The Open Collections website will be unavailable July 27 from 2100-2200 PST ahead of planned usability and performance enhancements on July 28. More information here.

Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A correlational study between creativity and transactional analysis ego states Way, Linda Margaret 1977

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata


831-UBC_1977_A8 W39.pdf [ 3.45MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0053792.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0053792-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0053792-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0053792-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0053792-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0053792-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0053792-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

A CORRELATIONAL STUDY BETWEEN CREATIVITY AND TRANSACTIONAL ANALYSIS EGO STATES by LINDA MARGARET WAY A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Counselling Psychology - Education We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA June, 1977 fc} Linda Margaret Way, 1977 In presenting th i s thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary shal l make it f ree ly ava i l ab le for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of th i s thesis for scho lar ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representat ives. It is understood that copying or pub l i ca t ion of th is thesis fo r f i nanc ia l gain sha l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of {^ OUh<,<> lli wj j c . i 0 ^°^J The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 i i ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation between creativity and the six ego states of Transactional Analysis. The research sample consisted of 42 adolescents (age 17-18) from a grade 11 high school psychology class. Creativity was measured by the fluency sub-score of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (Torrance, 1966). Ego states were measured by the Personal Response Questionnaire (Kealy, 1975). Six Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were calculated between the creativity scores and each of the ego state scores. On the basis of the creativity scores, two sub-groups were established. One group was comprised of the 10 highest scoring subjects and one group was comprised of the 10 lowest scoring subjects. A t-test was used to calculate the difference between the means of each of the 6 ego state scores of the two sub-groups. The results of the statistical testing of the correlation coefficients and of the t-value indicated that there were no statistically significant (.05) relationships between creativity and any of the 6 ego states. Descirptive data was presented to illustrate any differences within or among groups. Reasons for the lack of statistically significant results were discussed and recommendations for future research were suggested. i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I. INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 1 I. Background to the Problem 1 A. Creativity 1 B. Transactional Analysis 2 II. Statement of the Problem 6 A. Definitions and assumptions 6 B. Problems and hypothesis 7 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 9 A. Creativity 9 B. Transactional Analysis 21 C. Creativity and Transactional Analysis 24 III. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY 27 A. Design 27 B. Methodology 27 1. Sample 27 2. Administration and scoring 28 3. Instrumentation 29 a) Personal Response Questionnaire 29 b) Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking 30 4. Limitations 33 5. Statistical Analysis 33 IV. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA 35 A. Results of the Correlation of Creativity with Ego States 35 B. Results of the t-test Analyzing the Difference Between the Means of the Higher Criteria Groups and the Lower Criteria Groups 37 C. Summary 38 D. Descriptive Data 39 1. Scattergrams 40 2. Means and Standard Deviation Scores of the Higher Creative Group and the Lower Creative Group 40 3. Rank-order of Ego States 42 4. Summary 43 iv CHAPTER Page V SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 44 A. Summary and Discussion 44 B. Recommendations for future research 48 APPENDIX A 51 BIBLIOGRAPHY 54 LIST OF TABLES Table Page I Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients between creativity measure and each ego state measure 35 II Pearson product-moment correlation matrix for all experimental variables 37 III t-values for differences between the ego state means of the Higher Creative Group and the Lower Creative Group 38 IV Means and standard deviation for the sample and two sub-groups 40 V Rank-order distribution of mean ego state variables of the Higher Creative Group and of the Lower Creative Group. 42 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients between the creativity measure and each ego state measure 36 2 Mean ego state scores for Higher Creative Group and Lower Creative Group 41 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my appreciation to my supervisor Dr. Norm Amundson and to my committee members Dr. Bill Davis and Dr. Harold Ratzlaff for their cooperation and assistance in the preparation of this thesis. Special thanks are extended to Dr. Harold Ratzlaff for his contribution to the research design and statistical analysis of this study. 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND.STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The purpose of this research study was!;to investigate the relationship between creativity and personality characteristics. Per-sonality characteristics in this study were defined and considered within the personality theory of Transactional Analysis. Transactional Analysis is a conceptual and structural personality theory developed by Dr. Eric Berne in 1954. I. Background to the Problem A. Creativity Creativity has been the focus of speculation and interest throughout history and across disciplines. Galton's (1869) study of the imagination initiated the first scientific study of creativity, yet research in the early 1900's was sporadic and hampered by methodological and measurement limitations. J.P. Guilford's (1950) presentation of his Structure of the Intellect theory produced a resurgence of interest in creativity by providing a theoretical basis for credible research. Guilford's factor analytic research studies distinguished the creative-thinking factors from the general intelligence factors, thus providing a foundation for measurement. Concurrently, and with this added validation from the research community, other major investigations in the study of creativity were launched. D. MacKinnon and N. Sanford founded the Institute of 2 Personality Assessment and Research at the University of California (1949) as a "living-in" method to assess originality; C.W. Taylor, director of the National Science Foundation, promoted interest in scientific creativity and established national research conferences (1955); Anne Roe produced in-depth studies of the personality structure of creative scientists and artists (1952). These pioneer researchers established a firmer scientific foundation for the previously specu-lative contention that the creative individual was characterized by particular personality traits. Subsequent research has been varied and voluminous. The compelxity of the study of creativity is reflected by the multitude of approaches, definitions, and methodological considerations. Golann (1963) organized the various research aspects into four emphases: products, process, measurement and personological. Much of the research in creativity is within the personological domain, and responds to research questions such as "What is the nature of the creative individual?" and "What characteristics distinguish him from other individuals?" The primary research in the personological area has been due to the contributions of Roe, MacKinnon, Barron and Cattell. Roe (1952) used a variety of projective tests and biographical analysis for her in-depth study of the lives of artists and scientists; MacKinnon's (1962, 1963, 1965) studies of creative architects are representative of the highly refined assessment techniques utilized at the Institute of Personality Assessment and Research. Cattell's (1955, 1958) and 3 Barron's (1953a, 1963) investigations stressed particular instrumen-tation or particular traits to distinguish between creative and non-creative individuals. Other studies, using either a multidisciplinary approach or a trait approach provided collaborating evidence on the pronounced characteristics of the creative individual (Taylor, 1959; Crutchfield, 1962). Despite the diversity of techniques and subjects used in the research studies, the literature on creativity presents a fairly unified picture of the creative individual. It appears that he does utilize different thinking processes and does exhibit personality characteristics that distinguish him from the non-creative individual. Some of the personality characteristics common to the creative person seem to be: independence in judgement and behavior; high ego strength, tolerance of internal and external ambiguity, and an appreciation of the intuitive and sensual elements of l i f e . From these research findings, i t appears that the creative individual has actualized certain traits and has a particular com-position of traits which facilitate the creative process. The emergent result of this process is a novel product or a new perspective on known or unknown