personal construct theory and the creativity cycle dissertation presented in
TRANSCRIPT
PERSONAL CONSTRUCT THEORY AND THE CREATIVITY CYCLE
DISSERTATIONPresented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of
the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
Charles Lyle Jennings, B. S. Ed., M. A.
■XX-XK-X*
The Ohio State University • 1963
Approved by
Adviser Department of Psychology
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to express my appreciation to Dr. George A. Kelly for
his many hours of patient guidance and forebearance in the develop
ment of this dissertation. To Dr. Edwin N. Barker and Dr. James C.
Naylor my many thanks for their helpful suggestions and aid.
To Dr. Kenneth C. Kramer, Chairman, Department of Psychology,
Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas, and his colleagues I wish to
extend my thanks for their aid in obtaining subjects and providing
space to work.
To Dr. Don E. FIinn, Chief, Neuropsychiatry Department, and
Dr. Bryce 0. Hartman, Chief, Psychobiology Branch, Neuropsychiatry
Department, and to the other staff members of the Clinical Sciences
Division of the United States Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine,
Brooks Air Force Base, Texas, my deepest appreciation for their many
efforts to provide the time, space, and personnel to complete this
dissertation.
And last, but not least, my sincerest appreciation to my wife,
Peggie, and my children, *rtio for years have endured the many undula
tions and deprivations resulting from the pursuit of this dissertation.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................... ii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS................................... vi
LIST OF T A B L E S ......................................... vii
ChapterI. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND.......................... 1
II. SURVEY OF THE PERTINENT LITERATURE............... 21
III. THE CREATION OF A DISSERTATION.................. 42
IV. METHODOLOGY..................................... 61
I. Statement of the problem.................. 61
II. Design and Experimental Procedure.......... 62
III. Description of the Scoring Dimensions, thetechniques of Evaluation, and the Hypotheses ................................... 74
IV. Summary of the Hypotheses.................. 86
V. RESULTS.......................................... 91
I. Pre-Experimental Measures.................. 91
II. Comparison of the four highest frequencywords of poems and pre-experimental t a s k ................ 99
III. Creative Latency ........................... 100
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Chapter Page
IV. Analysis of the Subject's Productions. . . . 101
A. Word Co u n t............ ................ 101
B. Subject's Judgment of Poems . . . . . . 102
C. Subject's Judgment of Potential...........106
D. Ease or Difficulty of Procedure...........108
V. Results of Judges Ranking and Rating of theSubject's Poems............................. 109
A. Ranking of Excellence................... 109
B. Judgments for Originality................. 112
C. Judgments for Loose-Tight Dimension. . . 116
D. Judgments for Expressive Fluency . . . . 118
E. Judgments of Stimulus-Bound/StimulusFree Dimension......................... 120
VI. DISCUSSION AND CREATIVE IMPLICATIONS.............. 126
I. Introduction.................................. 126
A. Discussion of Pre-ExperimentalTasks. ........................... 129
B. Discussion of Subjects' Judgment ofTheir Poems............................. 132
C. Discussion of the Results of thePost-Experimental Inquiry............... 134
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Chapter Page
D. Discussion of the Judges and TheirRatings................................. 140
II. Creative Implications.......................148
III. Suggested Areas of Research with theCreativity Cycle ......................... 153
APPENDIX..................................................156
BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................. 222
AUTOBIOGRAPHY........................................... 230
v
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
1. Experimental Design for First Pilot Study ........... 43
2. Experimental Design for Second Pilot Study ........ 51
3. Experimental Design for Third Pilot Study ........... 53
4. Experimental Design for Final Study.................. 63
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Text Table Page
1. Each Subject's Selection of Best and Poorest Poemon Pilot Study by Mode of Presentation ........... 55
2. Judge's Selection of Best and Poorest Poem on PilotStudy by Mode of Presentation............. 56
3. Combined scores for Judges and Mode of Presentationon Pilot Study............................ 56
4. Differences Between the Means for Total "With" Wordsand "Away" Words and Differences Between the Means for Total Frequency Values for Each T a s k ..........93
5. Differences Between the Means for Total Words forFirst Minute and Second Minute for "With" Association Task and "Away Association Task . . . . 96
6. Differences Between the Means of First and SecondMinute for Total Frequency Value of the Pre- Experimental Words ............................. 97
7. Differences Between the Mean Frequency Values of theFour Highest Frequency Words from Each of the Poems and the Pre-Experimental Tasks..... 99
8. Means and Standard Deviations for Creative Latencyfor the Three Modes of Presentation........ 100
9. Summary of Analysis of Variance for Word Count . . 102
10. Summary of Analysis of Variance of Subject's Judgments of Best and Poorest P o e m ................... 103
11. Differences Between the Means of the Stimulus Poems 103
12. Differences Between the Means of Subject's Judgmentof Best and Poorest Poem by Mode of Presentation. 105
vii
LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)
Text Table Page
13. Summary of Analysis of Variance of Potential. . . 106
14. Differences Between the Means of Subject's Judgmentof Potential by Mode of Presentation.............107
15. Ease or Difficulty of Mode of Presentation. . . . 108
16. Summary of Analysis of Variance of Judges Rankingfor Excellence....................................110
17. Differences Between the Means of Judges Ranking forExcellence by Mode of Presentation .............. Ill
18. Summary of Analysis of Variance of Judges Ratingson the Originality Dimension..................... 112
19. Difference Between the Means of the Three Judgeson the Originality Dimension..................... 113
20. Differences Between the Means of Judges Ratingson Originality Dimension by Mode of Presentation 115
21. Summary of Analysis of Variance of Judges Ratingson Loose-Tight Dimension................... ’.. 117
22. Differences Between the Means of Judges Ratingson Loose-Tight Dimension by Mode of Presentation 117
23. Summary of Analysis of Variance of Judgements forExpressive Fluency Dimension .................... 119
24. Differences Between the Means of Judges Ratingson Expressive Fluency Dimension by Mode of Presentation..........................................119
25. Summary of Analysis of Variance of Judges Ratingson Stimulus-Bound/Stimulus-Free Dimension . . . 121
26. Differences Between the Means of Judges on theStimulus-Bound/Stimulus-Free Dimension ......... 122
viii
LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)
Text Table Page
27. Differences Between the Means of Judges Ratings on Stimulus-Bound/Stimulus-Free Dimension by Mode of Presentation............................. 123
Appendix Table
I. Table of Total Words for Pre-Experimental Tasks. . 194
II. Table of Frequency Values for Words on Pre-Experi-mental Tasks. ................................195
III. Total Frequency Values for the Four HighestFrequency Words from Each Pre-Experimental Taskand Each P o e m ......................................196
IV. Total Word Count for Each Subject's Poems...........197
V. Combined Totals for Word Count by Order, Mode ofPresentation, and Stimulus P o e m ................ 198
VI. Subjects' Judgments of their Best and Poorest Poems 199
VII. Combined Totals for Subjects' Judgment of Best and Poorest Poem by Order, Mode of Presentation, and Stimulus Poem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
VIII. Subjects' Judgment of Poems with Most an.j LeastPotential..........................................201
IX. Combined Totals for Subjects' Judgment of Poems with Most and Least Potential by Order, Mode of Presentation, and stimulus P o e m ......................... 202
X. Excellence Rankings of Judges by Subject and Modeof Presentation....................................203
XI. Combined Totals of Excellence Rankings by Judgesand Mode of Presentation........................... 204
LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)
Appendix Table Page
XII. Originality Ratings by Judges................... 205
XIII. Combined Totals of Originality Ratings by Judges andMode of Presentation........................... 206
XIV. Loose-Tight. Ratings by Judges................... 207
XV. Combined Totals of Loose-Tight Ratings by Judgesand Mode of Presentation.................... 208
XVI. Expressive Fluency Ratings by Judges ............. 209
XVII. Combined Totals of Expressive Fluency Ratings byJudges and Mode of Presentation...............210
XVIII. Stimulus-Bound/Stimulus-Free Ratings by Judges . . 211
XIX. Combined Totals of Stimulus-Bound/Stimulus-FreeRatings by Judges and Mode of Presentation. . . . 212
x
CHAPTER I
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
I. Introduction
A major research interest of present-day psychologists is the
recognition, assessment, and enhancement of creativity. This is not a
new problem area, as creative activity and man's ability to develop new
ideas has intrigued men of learning for centuries. The early philoso
phers were aware of this ability and the literature through the years
contains many references to man of genius and the speculations of
scientists on how these gifted individuals produced their material.
In the past two decades psychology has witnessed a renewed
interest in the identification of the creative person, creative products
and the creative process. The assumption now is there are creative
potentialities in man that could lead to productive creative activity
if recognized and aroused. This renewed interest has resulted in an in
crease in research concerned with the identification, encouragement and
training of this potential in industry, government, science, and educa
tion. The need for creative personnel has never been greater in all of
these fields.
The study of creativity presents many problems. It is a sub
ject with a multiplicity of meanings and a lack of a practical criteria.
Wilson lists eight separate definitions of creativity in his review (98).
1
2
One committee of the three research conferences on the identification
of creative scientific talent conducted by the University of Utah has
had the task of developing practical criteria. Everyone has some notion
of what is meant by creativity, or what is a creative person, or what
constitutes the creative process.
It is now generally accepted there are various levels of creati
vity. The author who is awarded thie Pulitzer prize for an outstanding
literary work may well represent one level; the jazz musician who develops
a new method of improvisation, the school teacher who is able to get
students to look at learning enthusiastically, the football coach who
devises a new play, or the housewife who discovers a new way to cook a
favorite dish, and so on into all levels of human endeavor.
An essential characteristic of a definition of creativity is the
reference to original behavior. To be original means to produce some
thing that is new, novel, different from the existing state of things.
The judgment of whether something is new, novel, or different is, in
many instances, a function of the social acceptance of the product by
others. Stein, for example, defines creative work as "a novel work
that is accepted as tenable or useful or satisfying by a group at some
point in time'' (76). By "novel" Stein is referring to a product that
did not exist previously in precisely the same form.
Another, and equally important connotation of new, novel, dif
ferent, concerns those activities that have never been exactly duplicated
by the individual before. This approach does not necessarily require
social acceptance; it includes those activities which are of value only
3
to the individual himself, his dreams, hallucinations, mental wanderings,
or self-indulgences, but which may provide fresh outlooks and set the
stage for creative thinking.
The Psychology of Personal Constructs considers this latter point
of major importance in the acquiring of new ideas; the creative activity
and its product may be of value only to the creator himself. The con
struct is new to the individual in the context of the world as he con
strues it. The process of evaluation is within the individual as he
tests his hypothesis and continues his experimentation.
The products of creative activity have traditionally been the
tangible proof of man1s originality. The music of the masters, the
great literary works, the artistry of famous painters, and scientific
discoveries are examples of this creative activity. This emphasis upon
the tangible evidence of creative activity has tended' to slight the
point of view that all men are creative to some degree. Murphy states,
"we know from watching children in progressive schools that the desire
to create must be almost universal, and that almost everyone has some
measure of originality which stems from his fresh perception of life
and experience, and from the uniqueness of his own fantasy when he is
free to share it" (57). Maslow states, "Each one shows in one way or
another a special kind of creativeness or originality or inventiveness
that has certain peculiar characteristics" (52). Wilson's article on
creativity begins with the assumption that the abilities involved in
being creative are universal (93). Thurstone in an early article that
provided inqpetus to the present interest in the study of creativity
4
stated as his working hypothesis that "creative talent is qualitatively
the same at all levels; in the trades and in the professions, as well as
in the rare and extreme forms as we-call genius" (84). Ghiselin states
"the creative process is not only the concern of the specialists, . . . it
is not limited to the arts and to thought, but is as wide as life" (26).
The problem facing psychology today is not only this need to identify,
encourage, and utilize this wealth of creative potential in industry,
government, and the many scientific areas, but also how every man may be
taught and encouraged to use his creative potentialties to live a more
fruitful and rewarding life.
The approach taken by many present day psychologists is a trait
oriented one in which the various characteristics of the creative in
dividual are identified. The Guilford studies (31, 33, 35, 91, 92)
identify these characteristics in terms of their statistical infrequen
cy. They use the method of factor analysis to determine the elements
that make up the creativity dimension. Guilford regards creativity as
an intellectual process identified by such factors as "ideational
fluency, originality, spontaneous flexibility, redefinition and sen
sitivity to problems." Verbal fluency, cleverness, novelty and remote
ness of the response are the major determinants in his description of
creativity. Guilford's criteria for creativity is based on the uncom
monness of remoteness of the individual's responses in relation to a
normative group.
The California group, represented primarily by Barron (3, 4, 5,
6, 7), is interested principally in the personality characteristics of
the creative individual. Barron developed a measure of originality
through the use of a battery of psychological measures correlated with
rated evidence of original behavior of individuals in a test situation.
This instrument was then used to assess the personality characteristics
of individuals who had been judged by their peers to be creative. Bar
ron's general findings emphasize that the creative person is characterized
by a preference for complexity, disorder, independence of judgment, non
conformity, somewhat impulsive behavior and by esthetic expression. In
addition he found that the individuals who made high scores on his ori
ginality dimension were characterized by intelligence, had acquired a
wide range of information, were concerned with basic problems, were
clever and imaginative, socially effective and personally dominant,
showed a high degree of initiative and were verbally fluent. Barron
states "the truly creative individual stands ready to abandon old class
ification and to acknowledge that life, particularly his own unique life
is rich with new possibilities. To him, disorder offers the potential
ity of order" (6).
Torrance in an article outlining the current research on the
nature of creative talent describes the many centers where much of the
work on creativity is being carried on and the major emphasis (85). For
the majority of these centers the major concern is with the identifica
tion of creative talent and the characteristics and traits that identify
the creative individual.
There is, however, a growing concern with man as a creative
being in his own right, not as an asset to an industrial enterprise,
important as this is at the present time. The psychoanalytic school
I
6
has been the one theoretical school of thought in the past to give
credence to the role creativity plays in man's everyday adaptation to
his universe. They consider creativity as "an inherent part of human
existence" (41).
The Psychology of Personal Constructs (44) is the contemporary
psychological theory concerned with the creative process of an individ
ual. The creativity cycle is a major construct of transition, or adapta
tion. Where other theories are interested in individual differences,
the Psychology of Personal Constructs is interested in the difference
or changes that occur within an individual's construct system. Personal
Construct theory considers man as a dynamic entity whose processes are
channelized by the ways in which he anticipates events (44, I, p. 46).
The Psychology of Personal Constructs views human behavior as basically
anticipatory rather than reactive and hypothesizes that new avenues of
behavior evolve for an individual as he reconstrues the course of events
(44, Vol. II, p. 560).The Psychology of Personal Constructs is interested in the
individual, what he does, how he goes about creating his product. The
interest is in the process of creativity and the process that enhances
productive thinking. The purpose of this study is to examine the effect
of the Creativity Cycle, or moving from loose construction to tight construction and its influence on the product of this activity.II. Theorectical formulation
A. The concept of the creativity cycle.— In the Psychology of
Personal Constructs the dimensions of transition are concerned with the
7
way people adjust themselves to the changing scene. The Organization
Corollary states "each person characteristically evolves, for his conven
ience in anticipating events, a construction system embracing ordinal
relationships between constructs" (44, I, pp. 56-59, 486-89). This
system of ordinal relationships enables an individual to develop ways
of anticipating events in his universe which transcend contradictions.
Along with the Organization Corollary is the Modulation Corol
lary which states that the "variations in a construction system is
limited by the permeability of the constructs within whose range of con
venience the variants lie." Kelly goes on to state that for new ideas
to be included in the individual1s construct system he needs to have
superordinate constructs that are permeable. For a construct to be
permeable it must have the capacity to embrace new elements. Without
this the individual "is limited to a more or less footless shuffling of
his old ideas" (44, I, pp. 486-87).
One of the dimensions of transition by which man develops new
ideas is the Creativity Cycle. The Creativity Cycle is defined as "one
which starts with loosened construction and terminates with tightened
and validated construction" (44, I, p. 528).
The Creative Cycle serves an important function in the recon
struction of events and acquisition of new ideas. Through a process of
loosening and tightening the individual formulates new ideas, makes new
associations, and forms new constructs. The loosening process permits
some extension of the individual's construct range of convenience. By
8
this the individual is able to broaden his construct system and his
anticipation of events. It tends to make his constructs more permeable
to new experience. In the tightening process the individual validates
and tests his constructs against reality in order to make them more pre
dictable. As the individual moves through the loose-tight cycle he
stabilizes his construction system and facilitates organization.
B. The concept of loosening.— Loosened construction may be com
pared to dream-like states or to free association in a therapy situation
where the elements are vague and poorly differentiated. A loose con
struct leads to varying alignments of the elements without losing its
identity. In this process the person takes a shifting approach to a
problem. His thinking may be preposterous; it may be preverbal. He will
have difficulty expressing himself during this phase. The shifting
approach allows other elements to come into his range of attention. As
the individual experiments with these elements and momentarily tightens
them he may communicate more easily though much may still defy ready
verbal description.
Creative activity and the acquisition of new ideas involves
moving from loose construction to tight construction. During the loosen
ing process the person may not communicate with any satisfactory measure
of precision. He experiments minimally with a variety of elements,
moving across them quickly and tentatively with a constant incipient
movement toward tightening as the person takes a likely construct and
minimally tightens it. If he receives some validation of his attempt
he may seek symbols that will more adequately express his thought and
9
finally, if successful, will be able to formulate his hypothesis in
more precise terms.
Loosening starts with no appreciable personal commitment. It
may be characterized as a "I wonder," "what if" type of experience, or
it may be activity brought about by a sensory, kinesthetic or intellec
tual experience. There are innumerable ways in which the cycle may begin.
Kelly states that new ideas arise from the Creativity Cycle
but, unfortunately, few people utilize it productively. There are people
who predominantly use only one-half of the cycle in their transitions,
thus sacrificing much of their potential.
The person who predominantly uses the loose phase of the cycle
may be neither productive nor creative. He never lights long enough on
an idea to test it. As Kelly states, the predominantly loose individual
may never get out of the mumbling stage (44, p. 529). Psychopathologically,
those individuals who are so conceptually loosened there is continuous
and diffuse reactivity, with little testing of their ideas against reali
ty, could be characterized as those who use the loose phase of the cycle
predominantly.
Much of the communication of the loose individual makes little
sense to anyone except the originator. His fantasies and thinking may
be fragmentary and incoherent. But, as evidenced by schizophrenic art
or writings, the individual may be productive, although his productions,
for the most part, may be meaningless to others. Even in severe patho
logies, such as described, the incipient movement towards tightening may
be observed. The combinations of colors or words into some form, though
10
highly symbolic, is indicative of the use of the tight phase of the
Creativity Cycle.
In others, this reliance on predominantly loosened construction
is not so characteristic. Daydreamers and children may utilize loosen
ing in their attempts to master the universe and understand the reali
ties of everyday life but the tightening process plays a major part in
the testing of their hypotheses.
The use of predominantly loose construction with little or no
evidence of the tightening process is not the usual picture. It is moreI
usual for the individual to move through the cycle, minimally or at
length, depending upon the events. At one time loosening may be the
predominant mode of construction, at another time tight construction.
The Creativity Cycle is a transitional process that constantly moves an
individual forward.
Loosening serves an important function in the psychological life
of the individual and is a necessary phase of creative thinking. Kelly
states, "the loosening releases facts, long taken as self-evident, from
their rigid conceptual mooring. Once so freed, they may be seen in new
aspects hitherto unsuspected, and the creative cycle may get under way"
(44, II, p. 1031).
C. The concept of tightening.— Tight constructs are defined as
those that lead to unvarying predictions and serve to define the con
struct and stabilize the individual's construct organization. Through
the tightening process the individual tests the constructs derived from
the loosened construction against the reality of his universe. As a
11
result of the testing his world becomes more predictable and facilitates
further experimentation (44, II, pp. 1063-67).
The predominantly tight person may, as Kelly states, (44, I, p.
529) be a productive individual, but not necessarily creative. He may
experience difficulty breaking loose from his tightly organized con
struct system to try alternative approaches. The tight person is char
acterized by a construct eyrrtem which allows for little deviation from
his method or way of doing thingi. The attempts to change his construct
system may be anxiety producing when he becomes aware that the event
with which he is confronted may lie outside his range of convenience.
Psychopathologically, these tightly ordered constructs could be
characteristic of an obsessive-neurotic. They also may be seen in deep-
rooted prejudice, legalistic thinking, and fanaticism. Here the pre
dominance of the tightness of the construct system may serve as a
defense against an encroachment upon the individual's core constructs.
There are predominantly tight thinking individuals who have the
capacity to loosen but who are unable to allow themselves full use of
the Creativity Cycle. They tend to tighten too quickly as they perceive
a premature validation of their hypothesis. They may jump to conclu
sions quickly on the basis of a few facts or generalize broadly with
little foundation. Some may even be unable to do this because of the
necessity to make a choice or a decision which may be construed as con
trary to their construct system. They may spend their time weighing one
fact against another to the point wherenothing moves. They may, in
this latter case, never be productive.
12
Tightening is not always undesirable. Tightening is necessary
to stabilize construction and facilitate organization. A certain degree
of tightening is necessary in order for an individual to communicate his
constructs to others. Tightening not only serves to define what is con-
stured but leads to further experimentation. Tightening is an important
aspect of the Creativity Cycle, for without it there would be no produc
tivity, only mumbling.
These have been descriptions of the extreme poles of the loosen
ing and tightening dimension that constitutes the Creativity Cycle. It
would be unusual for either loose or tight thinking to be the sole
method an individual uses. It is more usual to find evidence of the
Creativity Cycle in everyone with possibly one phase of the cycle being
more predominant than the other at some particular moment. As the in
dividual approaches problems, perceives relationships and events in his
everyday life, he will utilize the Creativity Cycle on many occasions,
possibly without any awareness the process has been evoked. The dura
tion of the cycle may be momentary, or it may be quite extended, depend
ing upon what new areas and ideas are acquired. It is not a process that
can be turned on and off at the individual's desire, but yet is one that
can be encouraged and developed.
D. Range of convenience of the creativity cycle.--The Creativity
Cycle may occur in any type of situation; in conversation, development
of a new method of performing a task, artistic work, or recreational
activity. Its product may be of consequence only to the individual him
self at some point in time, or it may conceivably, in time, lead to vast
13
and dramatic changes in social or economic structure. It is transient,
yet dynamic, and constantly moving the individual forward in quest of
new constructs. Its usefulness may be observed in many realms.
1. Education.— Children are highly creative. With their un
sullied outlook on life and their wide experimentation with their
developing construct systems in order to learn the nature of their uni
verse, ample evidence is seen of their creative activity. Children
utilize loose construction freely; tightening to test whether something
works and then go merrily on to the next phase. The process of the
Creativity Cycle may be seen in their block play, scribbling, kinesthetic
activities, and imaginary games of all types.
In many enlightened kindergartens the teachers capitalize on
this creative activity and the child is given the freedom to experiment
widely with p. great number of activities and materials. At the same time
the teacher offers some reality against which the child may test his
hypotheses while maintaining an atmosphere of intellectual venturesome
ness and creativity.
Unfortunately this is not the usual approach. The predominantly
tight approach is more prevalent. There has been an insidious and pro
gressively earlier emphasis upon fostering reality upon the child to the
point where he must surrender his imaginative wonderings to "factualism
and usefulness" (25, p. 121). Getzels and Jackson state these childhood
experiences have now been replaced by "real" educational visits, "real
istic," and "readiness-producing" toys, "true-to-life" human replica,
puzzles and toys all geared to make the child into a miniature man or
woman.
14
There are penalties attached to this say Getzels and Jackson.
They wonder how a child who has such a constrictive environment fostered
upon him ever has time for fantasy and imaginative activities. This,
they feel, is why many adolescents and adults are so limited in their
creative activity. They quote a passage from a speech given by the
poet, John Ciardi, to dramatize the penalties the individual and society
must pay for the neglect of his creative potential.
There is no poetry for the practical man. There is poetry only for the mankind of the man who spends a certain amount of his life turning the mechanical wheel. But let him spend too much of his life at the mechanics of practicality and either he must become something less than a man, or his very mechanical efficiency will become impaired by the frustration stored up in his irrational human personality. An ulcer, gentlemen, is an unkissed imagination taking its revenge for having been jilted. It is a declaration from the mankind of the man that a clear,spring of joy has not been tapped, and that it mustbreak through, muddily on its own (25, p. 122).
Education, with its emphasis on factualism, repetition and un
inspired units tends to inhibit freedom of expression, testing pre
posterous thoughts and ideas, and striking out in a new direction on a
task. The emphasis is on learning what others had to say or did, not
on why he said it, or on how might he have said it differently, or even
"I wonder what would have happened if he had tried this."
It is not until a student gets into graduate school that he may
again be exposed to a certain freedom to utilize his fantasy and imagin
ative powers in creative activity. For some it is too late1. As
Thurstone says, "It is not the brightest student who is the mofit crea
tive but usually the one appears to savor an off-beat idea and who
15
continues to play with it even after the bright student by brilliant
logic has apparently proved it is infeasible" (84).
Graduate school is analogous to the kindergarten in some re
spects. Once again the student is allowed to experiment with a variety
of materials and ideas and test them against the reality of his own
convictions. The creative process is reinstituted and changes result.
2. Dreams.— Dreams are an area where the evidence of the
loosening phase of the Creativity Cycle is most pronounced. During
dreaming the loosening process is operating at its greatest extent.
The shifting context, the realignment of events, the difficulty of
communication, all facets of the loosening process, are observed in
dreams.
Probably all people dream though it may be the tight thinking
people who are unable to recall their dreams. Those who are pre
dominantly loose thinkers may place too much faith in their dreams and
have difficulty separating reality and fantasy-. The individual who is
comfortably secure in the use of the Creativity Cycle may find elements
of new ideas in his dreams. It is not an unusual occurrence for crea
tive people to awaken after a dream and make notes of-what was manifest.
Dreams are usually triggered by external stimuli, by the day's
happening, or by thoughts that are not resolved through other activities.
However, through the process of condensation,- displacement, regard for
representability, and secondary elaboration, these activities may show
no resemblance to the day's activities or the reality involved (22).
Dreams are necessary to the psychic life of the individual. They are
16
a protective measure to ensure the person's need to sleep. During the
day, tension is released through activity; during sleep residual ten
sions are relieved by dreaming. Schafer says "The successful dream is
a great compromiser, achieving relative and temporary tranquility on all
the psychological fronts" (71, p. 83). The studies of Dement (15) on
dream deprivation have been able to show, through the use of the elec
troencephalograph, evidence of dream activity in the electrical im
pulses of the cortex. They found that not allowing an individual to
dream made him irritable and easily upset. They also found that when
the individual was awakened just as his dream activity started there was
evidence of an increase in the electrical potential upon returning to
the sleep state. This led Dement to conclude that an individual needs
a certain amount of dream activity and when it is interrupted there is
a tendency for the activity to increase when the sleep state is resumed.
In the loosening process, as in dreaming, the figures and events
loom ghostly against a backdrop of black and white, shifting frequently,
alternating in mood, aligning and realigning each transient variation as
a whole life may pass inkaleidoscopic procession. In the attempt to
recall dreams in a therapeutic situation, the loose phase of the Creati
vity Cycle may be observed in the slowing of the tempo of communication
and the wandering about in the dim regions of the individual1s thinking
as he attempts to fit the elements together.
Loosening in day time activities may be analogous to dreaming.
The utilization of the loose phase of the Creativity Cycle would enable
the individual to take a shifting approach to the problem, experiment
17
minimally with the transient variations and tighten those, that he con
siders the most likely but without an appreciable amount of personal
commitment. Through this process he would gain a fresh outlook but
without the tension-producing, decision-making activity that is suggested
by an emphasis upon continual tight activities.
3. Athletics.— It is possible to observe evidence of the loose-
to-tight process even in such varied activities as athletic endeavors.
In athletics a high level of skill is developed as a result of repeti
tive practice. It is of interest that when a certain skill level is
reached a period of "inactivity" sometimes results in inproved perfor
mance. William James' (43) statement that "we do learn to swim in
winter and skate in summer" indicates that periods of inactivity or par
ticipation in other activities may enable the individual to review the
activity in a way that does not involve an immediate personal commit
ment. The individual may approach it very loosely, shifting the various
elements around, tightening minimally on occasion, asking himself the
question, "would it work?", saying "maybe" and moving on to the next
construct.
4. Constriction and encouragement of the creativity cycle.— The
process of creativity is not one of continual activity with the problem
at hand. An individual who continually works on a problem may tend to
constrict the creative process because tightening leading to hypothesis
testing takes place prematurely leaving the individual with a sense of
incomplete validation. Stein also points this out when he says the
18
creative process may stop during "the stage of hypotheses formation (76).
Probably the most famous story of all that illustrates this need
to detach one's self from the problem occasionally is one that Poin
care tells of his attempts to solve a complex mathematical problem. He
stated he went for a vacation and, the story goes, the solution came to
him as he was about to board a railway carriage. Poincare stated
further he had found that doing other things enabled him to come to
solutions faster and more comprehensively than if he continued to work
at them intently for long periods of time (65).
This sudden clarification or insight apparently is not an un
usual occurrence among creative people as reported by the literature,
but it is not peculiar only to this group. It is a phenomenon ex
perienced by most people in the course of their creative activity.
Wallas (88) in his work on the art of thinking stated that if
the individual is actively engaged in several problems at a time, and
voluntarily leaves them unfinished while turning to others, it is
possible to get better results.
There are other factors which also tend to constrict the full
utilization of the Creativity Cycle. Crutchfield (14), Horney (39),
Hart (38), Maslow (53), and Stein (76), write of the constriction of
creativity activity through conformity, emotional blocks and the many
cultural and environmental restrictions placed upon the individual.
Rogers (69) suggests there are two essential elements necessary
to encourage and enhance creative activity, both external in nature.
The first is psychological freedom. Here the creative individual, or
19
the creative activity of an individual, is accepted by others and he is
free from any reason to put up a facade or to be rigid (tight). Second,
Rogers advocates psychological safety. Here the individual is free from
all external evaluation or criticism of his creative efforts that may
cause distress and would block his creative activity.
The Psychology of Personal Constructs places the emphasis upon
the individual and his anticipation of events rather than on the ex
ternal factors. Personal Construct theory makes no distinction between
events that are "external" or those that are "internal". Kelly states
that two people may be involved in the same event, but each construes
it differently. As a result their anticipations will be different and
each will behave differently as a consequence. It could be said, that
if an individual anticipates a lack of freedom, or a possible critical
evaluation of his creative activity, he, as a result, may behave as he
thinks is expected of him in the situation (44, I, pp. 55, 90-94).
To be creative and productive the individual must "develop a
construction system with which he identifies himself and which is suf
ficiently comprehensive to subsume the world around him" (44, I, p. 126).
From the individual's successful construing of events and experimenting
with their consequences arise new constructs which enable the indivi
dual to meet the situations that confront him.
This study is concerned with the effectiveness of the Creativity
Cycle (loose to tight construction) in the production of original
material, i.e., a poem. The major hypothesis is that the use of the
20
Creativity Cycle will result in products which will be considered better
and more original when compared with products of other processes
obtained under similar conditions.
CHAPTER II
SURVEY OF THE PERTINENT LITERATURE
The literature on creativity is voluminous, highly diversified
and in many ways chaotic. Much of this literature is concerned with the
trait approach but there is a recognition, however reluctant, that this
is not all there is to the creative process. The scientists readily
admit that the study of creativity must start somewhere and the trait
approach is one fruitful approach to it.
For the purposes of this study, however, we will concern our
selves with that literature which implies the Loose-to-Tight sequence of
the Creativity Cycle. The factor that will be considered central to this
discussion is the relaxing of the boundaries during the thinking process,
a shifting alignment of the elements and a tentative testing of the new
idea or movement toward a goal.
Guilford, (35) though primarily concerned with the relationship
of intellectural factors to creative thinking, indicates that one of the
relevant factors in creative thinking is, what he calls, divergent think
ing; the ability of the individual to go off in different directions.
The traits of ideational fluency, flexibility, and originality are part
of this general factor of divergent thinking. He cautions against stat
ing that divergent thinking accounts for all of the intellectual compon
ents of creative thinking. Guilford states that this reflective thinking
must be replaced by the more rigorous convergent thinking factor leading
towards a restricted answer or solution to be productive. It is not21
clear whether Guilford treats this concept of convergent-divergent think
ing as a continuum or as discrete entities though he had stated earlier
that all of the primary abilities concerned with creativity and creative
productivity "represent continuous variables which may be found in differ
ing degrees in all people" (33). This would suggest he does perceive a
shifting approach between the divergent and convergent factors. Though
Guilford's approach is trait oriented, his concept of divergent thinking
which pertains to less structured situations does suggest what could be
called a loosening process. Guilford states, "the mediatative thinking
seems more related to less rigorous type of philosophizing, but might
play some role in connection with scientific curiousity and in theor
izing where some freedom from rigor is tolerated" (35).
