Abstract

Poetry is one of the most creative uses of language. Yet the influence of poetry on creativity has received little attention. The present research aimed to determine how the reception of different types of poetry affect creativity levels. In two experimental studies, participants were assigned to two conditions: poetry reading and non-poetic text reading. Participants read poems (Study 1 = narrative/open metaphors; Study 2 = descriptive/conventional metaphors) or control pieces of non-poetic text. Before and after the reading manipulation, participants were given a test to determine levels of divergent thinking (DT; i.e., fluency, flexibility, and originality). Additionally, in both studies, the impact of frequent contact with poetry was examined. In Study 1 (N = 107), participants showed increased fluency and flexibility after reading a narrative poem, while participants who read the non-poetic text showed a decrease in fluency and originality. In Study 2 (N = 131) reception of conventional, closed metaphorization significantly lowered fluency and flexibility of thinking (compared to reading non-poetic text). The most critical finding was that poetry exposure could either increase or decrease creativity level depending on the type of poetic metaphors and style of poetic narration. Furthermore, results indicate that long-term exposure to poetry is associated with creativity. This interest in poetry can be explained by an ability to immerse oneself in a poetry content (i.e., a type of empathy) and the need for cognitive stimulation. Thus, this paper contributes a new perspective on exposure to poetry in the context of creativity and discusses possible individual differences that may affect how this type of art is received. However, future research is necessary to examine these associations further.

Highlights

  • Creativity is often understood in different ways

  • We examined whether the creative potential of a poem can be beneficial for receivers by testing whether one-time reception of poetry can influence the quality of divergent thinking (DT; i.e., multidirectional and/or potentially creative thinking)

  • Reading of poetry improved two creativity indicators, while reading of the control text caused a decline in fluency and originality

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Creativity is often understood in different ways. In an elitist view, creativity means eminent works of art created by great, gifted artists. Creativity has been described as a common cognitive process, which can be improved (Finke et al, 1992) This more popular approach has been labeled by Csikszentmihalyi (1996) as “little c Creativity.”. Previous research (Mednick, 1962) has shown that creative thinking is based on flatter concept hierarchies, enabling remote associations to be more made. Csikszentmihalyi states that this kind of creativity is part of everyday human life, and can be observed even in young children. The current research concentrates on Poetry That Boosts Creativity “little c Creativity,” which can be improved by specific interventions under specific circumstances, and observed and measured (Guilford, 1950; Finke et al, 1992; Runco, 1999)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call