realms. Creativity can be considered as an expansion upon the socially defined norm or reality, providing us with new directions, attitudes and thoughts. Recognizing that social, cultural, and scientific advancement is often due to the contributions of the creative person, the study, of the creative individual is a deserving 4 area of research. With increased understanding of the internal and external dynamics of the creative person, i t may be possible to provide a psychological climate for the nurturance of creative ability and for the encouragement of potential creative talent. J.P. Guilford (1967) suggests further that "creativity is the key to education in its fullest sense and to the solution of mankind's most serious problems." (Journal of Creative Behavior, 1967, p. 10) The need for more under-standing of the creative individual is a partial rationale for this v research study. B. Transactional Analysis The secondary rationale for this study is to obtain research information within a psychological framework which is comprehensive and useful to both the theoretician and the practitioner. Often research information is usable and specific primarily to the academedician and requires a theoretical understanding beyond the scope of the layman. Paradoxically, i t is often the layman who has the direct need and responsibility for understanding and utilizing the available research knowledge. Because of this, a conceptual framework with a non-technical vocabulary is helpful for transmitting scientific knowledge into the public domain. Transactional Analysis (TA), the personality theory used in this study, is a viable medium for both research purposes and for general understanding and applicability. TA is a personality system which provides a theoretical basis for understanding human behavior and a structural framework by which behavior can be viewed. A conceptual framework allows for the synthesis of a wide variety of human traits 5 and behaviors into a unified system representing the total person. A structural framework permits the definition and categorization of per-sonality components within the system. The structural framework of TA embodies six distinct personality constructs (ego states)--Critical Parent (CP), Nurturing Parent (NP), Adult (A), Adapted Child (AC), Rebellious Child (RC) and Natural Child (NC). A further elaboration of the theory and constructs of TA will be presented in Chapter II. The suitability of Transactional Analysis as an educational and therapeutic tool has been demonstrated by its increased usage in a variety of settings. TA has been used in psychotherapy since its development in 1954; in 1973 i t was suggested that " i t may be the most widely used fastest growing form of treatment for emotional distress in the world." (Time, 1973). It has also been used effectively in the treatment of alcoholism (Steiner, 1971) and with juvenile delinquents (McCormick, 1973). TA has also found wide applicability in business and corporate management. Organizational and government agencies have used TA as a tool for studying staff relations and for teaching more effective communication patterns (James, 1975). Within the educational system, TA has become a valuable method for facilitating understanding of human behavior and inter-personal relations. It has been used as a counselling and teaching device with students in human development programs (Amundson, 1975; Freed, 1973). The concepts of TA have also been used in teacher training programs (Ernst, 1972), in in-service teacher workshops (National Educational Association, 1971) and in Parent study groups (Heasterly, 1974). 6 TA has been found to be useful in a variety of settings because i t presents a coherent structural and theoretical framework and because i t presents these concepts in terminology understandable to a general audience. It provides a vehicle for translating complex personality constructs into a comprehensive system of behavior. While there has been much clinical and theoretical literature written on TA, there is a paucity of empirical research. With the inc-reasing popularity of TA, empirical research is needed to prevent the corruption which often accompanies popularization, and to "permit transactional analysis to move toward a more respected position within the scientific community" (Hurley, 1973, p. 33). The existing empirical research in TA has established its structural components as identifiable and measureable attributes (Hurley and Porter, 1967; Thomson, 1972; Kealy, 1975), but further research in TA is needed. That TA is a valuable theoretical construct and that creativity is a deserving research area are the rationale for this research study. II. Statement of the Problem A. Definitions and Assumptions The operational definitions to be used as the basis for this study are as follows: 1. Creativity: "a process of becoming sensitive to problems, deficiencies, gaps in knowledge, missing elements, dis-harmonies, and so on; identifying the difficulty, searching for solutions, making guesses or formulating hypotheses about the deficiencies; testing and retesting these hypotheses and possibly modifying and retesting them; and finally communicating the results." (Torrance, 1966, p. 6) 2. Transactional Analysis: a) ". . .a systematic, consistent theory of personality and social dynamics . . ." (Berne, 7 1961, p. 1) b) "A theory of personality based on the study of specific ego states." (Berne, 1966, p. 370) 3. Ego State: a) ". . . phenomenologically as a coherent system of feelings related to a given subject and operationally as a set of coherent behavior, patterns; or pragmatically, as a system of feelings which motivates a related set of behavior patterns." (Berne, 1961, xviii) b) The six ego states which will be considered in this research study will be Critical Parent (CP), Nurturing Parent (NP), Adult (A), Adapted Child (AC), .Rebel!ious Child (RC), ' Natural Child (NC). The specific characteristics of these ego states will be presented in Chapter II. The assumptions inherent in this study are that creativity is a distinct and testable behavior and that Transactional Analysis ego states are plausible and testable entities. B. Problem and Hypothesis The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between creativity and the personality characteristics associated with Transactional Analysis ego states. Is creativity associated with the relative predominance of any ego state(s)? Is there a positive cor-relation between creativity and the personality characteristics defined in Transactional Analysis as NC, RC and A ego states? Is there a negative correlation between creativity and the personality characteris-tics defined in Transactional Analysis as CP, NP and AC ego states? It was further hoped that statistical and descriptive information would be obtained on the personality differences and patterns evident in persons of varying degrees of creativity. The following hypothesis was investigated in this study: There is a correlation between creativity, as defined and measured by the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (1966), and each of the six Transactional Analysis ego states, as defined and measured by the Personal Response Questionnaire (1975), in high school students 17 and 18 years of age. There is no statistically significant correlation between creativity as defined and measured by the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (1966), and each of the six Transactional Analysis ego states, as defined and measured by the Personal Response Questionnaire (1975), in high school students 17 and 18 years of age. 9 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The intent of this literature review is to present the major research evidence describing the personality characteristics of the creative individual. An overview of Transactional Analysis with a review of the relevant literature will also be presented. A- Review of the Literature on Creativity The assumption inherent in this research study is that creativity is a distinct and measurable phenomenon. An important aspect in defining and understanding creativity and its measurement rests on a theory of human intellectual functioning. While i t is beyond the scope of this study to examine fully the literature in this area, i t is appropriate to present the conceptual basis forlthemeasurement of creativity and its associated cognitive functioning styles. Most of the experimental studies in creativity and in the development of creativity tests is based on J.P. Guilford's Structure of the Intellect Theory (1950). Previous studies of intellect postulated a 'g' factor contributing to intelligence—a single unitary trait. Guilford redefined intelligence to incorporate this general intelligence ability with a number of secondary factors. Using multivariate analysis, he isolated 120 separate abilities which are grouped into three kinds of categories based on the operations performed, the content involved, and the product involved. In terms of the operations performed, five intellectual abilities are presented—cognitive, memory, evaluation, convergent thinking, and divergent thinking factors. These 10 represent different modes of cognitive functioning and of approaching problems. Of particular importance in the study of creativity is the distinction between divergent and convergent thinking operations. Divergent factors require a search for the unusual and the undiscovered and a flexibility and sensitivity to problems and problem solving. Convergent thinking factors involve the use of given information from which conclusions may be drawn