Premium
Sex differences in instructions to “be creative” on divergent and nondivergent test scores
Author(s) -
Katz Albert N.,
Poag John R.
Publication year - 1979
Publication title -
journal of personality
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.082
H-Index - 144
eISSN - 1467-6494
pISSN - 0022-3506
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1979.tb00630.x
Subject(s) - fluency , adjective check list , psychology , creativity , test (biology) , divergent thinking , meaning (existential) , creative thinking , personality , subject (documents) , developmental psychology , social psychology , cognitive psychology , mathematics education , psychotherapist , computer science , biology , paleontology , library science
A bstract Harrington (1975) found that both the magnitude and meaning of male subject scores on the Alternate Uses Test were altered by explicit instructions to “be creative,” and argued for the necessity of such instructions, plus qualitative scoring criteria, in the employment of tests of creativity. The present study elaborated upon this study by including female subjects, more than one test of divergent thinking and a test of nondivergent thinking. Instructions to be creative increased the proportion of creative responses output for both males and females, and sharpened correlations with Adjective Check List personality scales. Instructions did not alter performance on the nondivergent test. These results were interpreted to mean the instructions elicited strategies particularly relevant to divergent thinking and ruled out nonspecific effects such as those due to motivation. A reliable sex‐difference in ideational fluency was also observed: instructions to be creative facilitated the total number of responses output for the male subjects. This supports a hypothesis that the instructions disambiguate I he test situation differently for men and women, suggesting the need to isolate individual conceptions of creativity in order to maximize test performance.