Abstract
The general objective of this study was to reexamine two views of creativity, one positing that there is a general creative capacity or talent and the other that creativity is domain-specific. These two views were compared by (a) testing correlations among measures of domain-general and domain-specific creativity and (b) examining how the general and the specific measures was each related to indices of knowledge, motivation, and personality. Participants were 147 college students enrolled in a foreign language course. Data were collected on participants’ domain knowledge, motivation, and creative personality, as well as four measures representing “General or Domain-Specific Creative Ideation” or “Creative Performance and Activity”. Results indicated that the four measures of creativity were correlated with one another, except for “General Performance and Activity” and “Domain-Specific Ideation.” A canonical correlation indicated that knowledge, motivation, and personality were significantly correlated with the four creativity measures (Rc = .49, p < .01). Multiple regressions uncovered particular relationships consistent with the view that creativity has both general and domain-specific contributions. Limitations, such as the focus on one domain, and future directions are discussed.
Highlights
Motivation was significantly correlated with General Creative Ideation (r = .35, p < .01), Domain-Specific Creative Ideation (r = .37, p < .01), and Domain-Specific Creative Performance and Activity (r = .22, p < .05)
Creative personality significantly correlated with General Creative Ideation (r = .25, p < .01) and General Creative Performance and Activity (r = .24, p < .05)
The results indicate, first, that the four measures of creativity were largely inter-related
Summary
There is a debate whether creativity is domain-general or domain-specific (e.g., Baer, 1998; Plucker, 1998). Plucker (1998) described a tendency to study creativity with an assumption of generality (e.g., Guilford, 1967; Torrance, 1974).The key evidence for this position is that measures of creativity within particular domains (usually creative performance and activity check lists) show significant intercorrelations. Runco (1987), for example, assessed both gifted and non-gifted children’s creative performance and activity and found significant correlations among the indices in various domains (e.g., writing, music, crafts, performing arts, and science). Hocevar’s (1976) study indicated that for college students, significant correlations were found among creative performance and activity in various fields (e.g., fine arts, crafts, performing arts, math-science, and music). Hocevar’s (1976) study indicated that for college students, significant correlations were found among creative performance and activity in various fields (e.g., fine arts, crafts, performing arts, math-science, and music). Runco (1987), for example, assessed both gifted and non-gifted children’s creative performance and activity and found significant correlations among the indices in various domains (e.g., writing, music, crafts, performing arts, and science). These studies support the hypothesis that the nature of creativity is general rather than domain-specific. Diakidoy and Spanoudis (2002) found that ninth-graders’ performances (fluency and originality) differed significantly on general and domain-specific divergent thinking tests These studies support the hypothesis that creativity is domain-specific
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.