and a "right" answer provided. Most of the experimental work in creativity has been based on Guilford's suggestion that i t is the divergent thinking process that best characterizes the creative individual. Tests of creative ability are often composite tests of divergent thinking abilities. Research relating the construct and predictive validity of divergent thinking abilities is inconsistent but generally indicates the association of divergent thinking abilities with creative production (Delias and Gaier, 1970). Divergent thinking is perhaps the most characteristic cognitive style of the creative individual, but this does not preclude the proba-bility of other cognitive approaches during the creative process (Guilford, 1959). Theoretical and empirical studies suggest that creativity does involve certain types of cognitive abilities and a certain degree of intelligence. It also involves a particular set of personality traits which may be the more important isolates in characterizing the creative person. Delias and Gaier (1970), after a review of major research studies concluded that " . . . until the personological context in which the 11 cognitive variables are embedded is determined, real measures of the diemnsions of creativity remain elusive." (p. 59) The major research evidence within the personological domain resulted from the studies of Roe (1951a, 1951b, 1952, 1953), Cattell and associates (1955, 1958, 1967, 1968), and independent researchers working under the auspicies of the Institute of Personality Assessment and Research (IPAR). IPAR, founded by MacKinnon and Sanford in 1949, has produced the most comprehensive and statistically refined information on the creative personality. Studies are conducted by various eminent psychologists during a 3 day living-in assessment method. Their major research studied the creative and lesser creative individuals within the following professions: scientists and engineers (Gough, 1957, 1960), writers and artists (Barron, 1953, 1963, 1965), mathematicians (Helison, 1967, 1971; Crutchfield, 1962, 1970), military officers (Barron, 1970), architects, (Hall & MacKinnon, 1969; MacKinnon, 1965). The assessment techniques included interviews, staff observations, situational tests, and personality inventories. The psychometric measures used included the following California Psychological Inventory (CPI; Gough, 1957), Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory (MMPI; Hathaway & MacKinlay, 1945), Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB; Strong, 1959),f|yers-Briggs Type Indicator (Myers, 1962), Adjective Check List (ACL; Gough & Heibrun, 1965), Barron-Welsh Art Scale (BWAS; Barron.&;Weish,. 1952). Using this multidisciplinary approach, creative subjects within each profession were consistently differentiated from their lesser creative counterparts on many personality factors. The most characteristic 12 research model and most conclusive and generalizable results were evidenced form the study of.architects. Hall & MacKinnon's (1969) study classified 124 American architects into three groups of significantly different levels of creativity (by nominations, voting, ratings, peer assessment, quantity and length of published articles); the three classifications were higher.creative, lesser creative, and representative (unselected in terms of creative criterion). Staff assessment techniques (ACL) (Q-sort; MacKinnon, 1958) described the more creative architects as individualistic, preoccupied, critical, emotional, poised, rebellious and nonconforming. Lower creative architects scored higher on measures indicating self-abasement, deference, affiliation and nurturance. The subjects were also administered the CPI and MMPI to provide a general picture of their personality constructs; other personality inventories were administered to elaborate upon certain specific characteristics of the creative subjects. The MMPI, which was devised as a measure of psychopathology, differentiated between the creative and the lesser creative architects on eight of the measured psychiatric dimensions. The results presented a significantly elevated profile on the scales indicating depression, hysteria, schizophrenia and psychopathic deviation (all 5-10 points above the general population mean). The unusualness of these profiles was apparent in the evidence and strength of contradictory psychological disturbances. The profiles were also unusual in the magnitude of the ego strength scale (Es; Barron, 1953a), which is negatively correlated with the other MMPI scales. The ego-13 strength scale, representative of personal stability and a strong sense of reality, seemed to balance otherwise dysfunctional psychological ten-dencies. Rather than evidence of psychopathology, MacKinnon (1970) con-sidered these profiles "indicative of greater unusualness of thought processes and mental content and less inhibition and free expression of impulse and imagery", (p. 307) The results of IPAR studies with other creative individuals showed consistent results. The creative subjects of all professions also scored significantly higher (.01) than the lower creative subjects on the femininity component of the Masculinity-Femininity scale (Mf). The higher creative writers (Barron, 1963) were especially differentiated from their representative sample on all the eight clinical measures of the MMPI. Barron (1963) concluded that they appeared "more troubled psychologically, but (they) also have far greater resources with which to deal with their troubles", (p. 240) The personality scales of the CPI also showed an unusual patterning of personality constructs. The CPI was devised as a scale to provide measures of personal effectiveness rather than of psychopathology, and its scales are nagatively correlated with the MMPI scales (except the ego-strength scale). On the 18 scales of the CPI, the creative archi-tects scored significantly higher (.05) than the representative sample on the measures reflecting dominance, self assuredness, self-acceptance, spontaneity and flexibility; they were particularly differentiated in terms of freedom from restraint and inhibition, unusualness of views, and unconcern with others' opinions. They scored lower on measures of 14 socialization, self-control, good impression and a sense of well-being. They also showed a high ability to achieve through independence rather than conformance, a receptivity to inner needs, and more femininity of interests. Again, considering the apparent inconsistencies of some of the traits--non-conformity and flexibility, self acceptance, yet a low sense of well-being; dominance and feminity,--a high degree of personal effectiveness is apparent. The CPI presents a picture of the creative architect as being self-confident, aggressive, independent, and senstiive. Similar profiles resulted from studies of creative mathematicians and creative writers (IPAR). The SVIB, a measure of vocational preference, was also used in IPAR investigations to provide a composite measure of personality traits. The results of this measure illustrated the preference of the creative person to work with things or ideas rather than with people, and to work in fields requiring intellectual risk-taking and independence of judgement and behaviour. The creative subjects in all professions again scored higher on the feminity of interests (M-F) scale. Other research on creativity, conducted independently of IPAR, has used the 16PF (Cattell, Day, Meeland; 1956) to provide a comprehensive personality profile of the creative and lesser creative individual. The major studies involved creative graduate students (Drevdahl, 1956), creative physicists, biologists and psychologists (Cattell and Drevdahl, 1955), and creative artists and writers (Drevdahl and Cattell, 1958). The subjects were reliably rated as more creative or less creative. The results indicated similar personality profiles among the creative subjects 15 of the varied professions, and distinctly different profiles from the lesser creative subjects. In comparison with the control groups, the creatives were found to score significantly higher (.01) on the fol-lowing scales: withdrawn and unsociable, inhibited and introspective; self-sufficient in judgement, and radical. Creative scientists and artists were found, in addition, to be more dominant, more bohemian, more aware of their own needs, more emotionally sensitive, and more adventurous than the lesser creative subjects. All the creative individuals exhibited more introversion and more ego-strength on the 16PF. The personality profiles of the creative subjects were unusual (as with the MMPI and CPI), in the combination of generally inconsistent traits—inhibition and radicalism, dominance and unsociability; ego-strength and inner receptivity. Cattell (1968) suggested that the superior degree of ego-strength provided an adequate mechanism to handle deviations which are usually indicators of psychopathology. Further confirmation of the profiles characteristic of the creative person on the 16 PF scales was provided by Cross, Cattell and Butcher, (1967), Chambers (1964) and Tollesfson (1961). Tollesfson's research (cited in Cattell & Butcher, 1968) calculated the relative magnitude of factors necessary for creative production and found that the constructs of ego-strength (.46), emotional sensitivity (.46) and radicalism (.45) provided the strongest indicators. Other researchers (Gough, 1960; McClelland, 1962; Taylor, 1955, 1959) studied the personality traits specific to creative scientists; 16 their results concurred with investigations of creativity within other