One of the early writers in the field of creativity, Wallas (88),
felt that the creative process was a series of four stages. There is
evidence in his work to suggest that in the "preparation," "incubation"
and "illumination" stages there may be a loose to tight shift in the
individual's sequence of construction. Wallas states that in the "incub
ation period of the individual he is not thinking about the problem, but
a series of "unconscious and involuntary" events are taking place. This
may be construed as analogous to the loosening process where in the early
phases much of the process is pre-verbal. Wallas feels that conscious
mental work, such as working on several problems at a time, does not inter
fere with the unconscious or partially conscious processes of the mind.
He states the mind is quite capable during this period of assimilating,
23
integrating, and sorting out the various combinations that result in
"illumination." In personal Construct terms "illumination" may be con
strued as somewhat analogous to the "Tight phase." It is during this
phase the individual tentatively tightens his constructs and proceeds to
the verification or validation phase.
Patrick's work (61, 62, 63) with a group of artistic and non-
artistic people, using Wallas' four stages of creative thought, describes
a process which is similar to the Creativity Cycle. She noted there were
changes taking place during the preparation and incubation periods that
resembled what could be called the loosening process. This was mani
fested by a chage of ideas, shift in set, some difficulty in verbalizing
thoughts, and a recurrence of an earlier mood, thought or set in a some
what modified form. This went on until the illumination phase when the
individual began to produce his product. This latter phase is much like
the Tightening phase of the Creativity Cycle.
Patrick!s work, though primarily concerned with the stages of the
creative thought process, emphasized the presence of an overlap between
the stages, the shifting back and forth of ideas, and the interaction be
tween them rather than viewing the stages as a series of discrete steps.
These latter two points appear much like the process of moving from Loosen
ing to Tightening in the Creativity Cycle.
Thurstone (83) suggests the thinking which precedes the moment of
insight is different from the thinking that follows that moment. He states
that prior to the moment of insight thinking is characterized by"worrying
about the problem" and by unverbalized feelings. During this period the
24
thinker may have some feeling for the nature of the solution but is unable
to say how the various elements belong together. He is not able to verb
alize it adequately during this phase so it is difficult for him to dis
cuss it. Once the moment of insight is achieved, however, it can be verb
alized and the creator is then able "to apply various tools to it."
This phase that Thurstone discusses has many similarities to the
Loosening phase of the Creativity Cycle. Much of the Loosening phase is
preverbal and the early shifting and varying alignments cannot be com
municated, much as Thurstone states is happening in his context. The
moment of insight could be construed as Tightening although it is the
opinion that Thurstone uses the term "insight" in a somewhat different
way. He implies that a solution is reached at the point of insight,
while in Personal Construct theory, Tightening concerns the validation of
a hypothesis which leads to new ways of construing events and further
experimentation, not necessarily an immediate solution.
Ghiselin believes the creative process begins in a state charac
terized by confusion and suspense. During this period the mind does not
follow any predetermined courses in which there is order and structure.
He states: "There is an absence of form itself, in the sense of structure
that is fixed, determined, more or less resistant to flow, fusion and
dispersal." Those thoughts and configuration that are not relevant thus
fade since they do not contribute to the "order the mind is seeking."
This is very similar to the loosening process of the Creativity Cycle
where the shifting elements, lack of personal commitment, and transient approach to tightening are in evidence (26).
25
Eindhoven and Vinacke (18), expressing dissatisfaction with the
efforts of other scientists who view the creative process as a series of
discrete stages, conducted a study on the creative process with a group
of artists and non-artists. The subjects were allowed to create under
conditions which were as free and spontaneous as possible to determine how
an artist actually conforms to the requirements of a task. This study
illustrated the process of loosening and tightening that may take place in
an individual artist's construction system as he initiates, experiments
with, discards, renews and finally decides upon the right combination and
goes through with his final tightening process to produce his product.
Bartlett's (8) discussion of thinking includes the terms of a
"closed system," and adventurous thinking." Though he regards thinking
as a high level of skilled behavior, he states the ability of the individ
ual to break out of a "closed system" of thinking as essential to progress
in science. By a "closed system" he is referring to "one that possessed
a limited number of units, items, or members, and those properties of the
members which are to be used are known to begin with and do not change as
the thinking proceeds" (8, p . 23). In this type of thinking there are at
least two "givens" and it is the task of the subject to interpolate or
extrapolate to fill the gaps. This type of thinking is somewhat analogous
to the Circumspection-Preemption-Control Cycle that is one of the two con
struction cycles of the dimension of transition in the Psychology of
Personal Constructs (44, I, p. 515).Bartlett states further, however, "there is something in thinking
which is sympathetic to the uniform and the universal, and antogonistic to
26
uncertainty, "Taut.,"the thinker is more than a thinking machine; there is
a tremendous struggle between those forces which try to reduce all forms
of human knowledge to the closed system, and those forces which lie be
hind the human zest for adventure and are continually revolting against
and breaking out of the closed systemV (8, p.96). Man has to be con
forming and creative.Fromm's thesis of man's need to transcend the role of the creat
ure, the accidental and passivity of his existence, by becoming a creator
fits this hypothesis in some respects (23). Man is constantly trying to
find a better way to adapt to his universe and one way is to break out of
the "closed system" or tight phase and engage in the Creativity Cycle or
"adventurous thinking."In Bartlett's "adventurous thinking" can be seen elements of
the Loose to Tight movement of the Creativity Cycle. In ""adventurous
thinking" there is a movement toward greater freedom where it becomes
less and less concerned with the items and more with the schematizing
developments. Bartlett states that he can only speculate on why these
"schematizing developments take place and guesses that they are more
efficient and they are a lot more fun" (8, p. 111).Greenacre (28) and Maslow (53) both comment on the role of play
fulness or childishness on the part of the creative individual who has
fun with his ideas.Bartlett describes his own struggle coming to grips with a
problem and emphasized that the couse he took "twisted and turned a lot,
and that the bulk of those twists and turns found no place in the final
27
exposition. The whole process appeared as one in which gaps, progress
ively filled, opened up fresh gaps, and no really final halting place
was reached” (8, p. 147). This is a vivid portrayal of the utilization
of the loose-tight progression in a scientist concerned with the thinking
process.To this point there has been no mention, as such, of the role
of the conscious-unconscious in creativity activity. Most of the above
literature has been concerned primarily with the conscious factors. The
implication that other factors may play a role is recognized, for ex
ample, in Thurstone1s reference to non-focal and prefocal activities in
psychological acts (83).
In Personal Construct theory the consciousness-unconsciousness
dimension is considered a method of "invoking loosened construction to
see what additional elements it may pick up and what new constructs may
begin to take shape within the vague mass" (44, I, p.530). Unconscious
ness in Personal Construct theory is replaced by the notion of preverbal
constructs. Kelly states that the "construct of preverbal constructs
has a better range of convenience, including, as it does, personal con
structs which are communicable by means other than words, and including
personal constructs which are only partly immobilized because of their
poor symbolization" (44, I, p.466).In Freud's Basic Writings (21), there is a letter from Schiller
to his friends that illustrates the difficulties encountered in creative work and Schiller's suggestions on how to overcome these difficulties. Schiller states the reason for his friend's difficulty lies "in the con
straint which your intellect imposes upon your imagination." He states
28
the intellect should not examine too "closely the ideas..pouring in at
the gates." In the case of the creative mind, Schiller writes, the
"intellect has withdrawn its watchers from the gate, and ideas rush in
pell-mell, and only then does it review and inspect the multitude." His
major point is contained in the la3t sentence of the letter in which he
states the reason the individual complains of unfruitfuliiess;, is that
he "rejects too soon and discriminates too severely" (21, p.193).
In this letter Schiller appears to be contrasting the Tight
approach and the Loose-to-Tight cycle. In the letter may be found refer
ence to the shifting and varying approach and the need for preposterous
thinking from which creativity arises (44, I, p.529).
The role the unconscious plays in creative thinking and pro
ductions is emphasized in the psychoanalytic literature though other
writers recognize its presence and contribution. Sinnott, for example,
considers the unconscious as the site of the organizing factor of the
being. "Here in the unconscious is where matter, life and mind are
inextricably mixed. Here the natural tendencies and predilections of
living stuff come to expression. Here the organizing power of life
fashions into orderly patterns the floating fantasies of the unconscious
mind. Here, if anywhere, new patterns may be created" (74). Sinnott
views the unconscious as an active process and the reservoir of all man's
creative ability.Thurstone (83) recognized the importance of the unconscious when
he stated that the "psychological act originate in the essentially effect
ive and nonverbalized nonfocal motivation and the needs of the individual."
29
Springbett, Dial and Clark (75), consider that the difference
between creative thinking and problem solving is that creative thinking
"involves a greater sensitivity to unconscious processes."
Poincare (65) writes about the "sudden illumination" which he
ascribes to unconscious work, which follows periods of frustration and
unproductive work during which time he had put forth conscious effort.
Hadamard (37), writing about mathematical creation, agrees
partially with Poincare on the role of the unconscious. He is of the
opinion that the unconscious and "fringe conscious," as he calls it,
work cooperatively. This is much the viewpoint of Murray (58), who
stated that one of the requirements for creation at the mental level,
is a sufficient permeability between the conscious and unconscious
psychic processes."
In the field of art, music, and poetry, Dewey (16) states,
the creative activity may consist of a process of "doing and undoing
between the self and the object," which, when complete brings about a
feeling of harmony in the individual. The imagination of the artist is
considered an unconscious process, setting up tension and a feeling of
disequilibrium. Dewey states, however, that regardless of how imagin
ative the original object may have been, it only becomes a work of art
when the final product is ordered and organized, implying the utilization
of the Loose to Tight sequence. Willman (90), in his study of composers,
found that the creative process is a selective one, with many possibili
ties and combinations being attempted before the composers centered their
efforts upon one theme.
30
Poetic imagination, Prescott states (66), has both conscious
and unconscious attributes, but the truly creative poem utilized the
unconscious form from which the "totality of experience" may be called
forth. He states during this time the critical function is suspended,
allowing for naturalness and originality. Once the theme begins to take
shape it is exposed to "poetic control" which gives structure, language
and verse to the finished product. Wilson (94), in his study of twenty-
four American poets, stated that poets are probably more sensitive than
others to experience, but, more important, they are capable of being able
to discriminate among their experiences to transform them into meaning
ful form. These experiences may result in a tension producing effects
which the product is able to dispel and enable the artist "to triumph
over the forces of disintegration."
The concept of the Creativity Cycle may be implied from these
articles, particularly in reference to what might be construed as loosen
ing of the individual's conceptual framework. This, in psychoanalytic
terms, results in tension and disequilibrium, and in other terms, a sense
of frustration, that eventually evolves into some productive output.
Maslow (52, 53), who is of the opinion that creativity is
present in everyone and that it is correlated with psychological health,
differentiates between two kinds of creativeness, primary and secondary.
Primary creativeness is a product of the unconscious, and is the "source
of new discovery, of real novelty, of ideas that depart from what exists
at this point". Secondary creativeness is characterized by "a kind of
rational productivity demonstrated by many capable, functional, successful
31
people." Maslow (54), places the emphasis for creativity on the person
ality of the individual who is self-actualizing, rather than upon his
achievements. The self-actualized person is characterized by a relative
absence of fear, both of other people and of his own impulses, emotions,
and thoughts. Thus, the integrated person is able to use easily and
spontaneously that which comes from the primary process. Maslow further
states that more crucial to the creativity of the individual are the
primary processes that are cognitive rather then conative. These he
feels are less dangerous to the individual than the forbidden impulses
which the psychoanalytic interpretation of primary processes implies. As
a result of their being less dangerous, Maslow is of the opinion the per
son is able to do more with them. The integrated, or self-actualized
individual, is able to use both the primary and secondary processes
effectively.
Many of these writers appear to be using the concept of the "un
conscious", not in relation to its psychoanalytic meaning as the site of
repressed memories, but more in terms of Hadamard's meaning of "fringe
consciousness" (37), or Kubie's "preconscious" (47).
Hadamard does not question the "reality of the unconscious," but
he is of the opinion that we are dealing "with an unconscious which is
very superficial, quite near to consciousness and its immediate disposal"
(37, p.24). Kubie's concept of the preconscious is the psychoanalytic
notion of the "area" that includes the many perceptions and memories
available to the individual if his attention demands it. Kubie states,
"The rich play of the preconscious operations occurs freely in states of
32
abstraction, in sleep, in dreams, and as we write, paint or allow our
thoughts to flow in the non-selected paths of free association"
(47, pp. 44-45).
Though others mention it also, the psychoanalysts particularly
emphasize the role of the primary process in creative activity. This
activity, they state, is characterized by non-logical forms of thought
(condensation, displacement and symbolization) and drive direction and
organization of thinking. Rapaport (67), states that topographically,
thought processes may be conscious, preconscious or unconscious. The
primary processes operate in terms of the unconscious, and the secondary
processes in terms of the preconscious and conscious. In another art-i-
c-L"e; Rapaport (68) states there are two aspects of creative thought
which are of central interest: the first is "when an unconscious idea
rises to consciousness, the ego suspends its censoring functioning momen
tarily • only to resume it again." This, Rapaport calls the "invent
ive phase" of creative thinking, which abides by the rules of the pri
mary process. This phase has many of the characterics of the loosening
phase of the Creativity Cycle. This "idea" may take many forms, "a
vague general 'feeling,' a sense of relationship, a schematic pattern, a
verbal or visual fragment and so on." The elaborative" phase of creative
thinking establishes these relationships and turns the idiosyncratic
"inventive" product of the individual into the social communications of
art or science." Rapaport feels that this "elaborative" phase if effort
ful and, in contrast to the inventive phase, operates by the rules of
33
the secondary process. This corresponds to the tightening phase of the
Creativity Cycle.
Rapaport further states that much productive and ordered think
ing is of this biphasic character with most of it being preconsciously
prepared. He states that possibly in creative thinking the "inventive
originates from a much deeper and more idiosyncratic level of the hier
archy of motivations and thought-organization and is therefore more per
ceptible and even more startling, and its elaboration bound to more
stringent condition, than that of productive and ordered thinking."
Rapaport's second major point is that of the "schematic pattern
of thoughts." These, he states, are the quasi-stable forms of antici
pations pertaining to motivation of various hierarchic levels. The re
pressed drives, or the ideational representation, cannot in themselves
yield creative thought upon reaching consciousness. To do so, Rapaport
states, they must carry with them these quasi-stable thought-patterns,
which relate both to the impulse or idea, and to "nature." "It is not
infrequent" he states, "that such patterns, once having emerged, stay
conscious in a vague way for long periods before the arduous work of
elaboration provides them with the "relationship," "know-how" or facts,"
which make them communicable."
He further states that energy dynamics alone is not enough to
explain the process, but that the structural factors must be taken into
account. These Rapaport considers as the ego’s ability to renounce con
trol momentarily, and the existence of the quasi-stable thought-patterns
derived from the anticipation pertaining to the repressed drives.
34
Kris (45, 46), applies the concept of "regression in the service
of the ego" to creative functioning. By this he means a partial, tempo
rary, "inspiration" seeking shift to more primitive levels of psychic
functioning that are not typical of the individual's normal waking
state. It is his position that the primitive psychic levels reached
by this regression are freely admitted to consciousness in terms of
primary process thinking and feeling. This requires the ability on the
part of the individual to relax defensive, regulatory and organized ego
attitudes and allow the processes to come to awareness, but yet remain
essentially under the control of the ego. It is an active process, one
of taking imaginative liberties and demonstrating the ability to be
subjected to a critical, reality-oriented and communication-oriented
evaluation and modification. Without this last feature the individual
would remain wallowing in his psychic morass.
There are similar aspects between the concept of "regression in
the service of the ego," as postulated by Kris, and elaborated on by
Schafer, and the Creativity Cycle of the Psychology of Personal Con
structs. This similarity between the "regressive" phase and the
Loosening phase is suggested by the shifting approach each takes and
the transient quality of the process.i
By "regression" the psychoanalysts are referring to the individu
al's movement to more primitive psychic levels, where, it is hypothe
sized, the deeply repressed elements of destructive, amoral, and anti
social content are found. In the notion of the "regression in the ser
vice of the ego” these deeply repressed elements are permitted to come
35
into awareness but still remain under the guidance of the ego, the controlling influence.
The Psychology of Personal Constructs does not view "repression"
in the same way as the psych'.o analysts. Personal Construct theory is
concerned with the constructs the individual is now using to construe
his world. If some of the elements appear "repressed" it means, in Per
sonal Construct terminology, that these elements no longer serve a pur
pose in the individuals' construct system. However, to account for some
forms of "repression" and"suppression/ i.e., difficulty in recalling
past events and activities, the diagnostic constructs of preverbalism,
submergence, suspension, and level of congitive awareness are introduced.
Loose constructs, and the material evoked by the "regression in the
service of the ego" are often preverbal and cannot be easily communi
cated. In submergence the individual is expounding on one pole of his
construct in order to keep the opposite or contrast pole from being
tested. In suspension those constructs which do not fit with the immed
iate structure of the individual are not lost but put aside where they
may be again available to the individual. The diagnostic construct of
suspension has much in common..with Kubie's concept of the preconscious.
These forms of "repression" or ̂ suppression" manifest low levels of cog
nitive awareness as they concern those elements which lie at the outer
extremities of the ranges of convenience of the individual's available
constructs and provide little ground for making accurate discriminations
(445,Iy pp. 465-76).Maslow, (54) in addition to advocating two kinds of creativeness,,
states there are two types of primary process material: that which is
essentially cognitive and that which is conative. He feels the cognitive
processes are less dangerous than the forbidden impulses suggested by
the psychoanalytic reference to archaic and primitive impulses. He be
lieves the individual is able to do more creatively with the cognitive
processes. It was not quite certain which type Kris may have had refer
ence to in his original work on the concept of "regression in the service
of the ego," though there appears more of an emphasis on the affective
or conative aspects. Shafer's view of the concept of "regression in the
service of the ego" emphasized the cognitive aspects, as suggested by
Maslow, when he states the process occurs, "without a thorough going
sexualization or aggressivization of major ego functions and therefore
without disruptive anxiety and guilt" (72, p. 122). Shafer states fur
ther, "the process is easily reversible and amenable to productive work
ing over by the ego in terms of its adaptive pursuits" (72, p. 125).
Shafer, in a discussion of Kris' concept of "regression in the
service of theeego" postulates another term, "progression in the ser
vice of the ego" or as he says, more correctly, "progression ofppsychic
functioning." He believes this process results from the individual's
ability to "regress" and then "progress" to a level more advanced than
the individual's usual level of functioning. "The progression of psychic
functioning will be evident in the critical, elaborative, analytic and
synthetic manipulation of artistic images, scientific concepts, or any
creative material demanding intense, hyperacute concentration, ration
ality or sensitivity" (71, p. 81). What Shafer is saying, I believe, is
37
that each "regressive" swing does not bring the individual back to the
same point but progresses beyond this initial point to greater achieve
ment. Through this process of the "regression" and "progression" the
individual opens up new avenues of approach and adaptation.
This is essentially what happens in the use of the Creativity
Cycle. Being one of the transitional cycles its use enables an individ
ual to embrace new ideas and construe new ways to meet everyday
situations. A person's construct system is never at rest.
Kubie disagrees with the prominent role that has been assigned
to the unconscious. He places the emphasis for the basis of creative
activity in the pre-conscious system, stating that "unless preconscious
processes can bloom freely then there can be no true creativity." He
believes creativity suffers under the influence of the conscious and
unconscious processes, both of which are relatively rigid. The con
scious processes are anchored in reaLity, and the unconscious process
in repression, which cannot be overcome by will. Either, if dominant,
tend to result in stereotyped and rigid performance. In his conclusions,
Kubie states: "The goal to seek is to free preconscious processes from
the distortion and obstructions interposed by unconscious processes and
the pedestrian limitations of conscious processes. The unconscious can
spur it on. The conscious can criticize, correct, and evaluate it, but
creativity is a product of preconscious activity. This is the challenge
which confronts the education of the future" (47).
Getzels and Jackson, in their study of gifted adolescents,
found that Kubie's formulation concerning the role of the pre-conscious,
38
did apply to the highly creative adolescent who indeed seemed " to
retain his capacity to use his preconscious functions more freely than
is true of others who may potentially be equally gifted" (25, p. 111).
In the work of Kris and Kubie there is movement toward a new
psychoanaltic formulation of creativity with the emphasis on the role of
the preconscious rather than the unconscious. Kubie, in his work,the
Neurotic Distortion of the Creative Process, argues that the unconscious
plays little part in creative endeavors. He is of the opinion that, if
it operates at all, it is likely to be detrimental to the creative pro
cess. He states that in the preconscious rests the "highest degree of
freedom in allegory and in figurative imagination which is attainable
by any psychological process. The contribution of preconscious process
to creativity depends upon their freedom in gathering, assembling,
comparing and reshuffling of ideas" (47, p. 38).
Schachtel disagrees with both the classical psychoanalytic and
the neo-psychoanalytic approach concerning the role primary processes
may play in creative behavior. He states that the freedom of approach,
which characterized the creative activity of an individual,is not due
to a drive discharge function but to the openness of the individual to the world around him. He states, "Just as the amnesia for the early
childhood is not due primarily to the repression of forbidden sexual
impulses but to the transformation of the total number of perceiving
and thinking, so the unseeingness which in all of us, in varying degrees
stands in the way of a more creative vision is due more often to the
encroachment of an already labeled world upon our spontaneous sensory
and intellectual capacities than to the repression of a libidinal
impulses" (70, p. 243). Schachtel believes thatthe approach to creat
ive activity would be better pursued within the framework of perceptual
theory. He advocates two basic perceptual modes: subject-centered, or
"autocentric," and object-centered, or "allocentric." Developmentally,
Schachtel states, infancy and childhood consist almost exclusively of
the autocentric mode, with "little or no objectification; the emphasis
is on how and what the person feels; there is a close relation, amount
ing to a fusion, between sensory quality and pleasure or unpleasure
feelings and the perceiver reacts primarily to something impinging on
him" (70, p. 83).
As an individual matures the autocentric mode becomes less pre
dominant and reality in the form of the allocentric mode of perception
now emerges for him, writes Schachtel. However, as the individual mat
ures, there also develops a "secondary autocentricity" which, if it
becomes predominant in man's perception, may tend to block his view of
reality and lead to stagnation in a closed, autocentric world (70,p.166).
But, Schachtel states, man cannot live without the secondary autocentri-
ciiLty, , and, in a sense, it must develop. Schachtel states, "It is
part of the capacity, indispensable for the highest mental development,
to open oneself receptively with all one's sensibilities to the en
counter with the world and its objects. Such openness is not regression
to a primitive level, but development of a distinctly human capacity
which is essential for man's attempt to find his place in the world and
his relation to it? (70, p. 208).
40
Creativity, for Schachtel, involves this shifting back and
forth that takes place between the allocentric world and the secondary
autocentric world. He writes, "It is the openness of the individual to
his own sensibilities in his encounters with the world and its objects
that lead to creative productivity.,r His criticism of the notion of
’’regression in the service of the ego” centers on the point that it
overlooks this important factor of the openness of man toward the world.
He states, "man is capable of continued growth and development through
out his life if he succeeds in remaining open to the world and capable
of allocentric interest. Such openness is the basis of progress and of
creative achievement in the individual life as well as in the history of
mankind." (70, p. 248).
In Kris' concept of "regression in the service of the ego," in
Kubie's hypothesis that the loci of creative activity is in the preconscious, and finally, in Schachtel's perceptual approach with his allocentric and autocentric modes, are found similarities to the Loose-to- Tight sequence of the Creativity Cycle of Personal Construct Theory. Each
of these theoretical approaches, emphasize these processes that are both adaptive and creative.
Other psychoanalytic writers also look upon creativity as a pro
cess of reality-mastery which they feel is present in everyone (11,38,48, 78). They differ somewhat on the emphasis they place on the uncon
scious, the role of primary process material, the preconscious and the neurotic manifestation of the process, but all would agree with Tauber and Green (78) who write: "It is out of the well springs of prelogical thinking that ordered logical thinking can finally emerge" (78, p.33).
41
This is the major thesis of the Creativity Cycle. Kelly states
"Creativity always arises out of preposterous thinking. The creative
person must have that important capacity to move from loosening to
tightening" (44, p. 529).
CHAPTER III
THE CREATION OF A DISSERTATION
The conception of this study took place while I was a member of
Dr. Kelly's research team. We had been talking about thinking and
creativity. The ensuing discussions on the Creativity Cycle from the
Psychology of Personal Constructs intrigued all of us and I wondered
if it would be possible to elicit this process in either a clinical or
an experimental situation. There were many suggestions as to how this
might be accomplished with the major emphasis placed on situations in
which the subject would have the freedom to go loose. This would be
accomplished through relaxation and the uncritical acceptance of his
productions (44, II, pp. 1033-48).
I was a clinical psychology intern at the Columbus Psychiatric
Institute at the time, and was of the opinion the personnel there should
provide a source of subjects. This may sound strange, but the major
assumption asserted that all people have the ability to utilize the
Creativity Cycle. I was interested in whether "normal" individuals with
no known history of creative ability could produce a product others would
judge as creative. I believed that if the process could be elicited in
these subjects it would tend to validate the theoretical position.
The subjects in this first pilot study were four graduate nurses
who were taking advanced work in psychiatric nursing. This should have
42
warned me not to be too optimistic about my results, but being a bit of
an optimist, I blundered on.
The original design called for the administration of four cards
(Nos. 2, 5, 11 and 19) from the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) in a
standard clinical manner.
In an attenpt to determine if the movement frcm loosening to
tightening was taking place, the following experimental design was devised
Figure 1
Experimental Design for the First Pilot Study
Card and Condition
Order
19 T-T5 T-L 11 L-T2 L-L
11 T-T 19 L-L 2 T-L5 L-T
11 T-L 19 L-T 5 L-L2 T-T
11 T-L19 L-L 2 L-T 5 T-T
In Figure 1 the numbers 2, 5, 11 and 19 refer to the TAT card
numbers. The symbols, L-L, T-L, L-T and T-T, refer to the experimental
conditions. L-L means the experimental condition was moving from Loose
to Loose construction. During this condition the subject was encouraged
to be as imaginative as possible. She was encouraged to verbalize what
the picture made her think of; what it could mean symbolically, in terms
of fantasy, not what it actually looked like. Each phase of the cycle
was three minutes in length with a short rest interval between each phase.
The subject had the TAT card in her possession during the entire period
for each condition.
44
T-L means moving from Tight construction to Loose construction.
During this phase the subject first described the picture in minute
detail for three minutes and then, after a short rest period, was en
couraged to be as imaginative as possible for three minutes. For the
L-T phase, moving from Loose construction to Tight construction, the
reverse was in order. At first the subject was encouraged to be as
imaginative as possible for three minutes, then after a short rest
period asked to describe the picture in minute detail for three minutes.
In the T-T phase, moving from Tight to Tight construction, the subject
was first asked to describe the picture in minute detail, then after
a short rest period, was again asked to describe it, looking for the
details or portions she may have missed when describing it the first
time.
At the end of each experimental condition the TAT card was
removed and the subject made up a story in accordance with the stan
dard instructions for TAT. There was no time limit for the story
telling period.
During this first experiment, no attempt was made to control
for verbal fluency by placing a time limit on the story telling period.
Mistake number one, which unfortunately, due to the tightness of the
experimenter, was compounded in the second experiment.
Using only verbal fluency, or total words produced, as a measure,
there no significant differences though the t-test for the differences
between the conditions approached significance, particularly for the
L-T condition. In spite of the small sample and the lack of rigid e: -
45
experimental design the results were tantalizing enough to investigate
further to determine if the L-T cycle was more conducive to the crea
tive process, and as a result, a more creative product would occur. Looking back now there is no reason to think there was experimenter
bias in the presentation of the stimulus material. The four stories
produced under the Loose-to-Tight condition read better and appeared
more coherent, which tended to support the hypothesis of better produc
tions under the Loose-to-Tight condition.However, at this time it was necessary for me to go back to
work and any follow-up was put off for a year while I functioned as a
psychologist, administering tests, but all the while with the thought
of the Creativity Cycle constantly in mind. On several occasions I
tried the process in a clinical situation and continued to receive
encouragement on an empirical level that it would work.Finally the opportunity presented itself to work in a clinic
for a month where there was a pool of "normal" subjects available who
were being routinely tested for various activities.The second experiment was designed somewhat more efficiently,
I thought, utilizing a latin-square design with each subject exposed to
each picture and each condition. This experiment was designed to answer
two questions: one, does the L-T cycle appear to influence verbalfluency, i.e., word count, and consequently reveal itself in greater
originality, and second, is there any difference in the verbal fluency between subjects viewing chromatic TAT slides and those viewing achromatic TAT slides. The basis for this second question arose from the complaints obtained from clinical patients who commented upon the
46
drabness and lack of color in the original TAT pictures. There was
also the question of the role color may play in an individual's per
ception and whether it would have any bearing on his ability to be
creative.
The subjects in this experiment were twenty airmen ranging in
age from 17 to 30. For the most part, they were high school graduates,
though there were several college graduates in the group. Fifteen of
these subjects were airmen \dio had completed their basic training and
were awaiting transfer to a technical school; the other five were air
men assigned to the clinic.
Another source of experimenter tightness revealed itself in
retrospect at this point. Because minimal evidence of what could be
called loosening and tightening had been produced using these four TAT
pictures (2, 5, 11, 19), there was a decided resistence on the part
of the experimenter to changing the stimulus and look for other devices
more likely to produce loosening and tightening. Several new techniques
were adopted, however. First, the TAT pictures were projected on a
screen by means of a lantern-slide projector. Second, they were presented
"in focus" for the "tight" phase and "out-of-focus" for the "loose" phase.
The TAT pictures were projected on a screen in a semi-darkened
room and the subject was encouraged to verbalize about the picture during
the viewing phase. In the "tight" or "in focus" phase the subject was
instructed to pay close attention to the details and to describe the
picture literally. In the "loose" or "out-of-focus" phase the subject
was instructed to let his imagination go, to fantasize, to let his mind
47
wander, to say whatever came to mind. His responses during the "view
ing phase" were taperecorded, as were his stories. The time limit for
the "viewing phase" was five minutes but there was no time limit--again
unfortunately-rfor the story-telling phase. This appears to have been
one of the major reasons for the disparity of results obtained. The
four stories obtained from each subject were transcribed from the tape
and analyzed for verbal fluency, i.e., total word count.-
A major omission from this pilot study was the subject's report
of which story he felt was his best and which his poorest, or of how he
felt about the procedures. This was omitting a cardinal principle of
Kelly's philosophy, "If you don't know ask him."
However, even with these omissions, the data produced some in
teresting results. An analysis of variance indicated significant differ
ences between the subjects but no significant difference betweenthe
experimental conditions. The error of not limiting the time for the
production was quite evident in the results. The verbal fluency of two
men completely overshadowed the other subjects. However, even with these
two men excluded, the t's were not significant between the modes of pre
sentation.
Regarding the second question as to the ability of the chromatic
cards versus the achromatic cards to elicit verbal fluency and origin
ality, there was only one significant difference— that for the L-T
condition— and it favored the chromatic slides.
Once again the evidence supporting the efficacy of the Creati
vity Cycle was equivocal but it was still intriguing enough to consider
48
the procedure had possibilities and the Creativity Cycle could be elicited if pursued further.
At about this time events occurred that prevented following up
this project for a period of time. After lying dormant for a while
there came an opportunity to conduct the experiment with a group of basic
airmen who were subjects in another experiment, but who had enough free
time to participate.Thinking about the problem in the interim resulted in a much
cleaner research design with as many variables tied down as possible.
The element of verbal fluency was controlled by limiting the subject to
five minutes in which to write his story. The presentation of the pic
tures on the screen was worked out with more precision. The time inter
vals were more rigidly defined, the instructions clearer and more precise.
In many ways it was felt this was a good design with good experimental
procedures which should produce good results.It was with considerable consternation and chagrin that upon the
analysis of the results it was found there was an inverse relationship
to the stated hypothesis that the more verbally fluent stories would be
produced by the Creativity Cycle, or the Loose-to-Tight cycle. The loose
stories were the more verbally fluent stories and were in many cases
judged as the better stories. On the Loose-toTight phase and its counterpart, Tight-to-Loose, there was a tendency to tell two stories— one to
each part of the phase. This probably resulted from the shifting of the stimulus from the loose to tight position, and vice-versa.
