychology in · the Schools , ~ , 65 - 7 1. Vernon , P . E . (1971) , Effects of administration and scoring on divergent thinking tests . British Journal of Educational Psychology, 41 , 245 - 257 . Wallach , M. A. ( 1968) . [Review of Creative Thinking] . American Journal, 5 , 272 - 281 . the Torrance Educational Te sts of Research vlal l ach, M. A . ( 1970) . Creativity . In p. H . Mussen (Ed . ) , Carmichael ' s manual of c h ild p sycholog y ( 1,>p. 1211 1272). New York: Wiley. & 122 Wallach, M. A . (1 97 1). The i nte llige nce/ cr eativ ity . d is t inct ion. New York: Generar-LearnTngPress . Wall a ch , N . A ., physiognomic in children: & Kogan , N . (1 965a ). Cognitive Or i gina lit y , se nsitiv it y , a~d defens i veness in fin a l re port . Dura m: Duke University. in Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N . (1965b) . Hod es of thinkingyoung children: A study of the cr eativ it y -i ntell i ~ence d is tinctirn . New York: Hol t, Ri neha r~ & Wi nston . Wallac h , M. A., & Wi ng , C . w., Jr . (1 969 ). 'i'he talented ~tu dent ; A validation of the creat i v it y i ntel li gence . distinction . New York: Holt, Ri neha r t , & \dnston 'I'he validation Wallbrown , F. H., & Hue ls man , c . B . (1975). of the Wallach- Kogan creativity operations for i nne rcity c hi ld ren i n two areas of v is ual art . Journa l of Personalit y , 43 , 109-126. Ward, J. (1 967 ). An ob li que facto riz ation o f Wallach and Kogan 's 'crativi ty ' correlations . British Journal of Educational _Psychology , E._, 380 - 382 . War d , w. C. (1 968 ). Crea t i v i ty l2_, 737 - 754. Development, Ward, w. C . (1 969 ). nu rser y school 543 - 54 7. Ward , w. C. (1 975 ). Convergent and d i vergent measures of creativi ty in c hi ldren. Edu cational and P sy cho logical Measurement , 35 , 8 7- 95 . i n young children . Child Cr ea ti v i ty and environ mental cues in children. Deve lo pme ntal Psycho lo gy , 1, Watkin s, J. W. N . ( 1970 ). Against ' nor ma l science .' In I . & A . Musgrave (Eds.) , Critic ism and the g rowth Lakatos o f knowledge. Proceedings of the Inte r national Col l o5I1:1 i um in the Philosophy of Science, London , 1 965 . Cambri dge : Ca mbridge Un i ve rsit y Pre s s . Wi ne r, B . J. (1971). Statistical princi n les design ( 2nd ed . ). New York : McGraw - Hill Wodtke i n ex u er i mental . , K . H. ( 1964) . Some data on the reliab ilit y and validity of creat ivi ty tests at t h e elementary school le ve l. Educat ional and Psychological Measuremen t, 24 , 399 - 408 . 123 Yamamoto , K. (1965). Effects of restric tio n of range and test unreliability o n cor relations between measures intelligence and creative thinking . Br iti sh Journal Educational Psycho lo gy, 35 , 300 - 305 . P . K . ( 197 8 ). I Q, social competence Zig l er, E ., & Trickett, and evaluat io n of early chi l dhood i ntervent io n programs. American Psychologist , 33 , 789-7 98 . of of , 124 Appendix A Raw Data Note: fixed The data format : are in order according to the followin g 30F2 . 0/F3 . 0 , X, 2Fl . O, X, 9F2.0 , X, Fl . 0,12F2.0 The first card for each subject contains the da t a for the 30 trials on the Muller - Lyer task. The secon d card contains, in order , subject ID , order of trials , and experimenter. The next nine variables are the attention meas ure s . The order for instruction is Equal , Pri mary , Exclusive. The order for Word - Type is Scheme , Related, Unrelated. I nstruction is the slower changing of the t wo re pea ted measures . The next variable is sex , followe d by scores on each of three items for each of the four creativity tests , Alternate Uses , Pattern Meanings , Similarities , and Line Heani ngs . 125 Subject 001 55525053514657484653485542485647485746514649505049524959 001 11 090810120909111008 2040304040504060304040403 Subje~t 002 5351463846464646393839444652394050514046494539494754483 002 10 091006 11 0905091009 5 253 8 4443 Subject 003 625852504548554739455750494948454652505047475250473432633637 003 40 121009110907110906 1080806030503040204030302 Subject 004 454039323638333330323637323132202634253323232525262422171921 004 61 090807111006110908 1080404030403080504040305 Subject 005 585237463743492626344036443147383438324241474943474241423747 005 11 121008101110111108 2040503010302050404020302 Subject 006 57575652485150504746514951535052495352414547505649454243 006 40 080910120810111109 207090702040407070605 0 404 4 244 Subject 007 434750483641405043464850523742453428434950424543454343404546 007 21 090805 11 0707111007 2080704040503040603050608 Subject 008 616164996770585956566148446354645158524 8 50493946484745635350 008 60 08 1008100607100604 2070507030703050304040506 Subject 009 544742405038373844565342464347524543483341354340384029584947 009 32 121010100907121006 108050804060304030506 0 504 Subject 010 69576055565256586057605851585357595451565157605561535 0 1 0 52 091007091006 111 210 2120405030203070302050203 8 585555 Subject 011 6960535257435362495963576852454644544458444652475245474 011 32 090909121108060708 2100505040502060602040304 8 5251 Subject 012 697070695967565847575660575757595961596160605761535759676165 012 