professions. Characteristics of the creative scientist were shown to be autonomy and independence of judgement, non-conformity, risk-taking in intellectual but not social situations, personal dominance, and a preference for ideas rather than people. Taylor and Barron (1963) further described the creative scientist as being open to the irrational and ambiguous elements, having a high degree of ego-strength, and being sensitive but socially detached. Roe's in-depth analysis of creative scientists and artists (1951a, 1952, 1953) depicted an individual of high intelligence, much perseverence and absorption in work, and self-sufficiency and indepen-dence. From these comprehensive personality studies, singular per-sonality traits consistently emerged and were researched as possible critical variables in the creative personality. The recurrence of cer-tain characteristics has suggested that a preponderance of some traits contribute, allow, or inhibit creative production. While i t is generally assumed that creativity results from a particular constel-lation of traits, the knowledge of the potentially crucial attributes is important in the study of creativity. The personality traits which were consistently exhibited by creative persons included: perceptual openness, tolerance of ambiguity, sex ambivalence, ego-strength, and independence of judgement. The concept of perceptual openness has been categorized as both a cognitive and a psychological style. As a cognitive approach i t 17 is suggestive of the divergent thinking operations; as a psychological approach i t is the ability to fully experience internal and external stimuli. It is the opposite of rigidity and defensiveness (Rogers, 1954). Creative persons evidenced this trait on scales of the CPI (Py) and the 16PF(I) and on self-report and staff surveys in the IPAR investigations. More specific research (IPAR) was conducted using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (1958) which provides two measures of styles of awareness and perception (Judging vs. Perceiving; Intuition vs. Sen-sation). With the exception of the creative scientists (Gough, 1960), creative individuals preferred the Perceptive and Intuitive modes of perception. This is indicative of a receptivity and spontaniety to experience and an intuitive apprehension of experience. These modes of perception are closely associated with the con-cepts of "tolerance of ambiguity" (Snyder, 1967), and "openness to complexity" (Barron, 1963), which are defined by Barron as "a perceptual attitude which seeks to allow into the perceptual system the greatest possible richenss of experience, even though discord and disorder result". (Vernon, 1970, p. 281) The perceptual choice of creative subjects (IPAR; BWAF) was for complex, disordered stimuli rather than balanced traditional stimuli. This implied an ability to allow and tolerate discordant and unusual elements without anxiety. (Barron, 1963) Frenkel-Brunswik's studies of perception and defensiveness (1939, 1949) supported these findings. Creative students were found able to allow the co-existence of complex and inconsistent perceptual stimuli without anxiety or denial; less creative subjects were found 18 to be rigid and selective in their perceptions. Further evidence of 'tolerance of ambiguity' was contributed by Getzel and Jackson's (1962) studies with creative children and Synder's (1967) studies with college students. The conclusions drawn from these studies suggested that the creative individual's ability to perceive and to tolerate contradiction and disorder also allow him to synthesize these elements into a refined creative product. Another recurring characteristic of creative subjects (IPAR) was sex ambivalence, which was measured by the Masculine-Feminine scales of the CPI, MMPI and SSIB. Male creative subjects scored higher on the femininity component of these scales; this is descriptive of an openness to emotions, self-awareness, and affective and intellectual sensitivity. Female creative subjects scored higher on the items measuring traits of mascu-linity. Delias and Gaier (1970) concluded that i t is this "integration of the necessary sensitivity and intuition with the purposeness of action and determination, that is conducive to creativeness". (p. 64) These specific studies illustrate the creative persons' ability to be aware of, to experience, and to tolerate opposing internal and external stimuli and attitudes. Similarly, the combination of opposing personality tendencies shown by the personality profiles (CPI, MMPI, 16PF) illustrate the ability of creative individuals to productively handle such inconsistencies. It has been postualted that the ability to integrate opposing tendencies is due to the characteristics associated with the measures of ego-strength on the CPI, MMPI, 16PF (Barron, 1963; Drevdahl and Cattell, 1958; MacKinnon, 1962b). The ego-strength factor indicates an 19 ability to adapt to reality as well as to respond to inner needs in a constructive manner. Too much or too l i t t l e adaptation to reality would produce either rigidity or chaos in personality structure; in this sense, Barron (1963) concluded that creative persons are "both sicker and heal-thier psychologically than people in gneeral". (p. 240) Other research (McClelland, 1962; Getzels and Jackson, 1962) supported the adaptive yet spontaneous nature of the creative individual. Independence of Judgement, a personality construct similar to the ego-strength trait, has also been highly associated with the creative person. Measures of independent achievement (Ai; CPI) and self-sufficiency ( Q 2 ; 16PF) were highly indicative of creativity (IPAR). These abilities are connected with intellectual freedom and internal locus of evaluations (Rogers, 1954). A situational experiment (Crutchfield, 1955) assessed conformity or independence of behaviour under opposing group consensus, and demonstrated the ability of the creative subjects to behave, as well as think independently. Wyer (1967), Crutchfield (1962), and Roe (1953) also distinguish this as a behavioral ability of creative persons. Studies of creativity in adolescent samples presented personality characteristics similar to those exhibited by creative adults. Getzels and Jackson (1962) studied intellectually gifted children and found that the more creative of these subjects were also more aggressive, more play-ful, and more original and unusual in thinking patterns. The lesser creative subjects perferred the safety of conventional restraints, used stereotyped meanings and symbols, and viewed success in traditional terms. These same characteristics were found in studies of 20 Torrance and Dauw (1965a, 1965b). Runner and Runner (1961) (cited in Torrance, 1966) found that creative adolescents scored significantly higher (.01) on scales measuring intuition, experimentation, and unconventionality; less creative subjects showed more need for rules and structure, and exhibited more passivity and compliance. The studies of Hammer, (1961) Schaeffer, (1969) and Anastasi & Schaeffer, (1969) found that creative adolescents were able to reconcile the masculine and feminine aspects of their nature, as well as opposing external elements. The creative subjects also expressed more determination, rebelliousness, impulsiveness and independence. Parloff, Datta, Kleman and Hanlon (1968) used the CPI to distinguish personality characteristics between and among four groups of higher and lesser creative adults and adolescents. The results were generally con-sistent with other research studies using the CPI (IPAR) and presented a picture of both the creative adult and adolescent being more dominant, unconventional, spontaneous and independent. On scales which measured socialization and conformity (Self-Control, Good Impression, Sense of Well-being, Achievement via Conformance) the creative adults scored lower than their control group whereas the creative adolescents scored higher than their control group. Parloff (1968)suggested that adolescent creative .performance". . .may be facilitated rather than hindered by a self-discipline that permits him to learn principles, heuristics, and basic information", (p. 548) Generally the characteristics of younger creative subjects con-cur with the characteristics of creative adults, suggesting that particular 21 attributes are indicators and perhaps determinants of creative performance. Despite differences in age, sex and profession, a fairly consistent profile of the creative personality has emerged. He seems to be a unique combination of various and sometimes inconsistent personality traits. These traits include ego strength and emotional stability, independence and autonomy, an awareness of inner and outer processes, and a tolerance for the irrational and inconsistent elements of l i f e . B. Theory and Related Research in Transactional Analysis Transactional Analysis (TA) is a theoretical and structural personality approach developed by Dr. Eric Berne in the years from 1950-1970. Berne (1957) considered the personality to be comprised of three distinct and separate phenomenological ego-states, colloquially termed Parent, Adult and Child, with three parallel psychic organs termed extereopsyche, neopsyche and archaeopsyche. Ego-states were defined by Berne (1961) as follows: Phenomenologically as a coherent system of feelings related to a given subject; and operationally as a set of coherent behavior, patterns; or pragmatically, as a system of feelings which moti-vates a related set of behavior patterns, (p. xvii) Ego-states are residual incorporations of internal and external feelings, attitudes, and