What happened? Going back and reviewing the procedure step-by- step several points come to mind that might have accounted for these
49
discrepancies. One concerned the subjects themselves. For some reason,
this group of subjects were not able to be as "creative" as one thought
they should be under the circumstances. The stories they produced wereV -highly similar, stereotyped, and trite. One of the phenomena that might
be considered operant in this group of subjects is a natural selection
process which has been noted in the recruits who go through the basic
training center. In the summer and early fall the recruit population appears to be a group of highly enthusiastic, capable young men who have
chosen to enter the service either as a career or to get their military
obligation out of the way. For some reason these youths score somewhat higher on the classification tests and qualify for more of the technical
schools.In the late fall and late spring the reverse appears to be true.
Whether these are men who become discouraged, are school drop outs,
unemployed or what, no one knows for certain. The motivation level of
this population appears to be lower, and on the objective measures they
obtain lower scores.The subjects for this study come from the late fall group and
that may be one of the reasons why the results obtained were poor. On
the whole, they were a "tight" group of subjects.Regarding the design itself and the experimental procedure, it
was felt that possibly the process of writing the story at the conclu
sion of each experimental condition may have acted as a tightening process. Even the stories produced under the Loose-to-Loose mode of presentation, where there was little or no structure, indicated a tightening process.The inability of many of the subjects to shift in the Loose to Tight, or
50
Tight to Loose modes of presentation, appeared to be a major difficulty.
The subjects responded to one of the phases, usually the Tight one and
either ignored the other phase, or in several cases, as noted above,
wrote a story about each one. Instead of looking upon the stimuli as
four presentations, many of them looked upon it as six separate presen
tations. How "tight" can you get! Or was it the directions given them?
Again the error was made of not getting the subjects introspec
tion about the process he went through and his judgment of his best and
poorest story. The attempt was made to view the results entirely in
terms of statistical frequency. When again there were no significant
results the method was discarded in favor of another procedure which
constitutes the basis of the present study.
The new approach to the problem consisted of having subjects
write poetry under conditions of Tight, Loose and Loose-to-Tight modes
of presentation. The major reason for dropping the Tight-to-Loose mode
of presentation from the present design was its tendency to produce
stories that were very stimulus-bound in the majority of the cases. When
the subjects were presented the stimulus in the Tight phase of the Tight-
to-Loose cycle, they were unable to transcend it in the Loose phaise, or
out-of-focus phase, and let their imaginations take over. They were
unable to see any difference in the picture, except to say it was hazy.
(The level of the out-of-focus presentation had been determined original
ly by five judges who made judgments of each of the four pictures used
in this experiment. The psychophysical method of limits was used to
determine the level at which each picture was to be presented.)
51
The same process appeared to occur in the case of the poems.
If the subject had a period of time to look at the poem and study it,
most of them stated they either memorized it or remembered enough of it
that they were unable to produce an original poem of their own.
I wondered if people who had little or no experience with poetry
would be able under these conditions to produce a product that indepen
dent judges would consider as original. I also wondered if the Creati
vity Cycle of moving from loosening to tightening could be distinguished
from the other procedures.
Four subjects, female again, of whom one was an amateur poetress,
were administered the original form of the experiment. The design was
as follows:
Figure 2
Experimental Design for Second Pilot Study
Order 1 2 3
. !•■uoT1 l 2 l t3
a) ? •n *■' &3
L1 LT2 T3M 3. LTi T2 L3
The subscripts 1, 2, and 3 that appear with each of the modes of
presentation designate each of the stimulus poems used as the "shift to
a new topic." These three four-line poems were taken from.the Rubaiyat
of Omar Khayyam. (See Appendix M).
52
"T" stands for "Tight" presentation. During the tight presen
tation the subject had the stimulus poem and read it over and over to
himself for four minutes. The "L" stands for the "Loose" presentation.
The subject was allowed to read the poem to himself for one minute; then
it was removed and the subject free associated to himself about the poem
for three minutes. "L-T" stands for the "Loose-to-Tight" mode of presen
tation. The subject was first-handed the stimulus poem and instructed
to read it over to himself for one minute; then it was removed. During
the next part of the phase the subject free associated to himself about
the poem for a minute and a half. In the second part of the phase the
subject was given the stimulus poem again and instructed to read it
over again to himself for a minute and a half.
At the conclusion of each phase the subject's task was to write
a poem of his own choice. When this was accomplished,' the subject was
asked to decide which one of his three poems he thought was the best and
which the poorest. As I had hoped, and hypothesized, three of the four
subjects chose the poem produced under the Loose-to-Tight cycle as their
best one. Questioning them as to why they chose this particular poem
brought out reports that the Loose-to-Tight procedure involved a process
more comfortable to work with; that is to say their thoughts flowed more
easily and appeared more organized.
Upon my return to my base of operation I set up another pilot
study with much hope and enthusiasm, thinking here, at last, was a method
of getting at the process of loosening and tightening.
53
The design was the same with the exception the order of the poems
was programmed so each poem appeared once and only once in each position
in the 3 x 3 design. Figure 3 below gives the order of presentation of
each mode and poem for the subjects. Mode of presentation is designated
by the letters T for Tight, L for Loose, and LT for Loose-to-Tight. The
stimulus poems are designated by the subscripts 1, 2, and 3, and corres
pond to the poems designated A, B and C in Appendix M.
Figure 3
Experimental Design for Third Pilot Study
Mode/Poem
Order 1 2 3
I. T 1 L 2 LT34Jo W XI.Q) P. J"I-‘ •'-> 3 .O O
L3 L T 1 T 2
9 H III w e> ■L-LJ“ L T 2 T3 L1
Three subjects were in each group for an N of 9. Each subject
went through each experimental condition. They were given the stimulus
poem to read for one minute at the beginning of each experimental pro
cedure. During the Tight phase they were to write down the key words or
to make any notes they desired to help them write their poem. Each mode
of presentation lasted three minutes. At the conclusion of each mode
they wrote their poem.
54
In the Loose phase they had the stimulus poem for one minute
to read, then it was taken away and they free associated to themselves
for three minutes, then wrote their poem. In the Loose-to-Tight phase
the subject had the stimulus poem for one minute to read; then it was
taken away for ninety seconds while he free associated. The poem was
again returned to him for ninety seconds while he made notes or comments
about it. At the conclusion of the Loose-to-Tight phase the subjects
wrote their poem.
The time limit for writing the poem in each instance was five
minutes. At no time did the subjects verbalize during the various phases'.
During an earlier pilot study with this above method, an attempt
had been made to use written instructions for the various modes in a
group situation. This did not prove feasible. A great number of poems
was collected for the judges to read and judge whether one was more
creative than the other, but there was no way of obtaining a statement
from the subject about his feelings about his product or the process
except through a questionnaire or check list. This did not appear to be
very creative on my parti The procedure was dropped, but not until after
several weeks had been spent testing out an adjective check list. This
was to be a list of adjectives concerning feelings, attitudes and impres
sions the subject may have had during any of the modes. This necessitated
a long pause between each presentation to record these impressions. After
two or three attempts it was abandoned because it interfered more than it
helped. An attempt to use it after the experimental procedures were com
pleted only resulted in compounding the confusion.
55
As expected, because of the time limit on writing the poems, verbal
fluency indicated no significant differences for order, mode of presenta
tion, or poem \dien word count was used as the measure.
As a second measure each subject was asked to decide which of
his three poems was the best and which the poorest. As the third measure
two judges, two psychiatrists, made a ranking of the best to the poorest
poem for each subject.
Table 1 summarizes the results for each subject's selection of
his best and poorest poem. "Three" indicates the best poem; "oneV
indicates the poorest poem.
TABLE 1
EACH SUBJECT'S SELECTION OF BEST AND POOREST POEM ON PILOT STUDY BY MODE OF PRESENTATION
Mode T L LT
1 1 3 22 1 3 23 3 1 24 2 3 1
o 5 2 1 3£ 6 1 2 33 7 3 1 2W 8 1 2 3
9 1 3 2
Total 15 19 20X 1.67 2.11 2.22
Table 2 contains the results of the judges selection of the
best and poorest poems.
56
TABLE 2
JUDGE'S SELECTION OF BEST AND POOREST POEM ON PILOT STUDY BY MODE OF PRESENTATION
Judg.2 1 Judge 2Mode T L LT Mode T L LT
1 1 2 3 1 2 1 32 1 2 3 2 3 1 23 2 3 1 3 3 1 24 1 2 3 * ^ 1 3 2
o 5 1 2 3 3 5 1 3 2£ 6 1 3 2 2 6 2 3 1tO 73 ' 2 3 1 3 7 M ' 2 3 1w 8 3 1 2 8 1 3 2
9 3 2 1 9 3 1 2
Total 15 20 19 18 19 17X 1.66 2.22 2.11 2.0 2.11 1.89
Table 3 contains the combined totals for the judges for each
mode.
TABLE 3
COMBINED SCORES FOR JUDGES AND MODE OF PRESENTATION ONPILOT STUDY
TMode
L LT T
Judges1 15 20 19 54
2 18 19 17 54
TotalX
331.83
392.17
362.00
108
57
The t-test indicated no differences between the means for the
modes of presentation of the subject's choice of his best and poorest
poem. There were no differences between the judges for the modes. The
interjudge correlation was ,61. An inspection of the Table 1 indicated
that in terms of the raw score, however, there was a tendency for the
subjects to view the poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight
mode of presentation, the Creativity Cycle, as their best poems and those
produced as a result of the Tight mode of presentation their poorest.
Inspection of Table 3 indicates that one of the judges considered
the poems produced as a result of the Tight mode of presentation as the
poorest poems. Judge 2 apparently saw little difference between the
poems produced as a result of the three conditions. Both judges tended
to view the poems produced under the Loose experimental procedure as
slightly better. Needless to say, neither judge was used in the final
study.
Several things became evident in this pilot study. First, and
foremost, it appeared that the process could be elicited, at least,
the subject's responses tended to indicate this. Second, if judges with
little knowledge of poetry are going to be used, they should have some
training in what constitutes good poetry and a criteria to follow
that are simple yet explicit.
Third, although the subjects had indicated their choice of the
poem they thought was the .best and the one they thought was the poorest,
I did not know why. There was something lacking in this experiment.
It appeared as though it was possible to elicit the Creativity Cycle
58
but there was a feeling of sterility or lifelessness about the procedure. Even the poems appeared somewhat stereotyped and mechanical1.
What was wrong?
Finally, realizing the value of Kelly's philosophy, "If you don't
know, ask them" I went back to the subjects and talked to them at length
about their impressions of the experimental procedure and what, if any,
were their impressions during the various procedures. What an awakening'.
It was the opinion of the majority of the subjects that they found
it exceedingly difficult to be silent and do nothing, even for such a
short period of time. They wondered, for example, in all of the phases,
why it would not be possible for them to be doing something either con
nected with the problem at hand, or something different. Anything to
be kept busy'. Their complaint was that on the Loose phase, for example,
their "mind wandered," "I had formulated the poem I was going to write
early in the period and continued rehearsing it the remainder of the
time," "I thought of what I should be doing rather than the task at
hand." On the Tight phase they wanted more structuring; they were not
certain what was wanted, but something, either in terms of instructions,
or an approach to use. As a consequence they felt they performed
poorly on this procedure. Their judgments of their poems, as indicated
in Table 1, tends to bear this out. The poems produced as a result of the
Tight phase was considered the poorest by over half of the subjects.
The second major point the subjects raised was the length of
time the stimulus poem was exposed. The majority felt the one minute
exposure was too long. In fact, in three cases, the subjects stated
59
they had memorized the poem and spent the remainder of the time trying
to compose their poem around it. They were definitely of the opinion
it interfered with their production.
All of the subjects were in general agreement in stating they
enjoyed the process and, four of the nine, expressed the opinion the
Loose-to-Tight cycle was probably of more benefit to them in the produc
tion of their own poem than the other two modes.
As a result of these experiences, several innovations were
experimented with on six additional subjects and incorporated into the
experimental procedure for this present research. The time of expo
sure for the stimulus poem was reduced to 15 seconds; the subjects were
kept active during each of the procedures by having them either verbalize
their thoughts or answer questions; the subjects were questioned thorough
ly on what took place and on their impressions and feelings about the
procedures when the experiment proper was completed. The results from
these last six subjects suggested the procedure had merit and it was
decided to try it with a larger group.
If nothing more, the pursuit of the problem of the Creativity
Cycle may be called a study in persistence and perserverance. (I
almost wrote perseveration.) There were moments when ideas flowed
freely, moments of utter despair as the results turned up negative or
inconclusive, moments of nothingness, when every attempt to tackle the
problem again was met with mammoth psychic resistance, and moments of
wishful thinking "why don’t I do something simple."
60
The elation was felt at last when the pieces began to fall into
place and the procedure began to yield better results. I felt like many
of the other researchers, whose creativity I had studied, when they
reached a solution to a problem that had been plaguing them for a long
period of time. No longer was there confusion, no longer loose think
ing that alternated with premature tightening and inadequate testing of
hypotheses. The way was cleared for action and the tightening process
was instigated. For me, this had been a long and arduous Creativity
Cycle. This is one researcher who over a period of four years had had
intimate experience with the phenomena he investigated.
CHAPTER IV
METHODOLOGY
I. Statement of the Problem
The Psychology of Personal Constructs infers that productive
thinking follows a Creativity Cycle:
There is a shift to a new topic. The thinking about that topic becomes loose and fluid. The shifting conceptualization begins to fall into place under some new form of superordinate construction. Now, the conceptualization begins to become more precise, more tight. The person begins to construe more explicitly. The construct becomesmore stable (44, II, p. 1050).
This, in essence, is the Creativity Cycle, the process by
which an individual develops new ideas.
It was the purpose of this experiment to determine if the
Creativity Cycle of moving from loosened to tightened construction as
postulated by the Psychology of Personal Constructs leads to a product
which both the subject and independent judges feel may be considered as
new, novel and original.
The Psychology of Personal Constructs states that an individual
may pursue either the loose or the tight dimension of the cycle and
thus only partially utilize the Creativity Cycle in his thinking. The
theory further states that individuals who utilize either of these
dimensions exclusively may be productive but not necessarily creative.
Or, in some cases, he may not even be productive (44, II, p. 1031).
61
62
In this study the three experimental sequences of the Loose,
Tight, and Loose-to-Tight processes will be investigated under circum
stances designed to maximize these processes. The questions to be
answered are two. First, is there a difference in the product the sub
ject produces under each of these three conditions, and second, which
of the products is considered the best, and the most creative or
original.
II. Design and Experimental Procedure
A. Design— The basic experimental model was a 3 x 3 greco-latin
square design in which each mode of presentation (experimental procedure)
and each stimulus poem appear together once and only once in each posi
tion and combination. The 30 subjects were assigned to the three experi
mental groups in order of their appearance, making 10 replications of
each row of the model. Figure 4 is a representation of the experimental
design. The design was not counterbalanced. Each of the experimental
conditions were considered as a separate bit of behavior. It was hy
pothesized that there would be no order effect for the modes of presen
tation (experimental procedures), word count, subject's judgment of his
best and poorest poem, or for the subject's judgment of his potentially
best poem (See Section III A and III B below).
63
Figure 4
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
1
Order
2 3
I ta l b LTc4Ja w o) a• r - 1 $
II Lc LTA TBo III LT T L
C O o B C A
aT = Tight mode of presentation• L = Loose mode of presentationLT = Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation
= Poem one - "Ifyself when young . . . "B = Poem two - "There was the door . . . "C = Poem three - "Strange, is it not? . ."
B. The Stimulus and Task.— One of the examples of the nature of
a personfs creative efforts and productivity that Kelly gives is
poetry. Poetry is considered a medium which allows highly creative
expression. It was selected as the task for this experiment for two
reasons; first, it would be an unusual task for the majority of these
subjects, and second, it is difficult for most people to write poetry.
It was assumed that all of the subjects had been exposed to the
study of poetry at some time or other in their educational careers, but
that none, or possibly a very small number, had pursued the writing or
reading of poetry after their required exposure to it. This turned out
to be true. Of the 30 subjects included in this study only one was at
the present time actively engaged in writing poetry, and he, only
64
periodically. Among the others, a few stated that they had "gone
through the poetry writing stage" while in their pre-teens or early
teens but had not continued the activity into their later years. It
was also apparent upon questioning that some of these latter subjects
were embarrassed by the admission of having engaged in such activity as
a youth.
This made the writing of poetry as the creative task for this re
search an even more favorable one. It was assumed that if an individual
could write a poem under the circumstances called for in this experi
ment, it would in itself be prima facie evidence of creativity. The
subject would haven produced something which for him was new, novel
and original.
1. The Stimulus.— The stimulus used for each experimental
procedure was a poem from the Rubiayat of Omar Khayyam (19). The deci
sion to use short, four-line poems from the Rubiayat as the stimulus was
predicated on two reasons; first, these poems are unusual enough that
few, if any, of this population would have had little contact with them.
This point turned out to be true. Of the 49 subjects who either partici
pated in the pilot studies or in the present research, only three indi
cated any awareness of the origin of the stimulus poems. These three
were not included in the final research.
Second, the poems were easy to read. Each had a musical
rhythm about it that flowed easily without interruption. Yet, in each
poem, there was an aura of suspense, an unanswered question, an unre
solved problem. In each case, the subject was left with the feeling
there was more to follow.
65
Two additional points also governed the selection of the poems;
these were, first, the poems chosen must each contain an obviously com
plete thought in the four-line stanza, and second, the poems chosen
must not contain any unusual or Oriental words.
A list of fifteen poems were originally selected by the author
from the Rubiayat according to the above criteria. Two judges then
made the selection of the three poems that best met this criteria to
use as the stimulus poems. Appendix M contains the three poems selected.
The presentation of the stimulus poem served as "a shift to
a new topic." Each poem was typed on a 3 x 5 card and given to the sub
ject to read at the appropriate times during each of the experimental
procedures.
2. The Task.— The subject's task at the conclusion of each
experimental sequence was to write a poem of his own creation. Each
subject wrote three poems, one for each experimental condition. The
subjects were instructed to write their poems in any way they wished;
as a second stanza to the stimulus poem, as a continuation of the
thought and/or ideas expressed, as a retort or a reply to the ideas ex
pressed, or as a product that was in no way connected with the stimulus
poem. This procedure, it was believed, would allow the subject to ex
press his creativity in his own way. The only restriction placed upon the subject's production was that it must be in poetic form.
C. Subjects.— The experimental group consisted of 30 males. They
ranged in age from 18 to 37 years. The mean age was 22.5 years. Twenty
of these subjects were students at Trinity University in San Antonio,
Texas. They ranged from freshmen to graduate students. They were
66
enrolled in six different departments of the University, with the De
partment of Psychology and Pre-Medicine representing the majority.
The other ten subjects were airmen assigned to the School of
Aerospace Medicine at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas. Nine of these
subjects had at least a Bachelor's degree, one of these also had a
Master's degree in education. The tenth subject had completed one year
of college work.
The average educational level for the 30 subjects was 14.8 years
with a standard deviation of 1.31 years.
Each subject was asked whether he had ever engaged in any creative
activities, such as writing short stories, poetry, or had done any
painting, designing, or planned, designed or created from their own
ideas some product such as woodwork, metal work, etc. Thirteen of the
thirty stated they had engaged in such activity at some time in their
lives.
Of these, four had written short stories for school newspapers or
year books. One had operated a small "avant garde" literary magazine of
his own for a period of time. Three had written poetry rather extens
ively, one of these had some of his poetry published in a school news
paper, and one was still writing poetry, but only occasionally. One
composed music but none was published. He just played his compositions
for friends, he said.
Two of the airmen created plaster molds and made their own plaster
figures which they decorated and gave to members of their squadron.
Another subject was able to draw an excellent caricature or cartoon
from an idea or statement given him.
67
The last one was a young man from a small ranching community in
Texas who designed and constructed wooden furniture. He stated he would
start with only a faint idea of what his finished product was going to
look like, but as he worked it grew for him.
The other 17 subjects did not admit to any creative activity.
Possibly more detailed questioning would have elicited evidence of some
creative activity on their part, but this was not followed up at this
time.
Each subject in this experiment was a volunteer. No inducement or
incentive was tendered for their participation.
D. The Judges.— Three judges were used to rank and rate the sub
jects' poems on the dimension of Excellence, Originality, Loose-Tight,
Expressive Fluency, and Stimulus Bound/Stimulus Free. One judge was a
research audiologist, one a physician, and the third a clinical psy
chologist.
All three judges professed an interest and an appreciation of
poetry. The physician was an amateur poet and had several of his works
published. Neither of the other judges were writing poetry at the
present time, though both stated, like the subject group, that they had
"dabbled" in it at one time.
Each judge rated the poems independently of the other judges.
Difference of opinion as to the meaning of the various criteria were
resolved through discussion, so there was, at least overtly, a general
agreement on what they were judging.
E. Experimental Procedures.-- Each subject was tested individually.
He was first given the general instructions concerning the whole experiment
68
and his task, and allowed to ask any questions he might have. (See
Appendix A) Before the experimental procedures were introduced, there
was an attempt to make the subject feel comfortable and relaxed. These
few minutes were spent talking about his background and his goals for
the future.
1. Pre-Experimental Procedures.— In the pilot studies one
of the features the subjects had complained about was approaching the
task "cold." They suggested a period of time for warm-up, or a
familiarization period, so they would not be "so tight" during the first
part of the experiment.
Thus, taking a lesson from Kubie who had stated that "free
association is the foundation of creativity," and from Kelly, who
utilizes free association as one method of loosening, it was decided to
utilize a pre-experimental warm-up phase of association with and away
from a stimulus word.Two words, "loud" and "rough", were chosen from a group of
words used in an experiment by Simon on originality in word association
(73). These words were not chosen for any particular psychological
impact they may exert on a subject. They were chosen because it was
assumed that they were very common adjectives. They were also chosen
because, in Simon's experiment, they exhibited the facility to evoke
many and rather widely varying responses.The two pre-experimental tasks, associating with and associ
ating away, were administered to each subject in the same order. These
tasks were used basically for the purpose of relaxation and to give the
subject practice in association.
69
The procedure for the administration of the two pre-experi
mental tasks was as follows: first, the subject was given the general
instructions concerning the purpose of the experiment and told what his
task would be (See Appendix A). After a short pause, the subject was
asked if he had ever played the game of trying to think of as many
words as possible that were like a stimulus word. Regardless of his
response, the instructions for the first pre-experimental task (Pre-I)
were explained to him and several illustrations of associating with a
word were given.
If there were no questions about the procedure, and the sub
ject indicated that he was ready, the first stimulus word, "loud" was
introduced and he was instructed to continue associating with the word
until told to stop.
The time limit for the association period was two minutes for both
association with and association away. A notation was made at the end
of one minute of the number of words produced to that point. The basic
measures for each of the pre-experimental tasks was the number of words
produced at the end of one minute and the total words produced for the
two minute period.
After a one minute rest period the instructions for the asso
ciating away task (Pre-Il) were given along with some examples of this
technique. After it was ascertained the subject understood what was
expected of him, the stimulus word "rough" was introduced. The subject
was again instructed to continue associating until told to stop. The
time intervals mentioned above were observed.
70
Though these were used primarily as warm-up techniques, they
do offer a rough measure of verbal fluency, i.e., total words produced
in the one minute and two minute time periods, and a gross level of the
subject's verbal flexibility, i.e., the frequency level of the words
as determined by the Thorndike-Lorge word list (82).
These techniques could also serve as an estimate of an indi
vidual's ability to go tight or loose appropriately. The association
with a word may be construed as tightening. The subject's task was to
associate with the stimulus word. This would mean that his range was
constricted in the sense that his responses had to be relatively speci
fic. In this case he could not vary widely.
The task of associating away from the stimulus word may be
construed as loosening. On this task the subject was encouraged to say
whatever came to mind. He did not have to be concerned with the rela
tionship of his response to the stimulus word. He could range widely
in his choice of responses.
2. Experimental Procedure.-- When the pre-experimental proce
dures were completed the subject was again given the general instruc
tions for the experiment and told once more what his task would be.
Appendix B presents the outline for each of the experimental procedures.
The order of presentation was according to the experimental design
illustrated in Figure 4.
a. Loose mode of presentation.-- For the Loose mode of
presentation the subject was first handed the appropriate stimulus poem
and told to read it. At the end of 15 seconds the stimulus poem was
removed and he was instructed to associate aloud with a word, phrase or
71
with the entire poem. He was encouraged to say whatever came to mind
and to verbalize his thoughts regardless of how he may think they would
sound to others. All responses the subject made during the association
period were recorded by the experimenter.
The time limit for the Loose mode of presentation associ
ation period was three minutes. At no time during the Loose mode of
presentation did the examiner play an active role. Once he had given
the initial instructions he remained silent. He tried to make his notes
and time the intervals as unobtrusively as possible so not to disturb
the subject's trend of thought.
At the end of the three minute time period the subject
was handed paper and pencil and given brief instructions to write a
poem. The time limit for writing the poem was five minutes.
In order to control for verboseness on the part of some
subjects a "30 seconds remaining" warning was given each subject.
The poem was taken from the subject at the end of the five
ipinutes and turned face down on the desk so not to influence his sub
sequent poems.
A one minute rest period was introduced between each
experimental procedure but conversation was not encouraged during this
period. The experimenter during this period busied himself with
apparent administrative tasks.
b. Tight mode of presentation.-- At the beginning of the
Tight mode of presentation the subject was handed the appropriate stim
ulus poem and instructed to read it. At the end of 15 seconds the
stimulus poem was removed, but within 15 seconds it was handed back to
72
the subject along with a card containing the questions concerning the
structure and form of the stimulus poem (See Appendix B). These
questions were structured around the general formal and academic
characteristics to compel the subject to tightly construe it. During
the questioning period the experimenter was moderately active, asking
for clarification of vague points, or asking a related question if one
appeared warranted. The answers to the questions were recorded ver
batim if at all possible.
The time limit for the Tight mode of presentation ques
tion period was three minutes. At the end of the three minute time
period the stimulus poem and question card were removed and the subject
was handed paper and pencil and given brief instructions to write his
poem.
The time limit for writing the poem was five minutes with
a "30 seconds remaining" warning signal. At the end of the five minutes
the poem was taken from the subject and turned face down on the desk.The one minute rest period as described in the preceding
section was introduced before proceeding to the next experimental con
dition if the design called for it.c. Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation.-- At the begin
ning of the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation the subject was handed
the appropriate stimulus poem and instructed to read it. At the end of
15 seconds the stimulus poem was removed and the subject instructed to
associate with a word, phrase, or with the entire poem. He was encour
aged to say whatever came to mind and to verbalize his thoughts regard
less of how he may think they would sound to others. The subject's
73
verbalization was recorded as verbatim as possible by the experimenter.
During this period the experimenter remained inactive in his relation
ship to the subject.
The time limit for the Loose phase of the Loose-to-Tight
mode of presentation was 90 seconds. At the end of this time interval
the stimulus poem was again handed to the subject along with a card
containing the questions about the structure and form of the stimulus
poem.
The questioning period for the Tight phase was also 90
seconds in length making a total of three minutes for the Loose-to-
Tight mode of presentation.
At the end of the 90 second Tight phase the stimulus poem
and question card were removed and the subject was handed paper and
pencil and given brief instructions to write his poem. The time limit
for writing his poem was five minutes with a "30 seconds remaining"
warning given. When the time was up the poem was taken from the sub
ject and turned face down on the desk. The one minute rest period was
introduced at this point if appropriate.
3. Post-Experimental Procedures.— At the conclusion of the
three experimental procedures the subject was verbally administered a
questionnaire by the experimenter to elicit a self-report of the sub
ject's experiences while engaged in these three procedures (See Ap
pendix C). The questionnaire was administered in this fashion by the
experimenter rather than in the form of a check-list, a multiple choice
questionnaire, or some other paper and pencil self-reporting technique.
74
Previous experience had indicated that following the subject's lead as
he answered these questions many times lead into more pertinent areas
of information than tapped by the other techniques.
The questions asked of the subject were framed around four
major areas: (a) selection of best and poorest poem; (b) selection of
poem with most potential of being a good poem and the one with the
least potential; (c) judgment of which of the three procedures was the
easiest and which was the most difficult; and (d) an introspective
analysis of the subject's constructs leading up to the writing of his
poem for each of the three experimental conditions.
The replies to the questions and whatever additional comments
the subject made were recorded as completely as possible.
The post-experimental questionnaire is found in Appendix C.
III. Description of the Scoring Dimensions, the Techniques of Evaluation and the Hypotheses
These data were evaluated from two viewpoints: first, the
subject's judgment of his own products and performance, and second, the
judgment of three independent judges on five separate dimensions.
The Psychology of Personal Constructs is concerned with how
the individual construes’ events, gains experience from them, fits them
into his construct system, and what these changes mean to him. Thus,
the first evaluations were performed by the subject himself as he reviewed
his performance.The second evaluation consisted of, first, a ranking of the
subject's poems by the judges on an Excellence dimension, and second, a
rating by these same judges on four additional dimensions related to the
Creativity Cycle, and the constructs of loosening and tightening.
75
A. Subjectfs judgment of his Poems.— At the conclusion of the
experiment, during the post-experimental inquiry, each subject was
asked to choose which one of his poems he felt was the best poem and
which the poorest.
The poems the subjects chose as their best poems were given
a score of three, those chosen as their poorest poem a score of one,
and the remaining poem a score of two.
1. Evaluation.— The data obtained from the subject's judg
ments were analyzed by the greco-latin square analysis of variance
technique. The significant F. ratios were evaluated by the t-test to
determine the significance of the difference between the means.
2. Hypotheses.— (a) It was hypothesized that the subject's
judgments of their best poems would indicate no significant effects
for.0-) order of presentation of the experimental procedures, and (2)
stimulus poems; (b) It was hypothesized there would be a significant
effect for mode of presentation (experimental procedures); (c) It was
hypothesized that the poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight
mode of presentation would be selected by the subjects as their best
poems more often than the poems produced as a result of the other two
modes of presentation; (d) It was hypothesized that the poems produced
as a result of the Tight mode of presentation most often would be
selected by the subjects as their poorest poems.
B. Subject's Judgment of Potentially Best Poem.— In addition to
the subject's choice of his best and poorest poem, he was also asked to
decide which poem he felt had the best potential of becoming a good poem if the author had the opportunity to work it over and revise it.
76
The poems the subject chose as having the most potential were
given a score of three, those he felt had the least potential were
given a score of one, and the remaining poem a score of two.
1. Evaluation.— The data obtained from the subject's judg
ments of the potentially best and poorest poems were analyzed by the
greco-latin square analysis of variance technique. The significant F
ratios were evaluated by the t-test to determine significance of the
difference between the means.
2. Hypotheses.-- (a) It was hypothesized that the subject's
judgment of the poems with the most potential would indicate no signifi cant effects for (1) order of presentation, or (2) stimulus poem; (b) It was hypothesized there would be a significant effect for the mode of
presentation (experimental procedures); (c) It was hypothesized that
the poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight mode of presenta
tion would be selected by the subjects as the poems with the most
potential for becoming a good poem more often than the poems produced
as a result of the other two modes of presentation; (d) It was hypothe
sized that the poems produced as a result of the Tight mode of presen
tation would most often be chosen by the subjects as having the least
potential of becoming a good poem.
C. Judges Ratings.— The poems were ranked by the judges on one
dimension and rated on four additional dimensions. These dimensions
were as follows: (a) excellence; (b) originality; (d) loose-tight;
(d) expressive fluency; and (e) stimulus bound/stimulus free. It was
stated as a basic hypothesis for this section that there would be no
differences between the judges.
77
1. Excellence.-- The task for the judges on the Excellence
dimension was to rank each of a subject's three poems from the best to
the poorest. This dimension was not concerned with the grammatical
structure or the literary style of a poem but with how the raw material
of a creative activity of an individual impresses another. The judg
ments for this dimension were based upon how the poem impressed or
appealed to the judge when he first read it.
The decision as to the excellence or value of a creative
product is difficult. What constitutes excellence for one person may
be considered trite by another; what is thought to be original by one
may be considered commonplace by someone else. This dimension of Ex
cellence was based on the criteria of what constitutes good and bad
poetry (See Appendix E). The judges, however, in this instance, re
ceived little direct training in the interpretation of the criteria for
Excellence. They read the summary criteria of what constituted a good
and a bad poem and the general instructions concerning the ranking
procedure and proceeded with the required ranking. It was hoped to
obtain, what Bruner called, the "effective surprise" (29, p. 3). In
this way the judge would respond to each of the poems in terms of its
initial impact on him.
a. Evaluation.— (1) The ranks assigned by the judges
to each of the poems in a set of three were given a score of three for
the best poem, one for the poorest poem, and two for the remaining poem.