10 101006110506090804 1050205020504040704090508 126 Subject 014 586354605454536160595853595954555251546063566066575462614958 014 62 100704100606070802 2080405030202080304040405 Subject 015 575154605260625758595757554656595157605150525351545351515052 0 15 50 070604110406060100 2090504030303080405030403 Subject 016 645460615350535153555852465750505558624743635150575146404545 0 1 6 22 091010121210121010 1090709050505070606060405 Subject 017 373746394736324l36433735404243534148425040505141394540464550 0 17 50 12121111101 0 1211 07 1070605040503040201010304 Subject 018 6364646 16760546068596060646453586060586062616363616356636858 018 10 080709121108111211 2880107060508070907040508 Subject 0 19 655758484946464243514943384242474342444045464140454436484746 019 ' 13 100909090807121109 1110707070809100709030509 Subject 020 514459575660648464445051545454484950504848514951455050545150 020 20 030200050300050001 110 0304010403040503030404 Subject 02 1 374947524242504941384041383835374444463846524245544858444242 021 13 1212121 2111112 1211 2050001999999090304999999 Subject 022 715957636258546154495250454650484840534249404244424549475054 022 43 100709121004120707 1050406010201091117010101 Subject 023 595355484751534962545153625452494940515359535359484254516362 023 50 080401100505070602 2070405030100060402010501 Subject 024 585044443744384644464355484331474544464036454446495051534042 024 33 090707090504100604 1070405020303040407020503 Subject 025 534944475245394546415042464444454347474499504343534348484947 025 40 100808090603100505 2070404020304030202050403 . 127 Subject 026 5768504649164443444557455045525744466152505446524 026 34 050602070301080400 1100809040501100804050503 4 3639362 84 7 Subject 027 535553555444323249524852494245535057444853494749535550504948 027 10 071109091209070704 2110403020001 0 50304030301 Subject 028 474942454841505050544250534448374947385344444048465246515054 028 20 10090712111112110 9 115070602020208 0 503 0 30404 Subject 029 625256614955505459565761575259564859535551515350475251495144 029 34 121008120708121010 2100704040505100708060708 Subject 030 565558535859585452545553515551525151525855565245544653515149 030 44 121007090702110805 10906020405020504040303 02 Subject 031 645759545659626752515855525961675450555354496064645950636365 031 60 100803090306100603 1090706090704070806030406 Subject 032 666364547067656465616457666059585963595457616060616560596058 032 54 111209121111121010 2061006040304050504030504 Subject 033 395313354440444235424143324238373228384129283032282019292829 033 40 070709110905100911 2080203030304080403080607 Subject 034 . 566165575752514955605453537151606264644654476250535654576449 034 10 120607090908101108 108040302030106 05040 104 02 Subject 035 464943213945324744423340312719332931403833232730323328312135 035 15 081107121005111009 2050405030303040505030505 Subject 036 616571493626423741485158444539585242405043484738514046555056 036 30 060906070708100908 2150906030503090606030506 Subject 037 474353474548465056535754475556485257545350494850435249414634 037 45 1111121 212 10121 2 10 1140505050505130 609030303 128 Subject 038 444851554742515647555050474638514338364441383533414541362543 038 50 070300100803080300 1080605030405050507050405 Subject 039 50545555465051494245474236474 039 60 091208070808091009 04 139423844373 83938424138373946 1050206020504070605050804 Subject 040 586867524553445056546045585255666254516454626255586249585961 040 55 111209100908090809 2070505010301080303010404 ·subject 041 20304424283621252617180~210816142308201913162128242113123521 040 30 080403060100110705 1120204050906040405110807 Subject 042 586561616062597066536761565156485364649953413952295328355978 042 10 100809090905100809 2120605040403040506050403 Subject 043 575665676254545758565557575599322120121117991399101013121415 043 11 120909121210110708 1160908070807040306080511 Subject 044 362899999999995599999941999952415250474641434744475044515140 044 50 080500100707070301 2070504030302040405070406 Subject 045 635761626159656365593562636962625660595657586162606355586561 045 61 121110121108110301 2100306010101050810000101 Subject 046 555855565147343836363937354039342933333434353034362325352626 046 30 080702070606080504 11 003030 2020104 0301020305 Subject 047 645050433632445242423949473334344937383850433825434235434848 047 11 080806101107101009 1050405040302040403050504 Subject 049 586164564855555049494852504549445348494849516249465053535549 049 41 1108051106061 00703 2090303020302060505030504 Subject 050 746665546261587358485950556555556459645859526253636156695581 050 31 090607060805060404 2i20303020302060508050408 129 Subject 05 1 5651484959515557585758575355585952565856475851565 15958435051 05 1 46 1 21108100808 120710 222 0806130 708 09 1011 0807 14 Subject 053 65646161606 1606064525658606060614852545650515552656054555452 053 10 060802060509100706 2100404081005050606050507 Subject 054 58465 1484746365440413738424143464539453340363542464436474947 054 26 1211 12 111 20809 1111 1 2525 15040404 1 207 1 5020302 Subject 055 695856535457476054585752505951485048544955485861634964636863 055 66 121111090706090910 1070308040702050204070404 Subject 056 59575157545 