behaviours experienced during the developmental process of the child. In his later l i f e , an individual operates from one of these states of mind in response to external or internal stimuli. The existence of semi-permeable ego boundaries between these internal states is implicit; and Berne (1961) postulated that there was a flow of energy (cathexis) between the ego-states. Energy resides in one ego-state at a given time 22 which results in a manifestation of the related pattern of affect and behaviour. In its tripartite division of personality structure, TA parallels Freud's (1923) psychoanalytic constructs of superego, ego and id, but Berne (1957) stated that "these are not synonymous or redundant, but represent different approaches", (p. 301) The primary distinction is that ego-states are represented by visible, audible, and behavioral realities, with actual historic prototypes, whereas the psychoanalytic constructs are theoretical definitions. Benre's conceptualization of ego-states is more cogently related to that of the neo-Freudian ego-psychologists Federn (1952) and Weiss (1950). Federn (1952) considered the ego an "actual continuous mental experience, not merely a mental abstraction" ., (p. 6), with "ego boun-daries (are) correlated with different ego states", (p. 14) Weiss (1950) suggested that there are residual ego-states of other entities within the individual, formed at various age levels, which are s t i l l part of the personality. Further confirmation of Berne's conceptualization of ego states was provided by the studies of W. Penfield (1952), a neurosurgeon working with patients suffering from epilepsy. Penfield found that by electrical stimulation of the temporal cortex of the brain he could induce exact reproductions of visual, audible, and emotional events previously experienced by the patient. The studies of Federn (1952), Weiss (1950), and Penfield (1952) collaborate with Berne's hypotheses that past and present experiences remain intact in the mind and are available for recall. 23 Since Berne's development of TA, differing theoretical schools within this framework have emerged. While the definitions of the major structural components (P, A, C) are similar, differences occur in the sub-divisions of the Parent and Child ego-states. For the purposes of this study, the interpretation of ego-states will follow those of Kealy (1975) who devised the psychometric instrument to be used in this research. Kealy's Personal Response Questionnaire (PRQ, 1975) is based on the theoretical and structural orientation posited by Berne (1961, 1964, 1972), Harris (1967), James and Jongeward (1971), and Steiner (1971). Within this framework, the structural components will be con-sidered the Critical Parent, Nuturing Parent, Adult, Adapted Child,, Rebellious Child and Natural Child ego-states. Kealy's research'(1975) -uti 1 i zed the. fo.ll owi ng descripti ons of .ego-states: The Critical Parent (CP) "consists of standards of behaviour based on unexamined information rather than on fact. It is basically composed of laws, rules and prohibitions." (p. 9) The Nuturing Parent (NP) "is more sympathetic and protective, but can also be critical and moralizing." (p. 9-10) The Adult (A) "examines previous data to determine whether i t is s t i l l relevant. It also examines feelings, deciding whether or not they are appropriate, and whether or not to allow them to surface." (p. 10) The Adapted Child (AC) consists of behaviour which "is usually that of being very cooperative and compliant." (p. 10) The Rebellious Child (RC) consists of behaviour which "is usually rebellion against some form of authority.: The Natural Child (NC) consists of behaviour which is "free, uninhibited and impulisve. Creativity resides here, as do curiosity, the desire to explore and know, and the urge to touch, feel, and experience." (p. 11) 24 Further elaboration of the characteristics associated with par-ticular ego-states is relevant for this research study and parallels Kealy's theoretical orientation. The CP ego-state contains the attitudes, knowledge and behaviors that are unquestionably retained by the individual from external sources. Some aspects of this are useful and important to survival by their facilitation of automatic reactions; other aspects of this ego-state promote inaccurate and prejudicial opinions and behaviour. The NP ego-state is similarly comprised of both beneficial and non-beneficial elements. While i t is an assimilation of knowledge and behaviours necessary for growth and proteciton, this behaviour can also be exhibited in an excessive and overly-protective manner, which mitigates rather than facilitates the development of the child. The behaviour of the NC ego-state is autonomous and uninhibited. This ego-state is comprised of the behavior and emotions natural to the child before i t is molded by external restraints. It contains such innate emotions as joy and sadness, anger and fear, excitement and despair. The AC and RC egosstates are modifications of the desires of the NC in response to experienced parental directives. It is an incorporation of early feelings and adaptations to external sources. The A ego-state processes internal and external data through the senses, and mediates the needs of the inner child and the outer world (Steiner, 1971). It allows autonomous, reality-based behaviour and predictions. C. Creativity and TA Ego-states There is l i t t l e specific research on creativity within TA, although 25 creativity is generally referred to as an integral element of the NC ego-state. Ste.iner (1974) described the NC as the source of "spontaneity, sexuality, creative change'.1 (p. 75), and Harris (1967) stated that: "In the Child reside creativity, curiosity, the desire to explore and know, the urges to touch and feel, and experience." (p. 49) Harris concep-tualized the creative process as the Child providing the energy and commitment!, and the Adult providing the structure and knowledge. He suggested that the essential feature was to free the Adult from continual decision-making or data-processing functions. By relegating automatic day-to-day decisions to the Parent ego-state some behavioral decisions will become automatic and "free the computer for creativity", (p. 57) Berne (1966) considered "disciplined creativity" a result of the individual's ability to "exercise Adult insight and control so that these childlike qualities emerge at appropriate times and in appropriate company", (p. 307) Similarly, he states (1962) that intuition, an important aspect of creativity, is an archeaopsychic phenomenon which is "repressed when the neopsychic adult ego-state predominates, and is impaired when the extereopsychic parent ego state encroaches on the freedom of the archaepsyche". (p. 296) Ostling (1974) has suggested that there is an appropriate ego-state for each phase of the creative process—the acquisition of knowledge (A), the commitment use of the imagination (C), and the evaluation of the solution (P; A). The Child discovers, the Adult records, and the Parent and Adult evaluate, (p. 61) The NP ego state is ineffectual in the creative process as i t "will restrict the C to being 26 good instead of being creative". (p. 49) From the theoretical literature on TA, and from the empirical literature on creativity, i t is evident that many of the characteristics of the creative and non-creative individual are similar to the descriptions of certain ego-states. While all ego states are potentially available to each individual, the ability to cathect or to fully utilize each ego-state varies among individuals. The relative preponderance or absence of certain ego states, and therefore certain personality characteristics is indicative of a particular personality style. The personality charac-teristics of the creative person may be explained by the structural components of the TA ego states. The characteristics of the NC ego-state--impulsivity, spontaniety, emotionality, and intuition are highly indicative of the creative per-sonality, as is the rebelliousness and the unconventionality manifested by the RC ego-state. The ability of the Adult ego-state to process and balance internal and external forces is similar to the concept of ego-strength. The autonomy and independence associated with both the A and NC ego-states concurs with the creative person's ability to achieve and behave independently. The prohibitive and conventional characteristics of the CP ego state and of the nurturing and protective aspects of the NP are obverse traits of the creative person. Similarly, the compliance and adap-tation to external restraints exhibited by AC behaviour is inversely related to creative performance. The descriptions of particular e.go-states and the characteristics of creative and non-creative individuals, suggests the possibility of studying creativity from within the TA constructs. 