Appendix F describes the criteria and the complete instructions to the
judges for ranking the poems on this dimension; (2) The data obtained
from these judgments was evaluated by a three-way analysis of variance
design with subject, judges, and mode (experimental procedure) the main
variables. There will be no poem or order effect in the judges' ratings.
Poem and mode constitute the same variable. There will be no order
effect as the judges looked at the three poems together that constituted
a subject's set; (3) The significant F ratios were evaluated by the t-
test to determine the significance of the difference between the means;
(4) Interjudge correlation was estimated by a modified Hoyt's analysis
of variance technique for determining the reliability of the rankings
among several judges (40).
b. Hypotheses.— (1) It was hypothesized that the poems
produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation would
be ranked by the judges as being the better poem in terms of the Ex
cellence dimension than either those produced as a result of the Loose
or the Tight mode of presentation; (2) The poems produced as a result
of the Tight mode of presentation will be ranked by the judges as being
the poorest poems in terms of the Excellence dimension.
2. Originality.-- A major finding in most of the research con
cerned with creative activity has been the construct of originality.
Many treat this as a trait measurable in terms of its statistical un
commonness.
Originality is defined, for our purposes, as a product of an
individual's creative activity that is viewed by others as being novel,
new, or different in its approach, imaginative but yet appropriate, and
with a certain cleverness or freshness about it which makes it stand
out from the other products.
79
The criteria for the Originality dimension implies a dichoto-
mous nature to the construct. The "High" Originality pole emphasizes
the presence of novelty, newness, imaginative quality and the clever
ness of the product. The "Low" Originality pole emphasizes the presence
of triteness, commonplaceness of the theme, stereotypy in the use of
phrases and content, and a lack of imaginative quality.
The rating scale used for this dimension and for the follow
ing three dimensions was constructed on a four and one-half inch line
divided into nine one-half inch segments. The intervening line seg
ments were not numbered or labeled in any way. The end-points were
labeled "Low" and "High". The judges were instructed to make a judg
ment of each poem in a triad in terms of its agreement or disagreement
with the criteria for originality and place the code letter for that
poem somewhere on the line for that subject to indicate the rating. The
same procedure was followed for each of the other two poems in the set
before the judge went on to rate the next set.
In this way each of the three poems of a subject's set was
rated on its own merits according to the criteria and not in relation
to the other two poems in the set or to the poems of the other subjects.
All three poems could be rated as differing from each other to some
degree, or any two, or all three of them could receive the same rating
in reference to the criteria. The same procedure was carried out on
the following three rating scales. Appendix F describes the criteria
and the instructions to the judges for the method of rating used on
this dimension.
80
a. Evaluation.-- (1) The ratings assigned by the judges
to each of the poems were converted into numerical scores ranging from
one for Low Originality to nine for High Originality; (2) These data
were analyzed by a three-way analysis of variance technique with sub
ject, mode, and judges the major variables (55, Case XIV, p. 303).
Since this design calls for no replications within the cells, there will
be no within subjects error tern to serve as the denominator in deter
mining the F ratios. The mean square of the triple interaction for
Subjects x Modes x Judges was used to determine the significance of the
three interaction effects. The mean square of the Subject x Mode inter
action was used to determine the F ratio for the main effect of Mode.
The mean square of the Subject x Judges interaction was used to deter
mine the F ratio for the main effect of Judges; (3) The significant F
ratios were evaluated by the t-test to determine the significance of the
difference between the means; (4) The mean intraclass correlation for
the judges for each mode of presentation (experimental procedure) was
determined by EbeI1s technique for determining the reliability of
ratings by analysis of variance (17, 32, pp. 395-97). The mean corre
lations obtained for each mode of presentation on each dimension were
then averaged to obtain a mean intraclass correlation for each of the
three modes and for each dimension; (5) Homogeneity of variance for
each of the dimensions were determined by Cochran's technique (13).
The statistics described in this section were used for the
analysis of the data from each of the following three rating scales
described in Sections 3, 4 and 5 of this chapter.
81
b. Hypotheses.— (1) It is hypothesized that the products
of the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation would be rated as more
original than the products of either of the other two modes of presenta
tion; (2) The products of the Tight mode of presentation would be rated
as less original than the products of the Loose mode of presentation.
3. Loose-Tight.— The Psychology of Personal Constructs
describes the construct of loose versus tight as dimensions of the
individual's personality characteristics. These characteristics are
manifest in the way the individual construes his world. He may, for
example, view the world in terms of a series of tight, undeviating set
of constructs that control his everyday life and may hamper his adaptive
solutions. It would be anticipated that in a task such as writing a
poem, the "tight" individual would have difficulty finding constructs
which are permeable enough to allow a suitable transition to take place
to produce a poem of highly imaginative and novel quality. Thus, it
is anticipated that "tightness" would be reflected in an individual's
production by rather concrete, possibly trite subject matter, with the
use of many stereotyped phrases. There would be little highly imagi
native content. However, the structure may be highly organized, pre
cise, and logical, with an emphasis upon control.
The loose individual would be an individual whose construct
system is dilated. He jumps from topic to topic, condenses and expands
time and space relationships within the same context, and may partici
pate in a wide range of activities with little achievement in any one
of them. His behavior may be erratic and bizarre.
82
The task of writing a poem for the loose individual may prove
to be as much of a challenge as for the tight individual. Contrary to
the tight individual's attempt to cast his product in some precise order,
the loose individual may have so many ideas and thoughts that he is
unable to choose the appropriate ones to complete. As a consequence,
his poem will be characterized by a certain vagueness, incoherence, a
loose flow of ideas and a feeling of confusion or lack of control over
the expression. It may be a highly original work but be so poorly or
ganized it is difficult to follow.
For the Loose-Tight dimension these descriptions of the ex
tremely Tight or extremely Loose products are the end-points of the
dimension. Since the judges have no persona), knowledge of the subjects
they must rate these personality characteristics as they are portrayed
by the poems.
The end-points describe the contrast poles of the Loose-
Tight dimension. The judges were instructed to make a judgment of the
degree of looseness or tightness present in each of the poems in a
subject's set and place the code letter for that poem somewhere on the
scale for that subject to indicate the rating. The same procedure was
followed for each of the other two poems in the set before the judge
went on to rate the next set. Appendix G describes the criteria and
gives the complete instructions to the judges for the Loose-Tight
dimension.
a. Evaluation.-- The statistical analysis was the same as
that described for the Originality dimension in Section 2a above.
83
b. Hypotheses.— (1) It was hypothesized that the poems
produced as a result of the Tight mode of presentation would be rated
as indicating more tight constructs than those produced as a result of
the Loose or the Loose-to-Tight modes of presentation; (2) The poems
produced as a result of the Loose experimental procedure would be rated
as indicating more loose constructs than the poems produced under the
Tight or Loose-to-Tight modes of presentation.
4. Expressive Fluency.— The ability to use words in meaning
ful discourse and to communicate effectively is one of the characteris
tics of the creative person.
The loose individual may have difficulty in getting his points
across. He may wander through a jumble of words in his attempt to
communicate and may never quite make it. There will be evidence of a
lack of continuity, of ideas poorly expressed, and a product that is
difficult to read and understand.
The tight individual may be able to express himself with rela
tive accuracy and precision. His points are well made and logical but
there may be a degree of pendantry and atiltedness about his product
that detracts from the otherwise excellent quality of the production.
The individual who uses the Creativity Cycle effectively is
able to express himself adequately with evidence of full command of his
themes and ideas. There may be some evidence of disjointedness in his
production but it does not detract from the over-all flow. His product
will contain both imaginative and factual material woven into a coherent
whole that will be understandable and meaningful to others.
84
The judges1 task on this dimension of Expressive Fluency is to
rate each of the poems in terms of how well the subject was able to ex
press himself and communicate his thoughts. The "High" pole of this
dimension describes the products that are well organized, coherent and
logical, where there is evidence of control, where the central theme is
elaborated upon in an adequate manner, and where the author appears to
be in full command of his product. The "Low" pole of the dimension
describes those products that are rambling, jumbled, possible incoherent,
with little evidence of a central theme, and may show evidence that the
author lacks command of the situation. These products may be difficult
to read because of the inability to follow the author*s trend of
thought. The judgment on this dimension was not concerned with indivi
dual words but how those words, which represent the subject's thoughts,
were woven into a coherent product.
The judges were instructed to make a judgment of the expres
sive fluency present in each poem in a subject's set and place the code
letter designating that poem somewhere on the scale for that subject to
indicate the rating. The same procedure was followed for the other two
poems in a set before the judge rated another set. Appendix H gives a
description of the criteria and the complete instructions for the judges
for rating this dimension.
a. Evaluation.— These data were analyzed in the same
manner described in Section 2a above.
b. Hypotheses.— (1) It was hypothesized that those pro
ducts of the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation would be rated as being
85
high on the Expressive Fluency dimension; (2) The products of the Tight
mode of presentation would be rated as less fluent than those of the
Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation; (3) The products of the Loose mode
of presentation would be rated as less fluent than those produced as a
result of the Loose-to-Tight and the Tight mode of presentations.
5. Stimulus Bound/Stimulus Free.— This rating was, essen
tially, a matching process. The judges compared the subject's product
with the appropriate stimulus poem to determine what influence the
stimulus poem may have had on his creative activity.
The ability of the individual to transcend the stimulus
material and go off in new directions is a factor that is cited many
times as a major characteristic of the creative individual.
Individuals whose construct systems are relatively tight may
find it difficult to "break loose" from the stimulus material and look
at alternatives. The stimulus material should play a major role in his
productions. In our context the poems produced as a result of the Tight
mode of presentation should include many elements from the stimulus
poem.
The individual whose contruct system is relatively loose may
experience many transient images and impressions. His final product
may show little relationship to the stimulus material. Thus, the poems
produced as a result of the Loose mode of presentation should- include
few, if any, of the elements from the stimulus poem.
The individual who uses the Loose-to-Tight transition effec
tively should be able to use the stimulus material minimally, selecting
elements, subjecting them to a validation process and using certain of
86
them in his product. The poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-
Tight mode of presentation should indicate minimal use of the stimulus
material but what is used should be well integrated into the product.
The end-points of this dimension are described as Stimulus
Bound and Stimulus Free. It was the judges1 task to compare the sub
ject's poem against the appropriate stimulus poem, i.e., Code A on
subject's poem against stimulus poem A, and determine the similarity
or the remoteness of the subject's poem.
The judges were instructed to make their judgment and place
the code letter designating the poem somewhere on the scale for that
subject to indicate the rating. The same procedure was followed for
the other two poems in the set before fshe judge rated another set.
Appendix I describes the criteria and the instructions to the judges
for rating this dimension.
a. Evaluation.— These data were analyzed in the manner
described in Section 2a above.
b. Hypotheses.-- (1) It was hypothesized that the pro
ducts of the Loose mode of presentation would be rated as the most
stimulus free; (2) The products of the Tight mode of presentation would
be rated as the most stimulus bound; (3) The products of the Loose-to-
Tight mode of presentation would be rated as most like those products of
the Loose procedure but not as stimulus bound as the product of the
Tight procedure.
IV. Summary of the Hypotheses
A. The major hypothesis for this study states that the product of
the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation (the Creativity Cycle) will be
87
judged by the subject himself and by others (judges) to be superior to
the products produced as a result of the Loose and/or the Tight experi
mental procedure.
B. The alternative hypotheses are stated in terms of the dimen
sions measured:
1. Using the subject's judgment of his best and poorest poem
it is hypothesized there will be no significant effect for (1) order of
presentation, or (2) stimulus poem.
a. It is hypothesized there will be a significant effect
for the mode of presentation (experimental procedures).
(1) The poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-
Tight mode of presentation will be selected by the subjects as their
best poems more often than the poems produced as a result of the Tight
or Loose modes of presentation.
(2) The poems produced as a result of the Tight mode
of presentation will be selected by the subjects as their poorest poems
more often than those of the Loose mode of presentation.
2. Using the subject's judgment of his potentially best poem
it is hypothesized there will be no significant effects for (1) order of
presentation, or (2) stimulus poems.
a. There will be a significant effect for the mode of pre
sentation (experimental procedure).(1) The poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-
Tight mode of presentation will be selected by the subjects as the poems
with the most potential to become a good poem more often than those
poems produced as a result of the Tight or Loose modes of presentation.
88
(2) The poems produced as a result of the Tight mode
of presentation will be selected by the subjects as having the least
potential of becoming a good poem more often than those of the Loose
mode of presentation.
3. For the judges ranking on the Excellence dimension it is
hypothesized that:
a. The poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight
mode of presentation will be ranked by the judges as the best poems
more often than the poems produced as a result of the other two proce
dures.b. The poems produced as a result of the Tight mode of
presentation will be judged as the poorest poems more often than the
products of either of the other two experimental procedures.
4. For the judges ratings of the poems on the Originality
dimension it is hypothesized that:
a. The poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight
mode of presentation will be rated higher on the originality dimension
than the poems produced as a result of either the Loose or Tight experi
mental procedures.b. The poems produced as a result of the Tight mode of
presentation will be rated as being low on the originality dimension.
c. The poems produced as a result of the Loose mode of
presentation will be rated high on the Originality dimension but not as
high.as the. Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation.
89
5. For the judges ratings of the poems on the Loose-Tight
dimension it is hypothesized that:
a. The poems produced as a result of the Tight mode of
presentation will be rated higher on this dimension than the poems pro
duced as a result of either the Loose or the Loose-to-Tight mode of
presentation,
b. The poems produced as a result of the Loose mode of
presentation will be rated lower than the poems of either the Tight or
Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation.
c. The poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight
mode of presentation will be rated lower than those poems produced as a
result of the Tight mode of presentation.
d. The poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight
mode of presentation will be rated higher than those poems produced as
a result of the Loose mode of presentation.
6. For the judges rating of the poems on an Expressive
Fluency dimension it is hypothesized that:
a. The poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight
mode of presentation will be rated by the judges as more fluent than the
products of either the Loose or the Tight modes of presentation.
b. The poems produced as a result of the Loose mode of
presentation will be rated as being less fluent than either the products
of the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation or the Tight mode of presen
tation.
90
c. The poems produced as a result of the Tight mode of
presentation will be rated as being more fluent than the products of the
Loose mode of presentation but not as fluent as those produced by the
Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation.
7. For the judges rating of the poems on the Stimulus Bound/
Stimulus Free dimension it is hypothesized that:
a. The poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight
mode of presentation will be rated as less stimulus bound than the
poems produced by the Tight mode of presentation.
b. The poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight
mode of presentation will be rated as less stimulus free than the
poems produced as a result of the Loose mode of presentation.
c. The poems produced as a result of the Loose mode of
presentation will be rated as more stimulus free than either the poems
produced by the Tight or the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation.
d. The poems produced as a result of the Tight mode of
presentation will be rated as more stimulus bound than the poems pro
duced as a result of either the Loose or the Loose-to-Tight mode of
presentation*
•CHAPTER V
RESULTS
I. Pre-experimental measures
The pre-experimental measures were used primarily as a warm-up
device for the experiment proper but they produced some interesting
evidence that reflect on the Creativity Cycle.
The Psychology of Personal Construct would lead one to
hypothesize that association with a word may represent a "tightening"
process while the association away from a word may represent a
"loosening" phase.
In the association with task the subjects were to respond with
words that were related in some way to the stimulus word. This
limited the subjects to searching through the various related cate
gories and classes of words seeking one that would fit, responding and
then repeating the process.
In the association away task the subject was not hampered by
any restrictions imposed upon him to respond with a particular class
of words. He was free to delve into his innermost depths and bring
forth a response. The process of moving from loosening to tightening
could be observed in the remoteness or closeness of the subject's
responses to the stimulus word. There was a tendency for some of the
subjects to come back to the stimulus word as though to get a fresh
start. The response pattern appeared to fluctuate more on this task,
almost in concentric circles at times.
91
92
It was the opinion that the total words a subject produced and
the frequency of these words, as indicated by the Thorndike-Lorge Word
Frequency lists (82), would give an estimate of the subject's verbal
fluency (the ability to produce words) and his verbal flexibility (the
ability to produce remote words). No thought was given to using these
as predictive measures of creative ability in this study. Guilford has
explored this area thoroughly and includes both verbal fluency and
flexibility as important factors in his concept of creativity (35).
If the range of possible words the subject has to choose from
is limited in the with task by the instructions, the subject is com
pelled to view the stimulus in a tight manner. Therefore, if the
total words a subject produces during a stated time period could be
construed as an estimate of his verbal fluency, then it may be
hypothesized that the subject would produce less words under the Pre-
experimental Task I (association with) than under Pre-experimental
Task II (association away), and words that have a lower frequency
value level.
On the other hand, for the away task, no such limitations were
imposed and the subject could range freely and widely over a vast realm
of possibilities. This could be indicative of the loosening process
and should result in a larger number of words being evoked and that
will have a higher frequency value level.
If the ability to produce remote words, in terms of their fre
quency value, could be construed as an estimate of a subject's verbal
flexibility then it could be hypothesized that the words evolved by the
Pre-experimental Task II would be of a higher frequency value level
93
than Pre-experimental Task I.
TABLE 4
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS FOR TOTALS OF THE "WITH" WORDS AND "AWAY" WORDS AND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
THE MEANS OF THE TOTAL FREQUENCY VALUES FOR EACH TASK
Total Words
Range of Number t ValueTask of Words Total Words X Words N = 30
I With (5-42) 599 19.97 NSII Away (3-37) 603 20.10
Total, Frequency Value
Range of Fre Total Fre Mean Fre- t Valuequency Values quency Values quency Values
I With (27-177) 2399 79.97 NSII Away ( 9-282) 2173 72.43
Table 4 presents the differences between the means for the
total number of words elicited for the two-minute period for each con
dition and the differences between the mean frequency values of each
condition.
There were no significant differences between the two tasks
(Pre I and Pre II) for either total words produced or for the total
frequency value of the words produced during the two-minute time limit.
A rough measure of the variability of the subjects is indicated
by the range of words and frequency values in the first column above.
Here may be some evidence of a tight or loose process in the
94
individual's thinking. One subject (#22) who responded with five words
during the with procedure gave them all within the first few seconds
then sat for over a minute with a very perplexed expression on his
face stating he just could not think. This was true also of subject
#10. He produced six words in the first minute and none in the second
minute. The same thing apparently happened to subject #4 on the
association away procedure. He responded with two words in the first
minute and managed to get one more out in the second minute (see
Appendix J, Table I).
Though this was a relatively simple task the subjects had
considerable difficulty. Their performance was marked by repetitions
and chaining of related words in both phases. Their production was
marked by many long pauses as the subject tried to associate other
words. Although there were no significant differences between the
means for the "with" and "away" phases the individual variability, as
indicated by the range, was great. There was no consistent pattern to
the subjects responses. In some cases they were able to respond with
a number of words on the "with" phase but only a few on the "away"
phase, but the reverse also held true. The correlation between the two
conditions was .64 for the total words produced.
In comparing the frequency values for the with words and the
away words it was more difficult to assess the meaning of a large
increase or decrease between the two tasks for a subject because this
increase may have been the result of one or two high value words.
In examining the mean frequency values of the words for each
of our 30 subjects, found in Table II, Appendix J, it would appear
95
that few of them have extensive vocabularies as measured by this method.
The mean'frequency values for the with group ranged from a low of 1.93
to a high of 8.33. The mean of the mean frequency values for the Pre-I
task was 4.01. According to Thorndike and Lorge these subjects are
using words, in this situation, that appear in printed works at a fre
quency from about 50 to 100 times per 1,000,000 words to about 8 per
1,000,000 words (82, see Appendix D).
For the away procedure the situation does not improve. Here
the mean frequency value for each subject ranged from a low of 1.40 to
a high of 11.28 with an over-all mean of the means of 3.60. The
difference between the two means was not significant (see Table 4
above). The correlation between the total frequency level values was
.70.
A word of caution must be injected here to prevent these results
from being interpreted too generally, even in terms of this population.
The stimulus words themselves were not high frequency value words and
as a result may well have tended to generate low frequency value
responses. Their values according to the criteria would be 2 in each
case (see Appendix D).
The suggested hypothesis of a significant difference between
the with task and the away task for the total words produced and the
total frequency value was not substantiated by these data (see Table 4).
It may be the results of these pre-experimental data indicate we may be
dealing with a somewhat tight group who respond better to structure
rather than the freedom to go off on their own as would be indicated by
the away association.
96
A last point concerning the analysis of the pre-experimental
measures was the significant difference found between the first and
second minute time periods for both the with task (Pre-I) and the away
task (Pre-II). From these results there appears to be a very signi
ficant difference in the subjects' verbal fluency, as measured by this
technique, between the first and second minute on each task. There
were no significant differences found between the total words for
with "one minute," and away "one minute," or between their "two minute"
means. The differences between the means for the total words for each
time interval are presented in Table 5.
TABLE 5
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS FOR TOTAL WORDS FOR THE FIRST MINUTE AND SECOND MINUTE FOR "WITH" ASSOCIATION
TASK AND "AWAY" ASSOCIATION TASK
Task Time Segment X t Value p (2 tailed tests,WithWith
One Minute Two Minutes
12.437.53
3.798 < .001
WithAway
One Minute One Minute
12.4311.20
.976 NS
WithAway
One Minute Two Minutes
12.438.90
2.942 < .01
WithAway
Two Minutes One Minute
7.4311.20
-3.195 <.01
WithAway
Two Minutes Two Minutes
7.538.90
-1.223 NS
AwayAway
One Minute Two Minutes
11.208.90
2.130 <.05
97Of interest is this consistent significant decrease noted in
the number of words evoked during the second minute on both tasks.
Each subject responded quickly at first then tapered off as it became
difficult to associate more words.
One wonders what might have happened, both to the total number
of words produced and to the frequency value level, if the time period
for responding had been longer. A study by Christensen, et al (12),
on the temporal characteristics of creativity, reports that the more
creative responses tend to come later in a session. They also found
this initial high response rate then a decrease in the rate. Along with
this decrease, however, they found a decided increase in the quality of
the responses.
TABLE 6
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS OF FIRST AND SECOND MINUTE FOR TOTAL FREQUENCY VALUE OF THE
PRE-EXPERIMENTAL WORDS
Between X*s X t Value p (2 tailed tests, 58df)
With One Minute With Two Minutes
49.4730.50
3.559 < .001
With One Minute Away One Minute
49.4736.00
1.845 <.10
With One Minute Away Two Minutes
49.4736.43
2.100 <.05
With Two Minutes Away One Minute
30.5036.00
-0.736 NS
With Two Minutes Away Two Minutes
30.5036.43
-0.922 NS
Away One Minute Away Two Minutes
36.0036.43
-0.053 NS
98Using the frequency value of the words the subjects gave as an
indication of the quality of a word it is noted there is a significant
decrease in word quality for the second minute of the with (Pre-I)
task but no difference for the second minute of the away (Pre-II)
task. The differences between the mean frequency values of the words
for the first and second minute time intervals for both the with and
away tasks are shown in Table 6 above.
From the data contained in Table 5 it was noted there was a
significant difference in the subject's performance between the two one-
minute periods for both the with and away tasks. The subject produced
more words during the first minute then tapered off. This is sub
stantially what Christensen, et al (12), found, though their total
experimental time was much longer. Examining Table 6 the same
phenomena is noted for the mean frequency value for the time periods
for the with tasksj there is a decrease for the second minute. The
difference between the frequency values for the two time intervals on
the with task is highly significant. The difference between the time
intervals; for the frequency values for the away task, on the other hand,
does not indicate a significant difference as might be expected with
reference to the results obtained for total words (see Table 5). It
may be that the away technique does provide enough loosening to enable
the individual to produce words in the second minute whose frequency
values are as great or greater than those produced in the first minute.
This may be related to Christensen's finding where in simple recall or
association tasks the rate of production, at first, is rapid, but
becomes progressively slower with time. They state that for the more
99
creative or imaginative tasks the rate of production remains relatively
constant with an increasing level of uncommonness as time goes. on. The
away frequency level is approximately the same though the number of
words produced for the second minute decreases. This may suggest that
loosening is providing a certain stability of responses and possibly
would result in an increased level of "uncommonness" as time goes on.
II. Comparison of the four highest value words from each poem andthe four highest frequency value words from each pre-experimental task
The four highest frequency value words were selected from each
of the subject's poems and correlated with the four highest frequency
value words from the with and the away association tasks. The
Pearson Product-moment correlation was .36 suggesting a low degree of
relationship in terms of frequency value between the frequency level
of the Pre-experimental tasks and the poems.
The differences between the means for the frequency value of
the four words with the high frequency value from each of the poems and
the four words with the highest frequency value from each of the Pre-
experimental tasks is presented in Table 7.
TABLE 7
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEAN FREQUENCY VALUES FOR THE FOUR HIGHEST FREQUENCY LEVEL WORDS FROM EACH OF THE POEMS
AND EACH OF THE PRE-EXPERIMENTAL TASKS
Sum X t Value p (2 tailed test, 58df)
Poems 1830 20.33 -2.209 <.05Pre-Experi 2182 36.37ment Tasks
100
The frequency values for the Pre-experimental task words were
significantly greater than those for the poems. (P<*05). These
differences may be attributed to the nature of the tasks. On the Pre-
experimental tasks the subject had only single responses to be con
cerned with. In writing his poem the subject not only had to think of
the words, but also their relationship to each other, so they would
make, what to him would be, a logical and coherent statement. This
may have tended to lower the frequency level of the words for the poems.
III. Creative latency
Creative latency was considered the period of elapsed time
immediately following the instructions to write the poem and the moment
the subject wrote his first word. There were no significant differ
ences between the means of the experimental procedures for this measure.
The means and standard deviations for Creative Latency are reported in
Table 8.
TABLE 8
MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR CREATIVE LATENCY FOR THE THREE MODES OF PRESENTATION
Mode X SD
Tight 22.47* 19.36*Loose 23.40 19.73
Loose-Tight 23.90 21.97JL, In seconds
In this rather classic measure was observed what could be
called the Creativity Cycle in operation. In several cases the
101subject appeared to have his thoughts well in mind and picked up the
pencil and started writing immediately. In others, there was a
noticeable delay, with overt evidence of false starts, suggestions of
discarded ideas, and then, what could be called a tightening action,
when with almost a sigh of relief, the subject began to write. The
whole process of writing the poem was indicative of the Creativity
Cycle of moving from loose to tight construction. The tightening
process could be observed in the fast writing: the loosening process
in the pauses, the hesitancy, and the quick motor movements that
suggested ideas were in conflict.
During the inquiry the subjects were asked about their
reaction to and/or impressions of what had taken place during this
initial preparatory phase. Several were surprised to learn they had a
latency period. Others stated they were actively seeking or trying to
think of a word to begin their poem. Four of the subjects experienced
what might be called an "insight," "aha," or a sudden illumination
experience. These stated they felt completely blank at the point when
asked to write their poem and stayed blank until "all of a sudden it
came." They had no explanation for it nor could questioning elicit
any pertinent information about the process. It, however, fits with
the assumption that much of creative activity is preverbal and
unrecognized by the subject but yet is active.
IV. Analysis of the subject*s production
A. Word count.— This analysis was made to insure that productivity
- total words produced - had no undue influence on the results. Table
9 is a summary of the greco-latin square analysis of variance for the
102
total word count on the four major variables of (1) subjects, (2) the
effect of order, (3) mode of presentation, and (4) stimulus poems.
TABLE 9
SUMMARY OF THE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR WORD COUNT
Source dfSum
SquaresMeanSquares F p
Subjects 29 35,577.13 1,226.798 11.313 <.01Order 2 222.29 111.145 NSMode 2 215.49 107.745 NSSt. Poem 2 33.76 16.880 NS
SxO 18 987.93 54.885Replications SxM 18 2,791.13 155.063
SxP 18 2,076.73 115.374Total 89 41,904.46
The highly significant subject difference (p<.01) was expected
due to the individual differences in verbal and written expression.
There were no significant differences for the other three major
variables. The absence of a significant difference for the major
variables on word count was anticipated due to the five-minute time
limit for writing the poem.
B. Subjects1 judgment of their poems.— Table 10 is the summary
of the greco-latin square analysis of variance of the subject's own
rating of his poems on a best-to-poorest dimension.
The order of presentation of the experimental conditions had
no effect upon the subjects' selection of his best or poorest poem.
There was a significant stimulus poem effect, (p^.025). This
suggested that one or more of the stimulus poems was influencing the
judgment of the subjects in their selection of their best and poorest
103
TABLE 10
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF SUBJECT'S JUDGMENT OF BEST AND POOREST POEM
Source dfSum
SquaresMeanSquares F P
Subjects 29 .00 .000Order 2 1.07 .535 NSMode 2 4.07 2.035 3.069 < .08St. Poem 2 9.27 4.635 5.666 < .02f
SxO 18 18.93 1.052Replications SxM 18 11.93 .663
SxP 18 14.73 .818Total 89 60.00
poem. A test of the significance of the differences between the means
of the three stimulus poems, indicated that stimulus poem (3 was con
tributing significantly to the subjects' judgments. Table 11, below,
shows the differences between the means for the three stimulus poems.
TABLE 11
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS OF THE STIMULUS POEMS
Poems X t Value p (2 tailed test, 54 df-pooled-Ms)
A 1.67 -0.958 NSB 1.90
A 1.67 -3.167 < .01C 2.43
B 1.90 -2.208 <.05C 2.43
% A+B 1.79 -2.667 < .01C 2.43
104A score of three represented the subject's choice of his best poem and
a score of one his poorest poem. The mean values refer to the mean of
the ranks assigned to a particular poem by the subjects.
Inspection of the data for the subjects' judgments found in
Appendix K, Tables VI and VII, indicates the influence of poem £ is
about equally distributed over each of the orders and each of the modes
of presentation. A review of the protocols obtained at the conclusion
of the experiment did not reveal any particular reason for the prominence
of this poem as the stimulus for the subject's best poem. A review of
the subjects' poems indicated a tendency to use the "death" theme
suggested by poem £ thus indicating there was some stimulus influence.
In the Tight experimental process when the questions were asked about
the poem this particular theme was recurrent. This appears to be the
only explanation for poem C's prominence in the subject's selection.
Since the effects of this poem were evenly distributed over both order
and mode of presentation it was not felt it biased the results.
The mode of presentation variable approached significance with
an F-ratio of < .08. This did not reach the significant level antici
pated. To test the hypothesis that the subjects will judge as their
best poems those produced under the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation
the difference between the modes of presentation were analyzed by the
t-test.
The differences between the means for the modes of presentation
are reported in Table 12.
The significant differences found for the Loose-to-Tight mode
of presentation supports the hypothesis that the subjects will select
105
TABLE 12
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS OF SUBJECT'S JUDGMENT OF BEST AND POOREST POEM BY MODE OF PRESENTATION
Mode X t Value p (1 tailed test, 54 df, pooled Ms)
T 1.83 -0.164 NSL 1.87
LT 2.30 1.958 < .05T 1.83
LT 2.30 1.792 <.05L 1.87
LT 2.30 1.875 <.05% T+L 1.85
as their best poems those produced as a result of the Creativity Cycle.
These results also support the theory that the Creativity Cycle
enhances productivity in its own right and does not need to be com
bined with either of the other methods. These data on the subject's
judgement of his best and poorest poem lend confirmation to the primary
hypothesis concerning the efficacy of the Creativity Cycle.
These data do not support all of the alternative hypotheses for
this measure. The hypothesis concerning no order effect was confirmed,
but the hypothesis concerning no differences between the poems was not
confirmed thus casting some doubt on the results. Using a latin-square
analysis with no evidence of interaction effects makes it difficult to
make more than a calculated guess at the probable interaction taking
place.
Reference to Table 12 indicates that the subjects did consider
the poems produced as a result of the Tight mode of presentation the
106poorest. The difference between the Tight and Loose-to-Tight mode of
presentation is significant (p < .05). The lack of any significant
difference between the poems produced as a result of the Loose and the
Tight modes indicate the subjects, as a whole, saw little difference
between them.
C. Subjects judgment of potential.— An analysis of the poems the
subjects judged as having the most potential of becoming a good poem
indicated the mode of presentation approached significance with an
F-ratio of < .07. Neither order nor the stimulus poems contributed
significantly to the subjects' judgment of potential. Table 13 is a
summary of the greco-latin-square analysis of variance of the subjects'
judgment of the poems with the most potential.