16265566054525654645 15 062574963525047364545434641 056 40 111 008 11 0806 111 003 2999999999999 999999999999 Subject 057 6151516054 5557546 1615962626257586264566 057 10 090703040501 111 005 11 00705030304 1606 1 5758605249605560 141213060708 Subject 06 1 484651443841534740474344372741343240414340433942363947353332 061 1 0 0505071 11 008 10 11 08 2070505020404030305030303 Subject 062 384453474748444445404140453647443735434 14 647464939424 062 65 121112121211111007 1050 1020204020 10302020302 1444945 Subject 065 6161615952535251485749555457635954505148555 14857434049454242 065 55 060307090705060604 10403060 1020 103020 1030203 Subject 066 72726552495466584 12 0 29304332373740513727363239364047545 066 45 111110110907091012 1080305030 30305 040305030 Subject 067 474445444543433844425045424342 067 20 080807 11 0908090710 99999 3 454 54743453637404 4424242444243 117091601 020 50307040303 0 2 Subject 068 544947444653434540354050435150564244484542433847412938424543 068 10 101 0060 7 070706 1 209 21 1 0 708040 70 1060706080708 130 Subject 069 6057595457495 16445586445545455504458475350455652605452605854 069 55 060601060403070100 2110505 0 3030305050705 0404 Su b ject 070 555 95450495350445550535 14 94852485147504451495 070 20 111009111108101206 1241 4 17 0504052120 149495248524250 11 040407 Subject 072 57545656484355585146604749505343434644485356484653435 072 50 111 008 1209 09 11 0904 2060406010304050203030307 65 75862 Subject 073 505451504547515448415649444344484952535353484952545152514246 073 20 090809110701110804 1130305030403040606030907 Subject 074 4348575660554754464147494457585345485451565 9 5356534948505053 074 50 040403110708100705 21407 09070806080507060605 Subject 075 655857596658615654585561604759674756515668494948555456564953 075 15 08 1004070604 11 0803 1090706030303060607040205 Subject 076 746768676168686866676767656567666769676967666566676768676665 076 14 120 907 12 11091 012 1 0 209050503050505040206 0609 Subjec t 077 59 54535251424 6505045433643474237444 1435 1434 1434 1403840394036 07 7 1 0 121 008 121 003 1110 09 1070203020202060304020203 Subject 078 5951555256524954555260595562535539404544424645 46484540424355 078 24 100808 12 11 08 10 0708 2120607050502080506040304 Subject 079 444037444447545852464238455149534848404449383940433846434046 079 20 071007 10 1009060409 113121209070805 0408080909 Subject 08 1 525065695353566074484953566857635347554844534851485342625762 08 1 44 080704080302090604 2050503040201030302050305 Subject 083 424743423246494242404146424543474546414744464044394 083 20 100504 10 111 0090602 11208 09050504090708020406 1 56354 152 131 Subject . 084 60585557525350 515 448514747505 85 15153444 448424 152495340484251 084 13 '12 12 1 2 1009 1 2 111 0 1 0 10604060202020502040 10302 Sub ject 085 43435046545063665856365231555349575547544749564 45066 52474140 085 63 070503040402040301 205980300020 19804020 10 204 Subject 086 486364586 2556 2585560666862586357 57 51 536155 64565454576 086 53 1112 0809 101 00709 10 2 13 0506090406030502040405 Subj ect 087 51534954505151485248505049484949445254515350555449 08 7 20 - 111010121104120907 20504030103010402010101 1545752 42485 15 453 02 Subject 089 555354465047524851505 054495259526057535048555550545255524954 . 089 10 11 0905 111 009 100806 210061403070607070 9060608 Subject 090 4938414555494746454545404449353448394950 4 345403 9404338404 090 32 12 1212111208 1 21 11 2 1090 7100207050604 08030405 141 Subject 09 1 68 51 64646862655546545658585448424236403536323654486154435347 09 1 30 0604020501020 10401 20906040303030704 04030302 Subject 092 595953525458524857535149575 092 62 110 809060707090809 85558545457 545 5525 7545 65 1 53565357 217151407071112 0809120508 Subject 093 5157 .52565460515556555 65 4465047435549465350475557575 093 52 100707080804040902 108031 102030 1050305020 954544550 4 04 . Subject O 94 58495251525049535 1 565 151 50555556545143484 8 564847484 094 20 080507 120904120804 2070406020403060705030202 649464849 Subject 095 . 47454442504744414940354 44 1444535203420 17223 432 3026 4736333032 095 62 090805110607070801 1050203989898060304010201 Subject 096 71605352595247505555525249425152525454565 864 58 42484364464260 096 1 0 07050 1 080705 11 0701 2100604040404060606060 806 132 Subject 097 514551483748304143453544384349503855474441464536525045385150 097 12 08080 71 0 11 06 10 0908 2 14 10040 10404060306030303 Subject 099 715 25945525 1455 0 39545 556 545 157 494347 51 5054525254534438394954 099 42 1111121 2 1208 111110 2050402020100030302020304 Subje ct 1 00 505763716359625655444750615437433946475656583941574947464542 100 42 121008100606 121 209 1100305030403060402020503 Subjec t 101 585654556056625852585962545558545 15 95454585564535354686 1 0 1 50 090912090706080904 2070503020201040305010302 15 754 Subject 1 02 545553515859545960576062655762586358656057565660595456595961 10 2 66 121210 121 2 1111100 9 112 0307040504040406060607 Subject 103 4645493938454 131 34372827362827384032344536404 142383234393934 1 03 50 080405100703050401 205020 1020 104040304020403 Subject 104 767066706969 7161 63686870676976797574797375707 17 0 7 2687472657 1 04 36 100606081003090807 2080506040202060607050204 