27 CHAPTER III DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY A. Design The design involved a one-group correlational field study. The function of the design was to explore the relationship of the six ego state variables with the creativity variable. Scores were obtained from each of the seven scales, and Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were calculated between each of the six ego state variables and the creativity variable. On the basis of the creativity score, the 42 subjects were divided into a Higher Creative (HC) group composed of the ten highest scoring subjects, and a Lower Creative (LC) group composed of the ten lowest scoring subjects. A t-test was utilized to analyze the differences between the means of each of the six ego state variables of the two groups. This t-value provided further statistical support for the correlational data. Descriptive data were calculated and presented to illustrate any individual differences within and among the groups. B. Methodology 1. Sample The research sample consisted of 42 adolescents (age 17-18) from a North Vancouver high school grade 11 psychology class. The sample was self-selected in terms of their choice of the psychology class rather than other available curriculum options (music, art, industrial arts). The course required no pre-requisite in terms of scholastic achievement. This non-random sample was utilized because of research restrictions, 28 and because of the subjects' availability and interest in psychology. Adolescents rather than younger children were chosen as the sample on the basis of research indicating the instability of the development of creativity in younger children. Creative expression in younger subjects has been shown to be influenced by age level and sex differences more than i t is with older subjects (Torrance, 1966). These adolescents were also chosen in preference to adults because of their accessibility and their interest in psychological research. Although extraneous variables other than age--sex, intelligence, background—would produce some variance, i t was considered.more pertinent for this study to control developmental variables. It was assumed that the self-selection into a psychology class would produce less skew in relation to creativity than self-selection into other offered options 1. e.; other options, such as music and art, often, require more delineated interest and talent than in a general subject such as high school psychology. 2. Administration and Scoring The TTCT, Verbal and Figural, Forms B, and the PRQ were group administered and hand-scored by the researcher. Each of the two psychology classes were tested separately. All testing times occurred during mid-week. Testing was done in the classroom. Both the TTCT Fiqural, Form B, and the PRQ were administered to each psychology class in a one-hour classroom-time block during mid-morning. The TTCT Verbal, Form B was administered to each psychology class during a mid-afternoon one-hour classroom time block. 29 The measure of creativity was obtained from one of the four creativity sub-scores (fluency). This sub-score was utilized on the basis of research evidence citing the validity of the fluency score for use in research purposes (research cited in Instrumentation). 3. Instrumentation a. Personal Response Questionnaire The PRQ (see Appendix A) was developed by L. Kealy for a doctoral dissertation (1975) as a tool for the identification and measurement of Transactional Analysis ego states. The questionnaire consists of sixty True or False items representing attitudes and behaviors from one of the six ego states. It may be group administered and hand-scored. The PRQ was devised according to the Loevinger (1957) model of test construction and was validated by Kealy as a usable psychometric instrument. Validity in terms of this model incorporated all other kinds of validity (content, construct, criteria-related) as well as internal consistency. The substantative component (content validity) and struc-tural component (internal consistency) of construct validity were estimated by fi r s t - and second-order factor analysis and showed six independent factors (ego states). Content analysis was provided by five inter-judge ratings on a pool of 205 items. Internal consistency ranged from .47 - .72 (KR-20; N =508). Using the California Personality Inventory (CPI; Gough, 1957) to establish the external component of construct validity (criteria-related), the coefficient of internal consistency ranged from .47 - .69 (KR-20; N = 139). Correlations of the personality constructs of the CPI with the personality constructs of the PRQ provided external evidence of 30 validity for the CP, AC, RC and NC ego state scales; the constructs of the A and NP scales were not supported. The PRQ appears to be more valid for females than for males (Kealy, 1975)-. The PRQ was chosen for this research study on the basis of Kealy's (1975) research findings which "indicate(s) that the PRQ is ready for use in its present form" (p. 67) and that "the construct of ego states is a particularly useful one in the analysis of human behavior, and stands up under rigorous statistical experimentation", (p. 67) Little other research has been done to substantiate Kealy's thesis, and Kealy does suggest several important areas for improvement of the instrument (external component of validity, sex differences); however, other research in TA ego state instrumentation has been less successful (McCarley, 1971; Coffman, 1972; Thomson, 1972) and has resulted in less validation than Kealy's measurement instrument. b. Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking The TTCT is a paper and pencil test consisting of a Verbal and Figural Form with alternate forms for each. It can be group administered and hand-scored with each form requiring approximately one hour to administer. The TTCT was developed by P. Torrance (1966) to assess the four divergent aspects thought to contribute to creative thinking-fluency (total number of acceptable responses), flexibility (different categories of responses), elaboration (detail and additions to responses), originality (unusual responses). The rationale for assessing creativity in terms of divergent thinking factors rests on J.P. Guilford's Structure 31 of the Intellect theory (1950). These four sub-test scores are derived from the three tasks of the Figural form and the seven tasks of the Verbal form of the TTCT. The manual presents, explicitly, directions for scoring and presents information on validity and reliability from research samples of adults, adolescents and children. Torrance (1966) reports the fol-lowing reliability coefficients in the manual: inter- and intra-correlations of experienced and inexperienced scorers in the high .90's; test-retest reliability from .50 - .93 (two weeks) and .35 - .73 (three years); alternate forms reliability from .85 - .96 (Verbal form) and .70 -.80 (Figural form). Cited investigations by other researchers substantiate these figures (Goralski, 1964; Eherts, 1961). Torrance (1966) also pre-sents content, construct and concurrent validity investigations which support the usage of the TTCT (Torrance, 1966; Nelson, 1963, Liberman, 1965). Yamamoto's (1964, 1965) research provides further evidence for the validity of the TTCT. Evidence of predictive validity is presented from short-range studies showing a coefficient of validity of .51 in a five year sutdy (Cropley, 1971), and .51 in a 12 year study (Torrance, 1971). Although there has been much supportive evidence for the validity of TTCT, there has also been much skepticism regarding the measurement of creativity, and for the use of the TTCT as a measurement instrument. While most of the literature suggests that the TTCT is at least as adequate as other creativity tests, i t has been considered desirable in creativity research, and for this particular study, to briefly examine two salient ' -criticisms. The most controversial issue in the measurement of creativity 32 is in establishing its discriminant validity in regard to intelligence measures; that is showing that the intercorrelations of the creativity criterion measures (sub-tests) are higher than their correlation with intelligence measure. The correlation between traits and within traits of the creativity measures of the TTCT are generally not as high as the average correlation between creativity scores and intelligence scores. The range of creativity sub-test scores and intelligence measures' cor-relations are reported between .30 and .88, but are generally considered to be in the..50 area (Crockenburg, 1971; Yamamoto, 1964, 1965b; Torrance, 1966). In adolescent samples the overlap is often greater than .50 sr.: (Thorndike, 1963). Wallach and Kogan's review of creativity measurement (1965) suggests that the correlation with IQ is so substantial that i t may be considered as an alternate measure of general intelligence. Even with the lack of discriminant validity, some of the variance in scores seems to be determined by factors other than IQ and i t is on this premise that creativity instruments continue to be used. (Crockenburg, 1971) More specific for this study is the concept of convervent validity; that is, the intercorrelations of measuresof the same construct. There is l i t t l e evidence of construct differentiation between the sub-tests of the TTCT (Thorndike, 1963b, Wallach and Kogan, 1965; Crockenburg, 1971). The highest degree of within trait correlation occurs between fluency socres (Crockenburg, 1971; Harvey, Hoffmeister, Coates, and White, 1970). This research suggests that the measurement of fluency is the most relevant criterion measure of the TTCT. The most conclusive evidence in support of this scoring procedure was established by Hargreaves and Bolten (1972) by a factor analysis of 15 divergent and non-divergent 33 creativity tests. Their findings suggest that creativity is a unitary trait within divergent tests and "in more practical terms, the time and effort required to calculate anything more than fluency scores on divergent tests do not justify the small amount of extra information gained", (p. 460) Theoretical evidence suggests that i t is the flow and production of ideas that is the crucial stage in the creative process and that fluency is the more predominant quality in creative problem solving. (Freeman, 1971) Research shows evidence of a high correlation between the quality and quantity of ideas generated. (Parnes, 1962; Osborn, 1963) While fluency is not identical with creativity, i t seems to be the essential score for doing research and one of the most fundamental factors in creativity. 