TABLE 13
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF POTENTIAL
Source dfSum
SquaresMeanSquares F p
Subjects 29 .000 .000Order 2 .867 .434 NSMode 2 4.867 2.434 3.334 <.07St. Poem 2 .267 .134 NS
SxO 18 19.133 1.063Replications SxM 18 13.133 .730
SxP 18 21.733 1.207Total 89 60.000
Although the F-ratio was again lower than anticipated, the
means for the mode of presentation were tested for differences. Table
14 reports the differences between the means for the modes of presenta
tion for potential. The results indicate the subjects considered those
107poems produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation
as having significantly more potential of becoming a good poem than
those produced under the Tight mode of presentation (p <.025).
TABLE 14
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS OF SUBJECT’S JUDGMENT OF POTENTIAL BY MODE OF PRESENTATION
Mode X t Value p (1 tailed test, 54 df, pooled Ms)
T 1.73 -0.923 NSL 1.97 ■
LT 2.30 2.192 < .025T 1.73
LT 2.30 1.269 NSL 1.97
LT 2.30 1.731 < .05% T+L 1.85
% L+LT 2.14 1.577 ? .05
The subjects considered many of the poems produced under the
Loose mode of presentation as showing almost as much potential for
becoming good poems as those from the Creativity Cycle. (Loose-to-
Tight). These data support the hypothesis concerning the subject’s
choice of the poem that would show the most potential.
Although the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation is significantly
different from the Tight mode, and from the combination of the Tight
and Loose modes of presentation, absence of a significant difference
between the other combinations suggest these differences may be quite
tenuous as would be expected from the less than hoped for F-ratio.
108D. Ease or difficulty of procedure.— One of the questions asked
each of the subjects about the experimental process was which of the
three procedures did he find the easiest to work with and which the
most difficult. In Table 15 is indicated which mode of presentation
the subjects1 felt was the easiest and which the most difficult along
with the percentage of their responses for each mode.
TABLE 15
EASE OR DIFFICULTY OF MODE OF PRESENTATION
Mode Easiest % Most Difficult %
Tight 8 26.67 13 43.33Loose 9 30.00 15 50.00
Loose-to-Tight 13 43.33 2 6.67Total 30 100.00 30 100.00
This table indicates that less than half of the subjects
(43.33%) chose the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation as the easiest.
There does not appear to be any real concensus of opinion about the
easiest mode although in terms of the magnitude of the differences
between the percentages and the subjects, the Loose-to-Tight mode is
favored. However, in choosing the mode which was the most difficult
there are striking differences. Ninety-three per cent of the subjects
chose either the Tight mode or the Loose mode as the most difficult,
with only two subjects (6.67%) indicating that the Loose-to-Tight mode
was the most difficult. Chi-square analysis of the differences between
the modes of presentation and its ease or difficulty was highly
significant at the <.01 level. (Chi-square 10.756, 2 df). These
109data offer support to the hypothesis that the subject's sense of
facilitation of his performance is improved when the Creativity Cycle
is used.
The information gained from the subjects during the post-
experimental inquiry shed some light on these findings. Though several
were rather inarticulate, others felt the process of getting an idea,
"playing with it" briefly and then looking at it again was the better
method and aided them considerably in the production of their poems.
Although they did not complain explicitly, several stated they
were annoyed at the need to answer the questions or look at the poem
in terms of its structure rather than its thought as required by theiTight mode. The reverse of this, however, was indicated by those
subjects who thought the Tight mode of presentation was the easiest
because they needed the structure it provided. Several stated they
were uncomfortable with the "loose" phase because "there was nothing to
go by."
V. Results of judges ranking and rating of the subjects' poems
A. Ranking for excellence.— The first task for the judges was to
rank each subject's three poems from the best to the poorest. The
initial instructions (see Appendix E) emphasized the fact that these
poems were raw material and not finished products. The criteria for
good and bad poetry emphasized that good poetry is that which appeals
to the senses and has an immediacy about it that is recognized quickly.
The judges ranked the poems in terms of its appeal or effect upon them
when they read it. As one judge stated "I either liked it.or I didn't
110like it." Table X, in Appendix M, gives the complete data for each
judge's ranking on this dimension.
A summary of the analysis of variance of the ranks assigned by
the judges is presented in Table 16.
TABLE 16
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF JUDGES RANKING FOR EXCELLENCE
Source df SS Ms F PSubjects 29 0.00 0.00Mode 2 16.47 8.235 7.075 <.01Judges 2 0.00 0.00S x M 58 67.53 1.164S x J 58 0.00 0.00M x J 4 3.26 0.815S x M x J 116 101.74 0.877
269 189.00
The analysis indicated a highly significant F-ratio for the
mode of presentation (p <.01). The differences between the means for
the three modes of presentation were determined by t-test. These
results are reported in Table 17. The intraclass agreement between the
judges as determined by the modified Hoyt (40) analysis of variance
technique was .90.
It is noted in examining Table 17 that the poems produced under
the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation were selected by the judges as
the best poems to a highly significant degree. This is in agreement
with the stated hypothesis. Those poems produced under the Loose mode
of presentation, however, were considered as the poorest poems, contrary
to what was hypothesized. The poems produced under the Tight mode of
presentation were judged by the judges to be better than those produced
r
Ill
TABLE 17
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS OF JUDGES RANKING FOR EXCELLENCE BYMODE OF PRESENTATION
Between Mode X t-Value p (1 tailed test, 236 df, pooled Ms)
L 1.72 -1.843 <•05T 1.95
LT 2.32 2.882 < .005T 1.95
. LT 2.32 4.724 <.0005L 1.72
LT 2.32 3.803 <.0005% T+L 1.54
k T+LT 2.139 3.283 < .005L 1.722
% L+LT 2.02 0.520 NST 1.95
by the Loose mode of presentation. The Tight poems were not considered
as good as those produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight mode of
presentation. From these results it would appear that the judges were
able to discriminate between the good and the bad poems to a highly
significant degree, at l e a s f on this dimension.
To determine if there was any similarity between the subjects
and the judges on their selection of the best poem a coefficient of
contingency was performed. The chi squares for the subject's judgment
of his best poem and the judges ranking on the Excellence dimension
(Chi-square 4.998, 4 df), and the subjects judgment of his potentially
best poem and the judges ranking on the Excellence dimension (Chi-
square 5.2134, 4 df) were not significant. For the first comparison
112
C = .397, for the second comparison it was .496. These correlations
indicate a low, but definite relationship between the selections of
the subjects and the ranking by the judges on these poems.
B. Judgments for originality.— The judgments for the Originality
dimension were made on the basis of the presence or absence of the
elements of novelty, new ways of handling old concepts, and the
cleverness of the subjects' production.
The complete results for each judge's rating of the three poems
of each subject are contained in Table XII in Appendix K.
A summary of the analysis of variance of the judge's rating of
the poems on the Originality dimension is contained in Table 18.
TABLE 18
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF THE JUDGES RATING OF THE POEMS ON THE ORIGINALITY DIMENSION
Source of Variance df SS Ms F PSubjects 29 280.30 9.666Mode 2 14.96 7.480 2.148Judges 2 84.36 42.180 18.395 <.001S x M 58 203.04 3.483 1.921 <.001S x J 58 132.98 2.293 1.265M x J 4 25.02 6.255 3.450 <.01S x M x J 116 210.31 1.813
269 950.97
The highly significant difference between the judges was
unexpected. The high agreement between the judges on the previous
dimensions apparently gave a false sense of security. Each judge prior
to his actual judging had become familiar with the criteria and vague
points were discussed. It is possible the use of a nine point scale
113
with only the end points identified may have contributed to this
variability. The analysis of the other scales may give a more defin
itive answer to this.
The differences between the means for the judges are presented
in Table 19.
TABLE 19
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEANS OF THE THREE JUDGES ON THEORIGINALITY DIMENSION
Between Xfj
t-Value p (2 tailed test, 236 df, pooled Ms)
Judge 1 5.30 2.217 <.052 4.79
1 5.30 5.913 <.0013 3.94
2 4.79 3.696 <.0013 3.94
It is apparent from these data that Judge 1 appeared to rate
the poems significantly higher on the Originality dimension than the
other two judges. In addition, and probably what also contributed to
the difference, was the rather low ratings assigned by Judge 3.
Apparently Judge 3 perceived the poems as containing much less
originality than the other two judges.
Using Ebel's (17) method for determining the mean intraclass
correlation for the judges by the analysis of variance technique a
reliability coefficient was obtained for each mode of presentation for
all three judges. The average mean intraclass correlation for the
judges for the three modes of presentation was .52. The mean intraclass
114
correlation for each mode of presentation was .71 for Tight, .83 for
Loose and .032 for Loose-to-Tight.
The mean intraclass correlations for the judges for each
dimension and mode of presentation and the average mean intraclass for
the dimensions and modes will be found in Appendix L.
In spite of the judges disagreement in assigning equivalent
ratings to the subjects' poems produced under the Loose-to-Tight mode
of presentation they still rated them as being more original than the
poems produced under either the Tight or Loose mode of presentation.
(see Table 20 below, and Appendix K, Tables XIV and XV.) Apparently
the judges were of the opinion the poems produced as a result of the
Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation contained the most original factors,
but they disagreed on the weight given each poem. This would mean one
judge, for example, may have felt there was minimal evidence of
originality in the three poems, but the Loose-to-Tight poem indicated
the most evidence. As a result, the ratings for all three of the
poems may be low, but the rating for the Loose-to-Tight poem would be
the highest of the three. The same would be true for a judge who felt
the poems contained considerably more evidence of originality. He may
place them all toward the high end of the scale with the Loose-to-Tight
poem the highest. Therefore, though the judges may have ranked the
Loose-to-Tight poems as the highest, the weight assigned by their
placement on the dimension may vary widely.
The significant interactions for Subject x Mode, and Mode x
Judges together with a lack of a significant difference for the Mode
main effect suggest that one or more of the modes of presentation is
115exerting some influence on the rating in conjunction with both the
subjects and the judges.
The significance of the differences between the means for the
modes of presentation were tested by the t-test. The results are
summarized in Table 20.
TABLE 20
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS OF JUDGES RATINGS ON ORIGINALITY DIMENSION BY MODE OF PRESENTATION
Mode X t-Value p (1 tailed test, 236 df, pooled Ms)Between L 4.59 0.652 NS
T 4.44
LT 5.00 2.435 < .01T 4.44
LT 5.00 1.783 <.05L 4.59
LT 5.00 2.087 <.025% T+L 4.52
% L+LT 4.80 1.565 >.05T 4.44
The test of the interaction between Mode x Judges indicated
there were significant differences between the experimental procedures
(modes of presentation) with the Loose-to-Tight mode being judged as
significantly different from the other two modes.
The hypothesis that the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation
would result in products that are judged as containing more original,
new and novel elements was supported by these data.
The alternative hypotheses concerning the products of the Tight
116
and Loose modes of presentation were not confirmed by these data. This
would indicate the judges may have felt the Loose and Tight modes of
presentation were very similar in the degree of originality present.
The interaction effects noted on this dimension suggest the
judges may be responding to a certain type of poem and may as a result
not be able to make as unbiased a judgment as they would like. Since
each poem is part of a set of three the judges reaction to a particular
poem may also be reflected throughout the set and be revealed in the
Subject x Mode interaction.
C. Judgment for the Loose-Tight dimension.--The judges' task on
this dimension was to rate the degree of loosening and tightening he
felt each poem contained. This was not intended to be a measure of
structure in terms effectuality and literary style, but one of the
ability of the subject to weave ideas into a coherent whole, or leave
them dangling.
The summary of the analysis of variance for the Loose-Tight
dimensions is presented in Table 21.
The main variables were not significant. The significant
interaction effects for the Subject x Mode and Subject x Judge indicate
again there were combination effects prevalent. Only the results of
the t-test for the interaction effect of Subjects x Mode will be
presented in Table 22. There were no significant differences between
the judges for the Subject x Judge interaction indicating the differ
ences between the subjects poems are probably producing the variability
and contributing to the interaction.
The results of these data, presented in Table 22, below,
117
TABLE 21
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF JUDGES RATING ON LOOSE-TIGHT DIMENSION
Source df SS Ms F PSubjects 29 181.87 6.271Mode 2 10.07 5.035 1.143 NSJudges 2 5.40 2.700 1.040 NSS x M 58 255.60 4.407 3.248 4.. 001S x J 58 150.60 2.597 1.914 <.001M x J 4 0.93 0.233S x M x J 116 157.40 1.357Total 269 761.87
DIFFERENCES
TABLE
BETWEEN THE MEANS OF DIMENSION BY MODE
22
JUDGES RATINGS ON LOOSE-TIGHT OF PRESENTATION
Mode X t-Value P (1 tailed test, 236 df, pooled Ms)
Between T 4.90 2.043 <.025L 4.43
T 4.90 0.739 NSLT 4.73
LT 4.73 1.304 <.10L 4.43
% T+LT 4.82 1.696 <.05L 4.43
T 4.90 1.391 <.10% L+LT 4.58
support the hypothesis that those poems produced as a result of the
Tight mode of presentation would be rated as being more tight, and
those produced under the Loose mode of presentation would be rated as
118being more loose.
The hypothesis concerning the relative degree of loose and
tight elements in each poem was partially confirmed. In the com
parison between the Tight mode and the Loose-to-Tight mode the judges
considered the poems produced under these conditions as very much
alike in terms of their relative tightness or looseness. The poems
for the Loose mode were judged as differing significantly from the
other two modes.
There were no significant differences between the mudges on
this dimension. The average mean intraclass correlation for the judges
was .64.
A reason for the absence of a significant difference between
the judges where there is a significant Subject x Judge interaction
may lie in the construction of the scale. With an essentially two ended
scale of this type there is a tendency for the judges to produce similar
means (see Appendix K). This Subject x Judge interaction also may have
resulted from the increasing familiarity with the poems on the part of
the judges and the obvious recognition that some subjects produce
better poems. The tendency to rate poems as a group or by particular
code letter may have had some influence though it is difficult to say.
The judges stated this dimension was one of the more difficult to rate.
D. Judges ratings for Expressive Fluency.— On this dimension the
judges were to rate the ability of the subject to express himself
coherently in his poem. A high rating indicated the subject*s use of
words and phrases was logical and meaningful. A low rating suggested
difficulty in presenting material in a logical coherent manner. The
119
use of words in a meaningful way was the principle criterion.
A summary of the analysis of variance of the judges ratings
of the poems for the level of expressive fluency is presented in
Table 23.
TABLE 23
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF JUDGMENTS FOR EXPRESSIVE FLUENCY DIMENSION
Source df SS Ms F PSubjects 29 268.83 9.270Mode 2 10.28 5.140 1.285 NSJudges 2 5.61 2.804 1.444 NSS x M 58 231.94 3.999 2.051 <.001S x J 58 112.61 1.942M x J 4 20.23 5.058 2.594 <.05S x M x J 116 226.22
269 875.72
TABLE 24
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS OF JUDGES RATINGS ON EXPRESSIVE FLUENCY DIMENSION BY MODE OF PRESENTATION
Between Modes X t-Value p (1 tailed test, 236 df, pooled Ms)
T 4.63 -1.042 NSL 4.88
LT 5.11 2.000 < .025T 4.63
LT 5.11 0.958 NSL 4.88
LT 5.11 1.458 <.10T+L 4.78
T+LT 4.87 -0.042L 4.88
120The main effects were not significant. The significant inter
action effects of Subject x Mode and Mode x Judge were tested. Since
mode appeared predominant this was investigated first. Table 24
contains the results of the test for the differences between the
means for each of the modes and their combinations.
The results of the t-test indicate the Loose-to-Tight mode of
presentation was rated as significantly higher on the expressive
fluency dimension than the Tight mode (p £ .025). There was no
difference between the Loose-to-Tight and Loose modes, indicating the
judges tended to rate the poems produced as a result of these two
experimental procedures as being very much alike on this dimension.
The average mean intraclass correlation for the judges on this
dimension was .60.
The hypothesis concerning the Creativity Cycle and expressive
fluency was only partially substantiated in this case. The hypothesis
stating that the Tight mode would be rated as more fluent than the
Loose mode was not substantiated.
E. Judgment of Stimulus-Bound - Stimulus-Free Dimension.— This
task was essentially a matching task for the judges. They matched each
of the subject's poems with the corresponding stimulus poem by the
code letters and made a judgment on whether the subject's poem was
similar to the stimulus poem or remote from it.
In several cases, the decision of where to rate rested on the
interpretation of the thought expressed in the subject's poem and how
closely it adhered to the thought or idea expressed in the stimulus
poem. Since this, in many ways, could result in "splitting hairs"
121it was the consensus of the judges that the interpretation of the
expression of a thought or idea from the stimulus poems must be quite
obvious to rate it as highly stimulus-bound. Even this decision still
left some unresolved difficulties, as may be seen from the analysis of
the results.
The summary of the analysis of variance of the judges ratings
on the Stimulus-Bound/Stimulus-Free dimension is presented in Table 25.
TABLE 25
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF JUDGES EATINGS ON STIMULUS-BOUND/STIMULUS-FREE DIMENSION
Source df SS Ms F PSubjects 29 493.05 17.002Mode 2 11.56 5.780 0.877 NSJudges 2 102.45 51.225 16.033 <.001S x M 58 382.22 6.590 3.572 <.001S x J 58 185.33 3.195 1.732 <.001M x J 4 1.48 0.370S x M x J 116 214.07 1.845
269 1390.16
By now the judges were quite familiar with the poems and, in
spite of training on the criteria, and looking at several examples, it
was quite apparent the judges had their own ideas of what constituted
similarity and remoteness.
The hijghly significant Judges main effect could almost have
been expected from the comments of the judges during the training
sessions. The difficulty the judges had in attempting to interpret the
subject's main thought or idea in terms of the theme or main idea of
the stimulus poem is illustrated by both this significant main effect
and the interaction effect of the Subjects x Judges.
122
The results of the test of the differences between the means
for the judges is presented in Table 26.
TABLE 26
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS OF JUDGES RATINGS ON THE STIMULUS-BOUND/STIMULUS-FREE DIMENSION
Between Judges X t-Value p (2 tailed test, 236 df, pooled Ms)
1 4.83 -5.370 < .0012 6.28
1 4.83 -1.296 NS3 5.18 \ -,
2 6.28 4.074 <.0013 5.18
% 1+2 5.56 1.407 <.103 5.18
% 1+3 5.01 4.704 <.0012 6.28
% 2+3 5.73 3.333 <.0011 4.83
Judge 2 differed from the other two judges to a considerable
degree in assigning his ratings on this dimension. Inspection of Table
XVIII, in Appendix K, indicates that Judge 2 placed his ratings toward
the extremes more often than the other judges, i.e., he considered the
poems as more stimulus-free. One wonders if he was less discriminating
in the interpretation of boundedness and freedom or was he allowing
himself a greater latitude of interpretation in his judgments on this
dimension. Judges 1 and 3 were apparently much alike. Even in com
bination they still rated the poems as more stimulus-bound than Judge 2.
The average mean intraclass correlation for the judges on this
123
dimension was .77.
The significant Subject x Mode interaction was tested to deter
mine which mode, or more likely in this case, which stimulus poem, was
exerting the influence and the results of the differences between the
means for the modes of presentation are reported in Table 27. A rating
of 9 was highly stimulus-free and a rating of 1 was very stimulus-
bound.
TABLE 27
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MEANS OF JUDGES RATINGS ON STIMULUS-BOUND/STIMULUS-FREE DIMENSION
BY MODE OF PRESENTATION
Between Modes X t-Value p (1 tailed test, 236 df, pooled Ms)
L 5.48 -0.667 NST 5.66
LT 5.16 -1.852 <, .05T 5.66
L 5.48 1.111 NSLT 5.16
L 5.48 -0.259 NS% T+LT 5.41
% L+LT 5.32 -1.259 > .10T 5.66
% L+T 5.57 1.519 >.05LT 5.16
All of the means tend toward the stimulus-free pole. It had
been hypothesized that the poems produced under the Tight mode would
be more stimulus-bound and more similar to the stimulus poem. Reference
to Table 27 indicates this was not the case. The means for the Tight
124
poems tended more toward the Stimulus-free pole. In the pilot studies
several of the subjects had made comments about disliking the need to
look at the structure and the mechanics as required by the Tight
procedure, and as a result completely disregarded them in their own
production. The same thing appears to have happened with the subjects
in the present study.
It had also been hypothesized that those poems that were pro
duced under the Loose mode would be rated as highly stimulus-free since
they had little contact with the stimulus. There is a trend for the
poems produced as a result of the Loose mode as being stimulus-free,
as rated by the judges, but not to the same degree as the poems pro
duced under the Tight mode.
It was hypothesized also that the poems produced as a result
of the Loose-to-Tight mode would tend toward the stimulus-free pole,
but that these poems would not be as free as those produced as a result
of the Loose Mode. This was not found to be true. The judges tended
to rate the poems produced as a result of the Loose-Tight mode as
being more stimulus-bound than either of the other two modesI The
differences between the modes were almost negligible, however,
suggesting that in spite of the highly significant judge differences
their ratings for the poems appeared to coincide. Only the differ
ence between the Loose-to-Tight and Tight modes was significant
(p <.05). Two of the combinations approached significance but not in
support of the hypotheses. The hypotheses for this dimension were not
substantiated.
125
In summary, the results of these data support the major
hypothesis concerning the effectiveness of the Creativity Cycle in the
production of poetry by naive subjects but give only mixed support to
the minor hypotheses.
CHAPTER VI
DISCUSSION AND CREATIVE IMPLICATIONS
I. INTRODUCTION
However skeptical, doubtful, and fearful the author's constructs
were when the data began to emerge he is now able to loosen his con
structions and make them more comprehensive. The results support the
notion of a process that may be called the Creativity Cycle, moreover,
it is something that can be elicited so as to produce products which will
be considered novel and good both by the subjects themselves and by a
group of independent judges. Within the context of this experiment, the
products of the Creativity Cycle were superior when compared with the
products of the two other processes tested under similar circumstances.
The creative process is highly personal, but one that can not yet
be turned altogether off or on full force by an experimenter. We must
admit to the artificiality and limited effectiveness of the experimental
procedures and conditions designed to induce creative acts realizing full
well the aptness of Murray's words when he says that creativity rarely
shows itself when called upon. He is also of the opinion that impromptu
tests are not likely to bring forth anything but rather shallow forms of
originality and inventiveness (59, pp. 43-44).
In many studies concerned with creativity or originality, the
creative process must be inferred from the product and must meet the
criteria of social acceptance. The product of this process is,
126
, 127
what Beliak calls, the "fossil of the creative act, but one that has
the advantage of other 'fossils'--it holds still for study" (9).
In this study we were also concerned with the product but,
even more specifically, with the process. The experimental conditions
imposed on the subject were designed to stimulate this process, but
the evidence that creative activity had taken place must be determined,
in part, from the product--the "fossil."
With these points in mind it is necessary to make certain as
sumptions about the poems the subjects produced in the three experi
mental situations. First, it is accepted that the poems these subjects
produced may represent shallow forms of originality, as it was not ex
pected the products would be finished poetic art. The products are the
raw, unrefined result of a brief creative activity. It may be conjec
tured that these poems are, in essence, not much different than the
first vague, uneasy machinations of the loosening process of a more
accomplished poet. These could be called first impression poems, the
"gut-work," if you will, of what is later to occur as a result of in
numerable revisions and rewritings (much like writing a dissertation).
Second, the judgment of a product's novelty or worthwhileness
may be viewed from either of two frames of reference--social and in
dividual (80). Within the social frame of reference, other people be
sides the creator judge the product as being novel, different or worth
while within their present stage of knowledge. In this research, the
social judgment was accomplished, not by using professional poets,
artists or literary people, but by judges who indicated an appreciation
of poetry and an interest in its aesthetic qualities. Though the judges
128
were all professional people they had rather dissimilar backgrounds,
but among them they had one important similarity--they were all
interested in people. It was the opinion that if these three judges
would be able to agree to a significant degree on the various merits
of these poems this would constitute social acceptance of the product.
The second frame of reference--the individual--is concerned
with the individual's feelings about what he has produced and the
process that preceded its occurrence. Does it represent a novel and
worthwhile product to him? In this study the majority of the subjects
had little or no experience with writing poetry, so the experience it
self was new and novel, in the broad sense of the word. When faced
with the task of choosing one of their own products as being the best
or the poorest it necessitated making a judgment of the value or worth
whileness of a product of a new activity. This judgment, in part, was
based upon the process experienced in its production. The Psychology
of Personal Constructs is interested in this last point.
To determine the effectiveness of an individual's creative
process is is necessary to ask him what he was doing and have him de
scribe his feelings and thinking during the process. This is a question
able method of assessment because of the fallibility of introspection
in naive subjects. It is, however, the one method that has contributed
greatly to the understanding of the creative process (51). MacLeod
states, in his summation of the 1958 symposium on creative thinking con
ducted at the University of Colorado, that he felt the participants had
omitted one important block of evidence concerning the process of crea
tive activity, the memories of their own creative moments. MacLeod
129
goes on to say that "If a Poincare or an Einstein is willing to share
his experience, why shouldn't a Bruner or a McClelland?" He is of the
opinion that the study of the creative process should begin with this
"old-fashioned self-observation"
The data acquired in this manner may not be the most precise
but, as MacLeod very aptly states, "without the intuition derived from
direct experience, our inquiry would be formal and barren" (51, p. 183).
In the conduct of this research the introspection and retro
spection of the subjects contributed immensely to the evaluation of the
three experimental conditions, as will be indicated later.
A. Discussion of the Pre-Experimental Tasks.-- The results of the sub
ject's performance on the pre-experimental tasks are of interest. There
were no differences between the two tasks for the total words the sub
jects produced or the total frequency value for the total words. The
surprising finding was the difference found between the two time seg
ments for the frequency values.
For the association with task the assumption was made that the
task would call for tight constructs in responding to the stimulus word
with related words. Thus, the decrease in total words produced during
the second minute was not an unexpected phenomenon. Bousfield (10),
Christensen, et al, (12), and others, have found this same effect taking
place in recall or association type tasks. Bousfield stated that the
rate of production of words at any moment is proportional to the number
remaining. The general finding for these studies was the initial high
production rate and a decrease in the rate as time goes on.
130
This decrease in rate of production was also found for the
total words produced during the association away task. This task was
assumed to have some similarity to the loosening process. During this
task the subject could depart as far from the stimulus word as he wished.
In spite of this freedom the subjects remained somewhat task oriented
and, at least on the basis of total words produced, did not stray too
far. There was a tendency for the subjects on both tasks to repeat
previous words. On the association away task this tendency to repeat
was present in addition to, as happened in several cases, a tendency to
give a word that was similar or related to the stimulus word, contrary
to the instructions. This has some similarity to Kelly's statement con
cerning a technique of loosening in therapy when the subject is asked
to associate away from a word. He stated the subject many times has
difficulty abandoning an issue and may be unable to depart too far from
the initial point (44, II, p. 1036).
The hypothesis was tentatively advanced that the frequency
level value assigned to each of the words may represent an estimate of
an individual's verbal flexibility, i.e., the ability to evoke words
that are of infrequent usage.
It had been determined there was no difference between the
with or away tasks for the total frequency value of the words. However,
when these values were observed in their relation to the two one minute
time periods, an unexpected development occurs.
On the basis of what had been observed for the total words for
the two intervals it was not expected there would be any difference in
the trend of the results for the frequency values. The results of the
131
association with task substantiated this. But, the results for the fre
quency values between the two time periods for the association away task
did not decrease as expected. There was no difference between the means
for the two one minute time periods. Examination of the data for the
Pre-experimental task II (Appendix J, Table II) reveals that two sub
jects (#11 and #27) who had obtained very high total frequency values
for the first minute decreased rather markedly in the second minute.
The number of changes that took place within the total subject popula
tion were not remarkable. The sustained frequency value for the second
minute appeared to be influenced by two factors: one, the increase in
frequency values obtained by several of the subjects in the course of
the second minute which represented a significant increase over that
obtained in the first minute; and second, the observation that there
was a certain over-all stability within the total subject group on this
task. In the with task the difference was greater between the first and
second minute for a subject.
It would appear from these results that the loosening process
assumed to be taking place during the away task may be affording a cer
tain stability to the individual's constructs that is not present in
the with task. He may decrease in terms of the total words evoked during
the second minute but the level of these words remain high. This con
firms to some extent An observation made by Christensen that in creative
work the more original or unusual responses come later in the sequence.
It is of interest to speculate what might occur if the time
limits were extended. In the case of the association with task it may
be anticipated that the decrease observed in both total words produced
132
and their frequency level would continue due to the instructions they
had received. For the association away task it is more difficult to
state what might occur in view of our results. Would the total words
produced continue to go down as presently observed and would the fre
quency level increase? As the individual becomes less bound to the
stimulus word as a result of an increase in time and his own loosening
process, it may be that the frequency value level of the words evoked
would gradually increase much in relation to the increase in quality of
the product as found by Christensen. That is, if the individual does
not construe the situation as threatening or anxiety producing.
The inability of the subjects to use high level words in
their poems could be construed to be the result of a tightening process
that took place during the writing of the poems. It may be that higher
level words would have been used if time had been available to revise
the poems. On the other hand, the stimulus poems themselves did not
contain many words of a high frequency value and if the stimulus poems
had any influence on the subject it would tend to limit the frequency
level of his poems. However, it does not take esoteric words to achieve
a new and novel product in poetry, only the right combination of the
words to bring about what Bruner calls the "effective surprise" (29, p.3).
B. Discussion of Subjects' Judgments of their Poems.— The subject's
judgment of his best poem And the one with the most potential did not
reach the level of significance the experimenter had hoped, but did, in
both cases, indicate the subjects, for the most part, felt the poems
produced as a result of Creativity Cycle (Loose-to-Tight mode) were
better. The fact the subjects experienced difficulty in choosing
133
between the poems could be attributed to their own involvement with them.
In several cases, they stated they were all bad or all good and it was
difficult to make a choice. In all cases, the selection of the best
poem, and the potentially best poem, took a long time as they read and
re-read them in an effort to reach a decision. This ambivalence over
the selection of their best poem and the one with the most potential
possibly contributed to the absence of highly significant differences
for the Mode variable. The subject was saying, in effect, they*re all
the same.
Only on the Potential dimension did the subjects support the
hypothesis that the Tight poems would be the poorest. The subjects
stated they felt there was a lack of imagination and a stilted quality
in these poems. This is what, according to the theory, would be antici
pated. The products of a Tight mode of construction may be correct and
acceptable, but may reflect sterility and drabness when compared to the
more imaginative products of the other two modes.
The influence of one poem, (6) , was an unexpected development
in the subject's judgment of their best and poorest poem. It is of
interest that it apparently did not exert this same influence on the
subject's judgment of the poems with the most or least potential. To
determine if there was a significant difference between the subject's
judgment on the Best-Poorest and Most-Least dimension a chi-square
analysis of the differences was performed. It indicated no significant
difference between the judgment of the subject on the Best to Poorest
and Most to Least dimension at tthe .05 level. (Chi-square 8.4329, 4 df).
134
There was also no significant difference between poem C on the Best-
Poorest and the Most-Least dimension at the .05 level using the chi-
square analysis (chi-square .6255, 2 df). The contingency coefficients
was .495 between subject's judgment on Best-Poorest and Most-Least
dimension and .068 for influence of Poem C on Best-Poorest and Most-
Least. From these results it would appear the subjects were moderate
in agreement in their judgment on the Best-Poorest and Most-Least
dimension. There was almost negligible agreement on the influence of
Poem C between the Best-Poorest and Most-Least dimension.
Apparently there was a quality about Poem C that was experi
enced by the subject and generalized through the three orders and
through the three modes of presentation on the Best-to-Poorest dimen
sion. Its influence was subtle as it was not evident on the subject's
estimate of potential.
One factor that may be observed in retrospect was the failure
to ask the subjects which of the stimulus poems might have influenced
his product or made the most lasting impression upon him. It was not
anticipated there would be any differences between the poems so this
avenue of approach was not considered at the time the inquiry questions
were developed.
C. Discussion of the Results of the Post-Experimental Inquiry.-- The
introspection protocols obtained from the subjects during and subsequent
to the experimental procedures substantiated the efficacy of the Creati
vity Cycle and its ability to influence the product in a positive manner.
Twenty-six of the subjects, or 87 per cent, reported the pre
sence of loosening tendencies during the Loose mode of presentation.