Subject 106 495245454842474947504650464848514441465256534353495353474951 1 06 40 11 1209 1111 09 12 12 09 1060206010101050301030201 Subject 107 615857495 15 1384945554842424447404637404 14343494 8494249484444 107 56 11111112 1111111012 .2220406050502170815040807 Subject 108 394738383537353333293436403330363528313633383532353525352423 108 1 7 101010 1008 1211 1207 2080405030304090707040303 Subject 109 495048464841464345484 1464341414 14 143444846474847474650453846 109 50 11 0909121010090710 2110303020209051008040604 Subject 1 10 605556644952554552515259555155555354545557585550535553535653 110 50 100 8 10111008100604 21004050 80912090506060914 1 133 Subject 111 545053525153495152495254494946494949474446515048555051555450 111 4 7 12121010120 2 1211 07 1060208020303040302020306 . Subject 112 515446414 84 2454 84939464440394839404042394 1423636383444293227 112 60 111009110806110706 2150705040807090700060510 Subject 113 615959545 6 535 35554 53575 65551 535146 49534649504645474849 113 27 12121112121 212 12 1 2 11 409 12 030402070504040403 5 04750 Subject 114 . 544651424746434746444743414635454043434441494241404246434339 114 27 1212101112091 2 12 07 2160404030203050304010303 Subject 115 424131313741433736403940414344354135322842373931283734364541 115 20 121 009 120 808 1 2 1110 105020 7040406050403060605 Subject 11 6 . 86949292929 390 92909291 879 19197 8 7838886888 1878986828282828588 11 6 27 120906121109111109 2231210010101090810010101 Subject 11 8 495449494 5495 0544554444950404353495052505 1515 352 51 5351565251 118 50 12 0707121 1 06100709 2080704030201090503020504 Subject 11 9 495246494048494440474448494551514949465143464554505052495048 119 17 08050709 1005 100908 2220905050307060508080509 134 Appendix 'l'ables B 1 35 Tab l e 5 Mea ns a n d Sta n d a r d Dev iat ion s o n Wor d Recogn i t i on Sco r es : Cre at i vity L ev el X Wor d - Type X I nst r uction Cr eat i v i ty Leve l Low Wor d -Ty p e (n = 32 ) Med iu m (n = 35 ) · Hi gh (n = 3 3 ) 9 .-75 ( 2 . 36 ) ( l. 79 ) 9 . 64 ( 2 . 26) Rel a t ed 8 - 81 ( 2 . 85 ) 8 . 31 ( 2 . 34 ) 8 . 64 ( 2 . 28) Unr e l at e d 7 . 72 ( 3 . 06 ) 6 . 91 (2 . 86 ) 7 . 27 (3 . 20) Sc heme 10 .1 6 ( 1 . 63 ) 9 . 97 ( l. 96 ) 9 . 94 ( 2 . 30 ) 8 . 56 ( 2 . 60 ) 8 . 26 ( 2 . 42) 8 . 85 ( 2 . 99) 6 . 25 ( 2 . 96 ) 6 . 34 ( 2 . 63) 7 . 67 ( 2 . 77 ) ( 2 . 00 ) (2.60 ) ( 1. 54 ) Related 8 . 38 ( 2 . 88 ) 8 . 09 ( 2 . 97) 8 . 61 ( 2 . 37 ) Unr e l ated 6 . 28 (3 . 00 ) 6 . 17 ( 3 . 43 ) 7 . 67 ( 3 . 19 ) Sc heme 9 . 43 EQUAL ATTENTI ON PRI MARY Rel ated ATTENTI ON Unr elat ed -----------------------------------------------------------9 . 34 10.24 Sc heme 9 . 75 EXCLUSI VE ATTENT ION ------------------------------------------------------------ 136 Table Summary Table Creativity of Measures the 6 Canonical and Correlation Attention Between (N Variables = 104) -------------------------------------------.---------------Number * Eigen value Canonical Correlation Lambda Degrees Freedom Chi Square l .22 1 6 . 4708 . 5638 36 52.72* 2 - 1433 . 3785 • 7243 24 29 . 67 3 .12 1 2 . 3482 . 8456 14 15 . 44 4 . 0379 . 1948 . 9621 6 3 . 56 p < • 05 . 137 Table Test for Trend Over 7 Muller-Lyer Sum of Squares Trials D. F . ( N = 1 00 ) r.iean Square F ------------------------~--------------------------------21 . 99** 3153.16 9 350.35 Trial Error 1 3911.30 8773 Linear Error 2288 . 37 3816 . 92 97 · Quadratic Error 567.31 2336 .7 9 97 Cubic Error 99.71 1762.09 97 Quartic Error 94 . 22 1642.51 97 Quintic Error 66 . 48 1006 . 15 97 Sextic Error 33.77 892 . 52 97 2.48 10 00 . 50 97 Septenary Erro r o.oo 1 l 1 1 l l l 15.9 4 269716 . 80 39 . 35 361 . 35** 567 . 31 24.09 23 . 55 ** 99.71 5.49* 18 .1 7 94.22 16.93 5 . 56* 66 . 48 10.37 6 . 41* 33 . 77 9 . 20 3 . 67 2 . 48 10 . 31 0 . 24 Octenary Error o.oo 97 7.48 o.oo 725 . 77 Nonie Error 0.82 728 . 03 l 0 - 82 7 .51 0 .11 97 * ** p p < • 05 < . 001 l 138 Table Summary Between Numbe r Table Creativity Eigen value of the Measures Canonical Correlation 8 Canonical and . Correlation Slope Scores Lambda ( N = 100) Degrees Free d o m Chi Sq uare ----------------------------------------------------------- Note. the l -1 057 -3251 .7772 24 23 - 32 2 .0763 .2762 - 86 9 1 15 12 - 98 3 . 0539 . 2321 -940 8 8 5 . 64 4 . 0056 - 0747 - 9944 3 0 - 52 The first E < • 05 level canon i cal of probabilit correlation y. is not significant at 13 9 Table Summary Between Numbe r Table Atte nt ion Ei gen va lu e of the Measures 9 Canon ical and Correlation Slope Canonical Correlation Lambda Scores ( N =1 00) Degrees Freedom ChiSq uare ----------------------------------------------------------1 .1 426 . 3776 .653 8 54 38 . 25 2 .1113 . 3336 . 7625 40 24 . 40 3 . 0778 . 2788 . 8580 28 13.7 8 4 . 0394 .1984 . 9303 18 6 . 50 5 . 0250 .1 581 . 9685 10 2 . 88 6 - 006 7 - 0820 . 9933 4 0 .61 Note . The first canon i cal the p < • 05 leve l of correlation probability . is not significant at 1 40 App endix Frequencies In the Matched Sets En gl ish of Scheme, of C Occurr ence Language Relatea, for ana tne Three Unrel ated ~o ras Note: Words above the broken lines appear bot h in the listed words and among th e flashea words . Words b elow t h e broken lines a pp ear only in the liste d woras , not among the fl a shed words. 