4. Limitations The external validity of this study is limited by the lack of randomization and by the use of a self-selected group of adolescents. Because of the lack of discriminant validity between creativity and intelligence measures, i t is further limited by the unavailability of the IQ scores of the sample subjects. The lack of substantiating independent validation research on the PRQ as a measurement tool is a limitation in terms of instrumentation. 5. Statistical Analysis a.) The coefficient of correlation between the creativity measure and each of the ego state measures was calculated using the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. The Pearson product-34 moment correlation coefficient was chosen as the most efficient statistical measure for this descriptive field study. The assumption underlying the use of the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was that the measured scores were linearly related and that an underlying interval scale could be argued. The .05 level of significance was chosen since a Type I error was not critical and the outcome of the research question involved was not considered to be a critical issue; thus a higher degree of risk could be tolerated. The two-tailed test was chosen since the formal hypothesis to be tested invovled relatedness rather than direction. b. ) A correlation matrix was obtained to show the inter-correlations among the variables as well as between the creativity measure and the six ego state measures. Scattergrams were plotted to illustrate individual variability between the HC and LC groups as well as between the creativity variable and ego state variables. c. ) On the basis of the creativity measure, the ten highest scoring individuals and the ten lowest scoring individuals were grouped and the difference between the means of each of the six ego state measures of the two groups was tested by a t-test at the .05 level of/significance. d. ) Tables and graphic representations were compiled to illustrate any resultant patterns in the statistical data. Because of the relative nature of ego states, descriptive data were used to observe any personality profiles associated with higher creative and lower creative individuals. 35 CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA A. Results of Hypothesis Regarding the Correlation of Creativity; with Ego States a.) To investigate the correlation of the creativity measure (TTCT) and each of the six ego state measures (PRQ), Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were calculated. The correlation coefficient was tested at the .05 level of signfiicance using a two-tailed test and the results were found to be non-significant. Table I presents the correlation coefficients of the variables. The bar graph of Figure 1 presents the correlational relationship of the six ego state variables in relation to the creativity variable. TABLE I PEARSON PRODUCT-MOMENT CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE CREATIVITY MEASURE AND EACH OF THE SIX EGO STATE MEASURES (N = 42) EGO STATE VARIABLES CP NP A AC RC NC Correlation coefficient .1800 .0498 .0316 -.0684 .1612 .2598 Probability .2538 .7538 .8422 .6665 .3075 .0965 36 Figure 1 Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficients between the creativity measure and each of the ego state measures C C V 0 o a r e 1 r f u e f e 1 i s a c t i -i e o n n t .1 CP NP A AC RC Ego State Variables NC Five of the ego states correlated positively but non-significantly with creativity; the AC ego state correlated negatively but non-significantly with creativity at the .05 level. The positive correlation coefficients ranged from .03 (A) to .26 (NC). b.) A correlation matrix was obtained showing the intercorrelations among the creativity variable and the six ego state variables (Table 2). 37 TABLE II PEARSON PRODUCT-MOMENT CORRELATION MATRIX FOR ALL EXPERIMENTAL VARIABLES Variable Create CP NP A AC RC NC Create 1.0000 CP 0.1801 1.0000 NP 0.0499 0.2065 1 .0000 A 0.0317 0.3075* 0 .3703* 1 .0000 AC -0.0685 0.4049** -0 .0187 0 .2141 1 .0000 RC 0.1613 0.1519 -0 .0972 -0 .0811 0 .1242 1.0000 NC 0.2598 0.2444 0 .3180* 0 .2199 0 .866 0.2788 1.000 * £ < .05 ** p_ <".01 At the .05 level of significance the variables that correlated significantly were CP & A (.047); CP & AC (.0078); NP & A (.015); NP & NC (.040). The correlation among these ego state variables was stronger than the correlation between the ego state variables and the creativity variable. Two of the Parent ego states correlated significantly with two of the Child ego states. Both of the Parent ego states correlated significantly with the A ego state. (See Chapter V for discussion) B. Results of the t-test Analysing Statistically the Differences  Between Means Two sub-groups designated as.:higher creative and lower creative individuals were established according to their relative creativity score. A t-value was calculated for the difference between the means of each of the six ego states measures of the higher creative group and the lower creative group. The t-value, tested at the .05 level 3 8 of significance, showed no statistically significant differences between the means for each of the six ego states of the two groups, thus lending further support to the statistically non-significant results of the correlational data. (Table III) TABLE III t-VALUES FOR DIFFERENCESBETWEEN THE EGO STATE MEANS OF THE HIGHER CREATIVE GROUP AND INNER CREATIVE GROUP Ego states CP NP A AC RC NC T-value . 5 1 5 0 . 2 9 1 6 . 3 9 5 2 . 1 2 5 5 . 6 4 1 1 . 7 1 5 4 Probability (approxi-mate) . 7 0 0 0 . 6 0 0 0 . 6 5 0 0 ' . 5 5 0 0 . 7 5 0 0 . 7 8 0 0 The obtained t-values ranged from . 1 2 5 5 (AC) to . 7 1 5 4 (NC). The rank-order of the t-value scores correspond to the correlation data with the exception of the NP scale; which ranks fifth in the correlation data, and sixth in the t-test data. C. Summary The results of the statistical testing of the correlation coefficients as well as of the t-test results indicated that there were no statistically significant ( a = . 0 5 ) relationships between creativity and TA ego states. In this study the correlation coefficients and the t-values suggest the strongest relationship between creativity and the NC scale. The CP, NP, A, RC and NC scales showed a positive correlation with creativity; the AC scale showed a negative correlation. It was 39 expected that a positive correlation would exist between creativity and the NC, RC and A ego states. The correlation of each of these was in the predicted direction but non-significant. It was also expected that there would be a negative correlation between creativity and the CP, NP and AC ego states. The AC variable correlated in the predicted direction; the CP and NP correlated positively with creativity. The results of the t-test corresponded to the correlation data, with the exception of the rankings of the NP and A ego state variables. The A scale evidenced less correlation with creativity than the NP scale did yet the difference between the means was evidenced more with the A scale than with the NP scale. This is accounted for by the decrease in N for the t-test. The correlation matrix reveals, for this sample, more significant correlations among the ego state variables than between the ego state variables and the creativity variable. The ego states that correlated significantly (a = .05) were CP and AC; CP and A; NPand A; NP and NC. The correlation data and statistical evidence provided by this study show that the direction and magnitude of the correlations between each of the six ego state variables with creativity are due to l i t t l e else than chance probabilities inherent in this sample. D. Descriptive Data Descriptive data were compiled to provide a more holistic con-ceptualization of the ego state characteristics of the higher and lower creative subjects, and to study relationships or patterns occurring in the data. This information expands upon the previous data by providing 40 a closer look at differences and similarities within and between groups. 1. Scattergrams Scattergrams were plotted to illustrate the relatedness of each ego state variable with the creativity variable. 1 2. Mean and Standard Deviation Scores The means of each of the sub-groups were calculated. The mean and standard deviation of the sample were calculated to show the relative position and dispersion of scores within groups and between groups (Table IV). This table gives more descriptive information for the characteristics of this sample than does the t-test and reflects the statistical information that the scattergrams provide graphically. TABLE IV MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR SAMPLE AND TWO SUB-GROUPS CP NP A AC RC NC Sample (N = 42) Mean .43 .70 .63 .44 .37 .62 Standard Deviation .21 .23 .24 .19 .18 .21 Higher Creatives (N = 10) Mean .54 .74 .70 .45 .43 .73 Lower Creatives (N = 10) Mean .42 .64 .58 .48 .31 .50 The combined profile comparison of the two groups is provided by the bar graph of Figure 2. Scattergrams are available at the Special Collection Division, Main Library, the University of British Columbia. 