135
For the Loose phase of the Creativity Cycle, 13 subjects, or 43 per cent,
reported evidence of loosening tendencies. These tendencies, the sub
jects stated, consisted of attempts to combine words in odd ways, or the
reoccurrence of a word that did not seem to fit the context of their
formulations at the time. Most of these subjects stated they experienced
a feeling of fluidity and a shifting of the elements during these phases.
There were no clear-cut references to weird or strange thoughts, though
as one subject stated in reply to this question, "I don't think so,
though my thoughts might appear strange to other people who don't know
me, but not to me particularly." Seventy per cent of the subjects on
the Loose mode and 60 per cent on the Loose-to-Tight mode of presenta
tion reported they felt these processes had exercised some influence on
their final product.
There were individuals in the group who just could not go
loose. In fact, one became so exasperated he became mildly angry and
was able to produce only a one line cliche as his product for the loose
condition; "Fools rufih in where angels fear to tread." Apparently for
him this was a prophetic statement.
Some of the subjects indicated mild annoyance with the pro
cedures imposed upon them by the Tight mode of presentation. Thirteen,
or 43 per cent, of the subjects indicated they had this feeling. As one
subject expressed it, "I thought you were trying to test me." Others
stated they could not understand the purpose for the questions and, as
a result, tended to resist the placing of any emphasis on the structure.
Eighteen, or 60 per cent of the subjects stated the emphasis on the
structure and details had no influence on their product. In this result
136
may be found some confirmation of the difficulties encountered in this
type of inquiry. Many of the subjects who stated they experienced mild
annoyance over the procedure also stated the procedure had no effect on
their product. This may be one of the reasons why the results for the
Tight mode of presentation were, for the most part, equivocal, and also
suggest why the poems produced as a result of the Tight mode on the
Stimulus Bound/Stimulus Free dimension were judged as more stimulus
free. The subjects stated they wanted to look at the poem from an
affective level, in terms of the feelings or impressions, not mechanics.
Only 10 (33 per cent) of the 30 subjects stated they felt the Tight pro
cedure influenced their product. This is of additional interest be
cause in the pilot studies there had been indications that the majority
of the individuals did tend to become tighter and the Tight mode did
influence their products.
This rebellion'against the Tight mode of presentation was
probably not against the mode itself but against the technique. As
stated in the description of the subjects, few had little contact with
the writing of poetry beyond their literature courses. The questions
asked of them possibly aroused some feelings of inadequacy or incompet
ence in the poetic area because of their lack of familiarity with it.
This, coupled with the fact that they knew they had to write a poem,
presented a fairly formidable problem for most of them. This was indi
cated by their comments. Several of the subjects stated, in reply to
the questions about the Tight mode, that this was a weak area for them,
or one that had always presented problems. The most typical response
was "I just don’t know anything about poetry."
137
A possible alternative method that could have been used for
the Tightening procedure would have been to ask the subject to describe
the poem in detail, telling as much about it as he could. This might
consist of having the subject describe the ideas, the number of lines,
the key words, the total words, anything which may have applied to the
construction of the poem but yet not implying a need to examine it from
an academic viewpoint.
Another method which perhaps would have provided greater
tightening would have been to have the subject read the stimulus poem
aloud over and over again for the entire three-minute time period.
This, I expect, would have produced a much more stimulus bound poem for
the Tight mode of presentation.
There was some opposition to the Loosening phase also but not
to the extent noted in the Tightening phase. In this procedure the sub
ject had something to do which did not require a knowledge of the tech
nical qualities of poetry. However, several of the subjects stated they
were uncomfortable because they were not sure of what to say. The re
quirement of speaking their thoughts during the association period may
have produced more of a movement toward tightening than anticipated.
The subjects did not tend to say whatever came to mind but only what was
most in awareness at the time. They stated, on several occasions, that
they had a word or phrase in mind but discarded it in favor of another
because it did not seem to fit. This, as a result, may have tended to
interfere with the effectiveness of Loosening process.
An alternative to this method that may have produced better
results could have been to allow the subject to verbalize, or not, as he
138
wished. In this way the loosening process could have been utilized
more effectively. The preverbal elements, in this case, could.have
exerted more influence on the final product.
Another alternative, related to the pre-experimental task,
could have been to have the subject choose a word from the stimulus
poem and encourage him to associate away from it for the three-minute
time period. This method would have allowed the subject to range
widely in his associations and enhance the loosening process.
For the Loose-to-Tight experimental procedure the subjects
reported much the same impressions as reported in the loosening and
tightening phases noted above. Twenty-two, or 73 per cent, of the sub
jects stated they had no difficulty shifting from the loose to tight
phase of the cycle. There is an interesting aspect noted, however,
when analyzing these results. For the Loose mode of presentation, as
would be expected, the majority of the subjects (87 per cent) reported
impressions of loosening, vagueness, fluidity of their thoughts, and a
shifting of the elements. On the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation
a little less than half, 13 subjects, or 43 per cent, reported these
impressions of loosening. The same number of subjects, 13, reported
the impression of movement toward clarification during the Tightening
phase of the Creativity Cycle.
The lack of any large difference between the Loose and Tight
phases of the Creativity Cycle suggests that each phase of the cycle was
exerting about equal influence on the subject in the production of his
poem. One other point that must be considered is the smaller number of
subjects reporting impressions of loosening during the Loose phase of
the Creativity Cycle could also have been a function of the time element
involved. For the Loose mode of presentation the subject associated
for the full three minutes; for the Loose phase of the Loose-to-Tight
cycle, only 90 seconds. The interruption of the Loose phase of the
Creativity Cycle to shift the subject to the Tight phase, though done
as qmoothly as possible, did compel the subject to rather tightly
attend to the questions to be answered. Thus, on the inquiry, it would
be expected that fewer subjects would report loosening tendencies.
Though this was not followed up in this research, it would be of inter
est to speculate on the subjects who reported loosening tendencies dur
ing the Loose phase of the Creativity Cycle and those who did not. Is
the subject who utilizes the Creativity Cycle most effectively the one
who can recall the. loosening tendencies, or, is the subject whose method
of approach is relatively Tight the one who cannot recall these tend
encies? This area of self-awareness and sensitivity to their creative
process is a whole area of research itself with the Creativity Cycle.
The data reported in Table 15 showing the subjects* estimate
of the procedure they felt the most comfortable with, and the one in
which they were able to produce most easily, is substantiated by the
subjects' reports. As one subject stated, "It was fun to associate
with some of your ideas and then to see if I was anyways close." Others
referred to the Loose-to-Tight procedure as a way of better organizing
their thoughts. The subjects were in the majority in stating they felt
the Loose-to-Tight procedure influenced their final product (60 per cent
with 20 per cent more thinking it had some influence but were not sure).
140
The subjects as a whole stated they enjoyed the procedures and
many expressed surprise, and In several cases, genuine amazement, that
they were able to produce something that even looked like or resembled
a poem. The subjects were in general agreement in stating that in the
past they had paid little attention to how they thought or how they
produced something. They were all impressed by the introspective pro
cess of going back over their thinking and trying to reconstruct what
took place.
D. Discussion of the Judges and Their Ratings.— In many respects this
study constitutes a dual approach - one concerned with the individual
subjects, their estimates of their creative activity and their intro
spections; and second, the judges and their involvement in the process
of making judgments concerning the creative products of others. The
ranking and rating procedures required the judges to view the poems in
terms of a series of tight constructs. Each judge brought to these
sessions his own preconceived notion of what constitutes good poetry,
excellence, and originality, but, most of all, his own construct system.
During the training phases on the criteria for the dimensions,
though tight constructs were imposed upon the judge, it soon became
apparent that two of the judges were quite creative in their thinking.
Despite the training to adhere to the criteria, they saw and felt many
possibilities for the extension, clarification and enhancement of many
of the poems. As their familiarity with the poems increased so did
their involvement. The judging of some of the poems became a real exer
cise in creative activity. Here is probably some of the basis for the
interactions observed. Judge 1 was quiet, rather passive, asked few
141
questions and worked quietly and efficiently. Judges 2 and 3 were much
more active, questioning, changing, actively participating in the
poetry. This, as pointed out earlier, may explain some of the inter
action observed.
In regard to the rating of the dimensions the judges stated
they felt the easiest task was the ranking of Excellence. However, they
also experienced some of the same difficulty the subjects had in making
their decisions. Choosing the best poem was relatively easy, they
stated; the choice of the poorest poem presented difficulties. The
judges felt that many of the poems had a similar quality about them.
There were exceptions to this, of course; there were several of the
poems all of the judges thought were highly original and different. Ex
amples of the best and poorest poems as rated by the judges will be
found in Appendix N. Examples of high and low poems for each of the
dimensions are also included in this Appendix.
The four rating scales presented many difficulties for the
judges. It could well be the instrument was asking for finer discrimi
nations than the judges were able to make on the basis of the criteria.
Qualitatively the judges were able to distinguish those poems that were
particularly outstanding or particularly low on a dimension but experi
enced considerable difficulty in assessing the so-called middle group.
On the Originality dimension the judges were essentially in
agreement that the Creativity Cycle produced the more original poems
though the differences between the judges were great. Judge 1 tended on
the average to rate the poems high on originality while Judge 3 tended
to rate them as low. Judge 3, however, discriminated more widely between
142
the poems produced as a result of the Loose or Tight modes and those
from the Loose-to-Tight mode. He rated the Loose-to-Tight poems con
siderably higher. Judge 2, the amateur poet, rated the poems on the
average as being low on originality. On the Stimulus Bound/Stimulus
Free dimension, Judge 1 tended to rate the poems as more Stimulus Bound
while both Judges 2 and 3 saw them as tending more toward the Stimulus
Free dimension.
The table of mean intraclass correlations between the judges
is contained in Appendix L. It indicates the level of agreement between
the judges for the ratings given on each dimension for each experimental
condition. This table indicates there is fairly high mean reliability
for the Tight mode and the Loose mode but a relatively low mean intra
class correlation for the Loose-Tight mode.
In view of these correlations one wonders if the transition
from the Loose-to-Tight construction of the Creativity Cycle does not
present a more variable picture in its product and thus one more diffi
cult to judge. From these results it would appear the poems produced
as a result of either the Tight or the Loose mode of presentation have
a distinctive characteristic about them that resulted in fairly high
agreement among the judges. This is what would be expected in terms of
Personal Construct theory. The product of the Creativity Cycle, however,
is the result of the realignment and shifting of the elements within
the construct before tightening. The product may, as a result, differ
to such a degree from the other products that it is difficult to
reliably assess.
143
The two most variable ratings were those for the Originality
and Expressive Fluency dimensions. The difficulties of deciding what
was original within the context of the Creativity Cycle were great.
The differences between the judges on the Originality dimension were
highly significant, with Judge 3 the most variable. There was high
agreement between the judges for the Loose and the Tight modes of pre
sentation. The Loose-to-Tight mode was significantly different from
the other two modes. This would indicate the judges agreed as to the
presence of Originality, but it was on how much where they differed.
An explanation for the low intraclass correlation for the Loose-to-
Tight cycle may be that each judge varied to a considerable extent in
their judgments from poem to poem, and set to set, on the presence of
originality on the Loose-to-Tight mode. The mean reliability for a
single judge on the Loose-to-Tight mode for the Originality dimension
was .011 which is quite poor. The mean reliability rating for a single
judge on each of the other modes was .45 for Tight and .61 for Loose,
suggesting fairly good internal consistency on these ratings. (See
Appendix L for formula).
On the Loose-Tight dimension the judges rated the poems in the
predicted direction. The Tight mode was significantly different from
the Loose mode ^<^.025) but not from the Loose-to-Tight mode. The
judges rated the Loose-to-Tight and Tight modes as being similar in re
gard to the indications of loose or tight thinking present in the proto
cols. The combination of the Loose-to-Tight and Tight modes were sig
nificantly different from the Loose mode (p4..05). The difficulty the
judges experienced on this dimension appeared to center around the
ratings of the Loose and Tight poems.
144
Looking again at the Loose-Tight row in Appendix L, a phenomenon
is seen which is opposite to what occurred on the Originality dimension.
Here, it may be noted, the difficulty appears to center around the deter
mination of what was Loose and what was Tight with rather high agree
ment pn the Loose-to-Tight mode. The judges stated this dimension was
the most difficult of all to rate.
The Expressive Fluency dimension was the other variable dimen
sion. From Appendix L it is apparent the judges were in agreement on
the Loose mode of presentation. Again it is the Loose-to-Tight mode
that appears to present difficulty. Though the agreement among the
judges is higher than what was found for the Originality dimension,
there is still considerable internal variation within a judge. For the
Loose-to-Tight mode a single judge agreed with himself on his various
rankings to only .15, as compared to a single judge correlation of .36
for the Tight mode and .59 for the Loose mode.
On this dimension the Loose mode apparently was the easiest
to discriminate as would be expected. The Loose-to-Tight mode was sig
nificantly different from the Tight mode but considered similar to the
Loose mode in terms of the criteria for the Expressive Fluency dimension.
The judges felt that there was little difference between the Loose and
Loose-to-Tight cycle.
This was contrary to what was hypothesized. The Loose mode
was hypothesized to be less organized and coherent and as a result should
be rated lower on this dimension than the other two modes. Instead, the
Tight mode poems were considered the least fluent. These differences are
small, however, and may reflect only the interaction of the judges with
the subjects and, in turn, with their poems.
145
In this study the judges were faced with a two-way rating of
an individual subject's productions. First, the judge had to make a
decision in terms of all three poems in a set against the dimension, and
second, each of the poems against each other to determine the relative
position for each one on a particular scale. The complexity of the
rating made the task of the judges particularly difficult and probably
contributed to the interactions obtained. It is apparent the best re
sults were obtained from the within-subject comparisons such as the
Excellence dimension.
The last dimension, Stimulus Bound/Stimulus Free, required
the matching of the stimulus poem to the subject's poem and the deter
mination as to whether the subject was able to transcei^dthe material,
or whether he stayed close to the stimulus material. This dimension
should have given some indication of the subject's creative potential.
If the subject was able to "break loose" from the stimulus material and
set off on a new path, this would be indicative of creative ability
within our context.
There was only one significant difference for this dimension,
between the Loose-to-Tight and Tight modes, favoring the Tight mode
(p<.05). Inspection of the means in Table 27 and Appendix K, Table
XIX, indicates little difference in magnitude between the modes of pre
sentation. In almost every case the judges saw the tight poems as
being more Stimulus Free. The differences between the judges were
highly significant (See Table 26).
Though there was high agreement between:the judges in rating
the poems on this dimension (See Appendix L), the judges differed in
146
terms of the magnitude of their ratings. Judge 2 saw the poem as being
quite Stimulus Free while Judge 1 was just the opposite. He sqw them as
being more Stimulus Bound. None of the hypotheses for this dimension
were substantiated.
Despite the difficulties encountered by the judges in rating
the five dimensions, they supported the major hypothesis on the Excel
lence and Originality dimension and partially supported it on the Ex
pressive Fluency dimension. On the Loose-Tight dimension and the Stimu
lus Bound/Stimulus Free dimension where it was hypothesized the poems
produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation would
be rated as less than the Tight mode and more than the Loose mode of
presentation the results were not as clear-cut. On the Tight-Loose
dimension the poems produced as a result of the Creativity Cycle were
rated as showing more evidence of tight elements than the Loose mode
but there was no difference between the Loose-to-Tight mode and the
Tight mode. On the Stimulus Bound/Stimulus Free dimension the poems
produced as a result of the Loose-to-Tight mode were rated as being more
stimulus bound than those from either of the other two modes.
It had been hypothesized the product of the Tight mode of
presentation would be ranked the poorest on Excellence dimension. This
was not substantiated. The products of the Loose mode of presentation
were rated as the poorest poems. This would suggest the judges were0possibly rating along two dimensions; one concerned with the affective
impression of the poem, and second, its coherence. Not only did the poem
have to impress the judges but the content also had to make sense to
them.
147
For the Originality dimension it was hypothesized the product
of the Tight mode of presentation would be rated as low on originality.
This was partially substantiated. The difference between the Loose and
Tight modes was not significant. The difference between the Tight mode
and the combination of the Loose and Loose-to-Tight modes of presen
tation was also only partially substantiated (p = < .10, ^.05).
The hypothesis that the products of the Tight mode of presen
tation would contain more evidence of tight elements than the other two
modes was only partially substantiated. These products were signifi
cantly different from the Loose mode but not from the Loose-to-Tight
mode. In testing the Tight mode against the combination of Loose and
Loose-to-Tight it was expected that the Tight mode would be signifi
cantly greater. This was minimally substantiated (p = < il0).
On the Expressive Fluency-dimension it was expected the Tight
mode would show evidence of better expressive fluency than the Loose
mode but not as much as the Loose-to-Tight mode. The former of the two
hypotheses was not substantiated. There was no difference between the
Tight and Loose modes.
On the Stimulus Bound/Stimulus Free dimension it had been ex
pected the product of the Tight mode would be rated as the most Stimulus
Bound. This was entirely refuted. The Tight products were rated as the
most Stimulus Free.It had been anticipated the poems produced as a result of the
Tight mode of presentation would reflect the tight procedure and in
structions given to the subjects. This had been found true in the pilot studies and there was no reason to expect there would be a difference on this study.
148II. CREATIVE IMPLICATIONS.
In this study it was determined the use of the Creativity Cycle
enabled an individual to produce a better and more original poem. In
addition, many of the subjects indicated the Loose-to-Tight process was
a comfortable process to work with and they stated it aided them in
their productivity. This would suggest the use of the Creativity Cycle
may be of value in many areas where the production of new ideas, in
whatever context, is of importance.
The fact that the Loose-to-Tight process could be evoked in
this research suggests that it is amenable to an educative process.
Mearns (56) reports on the efforts of one school that encouraged the
use of the Creativity Cycle. He describes in vivid terms the growth and
development in the use of the Creativity Cycle in his students. He
tells of children who enter this school for the first time, fresh from
the confines of the traditional school system. He described their
resistance to being creative, then the slow awakening, the loosened
construction, and finally the full utilization af the Creativity Cycle
in productive creative activity. He commented that these products are
minimal at first, but as time goes on, the products grow in stature, in
scope, and in expression. But, more important, is the opening of new
ways to anticipate events, to reconstrue and organize constructs into
new ways of thinking about the universe.
Whitehead views education as a threefold cycle which he calls
the stage of romance, the stage of precision and the stage of generali
zation (89, pp. 28-31). Though he first describes these cycles in rela
tion to the development of learning ability and the acquisition of
149
knowledge in the child and youth, he later implies that this same cycle
should be prominent in the life of the productive individual. White
head states that for older youth these cycles are composed of a stage of
freedom, a stage of discipline, and again, a stage of freedom (p. 42).
He states further that this "whole affair is merely a preparation for
battling with the immediate experience of life, a preparation by which
to qualify each immediate moment with relevant ideas and appropriate
actions" (89, p. 98). He emphasizes that during the initial periods of
"youthful vigor" the product of the imagination should have no "responsi
bility for immediate action." The individual should be "free to think
rightly or wrongly, and free to appreciate the variousness of the uni
verse undisturbed by its perils." (89, p. 95).
What Mearns (56) and Whitehead (89) are saying, and what the
studies of Getzel and Jackson (25) and Torrance (86) have indicated, in
essence, is that the individual can be taught to utilize the Creativity
Cycle. He can be taught to loosen appropriately, "to realign his facts
in a makeshift way" without the need "to come to grips with the incon
sistencies" (44, II, p. 1030) and then from this will come new approaches,
fresh outlboks, and new ways to anticipate and construe events.
It is apparent from this research that it may be possible to
introduce this process on even higher levels of the educational process.
Reference is made to the analogy of the graduate school made in the
first chapter. It becomes more appropriate in view of these results and
Whitehead's remarks. Whitehead states the spirit of "generalization"
should dominate the university. Prior to the university the student has
150
been "mentally bending over a desk" acquiring the habits of disciplined
learning. In the university, the student "should stand up and look
around" (89, p. 37). The use of the Creativity Cycle may well be a
technique that would enable the student to see more clearly when he
"stands up and looks around."
There are many factors in the environment that restrict the
use of the Creativity Cycle (20, 53, 69, 76). For the most part, indi
viduals do not wish to appear different in their relationship with
others. Fromm says most people are not aware of and do not respond to
anything (24). This would suggest a very tight construction is pre
dominant in the major part of society if we accept Fromm’s thesis. What
he is stressing, I believe, is that in the way most individuals construe
events the use of the Creativity Cycle is minimal. They view the world
through tight, impermeable constructs. These tight constructs are formu
lated early in an individual's life. They have learned not to express
their creative thoughts for the inspection and possible rejection by
others.
This is not to say that the Creativity Cycle is not present,
but rather, its use is restricted. It is present in many aspects of the
daily life of an individual: in his handling of the many little details
that confront him, but unless his construct system is well-organized to
permit moving from loosened construction to tightened construction
effectively, he will remain within a relatively rigid conceptual frame
work. The effective use of the Creativity Cycle provides fresh out
looks and greater awareness for the individual. However, it takes a
"something" to bring it into being.
151
To be creative, in whatever context, there has to be an aware
ness of and a sensitivity to problems. The individual must be available
to outside experiences and impressions. In Personal Construct terms
the individual must possess a construct system which is amenable to
these experiences.
The results of this research indicate that the Creativity
Cycle is effective in the production of new ideas and ultimately new
products. Its utilization by an individual will enable him to be more
productive not only in the sense of a product for social consumption but
also in terms of his own personal construct system.
The major implications of this research lie, therefore, largely
in four areas where the use of the Creativity Cycle has been shown to
be of value. First, it appears to be a method that enables an individual
to analyze, synthesize, and order his thoughts to such a degree that he
is able to produce a better product when this product is compared to
those of other processes. The present research indicated the subjects
felt the Loose-to-Tight mode of presentation was of benefit to their
productivity. Thus, it would appear that the use of the Creativity
Cycle may enable individuals to produce better products, or ideas that
eventually lead to better products, than if he approaches the task in
either a Loose or a Tight manner.
Second, when the subject is given the freedom to engage in
"preposterous thinking", to "play" with the various alignments, while
minimally testing them, without the need to override the unconvention
ality of the construct with "tight" logic, many of the subjects felt
they performed better. The subjects* comments concerning the fluidity
152
of their thoughts and their feelings of the shifting and realignment of
the elements suggest that under conditions where the Loose-Tight process
is encouraged it is of value to the subject. This would imply that en
couragement and freedom to engage in loosening and tightening activity
may provide an individual with a more adequate method of adapting to
his universe.
Third, the ability of the individual to accept the unconven
tionality of his thoughts was indicated by the subjects' report. The
subjects, as a whole, stated they had given little attention in the past
to their thought processes or even the content. The subjects' reports
concerning the introspection process indicated some awareness of the
unconventionality of the content of some of their thoughts. Their com
ments indicated they felt these thoughts had some influence on their
products. It would appear that one of the important implications of
this research was the recognition and acceptance of the presence of
these occasional preposterous and unconventional thoughts and ideas and
the recognition that these may lead to a product that the subject him
self felt was worthwhile.
Fourth, and probably of most importance, this study supports
the contention that all individuals possess creative ability to some
degree. In this study, the majority of the subjects had little previous
experience with composing poetry, yet, in each instance, they were able
to produce a poem. Many of these poems were judged to be quite original,
and possibly if they could have been worked on and revised, would have
been acceptable to the literary public. It is indicative of the efficacy
153
of the Creativity Cycle when it is considered that the better poems from
these naive subjects, as selected by the judges, were a product, for the
most part, of the Loose-to-Tight (Creativity Cycle) mode of construction.
This would imply that though creative ability is present in all indivi
duals, the use of the Creativity Cycle tends to more readily evoke it.
III. SUGGESTED AREAS OF RESEARCH WITH THE CREATIVITY CYCLE.
There are many areas where research on the efficacy of the
Creativity Cycle is needed. One area, which follows from this present
research, is its extension into other forms of artistic endeavors;
painting, writing stories, creating mosaics from a multitude of dis
similar objects, drama. A possible innovation that could, and should
be introduced, is that of longer work periods both in the process phases
and on the product itself. Possibly alternating periods of loosening
and tightening of varying lengths could be compared to periods utilizing
all Tight or all Loose construction. One interesting facet that could
be explored within this context is the notion of the incipient movement
towards tightening suggested by Kelly.
An interesting area touched by the literature on creativity
and one which affords many possibilities is that of social relationships.
Creativity planning sessions, with the members chosen essentially for
their dissimilar talents and creative zeal, are becoming an integral
part of many industrial concerns. The literature indicates that, for
the most part, these sessions are highly profitable. The major emphasis
in these groups is on the freedom to express divergent opinion and the
acceptance of loose thinking. Research is needed on the effectiveness
154
of the Creativity Cycle in group situations. Would the Loose-to-Tight
movement promote cohesiveness within a group and a solidarity of pur
pose in approaching a goal or would it result in confusion? Possibly
all three experimental procedures used in this study could be utilized
in group situations to determine their effect. It would be of interest
to know what would happen both to the group and to the individual con
cerned if the individual perceived the group and its activities in
terms either of predominantly tight or loose constructs.
An area of interest that also stems from this present research
concerns the personal constructs of the judges and what effect this
might have on their ratings of the products of a creativity activity.
A hint of what might be occurring was indicated in this research in
the differences found between the judges. If it could be determined a
judge tended to construe events tightly or loosely, or was, for ex
ample, more aesthetically inclined or a rigorous thinker, it may be
possible to obtain results concerning the degree of involvement of the
judges and their sensitivity in discerning the subtle differences in a
product. Are tight judges more sensitive to tight products, and loose
to loose products, or are the tight judges more sensitive to the loose
products, and the loose to the tight products?
A very pertinent area of research concerns the evaluation of
an individual's usual method of construction, and whether this is at
variance with his product. The Role Construct Repertory Test (Rep Test)
(44, I, pp. 219-866) may be a fruitful method of ascertaining the pre
dominance of loose or tight constructs. By this method it may be
155
possible to determine whether tight individuals produce essentially
tight products, and vice versa; or whether the essentially tight indi
vidual engages in loose activities as a means of anticipating events,
and again, vice versa.
Another area is suggested by the studies of Crutchfield (14).
These concern the influence of conformity on the Creativity Cycle.
Crutchfield*s studies suggest that the more "tightly oriented" individual
may be the most conforming. Would the individual who utilizes the
Creativity Cycle effectively be a high or a low conformer? Or, to put
the question another way, if the individual was found to conform on
certain tasks in relation to his peer group, would the use of the Cre
ativity Cycle in a related, but different, task serve to make him less
of a conformer on subsequent tasks? This area of research has innumer
able possibilities.
. APPENDIXES
156
LIST OF APPENDIXES
Appendix Page
A. General Instructions and Instructions for Pre-Experi-mental Procedures ................................. 158
B. Experimental Procedure for Each Subject Group ....... 160
C. Questions for Post-Experimental Inquiry ............. 166
D. Scoring Procedures for the Pre-Experimental Tasks . . 169
E. Criteria and Scoring Instructions for Judging Excellence .............................................. 171
F. Criteria and Instructions for Judging Originality . . 174
G. Criteria and Instructions for Making Judgments on theLoose-Tight Dimension ............................. 179
H. Criteria and Instructions for Judging Expressive Fluency .................................. 184
I. Criteria and Instructions for Making Judgments on theStimulus-Bound/Stimulus-Free Dimension .......... 189
J. Tables of the Results of the Pre-Experimental Tasks . 194
K. Tables of the Results of the Subjects' Judgments andthe Judges Ranking and Rating of the Poems . . . . 197
L. Mean Intraclass Correlation Coefficients Between Judges for Each Mode of Presentation and Each Dimension 213
M. Stimulus P o e m s ....................................... . 214N. Examples of Poems Rated High and Low on Each Dimen
sion ............................................... 215
157
158
APPENDIX A
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR
PRE-EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURESThis is an experiment in creativity. It is an attempt to deter
mine if, under certain conditions reported to be conducive to creative
thinking, you are able to produce a product that others will consider as
creative. There will be a preliminary free association period and three
phases to this experiment. Before each phase you will be given specific
instructions.
At the conclusion of each experimental phase your task will be
to write a poem. This poem may take whatever form you wish to use. It
is your own creation. For example it could be in the form of a second
stanza to the stimulus poem you will see; it could be a continuation of
the stimulus poem; it could be a retort, reply, complaint, or a rebuttal
of the ideas expressed in the stimulus poem, or it could be a poem of
your own creation with no connection to the stimulus poem. The avenue
of expression is up to you. The content of the poem is up to you. The
only restriction that will be placed upon you is that it must be^ in some
poetic form.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
Have you ever played the game where someone gives a word and you
are to see how many words you can think of that are like it in some way?
In this first task I am going to say a word and I want you to associate
with it; give as many words as you can that have some relationship to it
until I tell you to stop. Do you understand? Remember to use words
159
that have some relationship with the word I give you. Keep going until
I tell you to stop.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?
The word is "loud." (2 minute time period for the "with" asso
ciation.) (Record all responses and draw a line after one minute has
elapsed.)
(One minute rest interval.)
During this period I want you to associate away from the word
that I will give you and keep associating away from it until I tell you
to stop. To associate away from a word means you will respond with a
word that has no relationship to the stimulus word nor to the word you
have just given as a response. Your responses may be as deviant as you
wish. Try not to inhibit your thoughts, say whatever comes to mind re
gardless of what you think it might sound like to others.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?
The word is "rough." (2 minute time period for the "away"
association.) (Record all responses and draw a line after one minute
has elapsed.)
At the conclusion of this phase a one minute rest period is
introduced and then the General Instructions are again read to the sub
ject and he is asked if he has any questions about what his task will be.
APPENDIX B
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE FOR EACH SUBJECT GROUP
GROUP I
15" Tfl*--Show stimulus poem *'A"--15 second time limit
Remove stimulus poem at end of time limit and return within 15 seconds. Hand Subject card of questions for Tight phase. Stimulus poem remains in Subject's possession during the Tight phase.
3* Questions to be answered:
What do you think is the main idea expressed in this poem?
What are some of the key words? How are they used?
What words rhyme? What purpose does the rhyming serve?
Are all of the lines accented in the same way? What purpose does the accenting serve?
How does the poem end?
5' Stimulus poem is removed and the Subject is told to write his poem according to the instructions given him previously. 5 minute time limit. When he has finished writing, the poem is removed and a one minute rest interval introduced. There will be no communication during this period.
15" Lg --Show stimulus poem "B"— 15 second time interval
Remove stimulus poem and within 15 seconds instruct Subject to associate with a word, phrase, or the entire poem. He is asked to say whatever comes to mind. To say what it makes him think of.
3' Association period. Subject associates with poem. All verbalization recorded. 3 minute time limit.
*T = Tight Mode of Presentation L = Loose Mode of Presentation
161
5 1 Subject told to write his poem according to the instructions given him previously. 5 minute time limit. When he is finished, the poem is removed and a one minute rest interval introduced. There will be no communication during this period.
15" LTq — Show stimulus poem "C"--15 second time limit
Remove stimulus poem at end of 15 second time interval and within 15 seconds instruct Subject to associate with a word, phrase, or the entire poem. He is asked to say whatever comes to mind. To say what it makes him think of.
90" Association period. Subject associates with poem. All verbalization recorded. 90 second time limit.
90" Questions to be answered during the Tight phase. Stimuluspoem "C" is handed to the subject with a card containing these questions: 90 second time limit.
What do you think is the main idea expressed in this poem?
What are some of the key words?
How is the rhyming used?
How does the poem end?
5 1 Stimulus poem removed and the Subject told to write his poem according to the instructions given him previously. 5 minute time limit.
Analysis Period:
At the conclusion of the three experimental procedures, the Sub
ject's three poems are placed in front of him in the order they
were produced and the analysis period introduced. The analysis
follows the outline of questions contained in Appendix C.
•fcLT = Loose-to-Tight Mode of Presentation
*62
GROUP II
15" Ii£— Show stimulus poem "C"--15 second time limit
Remove stimulus poem and within 15 seconds instruct Subject to associate with a word, phrase, or the entire poem. He is asked to say whatever comes to mind. To say what it makes him think of.
31 Association period. Subject associates with poem. All verbalization recorded. 3 minute time limit.
51 Subject told to write his poem according to the instructions given him previously. 5 minute time limit. When he is finished, the poem is removed and a one minute rest interval introduced. There will be no communication during this period.
15" LT^— Show stimulus poem "A"— 15 second time limit.Remove stimulus poem at end of 15 second time interval and within 15 seconds instruct Subject to associate with a word, phrase, or the entire poem. He is asked to say whatever comes to mind. To say what it makes him think of.