141 ·set Scheme 1: Words Words That Are Unrelated --- The Names Of Foods Words apple· suit (294) cheese (236) soup (122) potato (30) steak (99) bacon (515) bread ( 127) turkey (12) chili ( 28) cod (88) bean (92) crac ker (25) (292) court (236) harbor (121) ribbon (29) spout (100) meadow (511) hat ( 12 7) wax (12) gutter (27) oasis (90) organ (90) coop (24) sausage va rnish Related Woras meal ( 286_) pan (240) stove (122) fork (29) menu (103) feast (497) kitchen (128) picn ic (12) spatula (26) snack ( 90 ) spoon (92) pantry (25) toaster ( 16) ( 16) (16) radish falcon grocer ( 14) melon ( 16) prune ( 8) ( 14) orchid (16) tepee ( 8) (14) cafe (15) grill (8) 142 Set Scheme Words 2: Words That Are Unrelated The Names Of Vehi6 l es Word s Re lat ed Hor<is auto (39) rocket (242) jet (221) bicycle ( 182) canoe (1 64) van ( 35) yacht (1 6 ) sled (104) truck (410) taxi ( 43) ferry (41) train (55 6 ) g rove (39) factory ( 23 7) mail (203) soup (1 84 ) hay (171) hoe ( 33) corpse (16) guitar (1 06 ) army (412) quartz (43) flap (36) root (568) pedal ( 39) traffic (242) motor ( 198) horn ( 185) pi l ot ( 167) toll ( 33) bumper . ( 17) cargo ( 106) wheel (418) mast (41) car ( 35 ) gas ( 583) glider ( 38) ship ( 1021) bus ( 345) tractor ( 4 7) cocoon (34) moon (1046) plate (346) scarf (50) motal (34) road (1106) station ( 341) fare ( 54) 143 Set Sche me Words 3: Words That Unrelated Are The Name s Of Anima ls Wor ds Re lated words panther jade (21) zebra (25) turtle (1 04 ) cat ( 620 ) mule (7 6 ) camel (72) fox (163) tiger (11 2 ) (21) suite (26) la p (1 05 ) cover ( 604 ) b r ook (7 6 ) novel ( 71) porch (1 68 ) hook (112) candy ( 256) ac i d (140) tent (208) marsh (52) r (2 0 ) claw (25) feather (106) tail (620) paw ( 77) po r k (74) ro ar (167) s table (11 4 ) wool ( 255) zoo ( 139) ba r k (204) rodeo (52) p ig fort wing ( 142 ) gopher ( 11) elk (24) lion ( 264) ( 140) wig (11) a l tar (24) cave ( 264 ) cow ( 263) wolf ( 139) pony (21 0 ) moose ( 52) antle • (1 39 ) hoo f ( 11) snout ( 24) fur (25 9 ) 144 Appe ndix Instructions D 145 Consent Form This experiment is a stu dy of various perceptua l characteristics . It has th r ee ca rts to i t . TI1e first cart involves looking at words wh ich ... will be flashed very briefly on a TV screen and trying to reco gn ize the words when the y are flashed . Because this part of the stud y n ece ssi t at es w~tching flashing light s you should no t volunteer for it if you are bothered by flashing lig h ts o r susce pt i b l e to se i zures. I n the seco nd part of t he st udy su b jects will be comparing lin es of vari ou s lengths and tryin~ to -match them for size. The third par t will b e completing a paper and p encil questionnaire . The first two parts will take a bout ha lf an hou r altogether The third oa rt is ooen en- ded , it has no time li mits . You ... ... may s p end as much or as little time working on it as you like . Try to leave yourself a goo d c hunk of t i me for th is part tho u gh , so you don't have to break away wh ile you are st ill working at it. You may find the q u e sti o ns fun to answer and n ot wan t to l eave before y ou are satisfied that you a re done . . We are i nte reste d in how people in g eneral perf or m on these tasks and answer these quest ions, not i n your performance in pa rtic •ular , or that of any other in d ivid ua l. All of you r responses wi ll be kept confi dentia l . Only the data on the group as a whol e will be re p or ted , no t that of any i nd i vid ual. Only the exp eri mente r s wi ll see any identifying data o r any individual i nfo r mation , not your teachers or your class mates or anyone else. · If you decide t o volun tee r for this s tudy and co me during the sch ed uled time y o u will receive ten ex tra point s toward you r final course grade . You are f r ee to wit hd r aw from the study at any time i f for any reason you chose n o t to continue . After the resul t s of the study have been co mp i led you will receive a letter explain i ng th e f i ndings . You will a lso h ave a c hance to meet with t he exper i emnter at that ti me if you have any quest i ons or if you des ire any additional i nfo r mat i on . If you d ecide to par ticipate in th is experiment, please si g n yo ur name b elow and return this form . I ag ree to pa rtici pate i n the study described above. unders tan d I may withdraw at any time i f I so choose Name : Date: I . 