90" Association period. Subject associates with poem. All verbalization recorded. 90 second time limit.
90” Stimulus poem "A" is handed to the Subject with a card containing these questions: (90 second time limit)
What do you think is the main idea expressed in this poem?
What are some of the key words?
How is the rhyming used?
How does the poem end?
51 Stimulus poem removed and the Subject told to write his poem according to the instructions given him previously. 5 minute time limit. When he is finished, the poem is removed and a one minute rest interval introduced. There will be no communication during this period.
15" T^~-Show stimulus poem "B"— 15 second time limit
Remove stimulus poem at end of time limit and return within 15 seconds. Hand Subject card of questions for Tight phase. Stimulus poem remains in Subject's possession during the Tight phase.
3' Questions to be answered:
What do you think is the main idea expressed in this poem?
What are some of the key words? How are they used?
What words rhyme? What purpose does the rhyming serve?
Are all of the lines accented in the same way? What purpose does the accenting serve?
How does the poem end?
5' The stimulus poem is removed and the Subject is told to write his poem according to the instructions given him previously. 5 minute time limit.
Analysis period:
At the conclusion of the three experimental procedures the Sub
ject's three poems are placed in front of him in the order they were
produced and the analysis period introduced. The analysis follows the
outline of the questions contained in Appendix C.
GROUP III15" LTp--Show stimulus poem "B"--15 second time limit
Remove stimulus poem at end of 15 second time interval and within 15 seconds instruct Subject to associate with a word, phrase, or the entire poem. He is asked to say whatever comes to mind. To say what it makes him think of.
90” Association period. Subject associates with poem. All verbalization recorded. 90 second time limit.
164
90" Stimulus poem "B" is handed to subject with a card containingthese questions: (90 second time limit)
What do you think is the main idea expressed in this poem?
What are some of the key words?
How is the rhyming used?
How does the poem end?
5' Stimulus poem is removed and the Subject told to write his poem according to the instructions given him previously. 5 minute time limit. When he is finished, the poem is removed and a one minute rest interval introduced. There will be no communication during this period.
15" Tq — Show stimulus poem "C"— 15 second time limit
Remove stimulus poem at end of time limit and return within 15 seconds. Hand Subject card of questions for Tight phase. Stimulus poem remains in Subject's possession during the Tight phase.
3* Questions to be answered:
What do you think is the main idea expressed in this poem?
What are some of the key words? How are they used?
What words rhyme? What purpose does the rhyming serve?
Are all of the lines accented in the same way? What purpose does the accenting serve?
How does the poem end?
5' Stimulus poem is removed and the Subject is told to write his poem according to the instructions given him previously. 5 minute time limit. When he has finished writing, the poem is removed and a one minute rest interval introduced. There will be no communication during this period.
165
15" L^--Show stimulus poem "A11— 15 second time limit
Remove stimulus poem at the end of time limit and within 15 seconds instruct Subject to associate with a word, phrase, or the entire poem. He is asked to say whatever comes to mind. To say what it makes him think of.
3' Association period. Subject associates with poem. All verbalization recorded. 3 minute time limit.
5 1 Subject told to write his poem according to the instructions givenhim previously. 5 minute time limit.
Analysis period:
At the conclusion of the three experimental procedures the
Subject's three poems are placed in front of him in the order they were
produced and the analysis period introduced. The analysis follows the
outline of the questions contained in Appendix C.
166
APPENDIX C
QUESTIONS FOR POST-EXPERIMENTAL INQUIRY
Questions for inquiry from subject after he has finished all three experimental sequences:
1. Of the three poems you wrote which one do you feel is the best poem?
a. What is there about that poem that makes it better than the other two?
2. Of the two remaining poems which one do you feel is the poorest poem?
a. Why do you feel this is the poorest poem?
3. If you were an impartial judge making a selection on the basis of potential, which of the three poems do you feel has the best poten to be a good poem if the author had the opportunity to work it over and revise it?
a. Why do you feel this poem has the greatest potential to be a good poem?
4. Which of the remaining two poems do you feel has the least potential of becoming a good poem regardless of how much it was worked on?
a. Why do you feel this one has the least potential?
5. Which of these three processes did you find the most comfortable to work with?
a. What was there about it that made you feel comfortable?
6. Which of the processes do you feel was the most difficult to work with?
167
a. What was there about it that made it difficult for you?
7. During the procedure where you were shown a poem briefly and then asked to free associate with it can you tell me what you were doing, what thoughts came to mind, how you sorted out your different impressions?
a. Was there any feeling of vagueness or fluidity to your thoughts?
b. Did any of your thoughts seem too weird, strange or unreal to use? What happened to them?
c. Do you think they may have influenced your final product in any way? How?
8. During the procedure when you were shown the poem briefly at the beginning and asked to free associate with it for a short period of time, then given the poem again and asked about the structure and its mechanics did this need to shift your frame of reference present any difficulty for you? In what way?
a. During the first part of this phase did you have any thoughts orimpressions that appeared vague, strange, or confused? Did they tend tocome into focus or change in any way when you looked at the poem again?
b. What were these thoughts and/or impressions and how were theyclarified?
c. Did you feel these initial impressions or thoughts and the later clarifications influenced your final product in any way? In what way?
9. During the procedure where you used the stimulus poem continuously and were asked a lot of questions about its composition and structure what feeling or impression did you have?
a. Did this need to look closely at the mechanics annoy you in anyway?
168
b. Did close attention to these mechanical details interfere or enhance your final product? In what way?
10. During the period of time before you began to write your poem can you tell me what you were doing? What was taking place?
a p p e n d i x d
SCORING PROCEDURES FOR THE PRE-EXPERIMENTAL TASKS
The scoring for the Pre-experimental task I will be in terms of
the absolute number of associations the subject is able to make to the
stimulus word in the 2 minute time period.
A second score for this task will be the frequency level of
each of the words as determined by the Thorndike-Lorge word frequency
list. (See below.) These frequencies will be converted to scores rang
ing from 1 to 14 for common to uncommon and will be totalled for each
subject to yield a rough measure of his ideational flexibility.
The scoring for the Pre-experimental task II will again be in
terms of the absolute number of associations the subject is able to make
to the stimulus word in the 2 minute time period. The average number of
associations the subject is able to make for the two pre-experimental
tasks will yield a rough measure of his verbal fluency.
The frequency level of the words obtained during task II will
be determined by the same procedure as above and the average frequency
level for the two pre-experimental tasks will yield a rough measure of
the subject's ideational flexibility.
The scores assigned to each frequency level from the Thorndike-
Lorge word list are contained in the following table.
170
VALUES ASSIGNED TO WORDS ACCORDING TO FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE*
OCCURRENCE PER MILLION WORDS
ASSIGNED FREQUENCY VALUE
AA (100) 1
A (50) 2
30-49 3
19-29 4
14-18 5
10-13 6
8-9 7
6-7 8
5 9
4 10
3 11
2 12
1 13
- 14
*Thorndike, Edward L., and Lorge, Irving, The Teacher*s Word Book of 30,000 Words, New York: Bureau of Publications, TeachersCollege, Columbia University, 1944.
171
APPENDIX E
CRITERIA AND SCORING INSTRUCTIONS FOR JUDGING
EXCELLENCE
A. Criteria
The evaluation of poetic excellence is a matter of degree.
There are no clear-cut criteria to indicate good and bad poetry. JEn
terms of evaluating these poems in the Excellence dimension the follow
ing "rules of thumb" have been devised (64).
1. Good poetry appeals richly to the senses, to the imagina
tion; it conveys purpose and engages the whole man in his response. It
contains the following elements: no excess words; each word appears to
contribute to the total meaning of the poem; the word order may be
strange but it is the best to express the author's meaning; the diction,
images, and figures of speech will be fresh, not trite; the sound and
pattern of the poem are coherent; there is good organization.
2. Poor poetry lacks the above elements and may contain the
following elements: excessive sentimentality; trite, well tried for
mulas; no reality of emotion or thought; a flatness about it; lack of
poetic freshness; poverty of imagery and figurative language.
B. Instructions for Judging the Poems
The poems you are to judge are not finished products in that
they have not been revised or edited in any way by the author. They
are the raw material of the subject's imaginative output. With this in
mind your task is to rank each of the poems in each subject's set of three poems from the best to the poorest.
172
Read through each of the poems in a set quickly and in terms of
the criteria decide which of the poems is the best one. Place the
letter found in the Upper right hand corner of the card for that poem
in the block labeled Best on the score sheet. Place the letter for
the poem you feel is the poorest one in the block labeled 3_ on the
score sheet. Place the remaining poem in the block labeled 2,.
Rank only one set at a time. Do not compare the sets.
EXAMPLE OF SCORING
Set Best 2 3
1 A B C
2 B A C
3 C A B
4 B C A
5 B A C
etc etc etc etc
173
EXCELLENCE
Rating Sheet
Judge _______________________
Judges:
Make your judgment of the three poems in a set and place the letter for that poem in the column indicating your choice.
Judge each set separately.
Set1
Best 2 3 Set16
Best 2 3
2 17
3 18
4 195 206 217 228 23
9 9A
10 25
11 26
12 27
13 28
14 29
15 30
174
APPENDIX F
CRITERIA AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR JUDGING
ORIGINALITY
CRITERIA FOR ORIGINALITY
Originality is defined as a product of an individual's creative
activity that is viewed by others as being novel, new or different in
its approach. It is a product that is imaginative but yet will be
appropriate in form and content. An original product may be clever,
with a freshness about it that distinguishes it from other products
that use a more stereotyped or concrete approach. It may display a
measure of playfulness in the ideas expressed.
High originality on this scale will contain:
1. novel approach--may be an old theme handed in a
new way.
2. appropriate but imaginative in form and/or content.
3. Clever— freshness about— may be measure of playful
ness about it--may have a surprise ending or humorous
theme.
Low Originality on this scale will contain:
1. stereotyped or concrete approach
2. little imaginative content--dull
3. trite phrases
175
INSTRUCTIONS FOR JUDGES FOR THE ORIGINALITY DIMENSION
Your task is to measure the level of originality you feel each
of these poems contain on the basis of the above criteria. On your
original judgment you ranked the three poems 1-2 or 3 in order from
best to poorest. Now take each of the three poems of a set and make a
judgment on the basis of the level of originality you feel is indicated.
If you feel a poem is a very original jpoem according to the
criteria, place its letter at or near the high pole of the scale, e.g.:
Low HighSet X J :_______ :______ :_____:_______ :______ :____ :____x :_____ J
If you feel a poem is low in originality according to the
criteria, place the letter designating that poem at or near the low end
of the scale, e.g.:
Low HighSet X | X :________:______ :_____:_______ :______ :____ :________:_____ j
If you feel that a poem is somewhere in between the high and low
poles on originality, then place the letter designating that poem some
where between the two extremes indicating at what level you feel it
should fall, e.g.:
Low HighSet X
Place the letters designating a particular poem in the space
provided on the line for that set of poems. Do not place the letters on
the boundaries. More than one letter may occupy the same space if you
176
feel there is little difference between the poems in terms of the degree
of originality.
Rank all three poems of a set before going on to the next set.
Work quickly. Remember place all three letters of a set on one scale.
Rating Sheet
Originality Dimension
Judge
Set16
17
18
19
2021
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
178
Rating Sheet
Originality Dimension (Continued)
Judge _____
Low High•
1111111111
179
APPENDIX G
CRITERIA AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR MAKING JUDGMENTS
ON THE LOOSE-TIGHT DIMENSION
CRITERIA FOR THE LOOSE-TIGHT DIMENSION
We are concerned in this dimension with evidence of loose
(vague, incoherent, illogical) thinking or tight (factual, highly
logical, coherent) thinking. It is the opinion that the subjects will
show evidence of this type of thinking in their productions.
A loose poem will be characterized by rambling ideas, ideas
that are imaginative but poorly presented resulting in fragments of
themes woven into a generally incoherent production. It will be dif
ficult to follow and understand.
A tight poem on the other hand will be characterized by a
single idea or thought that is precisely treated, but with little imag
inative quality. It will be expressed in a highly organized manner,
leaving little doubt as to the impression the author is trying to con
vey.
OUTLINE FOR LOOSE RATING
1. imaginative but not integrated
2. content vague, incoherent
3. theme fragmentary
4. feeling of confusion— lack of control over expression
180
OUTLINE FOR TIGHT RATING
1. single idea or theme, little real imaginative content
2. subject treated methodically--organized--coherent
3. feeling of over-control in imaginative output
INSTRUCTIONS FOR JUDGES (LOOSE-TIGHT DIMENSION)
Your task is to estimate the degree of loose or tight thinking
you feel is indicated by each of these poems according to the above
criteria.
You are to take each of the three poems of a set and make a
judgment as to whether it indicates loose thinking, tight thinking, or
should be placed somewhere in between these two extremes.
If, for example, you feel a poem indicates very loose thinking
according to the criteria, then place the letter for that poem at, or
near the loose pole of the scale, e.g.:
Loose TightSet X | X :_____:______ :_____ :_____ :_____ :_____: t . |
If you feel a poem shows very tight thinking, then place the
letter identifying that poem at, or near the tight pole of the scale,
e.g.:
Loose TightSet X 1 : : : : : :_____: : X I
If you feel a poem shows some looseness but little or no tight
ness, then place the letter identifying the poem somewhere between the
midpoint and loose pole of the scale, e.g.:Loose Tight
Set X 1
181
If you feel a poem contains some tightness but little or no
looseness, then place the letter identifying the poem somewhere between
the midpoint and the tight pole of the scale, e.g.:
Loose TightSet X |_____ :_____ :_____ :_____ :_____ :_____ : X :_____ :_____|
If you feel a poem contains both loose and tight thinking in
about equal units, then place the letter identifying that poem somewhere
in the center of the scale, the side it is placed upon indicating the
relative emphasis of loose or tight thinking involved.
Place the letters designating a particular poem in the space
provided on the line for that set of poems. Do not place the letter on
the boundaries. More than one letter may occupy the same space if you
feel that there is little difference between the poems in terms of
loosening and tightening.
Rank all three poems of a set before going on to the next set.
Work quickly. Remember place all three letters of a set on one scale.
Set1
23
4
5
6
7
89
1011
12
13
14
15
182
Rating Sheet
Loose-Tieht Dimension
Judge ________________
Loose Tight• • • • 1
11i1111111111
. 1
183
Rating Sheet
Loose-Tight Dimension (Continued)
Judge ______
Set16
17
18
19
20 21 2223
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Loose Tight
184
APPENDIX H
CRITERIA AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR JUDGING
EXPRESSIVE FLUENCY DIMENSION
CRITERIA FOR EXPRESSIVE FLUENCY DIMENSION
What we are concerned with on this dimension is the ability of
the subject to use words in meaningful discourse. We are concerned
with how well he can express himself in this form of creative endeavor.
There will be a certain similarity between this rating dimension and
that of the Loose-Tight dimension but here we are only concerned with
the subject’s ability to communicate his ideas, not the imaginative
quality or content.
The questions to ask are does he have full command of his theme
and ideas and does he express them adequately or does he tend to weaken
and become disjointed? Do the words he uses fit the theme he is trying
to develop?
OUTLINE FOR EXPRESSIVE FLUENCY
High:
1. continuity--easy to read
2. expression of theme relevant and coherent
3. words fit4. full command of poem, does not weaken or become disjointed.
185
Low:
1. lack of continuity— disjointedness
2. words do not fit exactly
3. sense of not getting point across
4. may be difficult to read
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JUDGES FOR THE EXPRESSIVE FLUENCY DIMENSION
You are to read each subject's set of three poems and make a
judgment on the degree of Expressive Fluency you feel each poem con
tains. Place the letter representing that poem somewhere on the
dimension to indicate your judgment.
For example: if you feel a certain poem indicates a high level
of expressive fluency according to the above criteria, then place the
letter identifying that poem at or near the High pole of the Expressive
Fluency dimension; e.g.:
Low HighI * • * • • • • • Y I« « « « • • • _ _ _ _ _ ■ i V _ _ _ _ _ _ _ |
If you feel a poem indicates a low level of Expressive Fluency
according to the criteria, then place the letter identifying that poem
at or near the Low pole of the Expressive Fluency dimension; e.g.:
Low HighI V • • • • • • • • I. A » t • • •. . . • ______•_ _____«________|
If you feel a poem shows some aspects of good Expressive Flu
ency but there are also present some factors which prevent it from
being judged as highly fluent, then place the letter designating that
poem somewhere around the midpoint, with the direction from the midpoint
186
indicating whether you feel it tends toward the high or low pole of the
Expressive Fluency dimension; e.g.:Slightly high:
Low HighI * • • • • 7 • * • I> _ « • • • a « • * |
Slightly low:Low High
• • • V • • • • •• • • *•» • • • • •
Place the letter designating a particular poem in the space
provided on the line for that set of poems.
Do not place the letter on the boundaries.
More than one letter may occupy the same space if you feel
there is little difference between the poems in terms of expressive
fluency.
Rank all three poems of a set before going on to the next set.
Work quickly.
Remember, place all three letters of a set on one scale.
Rating Sheet
Expressive Fluency Dimension
Judge
Set
16
17
18
19
20212223
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
188
Rating Sheet
Expressive Fluency Dimension (Continued)
Judge __________
Low High
189
APPENDIX I
CRITERIA AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR MAKING JUDGMENTS ON
THE STIMULUS BOUND/STIMULUS FREE DIMENSION
CRITERIA FOR STIMULUS BOUND/STIMULUS FREE DIMENSION
In each experimental procedure that produced the poems you have
been judging the subject saw a stimulus poem either briefly or for an
extended period of time. I am concerned with the degree that this
stimulus poem may have influenced the subject's product, either in
terms of the ideas, thought, or theme, or even more specifically in the
use of words, or phrases from the poem.
You would judge a poem as stimulus bound if:
a. in comparison to the stimulus poem the subject's
poem appears to be closely related to it in terms
of the main thought, ideas or theme, or
b. in comparison to the stimulus poem the subject's
poem shows the use of many words or phrases from
the stimulus poem.
You would judge a poem as stimulus free if:
a. in comparison to the stimulus poem the subject's
poem is far removed or remote from the stimulus
poem, or
b. in comparison to the stimulus poem the subject's
poem shows no relationship to it in any way, either
in theme, ideas, words or phrases.
190
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE JUDGES ON THE STIMULUS BOUND - FREE DIMENSION
In this rating you are to compare the subject's lettered poem
against the stimulus lettered poem and make a judgment of the degree to
which the subject's poem is Stimulus Bound, i.e., very much like the
stimulus poem, or the degree to which it is Stimulus Free, i.e., how
remote is it from the stimulus poem.
If you feel a poem is very much like the stimulus poem in use
of theme, ideas, words or phrases, then place the letter designating
that poem at, or near the Bound pole of the dimension; e.g.:
Stimulus Bound Stimulus FreeSet X I ; X :______ :_____ :_______:______ :_____:_______ : I
If you feel a poem indicates a considerable freedom, remoteness,
or departure from the stimulus poem in its use of new ideas, themes,
words or phrases that have no relationship to the stimulus poem, then
place the letter designating that poem at, or near the Free pole of
the dimension; e.g.:
Stimulus Bound Stimulus FreeSet X 1 : : : : : : : X : |
If you feel a poem contains elements of both stimulus boundness
and stimulus freedom, place the letter designating that poem somewhere
near the midpoint, with the direction from the midpoint indicating the
relative amount of boundness or freedom you feel the poem contains.
If you feel the poem shows elements of both boundness and free
dom but relatively more freedom, then place the letter designating that
poem somewhere to the right of the midpoint.
191
Stimulus Bound Stimulus FreeSet X___ I____:______ :_____ :_____ :_____ :_____ : Z ;____ :_____|
Or if the poem shows elements of both boundness and freedom but
relatively more boundness, then place the letter designating the poem
somewhere to the left of the midpoint.
Stimulus Bound Stimulus FreeSet X |____:______ : X :_____ :_____ :_____ :_____ :____ :_____|
Place the letter designating a particular poem in the space
provided, on the line for that set of poems.
Do not place the letters on the boundaries.
More than one letter may occupy the same space on a line if you
feel there is little difference between the poems in terms of stimulus -
boundness or stimulus - freedom.
Rank all three poems of a set before going on to the next set.
Work quickly.
Remember, place all three letters of a set on one scale.
192
Rating Sheet
Stimulus Bound/Stimulus Free Dimension
Judge ________
Set1
23
4
5
67
8 9
1011
1213
14
15
Bound Free
Set16
17
18
19
2021
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
193
Rating Sheet
Stimulus Bound/Stimulus Free Dimension (Continued)
Judge ______________
Bound Free
194APPENDIX J
TABLE I
TABLE OF TOTAL WORDS FOR PRE-EXPERIMENTAL TASKS
Pre-Experimental Task I Words
Pre-Experimental Task II Words
Periods Sublects 1* 2 1
TotalWords
XPre. T
Periods 1' 2*
Total X Words PreJLiI_
1 7 4 11 5.5 8 5 13 6.52 21 12 33 16.5 10 8 18 9.03 10 8 18 9.0 8 11 19 9.54 4 4 8 4.0 2 1 3 1.55 13 2 15 7.5 8 4 12 6.06 8 5 13 6.5 11 6 17 8.57 13 6 19 9.5 16 14 30 15.08 24 18 42 21.0 16 14 30 15.09 13 13 26 23.0 8 10 18 9.010 6 0 6 3.0 6 7 13 6.511 12 9 21 10.5 18 12 30 15.012 15 6 21 10.5 19 15 34 17.013 10 6 16 8.0 11 9 20 10.014 14 9 23 11.5 11 8 19 9.515 12 9 21 10.5 8 6 14 7.016 8 9 17 8.5 9 4 13 6.517 19 19 38 19.0 19 18 37 18.518 9 3 12 6.0 7 3 10 5.019 22 14 36 18.0 15 12 27 13.520 18 9 27 13.5 10 7 17 8.521 20 9 29 14.5 11 9 20 10.022 5 0 5’ 2.5 5 8 13 6.523 , 11 4 15 ■ 7.5 16 13 29 14.524 16 11 27 13.5 17 13 30 15.025 11 6 17 8.5 12 10 22 11.026 13 11 24 12.0 12 9 21 10.527 12 9 21 10.5 16 9 25 12.528 7 2 9 4.5 6 4 10 5.029 15 6 21 10.5 13 10 23 11.530 5 3 8 4.0 8 8 16 8.0XX
37312.43
2267.53
59919.97
33611.20
2678.90
60320.10
195APPENDIX J
TABLE II
TABLE OF FREQUENCY VALUES FOR WORDS ON PRE-EXPERIMENTAL TASKS
Pre-Experimental Pre-ExperimentalTask I Frequency Task II Frequency
Total TotalPeriods Freq. X Periods Freq. X
Subiects 1* 2 1 Value Fre.I 1* 2 Value Fre.II1 19 20 39 3.55 13 7 20 1.542 83 27 110 3.33 18 13 31 1.723 55 37 92 5.11 68 93 161 8.474 23 4 27 3.38 2 7 9 3.005 25 23 48 3.20 16 14 30 2.506 35 13 48 3.69 41 29 70 4.127 50 22 72 3.79 50 48 98 3.278 35 46 81 1.93 63 87 150 5.009 47 64 111 4.44 11 37 48 2.67
10 50 0 50 8.33 22 32 54 4.1511 50 46 96 4.57 106 42 148 4.9312 86 42 128 6.10 52 41 93 2.7413 40 52 92 5.75 19 11 30 1.5014 63 20 83 3.61 27 24 51 2.6815 27 16 43 2.05 13 13 26 1.8616 58 25 83 4.88 27 32 59 4.9217 82 95 177 4.66 61 28 89 2.4118 27 17 44 3.67 10 9 19 1.9019 57 48 105 2.92 34 73 107 3.9620 72 36 108 4.00 15 12 27 1.5921 78 47 125 4.31 34 17 51 2.5522 36 0 36 7.20 5 23 28 2.1523 44 10 54 3.60 28 67 95 3.2824 61 69 130 4.82 49 60 109 3.6325 51 38 89 5.24 28 40 68 3.0926 34 29 83 3.46 38 65 103 4.9127 60 28 88 4.19 176 106 282 11.2828 27 12 39 4.33 10 4 14 1.4029 69 21 90 4.29 28 47 75 3.2630 20 8 28 3.50 16 12 28 1.75
X 1484 915 2399 1080 1093 2173X 49.47 30.50 79.97 36.00 36.43 72.43
196APPENDIX J
TABLE III
TOTAL FREQUENCY VALUES FOR THE FOUR HIGHEST FREQUENCY WORDS FROM THE PRE-EXPERIMENTAL
TASKS AND FROM THE POEMS
Total Frequency Value: Total Frequency Value:4 Highest Words Pre-Exp. 4 Highest Words Each Poem
I IISubjects With Away Total T L LT Total
1 31 11 42 22 25 21 682 53 16 69 21 23 16 603 50 56 106 30 30 17 774 23 9 32 13 10 34 575 23 18 51 41 19 41 1016 36 42 78 14 8 12 347 36 41 77 14 14 6 348 25 55 80 36 49 46 1319 47 27 74 36 47 51 134
10 43 38 81 4 22 24 5011 55 55 110 19 35 24 7812 55 44 99 7 12 15 3413 51 14 65 9 13 7 2914 43 28 71 16 9 21 4615 18 15 33 7 9 5 2116 51 44 95 21 15 17 5317 53 29 82 45 42 40 12718 32 13 45 21 28 15 6419 39 54 93 24 27 19 7020 46 12 58 17 14 19 5021 54 29 83 30 7 10 4722 35 17 52 10 11 13 3423 30 40 70 4 14 6 2424 54 52 106 7 28 4 3925 46 39 85 4 4 13 2126 41 52 93 14 11 10 3527 37 56 93 23 32 31 8628 29 8 37 10 13 30 5329 52 33 85 52 34 25 11130 22 15 37 13 29 20 62X 1220 962 2182 584 634 612 1830X 40.67 32.07 36.37 19.47 21.13 20.40 20.33
197APPENDIX K
TABLE IV
TOTAL WORD COUNT FOR EACH SUBJECT'S POEMS
1Order
2 3Mode (a) T L LTPoem (b) A B C TotalSubjects 1 18 27 32 77
4 22 44 48 1147 26 53 29 108
10 28 28 47 10313 24 29 35 8816 78 50 45 17319 23 34 32 8922 26 57 43 12625 17 22 23 6228 36 19 50 105
Sum 298 Sum 363 Sum 384X 29.8 X 36.3 X 38.4 1045
L LT. TC A B2 44 44 40 1285 65 60 64 1898 63 59 58 18011 45 54 51 15014 56 61 79 19617 81 102 78 26120 28 35 36 9923 29 23 28 8026 26 24 17 6729 70 76 58 204
Sum 507 Sum 538 Sum 509X 50.7 X 53.8 X 50.9 1554
LT T LB C A ■3 33 53 44 1306 31 55 49 1359 108 70 112 290
12 27 35 29 9115 29 25 8 6218 27 42 46 11521 48 47 31 ■ 12624 18 20 24 6227 87 78 81 • 24630 38 24 35 : 97
Sum 446 Sum 449 Sum 459X 44.6 X 44.9 X 45.9 ; 1354
(a) T, L, LT = Mode (See Appendix B)(b) A, B, C = Stimulus poem (See Appendix M)
198
APPENDIX K
TABLE V
COMBINED TOTALS FOR WORD COUNT BY ORDER, MODE OF PRESENTATION AND STIMULUS POEM
Total Order 1 2 3
Sum 1251 X 41.70 s 23.68
135045.0020.24
135245.0621.61
3953
Total Mode T L LT
Sum 1256 X 41.87 s 20.74
132944.3022.17
136845.6022.72
3953
Total Poem A B C
Sum 1295 X 43.17 s 25.74
131843.9322.22
134044.6716.97
3953
199APPENDIX K
TABLE VI
SUBJECT'S JUDGMENT OF THEIR BEST AND POOREST POEM
1Order
2 3Mode (a) T L LTPoem (b) A B C TotalSubjects 1 2 1 3ic;) 6
4 2 1 3 67 1 3 2 6
10 2 1 3 613 1 2 3 616 2 3 1 619 1 2 3 " 622 1 3 2 625 1 2 3 628 2 1 3 6
Sum 15 Sum 19 Sum 26X 1.5 X 1.9 X 2.6 60
L„ LT, TC A B
2 3 2 1 65 3 2 1 68 1 2 3 611 1 3 2 614 3 2 1 617 3 2 1 620 1 3 2 623 2 3 1 626 3 1 2 629; 3 1 2 6
60LT_ T„ L aB C A
3 2 3 66 2 3 69 1 2 612 3 2 615 2 3 618. 3 1 621 2 3 624 1 3 627 3 2 630 3 2 i ;■ 6
Sum 22 Sum 24 Sum 14X 2.2 X 2.4 X 1.4 : 60
fb) A, B', C = Stimulus Poem (Appendix M) (c) 1 = Poorest 3 = Best
200
APPENDIX K
TABLE VII
COMBINED TOTALS FOR SUBJECT’S JUDGMENT* OF BEST AND POOREST POEM BY ORDER, MODE OF PRESENTATION
AND STIMULUS POEM
Total Order 1 2 3
Sum 60 X 2.0 s .830
642.13.776
561.87.860
180
Total Mode T L LT
Sum 55 X 1.83 s .746
561.87.899
692.30.750
180
Total Poem A B C
Sum 50 X 1.67 s .711
571.90.803
732.43.774
180
* 1 = Poorest 3 = Best
201APPENDIX K
TABLE VIII
SUBJECT'S JUDGMENT OF THEIR POEMS WITH MOST AND LEAST POTENTIAL
1Order2 3
Mode ,(a.) T L LT ;Poem (bS A B c : TotalSubjects 1 1 2 3 ^ c > 6
4 2 3 1 67 2 3 l : 6