146 Initial Thank you for Instructions volunteering Please read the experiment will to fo1 ·1owing not begin help instructions until you to Subjects out with are this study. carefully. ready . In this part of the study , you will first b e looking list of words on a TV screen. You will b e given instructions on how to study the list . The at a Next , some of the words from t he list will be flashed on the screen -- very briefly -- one at a ti ine . The words will be flashed in the middle of a b ox. There will be an arrow on either side of the box , pointing to the spot where the word wil 1 be. Your job is to try to reco9nize the word when it is flashed and to say the word out loud. Remember to be looking as you press the button. right at the area between the arrows Otherw i se you might miss t he word. -- don't get discouraged i f you find you are missing many of the words. The task is difficult and you will not be ab le to recognize all of the words , but try to conce ntr ate on each one . -- if you have ask the assistant p ress the b utton any questions , reread the instructions for help. Hhen you are ready to and the example will beg in . start or , 147 Instructions to Experimenters 1 ) Give the subject a copy of the consent form to read and sign. Subject may choose to leave if he or sh~ would rather not s i gn . Return s i gned consent form to designated file. 2 ) P l ace a check sub j ect ' s name to 3) the on the list of subjects show that the subject Wr ite the i nformation subject ' s id# (taken 4 ) Give questions the sub j ect the but t r y not to next came . to the on the examp l e sheet, including from the list of subjects) . initial instructions give any additional . Answer any informat i on. 5 ) On the keyboard type "r un atten ". Don ' t fo r get the space between "run" and " at ten " and remember to press the " return " key after typing the words . 6 ) As the record the subject responses attempts to recognize the example as either correct or wrong . words, 7) After the last example word, count the number correct. If it is l ess than e i ght then press the "y" to repeat the example and record the responses again . If the total correct is eight or more, then as~ the subject if he/she wishes to repeat the example . If yes , press the 'y ' and record responses again . I f no , press the 'n' and go on to the next step. Do not repeat the example more than twice. 8) Read the genera l i nstructions . 9 ) Read the instruction set indicated by the computer, filling in the word in the blank as i ndicated by the computer. Do the same f or all three sets of instructions. 10) Press 11) the Record the order of any key to go on. instructions Enter the subject's id# comp uter , as indicated. (from 1 2) Answer any quest ions about subject reads the instructions on the the example example the second part on the screen . sheet) after sneet onto the . 148 13) Add up t o tals on the first workin g on the second p art . part while 14) When the subject is done , hand him/her and direct him /h er into another room where on it. subjects the he/sh are third part e ca n work 149 Genera l Instructional Sets Read Instructions (after the By the Expe r imenter example) Now we wi ll do the sa me thing with a l onger list of ~ords. The list wil l be on the screen fo r about 40 seconds , enough time for you to look at each word at least once . Spec i fic I nstructions (rea d each Give Equ al when com puter indicates ) Attention Some of the words in the 1 is t that follows are related . rrhey are the names of ____ The r est are un rel ated wo r d s. Howe ver, an equa l numbe r of the words wh i ch will be flashed are th e names of ---~ and unrel ated words. So t r y to g ive the same amount of attent ion to each word so thatyou 9-on ' t miss the unrela ted words when they are f l ashed . Gi ve More Attention Many of the words that will be flashed are the names of and some will be unrelated words . So try to g i ve more atten tion to the words tha t are the names of and not as much to the unre la t e d wor d s. Gi ve All i-iost of attention try nor Attention the words that will be flashed are the n ames of and a few are un related words . So g i ve a ll of your to the words tha t are the name s of --=--- - - anct to be d i stracted b y the unrelated words . · 150 Appendix Listing of E Comput er Programs 1 5.1 Attention Deployment Program 40 LOHEM: 1 6800 : HONE: HCOLOR = 3 50 S = PEEK ( 768) : I F S= 32 GOTO 1 20 60 PR I NT "BLOAD CLOCK" 12 0 PRINT " FIRS'r THE EXAMPLE WORD LIS'r" 130 PR I NT "WILL BE DIS PLAYED": PRINT 14 0 PRI NT "ST UDY ALL THE WORDS SO THAT" 150 PRINT "YOU CAN RECOGNIZE ANY O:NE" 160 PRINT "W--rlENI T IS FLASHED": VTAB (8) 170 PR I NT "PRESS THE BUT'I'ON AL"\J'D THE" 180 PRINT " EXAHPLE WORD LIST WILL APPEAR" 190 L = 6 : GOSUB 6000 200 HGR: VTAB ( 6 ) 2 10 FOR A = 1 TO 12 250 READ A$ : PR I NT A$ 260 I F A/3 = I NT ( A/3 ) THEN PRINI1 270 NEXT A 275 POKE - 16303,0 : POKE - 1630 1, 0 280 POKE 775 ,1 97 : POKE 781 , 60 : CALL 768 311 GOSUB 1500 315 POKE - 16300,0 : POKE - 163 03 , 0 320 VTAB ( 21) 330 PRINT "THE WORDS WILL BE FLASHED" 340 PR I NT "I N THE r-IIDDLE OF THIS BOX" 350 PRINT " ( PRESS THE BUTTON TO CONTI NUE)" 360 POKE -1 6304 , 0 365 GOSUB 6000 367 POKE - 163 00 , 0 : POKE -1 6303 , 0 3 70 HOME: PRINT "PRESS THE BUTTON A.ND THE" 380 PRINT " FLASHED EXAMPLE WORDS WILL START" 390 PRI NT " ( FOCUS YOUR EYES I N THE AREA mmRE " 39 1 PRI NT " THE BOX WAS BEFORE YOU PRESS 'l'HE BUTTON) " 394 FOR A = 1 TO 10 395 VTAB (10): HTAB (13): PRI NT" - >" <-" 397 GOSUB 6000 400 IF A< 9 AND A/2 <> INT (A/2 ) THEN L = L - 1 4 10 I F A> 7 ORD> 0 THEN L = 1 420 POKE - 16304 , 0 : POKE - 16302 , 0 : POKE -1 6300 , 0 430 READ A$ 440 VTAB (10): HTAB (I NT(20 - (L EN ( A$)/2 ) )) 