10 2 1 3 613 1 2 3 616 3 1 2 619 1 2 3 622 1 2 3 625 1 2 3 628 3 1 2 6
Sum 17 Sum 19 Sum '24X 1.7 X 1.9 X 2.4 60
LC lta v:2 2 3 i 65 2 3 i 68 1 3 2 611 2 1 3 614 3 2 1 617 1 3 2 620 2 1 3 623 1 3 2 626 3 1 2 629 3 1 2 : 6
Sum 20 Sum 21 Sum 19X 2.0 X 2.1 X 1.9 60
LT T_ L,B C A ..3 3 1 2 66 1 3 2 69 2 1 3 612 3 1 2 615 3 1 2 : 618 2 1 3 621 3 2 1 • 624 « 2 3 1 627 3 2 1 630 2 1 3 6
Sum .24 Sum 16 Sum 20X 2.4
A - . V " " T i — TX 1.6 X 2.0 60
f = BieSst= 3 = Most
202
APPENDIX K
TABLE IX
COMBINED TOTALS FOR SUBJECT'S JUDGMENT* OF POEMS WITH MOST AND LEAST POTENTIAL BY ORDER,MODE OF PRESENTATION, AND STIMULUS POEM
Total Order 1 2 3
SumXs
612.03.809
561.87.860;
632.10.803
180
Total Mode: T L LT
SumXs
521.73 : .785
591.97.765;
692.30.837;
180
Total Poem A B C
SumXs
581.93.868
622.07.740
602.00.871
180
*1 = Least 3 = Most
APPENDIX K203
TABLE X
EXCELLENCE RANKINGS* OF JUDGES BY SUBJECT AND MODE OF PRESENTATION
Mode : T L LT TOTALJudge J1 J2 J3 T J1 J2 J3 :t J1 J2 J3 TSub j 1 2 2 2 3 1 3 1 3 1 18
4 3 1 3 2 3 1 1 2 2 187 1 1 1' 2 2 3 3 3 2 18
10 2 3 2 1 1 1 3 2 3 1813 2 2 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 1816 3 1 3 1 2 1 2 3 2 1819 1 2 1 3 1 3 2 3 2 1822 2 2 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 1 * 1825 3 2 1 2 1 2 1 3 3 1828 2 1 2 3 2 1: 1 3 3 18
21 17 17 55 19 15 19 5.3 2Q 28 24 72: 180
Mode L LT TSubj 2 3 2 2 2 1 3 1 3 1 18
5 2 1 3 3 3 2 1 2 1 188 1 1 3 2 2 1: 3 3 2 1811 2 1 2 3 2 1 1 3 3 1814 1 . 3 2 3 2 3 2 1 1 1817 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 2 3 1820 2 3 2 1 1 1 3 2 2 1823 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 2 3 1826 1 2 1 2 3 3 • ' 3 1 2 1829 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 18
15 16 21 52 24 23 19 66: 21 21 20 62 180
Mode LT T LSubj 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 18
6 2 2 3 3 3 2 i: 1 1 189 2 3 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 1812 1 1 3. 3 2 2 2 3 1 1815 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1818 3 1 2 2 3 1 1 2 3 1821 2 2 1 3 3 3 1 1 2 1824 2 3 3 1 2 2 3 1 1 1827 3 3 3 1 1; 1 2 2 2 1830 1 2 3 2 1 2 3 3 1 18
22 23 26 71 20 to 18 59 18 16 16 50. 180
Total 540*1 = Poorest 3 = Best
204APPENDIX K
TABLE XI
COMBINED TOTALS FOR EXCELLENCE RANKINGS* BY JUDGES AND MODE OF PRESENTATION
Judgeis 1 2 3
Sum 180 180 180Means 2.0 2.0 2.0s .821 .821 .821
Modes T L LT
Sum 176 155 209Means 1.96 1.72 2.32s .888 .825 .775
*1 = Poorest 3 = Best
205APPENDIX K
TABLE XII
ORIGINALITY RATING* BY JUDGES
Mode T L LT TOTALJudge J1 J2 •13 T J1 J2 J3 T J1 J2 jf3 •TSubj 1 6 6 4 7 6 3 4 5 6 47
4 7 3 3 6 4 4 5 4 4 407 3 2 2 5 6 3 4 7 6 38
10 8 4 3 6 3 2 8 5 8 4713 3 5 4 4 4 2 5 3 8 3816 6 4 4 4 2 2 5 5 5 3719 4 2 1 6 5 3 5 8 2 3622 6 5 3 5 5 5 4 4 4 4125 3 2 1 2 1 1 4 4 2 2028 3 4 2 4 2 2 5 6 1 29
49 37 27 113 49 38 27 L14 49 51 46 146: 373
L LT TSubj 2 8 7 3 7 6 7 5 8 2 ■ v 53
■5 4 4 4 7 8 3 5 5 2 428 4 5 4 5 5 1 7 6 6 431-1 8 7 7 9 5 6 5 6 3 5614 5 3 5 6 5 4 7 6 2 4317 3 2 2 5 4 4 6 4 7 3720 6 5 4 5 4 3 7 7 3 4423 3 4 2 4 6 5 5 5 6 4026 7 8 3 6 6. 7 4 7 2 5029 8 8 9 7 ■7,,. 5 7 8 4. 63
56 53 .i3 152 61 56 45: L62 58 62 37 157; .471
LT T L ::Subj 3 7 3 8 7 6 5 8 5 3 52
6 6 3 8 7 7 7 4 5 6 539 6 5 6 5 4 4 8 7 8 5312 4 3 4 5 5 3 6 6 3 3915 2 5 6 3 2 2 5 1 1 2718 4 5 5 5 3. 4 7 7 6 4621 5 7 3 7 5: 5 6 4 4. 4624 4. 2 7 3 I 2 5 2 1 2727 3 6 2 4 6: 3 {•. 6 6 2: 3830 3 6 4 4 3 3. 6 4 5- 38
44 45 53: 142 50 42 38. .30 61 47 39 147, 419
Total 1263*1 = Low 9 = High
206APPENDIX K
TABLE XIII
COMBINED TOTALS FOR ORIGINALITY RATINGS*BY JUDGES AND MODE OF PRESENTATION
Judges 1 2 3
Sum 477 431 355Means 5.30 4.79 3.94s 1.58 1.80 2.00
Mode ; T L LT
Sum 400 413 450Means 4.44 4.59 5.00s 1.84 2.03 1.73
*1 = Low 9 = High
207APPENDIX K
TABLE XIV
LOOSE-TIGHT RATINGS* BY JUDGES
Mode . • T ; L LT TOTAL
Judge J1 J2 J3 T •ft J2 J3 :t ji J2 J3 T-Subj 1 6: 3 8 5: 3 4 3; 5: 6 43
4 6 7 7 4 7 4 6 7 5 537 3 8 3 2 6 3 2 4 5 3610 7 7 6 2 3 4 6; 7 5 4713 6 4 5 4 7 5 7; 7 5 5016 4 4 2 2 8 3 3 7 4 3719 3 4 7 4. 3 6 2 4 6 3922 6 4 7 3' 3 3 • 7 6: 5 4425 1 2 4: 3 1 1 2 3 3 2028 3 5 4 4 3 8 6 4 3 40
45 48 53: 146 33 44 41 118 44: 54: 47 145, 409
Ij ]LT TSubj 2 6 5 5 7: 3 6 5 3 4 44
5 3 4 6 7 5 4 6 6 5 468 4 4 4 5 3 1 7 5 7 4011 6 5 5 5 6 6 4 6 3 4614 6 4 5 4 5 5 5 6 3 4317 2 3 3 5 2 4 3 6 5 3320 3 5 6 4 7 6 6 6 6 4923 2 3 4 • >. 7 7 6 •, i 6 6 5 4626 6 6 5 . i 5 5 4 7. 7 7 5229 7 6 5 >. 5 5 5 •!«’ 6 5 5 49
45 .45 48 138 54' 48 47 149 55 58 50 161: 448
LI■I T LSubj 3 6 5 7 7 5 5 5 4 4 48
6 5 2 7 6 4 5 2 3 :4 389 2 5 4 3 7 3 6 5 7 4212 2 2 7 6 4 6 4 6 6 , , 4315 4 5 5 3 2 4 5 9 8 4518 7 4 7 4 7 4 6 5 5 4921 2 3 3 3 3 5 4; 7 .7 3724 4 6 5 3 3 7 6 2 2 3827 4 4 2 2 2 2 3 3 1 2330 3 6 4 $ 7 6 5 6 3 46
39: 42 •51 •132 43 ,44 47 134 4&: 50 47 143: 409
Total 1266
APPENDIX K
TABLE XV
COMBINED TOTALS OF LOOSE-TIGHT RATINGS* BY JUDGES AND MODE OF PRESENTATION
Judges 1 2 3
Sum 404 431 431Means 4.49 ’ 4.79 4.79s 1.69 1.73 1.63
Mode ; T L LT
Sum 441 399 426Me ana 4.90 4.43 4.73s 1.68 1.74 1.62
1 = Loose 9 = Tight
209APPENDIX K
TABLE XVI
EXPRESSIVE FLUENCY RATINGS* BY JUDGES
Mode . T L ■ t LT TOTALJudge. JL J2 J3 ,T J1 32 J3 T J1 J2 J3 TSubj 1 7 3 5 6 •5 4 4 4 3 41
4 6 3 5 ... 4 7 6 5 4 4 447 2 6 3 3 3 3 4 4 6 3410 6 7 4 3 6 3' - 7 4 8 4813 3 4 6 4 •5 8 • 5 6 8 49lb 5 2 3 4 •5 4 3 6 6 3819 5 6 5 4 4 7 3 6 6 4622 5 6. 4 4 3 4 6 4 5 4125 1 1 1 3 2 2 2 3 5 2028 4 3 4 ■.* 5 4 3 6 8 4 41
44; 41 .40 125 40 44 44 128 45 49 55 149 402
Ij LT TSubj 2 4 5 3 6 2 7 5 3 4 39
5 4 3 4 6 8 3 3 3 3 378 3 3 5 4 5 3 7 6 6 4211 7 7 8 8 3 7 4 6 7 5714 6 3 5 5 •5 6 3 6 5 4417 3 3 3 4 3 4 2 5 6 3320 4 7 8 5 3 6 6 7 5 5123 3 5 5 7 7 6 6 6 7 5226 6 9 6 8 7 7 7 8 3 6129 8 8 9 6 3 6 7 6 6 59
48 .53 56 3.57 59 46 55 160 50 56 52 158 475
LI I T LSubj 3 6 5 8 ’’ 8 7 7 7 5 3 56
6 3 4 8 6 2 4 2 1 5 359 3 5 7 . .< 4 4 2 8 8 8 4912 2 3 6 3 6 5 6 7 7 4515 6 8 6 4 5 3 5 3 4 4418 5 3 8 6 ■6 6 7 9 8 5821 3 2 4 4 3 5 5 6 4 3624 5 5 8 2 3 4 3 3 2 3527 4 3 4 5 4 2 6 6 3 3730 4 7 $ 6 3 5 5 5 3 44
. 41 45 65 151 48 43 43 134 54 53 .47 154 439
Total 1316*1 = Low 9 = High
210APPENDIX K
TABLE XVII
COMBINED TOTALS OF EXPRESSIVE FLUENCY RATINGS*BY JUDGES AND MODE OF PRESENTATION
Judges 1 2 3
Sum 429 430 457Means 4.77 4.78 5.08s 1.67 1.90 1.84
Modes T L LT
Sum 417 439 460Means 4.63 4.88 5.11s 1.7. 1.94 1.75
*1 = Low 9 = High
/
APPENDIX K
TABLE XVIII
STIMULUS -BOUND/S TIMULUS -FREE RATINGS* BY JUDGES
211
Mode < T L LT TOTAL
Judge J1 J2 J3 T Jl J2 J3 T J1 J2 J3 TSubj 1 9 9 7 4 6 6 7 6 6 60
4 4: 9 4 6 6 5 5 5 7, 517 7 5 4 4 6 7 5 4 7: 49
10 3 3 3 2 1 2 6 6 3 2913 6: 7 5 7 9 4 8 9 8: 6316 4: 5 6 7 9 7 3 7 7 5519 7 9 4 4 7 6 5 8. 2 5222 4 i 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 2025 5 9 9 7 9 6 4 7 9 6528 5: 7 3 4 7 7 2 6 5 46
54: 64 47. 165 48 63 52 163 47 60 55 162 490
L LT TSubj 2 4 7- 6 8 9 7 7 8 7. 63
5 5 7: 6 4 9 3 6 9 5 548 4 7 4 6 9 4 7 9 3 5311 5 7 6 2 2 2 3 2 2 3114 2 6 7 3 4 3 6 9 8 4817 7 9 8 6 9 5 5 9 3 6120 5 6 3 3 4 3 4. 7 3 3823 8 9 8 3 6 2 7 7 7 5726 9 9 9 4 5 2 9 9 9 6529 4 7 9 5 9 3 4 8 7 56
53 74 66: 193 44 66 34 .144 58 ̂' 77 54 189 526 :
LT T LSubj 3 8 8 7 , 3 3 7 5 4 5 50
6 4 3 4 3 2 3 2 1 2 249 7 7 7 4 5 7 6 7 6 5612 4 3 7 6 6 8 3 3 2 4215 7 8 6 3 6 7 9 4 3 5318 4 8 8 6 7 9 3 6 4 5521 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 6 2 2924 3 3 3 5 8 9 9 9 9 5827 3. 6 3 4 7 7 2 6 4 4230 4 8 6 2 6 4 3 5 3 41
; 47 57. 54 158 38 53 64 155 46 51 40 137 450
Total . . . . . . 1466
*1 - Bound 9 - Free
212APPENDIX K
TABLE XIX
COMBINED TOTALS OF STIMULUS-BOUND/STIMULUS-FREERATINGS BY JUDGES AND MODE OF PRESENTATION
Judges 1 2 3
••Sum 435 565 466Means 4.83 6.28 : 5.18
;■ - s 1.95 2.34 . 2.28
Mode T L LT
Sum 509 493 464Means 5.66 5.48 . 5.16s 2.30 2.27 2.24
*1 = Bound 9 = Free
APPENDIX L
MEAN INTRACLASS CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS* BETWEEN JUDGES FOR EACH MODE OF PRESENTATION AND EACH DIMENSION
Tight Loose Loose-Tight Ave.
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )Originality (.450) .710 (.614) .826 (.011) .032 (.358) .523Loose-Tight (.304) .567 (.319) .584 (.528) .771 (.384) .641Expressive Fluency (.362) .630 (.587) .810 (.149) .345 (.366) .595Stimulus Bound/Stimulus Free (.469) .726 (.631) .837 (.489) .742 (.530) .768
Average (.396) .658 (.538) .764 (.294) .473 (.409) ,.632
*Formula: (1) Mean reliability
(Ebel 17, Guilford 32, pp. 395-97)for one rater: y _ y
p eV + (k-1) V P e
(2) Mean reliability of k raters: V - „V _ L ev
V = variance for persons PV = variance for error k = number of raters
APPENDIX M214
STIMULUS POEMS (19)
Poem A
Myself when young did eagerly frequent Doctor and Saint, and heard great argument About it and about: but evermore Came out by the same door as in I went.
Poem B
There was the Door to which I found no key;There was the Veil through which I could not see:Some little talk awhile of Me and TheeThere was — and then no more of Me and Thee.
Poem C
Strange, is it not? that of the myriads who Before us pass'd the door of Darkness through Not. one returns to tell us of the Road,Which to discover we must travel too.
APPENDIX N
EXAMPLES OF POEMS RATED AS HIGH AND LOW FOR EACH DIMENSION
Excellence
Best Poem Judges Rating#15 (LT) 3-3-3
But we may accomplish something while we are here To help others that may come this way To tell all far and near That men have been this way.
#22 (LT) 3-3-3
We, like the myriads before us,Must pass through the door of darkness.To learn its secrets, for no one will ever return to tell us or show us the way,We must travel this road by ourselves. This is the only way.
#27 (LT) 3-3-3
The door was grand, I could not climb My strength was weak, I felt asleep But thinking of death, I felt immense,And will and power become my strength.I saw the veil, OhI what a sight ...Dark it was, out clear and fine I touched it less; my hands withheld For fragile it was for me to grab.I did break through, for life is such That one who lives, must always know That you don't live eternally,So pray my friend for thee and mei
Poorest Poem #7 (T) 1-1-1
What does life mean,And what general theme Is expressed by the every day Things, the large and the small The short and the tall At best?
Poorest Poem (Continued)#15 (L)
Judges Rating1-1-1
Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.
When young we are thoroughly taught,Then soon many arguments are there to be bought, But if we have been taught right,Our ideas will be unchanged no matter how hard be others might.
Originality Dimension
Hi ’ Judges Rating
When I was a child I saw a showBent wizards, and lizards and things I knowAre not really true.Late in the movie and near the end The wicked witch began to descend To a puddle of liquid, how sorry I felt. From that time on to puberty Nightly dreams frightened me Pictures of witches, melting away Troubled my sleep and seemed to say That my fancy lay not with the heroine But with the villainess, per se.Now wasn't that a crime for me To like the one that was not she For whom the show was made.
When asked to associateI found my vocabulary rangeWas not up to snuffWhich made this sort of toughI hope I'll do no harmAnd throw a wrench in your "norm."But what do you expect,
#20 (LT) 1- 1-1
8-7-8
#11 (L) 8-7-7
When volunteers you select!?
High (Continued)#29 (L)
Judges Ratings8-8-9
Sports car rally -Mileage tally -Obstacles to run -Must have fun -Pass the map -Wrong one you sap -Now we're lost -Wrong road we've crossed -Strange town section -Much perplextion -Which way to go?Why don't you know?You're such a bore -Last rally with you -You're the turn of the screw -Need someone who- knows the town -To pull me out and up when I'm down -
What is fearThe lack of knowledgeAnd fear of the unknownCertainly it is there and yet now;Fear is the loss of the key to the door.
Nothing more I would want to do Is that of an individual flying. Never is there any thought of dying.
Low#7 (T) 3-2-2
#24 (T) 3-1-2
#25 (T) 2- 1-1
You are going up,I went up to;We will drink too, Then out we shall go.
218III. Loose-Tight Dimension
Loose~ W l (lt)
Judges Ratings 2-3-3
But this is how it should be,Experience is what will stand thee The mystery of that darkened door,Stands now and for evermore,To those who have yet to go,Only those who have gone will surely know, Finding out for oneself is the pleasure.
#25 (L) 3-1-1
Can I help you?Do you think we can?Yes, we should,But, why should you help,I am able to.
#27 (L) 3-3-1
Visiting our old wise men I thought I'd find what life could be And in my short but fine talks I did find he was not myself...The inner in which I endeavor to look Promptly fills with blemishes.I know not what this could mean But surely it is a sign of evil.Once I asked him about my life Yet it could be straightened out - His advise was concise and free He said: "Know thyself"..; I did...
Tight(T) 7-7-6
Being still young with much to learn (As often will be the case)Many more times yet shall I turn To those who can show me my place.
#23 (LT) 7-7-6
Questions, questions, always questions,But alas how else to learn.Now the problem is to find answers But to who do we turn.
Judges Ratings
To write real poetryIs much too hardSo, I'll compose thingsThat belong on greeting cards
Tight (Continued)#26 (T)
Expressive Fluency Dimension
High 8-7-7(T)
SPECULATION?
The topic which is of common dread Is the state of the departed dead;We write and ask and wonder What they're doing over yonder Where in heaven's bliss the good reside Evil suffers the pangs of hell betide.Where do you expect to go?Is something to think about, you know.
#18 (L) 7-9-8
The youth in this age of wonders Wanders around in endless blunders,Blamed by his parents, overwhelmed by the times. Looks for an answer in this maze of rhymes.Who is God, what is goodness and rest?Are we his children, and are we really blest?
#3 (T) 8-7-7
The "wisdom of ages," it is claimed Are in books, by authors famed.One can find, if one tried,Greater wisdom on the outside.
Low“ #5 (T) 3-3-3
God is infinite;We are finite;God is omnipotent;We are weak.God is all knowledge; We are all ignorance.
Low (Continued)#5 (T) (Continued)
Judges Ratings
Some we will never know,But God has been willing to sow In our midst the clue to the truth He was a man to be save, but a man Who knew and understood the father.Infinite truth is to be found here - search!
#7 (L) 3-3-3
Life is not complete in understanding But it is constantly driving Us to be at our best or at least to try For if not we may live or die Life is certainly expressed in love Which brings to mind a white door Descending into the depths of life To ease eternal strife.
#17 (L) 3-3-3
I like my home on the range,However, it is strange,My parents live in modesty,Yet, I am against chastity,I like to be good and truthful,Yet, I seem to be forgetful,I will, however, think and play,And in doing so, not be so shy.I think that I will never be as freeAs when I think of a treeWhen I go to the store I will buy,Yet as surely I have money to buy.
Stimulus Bound/Stimulus Free Dimension
Bound#6 (L) 2-1-2
The saint and doctor argue stillAnd though I once heard them I understoodNot what they said, nor of what they spokeTill I one day took a different door andStayed and questioned them and did notLeave till someone else took my well traveled door.
Bound (Continued)#10 (L)
Judges Ratings2-1-2
There is a way to find the key Unlock the door and go inside The veil can be removed somehow There is a way for both of us.
#11 (LT) 2-2-2
With my question I went to see doc And I went to see Rev. Brown But it was just time on the clock For both of them let me down.The question I had in mind Was not of the difficult kind All I wanted to see Was what was to become of me.
Free#13 (LT) 8-9-8
Nature will give and nature will take But never will nature a true love break For God sent the sun and God sent the trees To grow in a time\hen God sent love’s breeze.
#24 (L) 9-9-9
I wish I could be swimming You could call that great living How about sitting on the patio?How about driving down the road?
#26 (L) 9-9-9
To devise a poem upon commandA difficult thing to doStruggle and think as hard as you mayBut nothing, always nothing ever comes through.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
223
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Anderson, H. H., ed. Creativity and Its Cultivation, New York:Harper, 1959.
2. . Creativity and Education, Association for HigherEducation, College and University Bulletin. No. 14, Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, 1961, (May), 13.
3. Barron, Frank. The disposition towards originality, J. abnorm.soc. Psychol., 1955, 51, 478-485.
4. ____________ . The disposition towards originality, In C. W.Taylor, ed., Research Conference on the Identification of Creative Scientific Talent, Salt Lake City: University ofUtah Press, 1956, pp. 156-70.
5. ____________ . Originality in relation to Personality and intellect,J. pers., 1957, 25, 730-742.
9
6. ___________ . The psychology of imagination, Sci. Am.. 1958, 199(3), 150-165.
7. . Creative vision and expression, In New Insights andthe Curriculum, Washington, D. C.: 1963 Yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1963, pp. 285-305.
8. Bartlett, F. C. Thinking: An Experimental and Social Study,New York: Basic Books, 1958.
9. Beliak, Leopold. Creativity, Some random notes to a systematicconsideration, J. Proj. Tech., 1958, 22, 363-380.
10. Bousfield, W. A., & Ledgewick, C. H. W. An analysis of sequencesof restricted associative responses, J. gen. Psychol., 1944,30, 149-165.
11. Burchard, E. M. L. The use of projective techniques in the analysis of creativity, J. proj. Tech., 1952, 16, 412-427.
12. Christensen, P. R., Guilford, J. P., and Wilson, R. C. Relationsof creative responses to working time and instructions, J. exp. Psychol., 1957, 53, 82-88.
13. Cochran, W. G. The distribution of the largest of a set of estimated variances as a fraction of their total, Annals of Eugenics 1941, 11, 47.
224
14. Crutchfield, R. S. Conformity and Creative Thinking. InH. E. Gruber, Glenn Terrell and Michael Wertheimer, eds., Contemporary Approaches to Creative Thinking. New York: Atherton, 1962, pp. 120-140.
15. Dement, William. The effect of dream deprivation, Science. 1960,131, 1705-1707.
16. Dewey, John. Art as Experience, New York: Putnam, 1959.
17. Ebel, R. L. Estimation of the reliability of rating, Psycho-metrika, 1951, 16, 407-424.
18. Eindhoven, J. E., and Vinacke, W. E. Creative processes inpainting, J. gen. Psychol.. 1952. 67, 139-164.
19. Fitzgerald, Edward, ed. The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, 2d Ver,1868, Roslyn, N. Y.: Walter J. Black, Inc., 1942.
20. Franseth, Jane. Freeing capacity to be creative, In New Insightsand the Curriculum. 1963 Year-book of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Washington, D. C.: 1963, 306-321.
21. Freud, Sigmund. The Basic Writings of Sigmund Freud. A. A. Brill,Ed., New York: Modern Library, 1938, p. 193.
22. _____ . The Interpretation of Dreams. Trans, by A. A. Brill,New York: Modern Library, 1950, Chapter VI.
23. Fromm, Erich. The Sane Society. New York: Rinehart, 1955,37-38, 68-69.
24. _____ . The creative attitude, In H. H. Anderson, ed., Creativityand Its Cultivation. New York: Harper, 1959.
25. Getzels, J. W., and Jackson, P. W. Creativity and Intelligence,New York: Wiley, 1962.
26. Ghiselin, Brewster, ed. The Creative Process, New York: Mentor,1955, pp. 11-32.
27. _________ . The creative process and its relation to the identification of creative talent, in C. W. Taylor, ed., Research Conference on the Identification of Creative Scientific Talent, Balt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1956, pp.195-203.
28. Greenacre, Phyllis, Play in relation to creative imagination, The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child. Vol. XIV, New York: International Universities Press, Inc., 1956, pp. 61-80.
225
29. Gruber, H. E., Terrell, Glin, and Wertheimer, Michael, eds.,Contemporary Approaches to Creative Thinking. New York: Atherton, 1962.
30. Guilford, J. P. Creativity, Amer. Psychol. 1950, 5, 444-454.
31. ____________ Kettner, N. W., and Christensen, P. R. A factor-analytic study across the domains of reasoning, creativity, and evaluation I: hypothesis and description of tests, Reports of the Psychology Laboratory. Los Angeles: University ofSouthern California Press, 1954, No. 11.
32. _______________. Psychometric Methods. 2d Ed., New York: McGraw-Hill, 1954, Chapters 11 and 14.
33. _______________. The relation of intellectual factors to creativethinking in science, In C. W. Taylor, ed., Research Conference on the Identification of Creative Scientific Talent. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1956, pp. 69-95.
34. . Creative abilities in the arts, Psychol. Rev. 1957,64, 110-118.
35. . Basic traits in intellectual performance, InC.. W. Taylor, ed., Research Conference on the Identification of Creative Scientific Talent. Salt Lake City: University ofUtah Press, 1958, pp. 66-81.
36. . Traits of creativity, In H. H. Anderson, ed.,Creativity and Its Cultivation. New York: Harper, 1959,pp. 142-61.
37. Hadamard, Jacques. An Essay on the Psychology of Invention in theMathematical Field. Princeton: Princeton University Press,1945.
38. Hart, H. H. The integrative function of creativity, Psychiat.Quart., 1950, 24, 1-16.
39. Horney, Karen. Neurosis and Human Growth. New York: Norton,1950, p. 332.
40. Hoyt, Cyril. Test reliability estimated by analysis of variance,Psychometrika. 1941, 6, 153-160.
41. Hulbeck, C.-R. Psychoanalytical thoughts on creativity, Am. J .Psychoanal.. 1953, 13, 84-86.
226
42. Hutchinson, E. D. How to Think Creatively. New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury, 1949.
43. James, William. The Principles of Psychology. Complete. NewYork: Dover, 1950, pp. 109-110.
44. Kelly, A. The Psychology of Personal Constructs. Vol. 1, Atheory of Personality, Vol. II, Clinical Diagnosis and Psychotherapy, New York: Norton, 1955.
45. Kris, Ernest. On preconscious mental processes, In D. Rapaport,ed., Organization and Pathology of Thought. New York:Columbia University Press, 1951, pp. 474-93.
46._____________ . Psychoanalytic Explorations in Art. New York:International Universities Press, 1952.
47. Kubie, L. S. Neurotic Distortion of the Creative Process.Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press, 1958.
48. Levy, N. J. Notes on the creative process and the creative person, Psvchiat. Quart. 1961, 35, 66-77.
49. Linquist, E. F. Design and Analysis of Experiments in Psychology and Education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1953.
50. MacKinnon, D. W. The personality correlates of creativity: Astudy of American architects, In Proceedings of the XIV International Congress of Applied Psychology. Vol. 2, Personality Research, Copenhagen, Denmark: Munksgaard, 1962.
51. MacLeod, R. B. Retrospect and Prospect, In H. E. Gruber, GlennTerrell, and Michael Wertheimer, eds., Contemporary Approaches to Creative Thinking. New York: Atherton, 1962, pp. 175-214.
52. Maslow, A. H. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper, 1954,pp. 223-24.
53. ____________. Emotional blocks to creativity, Humanist. 1958, 18,325-332.
54. ____________. Creativity in self-actualized people, In H. H.Anderson, ed., Creativity and Its Cultivation. New York: Harper, 1959, pp. 83-95.
55. McNemar, Quinn. Psychological Statistics. 2d Ed., New York:Wiley, 1955.
56. Mearns, Hughes. Creative Power: The Education, of Youth in theCreative Arts, 2d Rev. Ed., New York: Dover, 1958.
227
57. Murphy, Gardner. Personality: A Biosocial Approach to Origins andStructure, New York: Harper, 1947, p. 453.
58. Murray, H. A. Vicissitudes of Creativity, In H. H. Anderson, ed.,Creativity and Its Cultivation. New York: Harper, 1959,96-118.
59. ____________ . Preparations for the Scaffold of a ComprehensiveSystem, In S. Koch, ed., Psychology: A Study of a Science.Vol. 3, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959, pp. 7-54.
60. Parnes, S. J., and Harding, H. F. A Source Book for CreativeThinking, New York: Scribner, 1962.
61. Patrick, Catharine. Creative thought in poets, Arch. Psychol..1935, 26, 1-74.
62. __________________ . Creative thought in artist, J. Psychol..1937, 4, 35-73.
63. __________________ . Whole and part relationships in creativethought, Am. J. Psychol., 1941, 54, 128-131v
64. Perrine, Laurence. Sounds and Sense: An Introduction to Poetry,New York: Harcourt, 1956, Chapter 15 and 16.
65. Poincare, H. Mathematical Creation, In H. Poincare, ed., TheFoundations of Science. New York: Science Press, 1913,pp. 383-94.
66. Prescott, F. C. The Poetic Mind. New York: MacMillan, 1926.
67. Rapaport, David. On the psycho-analytic theory of thinking, Int.J. Psychoanal.. 1950, 31, 161-170.
68. ;___ . Toward a theory of thinking, In D. Rapaport, ed.,Organization and Pathology of Thought. New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1951. Part Seven.
69. Rogers, C. T. Toward a theory of creativity, ETC: Review ofGeneral Semantics, 1954, 11, 249-260.
70. Schachtel, E. G. Metamorphosis: On the Development of Affect,Perception, Attention and Memory, New York: Basic Books, 1959.
71. Schafer, Roy. Psychoanalytic Interpretation in Rorschach Testing;Theory and Application, New York: Grune & Stratton, 1954.
228
72. ____________ . Regression in the service of the ego, In G. Lindzey,ed., Assessment of Human Motives. New York: Rinehart, 1958.
73. Simon, Seymore. The affects of training on word associationoriginality and unusual uses, The Training of Original Problem Solving Behavior, Tech. Rep. #7, Los Angeles: Departmentof Psychology, University of California Press, 1961.
74. Sinnott, E. W. The creativeness of life, In H. H. Anderson, ed.,Creativity and Its Cultivation. New York: Harper, 1959,pp. 24-43.
75. Springbett, B. M., Dark, J. G., and Clark, J. An Approach to themeasurement of creative thinking, Canad. J. Psychol., 1957,11, 9-20.
76. Stein, M. I. Creativity and Culture, J. Psychol., 1953, 36,311-322.
77. __________ ., and Heinze, S. J. Creativity and the Individual.Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1960.
78. Taubert, E. S., and Green, M. R. Prelogical Experience. NewYork: Basic Books, 1959, p. 33.
79. Taylor, C. W., and Barron, Frank. Scientific Creativity: ItsRecognition and Development, New York: Wiley, 1963.
80. Taylor, D. W. Thinking and Creativity, In Fundamentals of Psychology: The Psychology of Thinking, Annals of the New YorkAcademy of Science. 1960, 91, 108-127.
81. ____________ . Environment and creativity, In Proceedings of theXIV International Congress of Applied Psychology. Vol. 5, Industrial and Business Psychology, Copenhagen, Denmark; Munksgaard, 1962, pp. 69-79.
82. Thorndike, E. L., and Lorge, Irving. The Teacher's Word Book of30.000 Words. New York: Bureau of Publications, TeachersCollege, Columbia University, 1944.
83. Thurstone, L. L. The scientific study of inventive talent, Re-ports from the Psychology Laboratory. Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 1952, No. 81.
84. - Creative talent, In L. L. Thurstone, ed., Application of Psychology. New York: Harper, 1952.
229
85. Torrance, E. P. Current Research on the nature of creative talent,J. counsel. Psychol., 1959, 6, 309-316.
86. Developing Creative Thinking' Through School Experiences, In S. J. Parnes and H. F. Harding, eds., A Source Book for Creative Thinking. New York: Scribner, 1962,pp. 31-47.
87.' Vinacke, W. E. Creative Thinking, In W. E. Vinacke, The Psychologyof Thinking. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1952, pp. 238-61.
88. Wallas, G. The Art of Thought. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1926.
89. Whitehead, A. N. The Aims of Education. New York: MacMillan,1929.
90. Willman, R. H. An experimental investigation of the creative process in music, Psychol. Monogr.. 1944, 57, (1).
91. Wilson, R. C., Guilford, J. P., and Christensen, P. R. The measurement of individual differences in originality, Psychol. Bull.. 1953, 50, 363-370.
92. ____________., Guilford, J. P., Christensen, P. R., and Lewis,D. J. A factor-analytic study of creative thinking abilities,Psychometrika. 1954, 19, 297-311.
93. ____________. Creativity, In Education for the Gifted, 57th Yearbook. National Society for the Study of Education. Part II, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958.
94. Wilson, R. N. Poetic creativity, process and personality,Psychiatry. 1954, 17, 163-176.
AUTOBIOGRAPHY
231
AUTOBIOGRAPHY
I, Charles Lyle Jennings, was born in Mt. Vernon, Ohio,
April 4, 1920. I received my secondary-school education in the
public schools of Columbus, Ohio, and my undergraduate training at
the University of Nebraska, which granted me the Bachelor of Science
in Education degree in 1949. I received the Master of Arts degree
from the same university in 1951. From August, 1949, until August,
1951, I held the position of speech and hearing therapist in the
Scottsbluff Public Schools, Scottsbluff, Nebraska. In August, 1951,
I was recalled to active duty with the United States Air Force as a
clinical psychologist. From September, 1955, to September, 1958,
I was a resident student at the Ohio State University while complet
ing the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree. From Octo
ber, 1957, until May, 1958, I was a clinical psychology resident
at the Columbus Psychiatric Institute, Columbus, Ohio.
I am, at the present time, on active duty with the United
States Air Force, serving as a clinical psychologist with the
School of Aerospace Medicine, Aeromedical Division, United States
Air Force Systems Command, Brooks AFB, San Antonio, Texas.