450 PRINT A$: POKE - 16303, 0 : POKE -1 6300 , 0 470 POKE 775, 80 : POKE 781,L: CA.LL 768 480 POKE - 16304 , 0 : POKE - 16297 , 0 500 POKE 781 , 1 : CALL 768 519 HOME 520 POKE - 16300 , 0 : POKE - 16303,0 530 PRINT "SAY THE WORD OUT LOUD" 540 PRINT "I F YOU RECOGNIZED IT" 5 50 VTAB ( 5) : PR I NT "WHEN YOU ARE READY TO CONTI NUB" 570 PRI NT "PRESS TliE BUTTON" 590 I F F > 0 THEN RETURN 152 595 600 610 630 640 670 680 740 750 760 770 800 80 5 8 10 900 910 972 985 990 995 1 000 1010 102 0 1 030 1040 1050 1060 1 0 70 1 080 110 0 1 120 1130 1140 1200 121 0 1220 123 0 1232 124 0 1250 1255 1257 1265 126 6 1267 1 270 127 1 1275 1278 1279 12 8 0 GOSUB 6000 PRINT " THE WORD WAS II;: PRI NT A$ VTAB ( 3 ): PRINT " PRESS THE BUTTON TO S'rART " PRI N'i' "T HE NEXT EXAMPLE WORD" NEXT A HOME: PRI NT " THAT WA8 THE LAS T EXAHPLE \WRD" VTAB ( 4 ): PRINT " REPE AT THE EXAMPLE? ( Y OR bi )" POKE 49168 , o : · GET B$: HOME IF B$ = "Y" THEN RESTORE : D = l: GOTO 200 IF B$ = " N " THE N GO'fO 800 GOTO 740 IF F > l GOTO 900 PRI NT " EXPERIMENTER : READ GENERAL I NST RUC'i'I OL,iS " PRI NT : PR I NT "F OLL OWED BY : 11 : P RI NT: PRIN'r . FOR F = l TO 3 GOSUB 15 80 C$( 1) = " FOODS ": C$(2) = "A N I MALS" : C $ (3) = " VEH I CLES " r-1$( 1) = " EQUAL " : M$ ( 2 ) = " MOI-<E": 1-1$ ( 3) = "ALL" PR I NT II A'l"l'ENT I OL\J " PR I NT " G I VE ";: PR I NT M$ ( H );: PR I N'r : PR I NT " WORDS THA'r ARE THE NAiviES OF II;: PR I.NT C$ (N) GET B$ HOME : PRINT " PRESS THE BUTTON AND '£HE " PR I NT " LIS T OF WORDS WILL BE PRE S ENTED " GOSUB 6000 POKE -1 6304 , 0 : POKE - 1 6302 , 0 : POKE -1 6298 , 0 FORD = l TO 12 PRINT FOR L = l T O 34 STEP 11 READ A$ : PRINT A$ ; HTAB (L): I F L > # ) TH EN PRINT NEXT L , D POKE -1 6303 , 0 : POKE - 16300 , 0 POKE 775 , 255· : POKE 7 8 1,247: CALL 768 : HOHE PRINT " PRE SS THE BUTTON AND •rHE " PRINT "FLASHED WORDS WILL ST ART " POKE -1 629 7, 0 : FOSUB 1 500 FORE = l TO 3 6 <- " V TAB ( 1 0 ): HTAB ( 13): PRIN T " - > GOSUB 395 .NEXT E GOSUB 6000 N EXT F d"l'AB ( 1 3 ) : PRINT "I NS'l' RUC'l' IO NS" : PRE\f '.f' PR I NT " EQ=";: PRINTMl , : PRINT " PR =; PR I NT t-12 ,: PR I NT " EX=";: PR I NT 1'1 PR I NT : PR I NT " EXPERIMENTER: PRE SS A KEY TO "; PR I NT "CO NTINUE " . POKE 49 1 68 , 0: GET B$ PR I NT : PRIN T " PRE SS THE BUT'I'ON TO GO ON " GOSUB 6000 PRI NT " RUN ML2 " 153 1290 15 00 1501 1510 1520 1530 1570 1580 15 9 0 1600 1615 1620 1630 1631 1640 1650 16 60 1690 1692 2010 2020 2030 21 10 2115 2120 2125 2130 2135 2140 2145 215 0 2155 2160 2175 2180 2185 2187 2190 2195 2197 2198 2215 2220 2225 2230 2235 2240 2245 2250 2255 227 5 END HPLOT 91,60 TO 16 8 , 60 TO 168 , 93 TO 9 1,93 TO 91 , 60 FOR Y = 60 TO 8 2 STEP ~l FOR X = 91 TO 162 STEP 7 HPLOT X, Y TO (X + 7) , (Y + 11) HPLOT X, (Y + 11) TO (X + &) , Y NEXT X,Y: RETURN I F F = 3 THEN M = 6 - Ml - M2: N = 6 - Nl - I N'1( lO*RND (0)): GOTO 1640 f'1 = I NT ( 10 *RND( Z ) ) IF M < 1 ORM> 3 OR M = Ml GOTO 159 0 N = I NT ( ! ) *Rl\J"D (Z ) ) IF N < 1 ORN> 3 OR N = Nl GOTO 1615 IF F = ! "THEN Ml = B: -N = Nl IF F = 2 THEN M2 = M N = ( (N - 1) * 84) + 22 RESTORE FOR A= 1 TON : READ A$ : NEXT A + 1 N = (( N - 21)/84) RETURN DATA LANP, TOWEL, FI J~LD, CI'rY, SNOW,CAP, ROPE, Box, RADIO, Pos·r DATA BRICK, TREE, CAP, TREE,CITY , ROPE, TOWEL, POST,RADIO DATA LAMP,S NOW,BRICK DATA FEAST, SAUSAGE, SPOUT, STEAK, COOP DATA HARBOR,BREAD , PICNIC,PANTRY DATA ORCHID, GRILL, GUTTER, SPOON DATA TOASTER, BEAN, RIBBON·, PAN DATA TEPEE, KITCHEN,CAFE,SNACK, HAT DATA CHEESE, APPLE,CRACKER, VARNISH DATA BACON, MEADOW , FORK, COURT DATA ORGAN, RADISH,SUIT,FALCO N DATA MELON, STOVE, MEAL,WAX, MENU DATA PRUNE, COD,SPATULA, CHILI , GROCER DATA SOUP,TURKEY,POTATO,OASIS DATA MEAL, PICNIC,BREAD , 1'-i EADOW DATA POTA"ro , OASIS , BACON, SNACK DATA TURKEY,SPOUTWAX , COD,GUTTER DATA SUIT , STOVE, COURT, GROCER DATA STEAK, MENU, FORK, RADISH, SOUP DATA FALCON, PAN,HAT, CHEESE,KITCHBN DATA TEPEE, SPATULA, CHILI,APPLE,FEAST DATA RIBBON, HARBOR,GRILL,PRUNE DATA PONY,COW,TIGER, FUR,ANTLER DATA ACID, PANTHER,PAW,BARK, WOLF DATA JADE, PORCH,LAP, LIO N,COVER DATA CANDY,WOOL,FORT,MARSH , WIG DATA STABLE, PORK, CAVE, WI NG, HOOSE DATA CAT,ROAR, FOX, ZEBRA, BROOK DATA HOOK, TENT, ELK,SNOUT,TURTLE DATA MULE, GOPHER, CLAW, ZOO, PIG, CAI-IEL , HOOF, RODE), SUITE DATA Tail,NOVEL,FEATHER,ALTAR,PO NY,TAIL , NOVEL, CAHEL DATA WOO L, FOX, WOLF , TENT, SUITE , cow , PORK 1 154 2280 DATA STABLE,TURTLE,PA W, LAP,HOOK 2285 DATA CANDY, PANTH E R , FEATHER , RODEO 2290 DATA BROOK ,CO VER , MARSH , ROAR , ZOO 2292 DATA JADE,ANTLER,ACID, f.'IULE,CLA W 2295 DATA ZEBRA,CAT, BARK , t-!OOSE, PORCH , TIGER 2305 DATA ROOT,SLED, ROCKET , MOON ,T RUCK 2310 DATA QUARTZ,PILOT, MOTEL,PEDAL,AR MY 2315 DATA AUTO, BUMPER, SCARF, TRACTOR , CAl"\iOE 2320 DATA ROAD , TAXI,TOLL,TRAFFIC,JET 2325 DATA GLIDER,OAR,GROVE, HA I L,FAC'I'ORY 2330 DATA ST ATIO N ,C ARGO , SHIP , BUS , FER RY 2335 DATA MAST ,F LAP ,C OCOON , FARE , TRA I N 2340 DATA WHEEL, VAN , HORN , PLATE , YACHT 2345 DATA SIL K,GU ITA R , HAY , GAS , CORPSE 2350 DATA BICYCLE , MOTOR, HOE , PI LOT, TAXI, GUITAR , 'i'RAFF IC, S IL K 2365 DATA TOLL,FACTORY , TRAI N ,J ET , ROCKET 2370 DATA AUTO , OAR , BUMPER , CAliOE , YACHT 2375 DATA SLED,C ARGO , ROOT , BICYCLE , CAl~OE,Y ACHT 2380 DATA PEDAL ,T RUCK , CORPSE , HAY, VAN 2385 DATA FERRY , MAIL, HOE , FLAP , ARMY, WHEEL 2390 DATA HORN ,G AS ,G ROVE , MAST, QUARTZ 3110 PRINT "K.Kf EQUAL NUMBER OF THE WORDS" 3120 PRINT "T HAT WILL BE FLASHED ARE 'rHE " PR I NT C$; 3 13 0 PR I NT "NAMES OF ";: 3 14 0 PRINT . " AND UNRELATED WORDS": PR I NT 11 314 5 PRINT II SO, AS YOU ARE STUDYI NG THE 3150 PRINT "LIST OF WORDS, GIVE AN EQUAL " 3160 PRINT "AMOUNT OF ATTENT I ON TO THE " 3 17 0 PRIN T " WORDS THAT ARE THE NAMES OF " 3 180 PR I NT C$; : PRI NT " AND TO THE UNRELATED \·lQRDS " 3190 PRINT : PR I NT " ONCE AGA I N , GIVE THE SAN E AMOUNT " 3200 PRI NT "OF AT TENTIO N TO ALL OF THE HORDS " 3500 RETURN 42 1 0 PR I NT " MAi.."i JY OF THW WORDS THAT WILL " 422 0 PRINT " BE FLA SHE D ARE THE i'JA.1. "iES OF "; 4230 PRI NT C$ ;; ... 4235 PRINT " AND S OME OF 'THE WORDS ARE UNRELAT ED" 4240 PRI NT : PRI NT II SO , AS YOU ARE STUDY I NG 'r HE LIST" 4245 PRIN T "OF WORDS THAT FOLLOWS," 4250 PRINT "GI VE MORE ATTE NTI ON TO WORDS " 11 4270 PR I NT "T HAT ARE THE NAMES OF · ; 4280 P R INT C$; : PR I NT 4290 PRINT " AND LESS TO THE UNRELATED WORDS " 4500 RETURN 5310 PRI NT " MOS"r OF T HE WORDS T HAT WILL" 5320 PR I NT " BE FLASHED ARE THE NAMES OF "7 5330 PRINT C$ . 5340 PR I NT " AND A FE.WARE FRO M THE UNREL A'fED "; 5350 PRINrr II WORDS ": PRii \J'i' 5360 PRI NT II SO AS YOU ARE STUDYING THE L I S'l1 OF " 537 0 PR I NT " WORDS THA'r FOL LOWS, GIVE ALL OF YOUR" 5 38 0 PRI NT II AT 'fENT I ON TO THE WORDS 'r HAT ARE THE" 1 55 5390 54 1 0 5430 5440 5450 6000 6002 6006 60 1 0 6020 PR I NT C$ ; : PR I N"r II AbJD TRY N OT TO" PRI N'r " NAMES OF 11 ;: PRIN 'r " BE DI STRACTED BY THE UNRELATED WORDS " PR I NT : PR I NT " W::t--J:E N THE WORDS ARE F L ASHED , HOWEVER , 11 PR I N'r "BE SURE '1'0 SAY ALOUD ANY ·woRD " PR I NT " THA'r YOU TH I NK YOU RECOGNI ZE ": RETURN Z = PEE K (-1 6286) : POKE -1 6368 , 0 IF Z > 1 27 GOTO 6000 Z = PE EK (-1 6286 ) : POKE -1 6368 , 0 I F Z < 1 28 GOTO 6006 HOME : RETURN 156 90 100 110 113 114 115 116 118 119 1 20 130 140 150 1 60 1 70 1 80 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 205 210 220 230 24 0 250 260 270 280 290 300 31 0 315 319 32 0 325 330 344 N uller - Lyer Illusion Program HO.ME PRI NT " THAT IS THE END OF THE FIRS 'l' P AR'f OF T HE STUDY" PRINT :PRI NT :PRINT " EN'.I'ER SUBJECT I D# AND PRESS ' RE'TURH ' KEY" I NPUTS$: PRI NT PRI NT 8 $ PRI NT " SUBJECT ID # = ";: PRI NT " CORRECT? ( ENTER 'Y' OR ' N ')" GE'l' SCK$: IF SCK$ < > "Y" THEN GOTO 11 1 SUBJECT= VAL (S$) HOME PRINT "IN THE N EXT P ART YOU WILL BE LOOKI NG AT " PRUTT "T WO SECTIO NS OF A Lii. 'JE AND" PRINT " ADJUST I NG THE LE NGTH OF ONE PART" PRI NT " OF THE Li bJE UNT I L I 'I' IS THE SAHE " PRINT "LEl."\JGTHAS THE FIRST PART": PRI NT PRI NT "YOU WILL . BE ABLE '1'0 CHANGE 'fH E " PR I NT "LENGTH OF THE LI NE BY TURNI NG THE" P RI NT "DIAL ON THE CON'I'ROL YOU HAVE BE EN USI NG" PRI NT : PRI NT " YOU WILL B E DOI NG 3 0 T RI ALS>" PRI NT "IT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT BUT IT WILL ONLY" PRI NT "TAKE A FE W MI NUT ES, SO T RY TO " PRI NT " CONCENTRATE ON EACH ONE": i?RI Wi' PRINT "T HE ASSISTAt. \J'T WILL H ELP YOU" PRI NT "IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS" : P RI NT PRI NT " PRESS THE BUTTON TO BEGI N " Z = PEEK (-1628 6 ): IF Z > 127 GOTO 2 00 GOTO 1 98 POKE -1 6368,0: HGR: DIM A(3 0 ) HOME HCOLOR = 3 HPLOT 0,90 TO 111,90 HPLOT 1 5 , 75 TO 1 , 90 T O 15,105 HPLOT 95 , 75 TO 111,90 TO 95 ,1 05 I F B > 0 THEN RETUR N FOR B = 1 TO 30 PRI NT : PRI NT : PRINT : V TAB (24): P RI NT 31 - B I F X < 112 GOTO 290 HCOLOR = 0 : W = X: GOSUB 910 HCOLOR = 3 X = I NT (1000 * RND (1)) IF X < 12 0 OR X > 25 0 THEN GOTO 300 IF (X - W)A2 < 25 GOTO 30 0 XO= PDL (1) W = X: GOSUB 900 Xl = PDL (l) > 0 GOTO 325 IF (X - XO) * (X - Xl) 'v'l = X 3 4 6 HCOLOR = 0: GOSUB 9 00 34 7 HCOLOR = 3 34 8 IF Xl = 0 T HEN GOSUB 21 0 35 0 X = PD L (l) 157 353 355 356 400 4 10 411 412 413 4 14 415 416 417 4 19 420 500 505 506 50 7 508 509 510 511 520 530 540 590 600 610 6 20 690 700 710 720 725 730 732 733 734 740 745 746 750 899 900 910 930 Z = PEEK (-162 86 ): If Z > 127 THEN GOSUB 4 10: GO'rO 500 IF (X - Xl)A2 < 2 GOTO 350 I F X < 112 GOTO 350 W = X : GOSUB 900 HCOLOR = 0: W = Xl IF X < 1 1 2 THEN HPLOT 112, 90 TO 255 , 90 : GOTO 4 13 HPLOT X, 90 TO W, 90 GOSUB 9 10 I F Z > 127 THEN RETURN HCOLOR = 3 I F Xl < 113 THEN GOSUB 210 HPLOT 111,90 TO X , 90 Z = PEEK (-162 86 ): I F Z > 127 GOTO 500 X 1 = X : GOTO 3 5 0 POKE -1 6368 , 0 HCOLOR = 0: HPLOT 112, 90 TO 255,90 FOR F = -1 TO 1 W = X + F I F W > 111 'rHEN GOSUB 910 NEXT F IF ( W - Xl)A2 > 2 THEN W = Xl A(B ) = W FOR C = 1 TO 3 FORD = 1 TO 1 0 : S = PEEK (-1 6336 ): Next D NEXT C,B POKE -1 6302 , 0 FOR B = 1 TO 30 PRINT A(B );: PR I NT NEXT B PR I NT II CHAIN Tourr " D$ = CHR$ (4) P RI NT D$ ; "APP END OUT PRI NT D$; "WRITE OUT" PRINT SUBJECT FOR B = 1 TO 30 X = 255 - A (B) PRI NT X NEXT B PRINT D$; " CLOSE OUT" HOME : TEXT POKE -1 6301 , 0 PR I NT " END PART II " END HPLOT 1 12 , 90 TO W, 90 HPLOT ( W + 15),75 TO W, 90 TO (W + 15),1 05 RETURN 11 11 ; 11