41: Figure 2 Mean Ego State Scores for Higher Creative (N = 10) Group and Lower Creative (N = 10) Group S: J CP NP A AC Mean' Ego State Scores RC NC 42 In this sample the difference in mean ego states appears strongest between the NC ego states of the two groups. Five of the six ego state scores (with the exception of AC) are higher for the HC group than for the LC group. The HC individuals of this study appear to have propor-tionally "more" of the five ego state characteristics than the LC individuals. 3. Rank-ordering of preferred ego states The rank-order of preferred ego states means of the HC and LC groups is shown in Table V. The concept of rank-ordering scores is often used in non-parametric statistics and in samples which lack randomization to provide a more characteristic score which is less affected by extremes in the distributions. Table V provides the rank-ordered placement of the mean ego state scores for both sub-groups. TABLE V RANK-ORDER DISTRIBUTION OF MEAN EGO STATE VARIABLES OF HIGHER CREATIVES AND LOWER CREATIVES Higher Creatives Lower Creatives Ego State Variable Rank Ego State Variable Rank NP 1 NP 1 NC 2 , A 2 A 3 NC 3 CP 4 AC 4 AC 5 CR 5 RC 6 RC 6 In the HC group the NC mean ego state score is rank ordered in • second place and the A mean ego state score is ordered in the third place; this ordering is reversed in the LC group. The CP mean ego state score is ranked fourth and the AC mean ego state score is ranked fifth in the HC group; this ordering is reversed in the LC group. 14. Summary On the basis of the mean ego state scores for each group, the HC group of this study evidenced proportionally higher ego state levels on five of the ego state scales (CP, NP, A, RC, NC). The mean of the AC ego state scale was higher in the LC group. All differences proved statistically non-significant at the .05 level. The strongest degree of differentiation in ego state means between the HC and LC groups occurred with the NC ego state variable. The NC ego state variable was also evidenced more frequently in the HC than in the LC group according to the rank-ordering. 44 CHAPTER V SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 1. Summary and Discussion The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between creativity and the six ego states of Transactional Analysis (TA). The sample consisted of 42 adolescents, 17 to 18 years old. Creativity was measured by the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (Torrance, 1966). Ego states were measured by the Personality Response Questionnaire (Kealy, 1975). Six Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were calculated between the score on the creativity measure and the scores on each of the ego state measures. On the basis of the creativity scores, two sub-groups were established. One group was comprised of the ten highest scoring subjects, and one group was comprised of the ten lowest scoring subjects. A t-value was calculated to test the differences between the means of each of the six ego states of the two groups. Descriptive data wereccalculated and presented to illustrate differences within and between groups. The results of the statistical testing of the correlation coefficients and of the t-tests indicated that there were no statistically significant (.05) relationships between creativity and any of the TA ego states. In this study, the NC, CP, RC, NP and A ego states measures correlated positively with the creativity measure. The AC ego state measure correlated negatively with the creativity measure. Although 45 statistically non-significant, these correlation coefficients were in the expected direction. These relationships concur with the research discussion in Chapter II. The positive correlation between the NP and CP ego state measures and the creativity measure in this study was unexpected and contrary to most of the review literature. However, i t was suggested by Ostling (1974) and Harris (1967) that there is a functional and appropriate ego state for each stage of the creative process. Parloff, et al. (1968) suggested that in adolescent samples, creativity may be facilitated by personality characteristics similar to those of the NP and CP ego states. The correlation coefficients obtained in this study showed the least relationship between the creativity measure and the A (.03) and NP (.05) ego states. As the Instrumentation discussion in Chapter III indicates, the A and NP ego state have the lowest internal consistency on the PRQ (.50; .47) and they both lack external validation with the CPI (Kealy, 1975). The correlation matrix obtained in this study reveals correla-tions (.0S)_ between the CP and AC ego states (.008) and the NP and NC ego states (.040). This might be explained by the developmental theory of TA which suggest that the formation of the AC ego state, and the nurturance of the NC ego state are dependent upon the P ego states (Berne, 1961). The correlation of the A ego state with each of the two P ego states is unexpected in view of the theoretical literautre in TA. It could be a function of this particular adolescent sample. In terms of instrumentation, i t could be due to the low internal consistency of the A 46 and NP scales (Kealy, 1975). It is also possible that the A and P ego state items sample similar personality characteristics. However, Kealy's research (1975) showed the six ego states to be independent measures and the CP ego state provides a high degree of internal consistency (.69). No statistically significant (.05) differences were found between the means of the six ego states of the higher creative and the lower creative groups. On the basis of the descriptive data in this study, certain trends are speculated. The rank order of the mean ego state scores for the higher creative group was: NP, NC, A, CP, AC, RC; in the lower creative groups i t was: NP, A, NC, AC, CP, RC. The order of the NP and A ego states in the higher creative group was un-expected since these ego states showed the lowest correlation with creativity. The order of the NP and A ego states in the lower creative group would be expected from the correlational data. It is possible that the A ego state serves a facilitative rather than mitigating function in the higher creative group of this sample. The A ego may correspond to the concept of ego strength discussed in Cahpter II. The high ranking of the NP ego state in both groups could suggest a curvilinear relationship between NP and creativity; i t could also be accounted for by the instability of the NP measure. It is more probable that i t is the particular balance and combination of ego states that contribute to the differences between these groups. The findings based on this sample also indicate a more elevated personality profile for the higher creative groups than for the lower creative groups. With the exception of the AC ego state, the higher 47 creative group scored higher on all of the ego state measures. This findi is consistent with the personality profiles obtained by other psychometric instruments (MMPI, 16PF) in research with creative adults (Barron, 1963; Cattell and Butcher, 1968). Runners and Runners (cited in Torrance, 1966) found similar high patterns of personality traits in their research with creative adolescents. This trend could also be due to a response bias of acquiescence in a forced choice attitudinal test, although response styles can also be indications of personality styles (Cronbach, 1970; Hopkins, 1972). It could also be due to relative ability of certain individuals to cathect particular ego states. The failure to find statistically significant results could be due to methodological weaknesses of the study. The use of a non-randomized sample and the failure to control extraneous variables may have accounted for more error than was expected. The small size of the sub-groups could also have affected the results. The classroom testing environment and the test-like, speeded format of the creativity measure may have been detrimental to a true measure of creativity. It has been suggested (Wallach and Kogan, 1970) that these elements induce anxiety and false motivation which detract form the creative process. Instrumentation difficulties may also have contributed to the lack of significant results. As the Instrumentation discussion in Chapter III indicates, there is conflicting evidence on the construct and content validity of the TTCT (Crockenburg, 1971). The lack of sup-porting research for the validity of the PRQ as a measure of ego states is also a measurement deficiency of this study. The phenomenological basis of ego states, and the subjectivity of self-report personality inventories hinders accurate assessment of personality characteristics. It is also possible that certain ego state characteristics were not sufficiently represented by the items of the PRQ. 2. Recommendations for Future Research On the basis of this research, several recommendations are suggested for future research: 1. The present study did not control extraneous variables such as intelligence and sex. Because of conflicting evidence regarding the correlation between intelligence measures and creativity measures (Crockenburg, 1971), i t is recommended that the intelligence variable be controlled in future research studies. 2. There is an indication of sex difference in the PRQ measure-ment of ego states (Kealy, 1975). It is recommended that future research control this as a possible extraneous variable. 3. Further research validating the PRQ as a measurement instru-ment is recommended. Additional content validity could be provided by using another TA ego state measure as well as the PRQ. Additional external validity could be provided by using another a personality test based on other personality constructs. 4. The correlation matrix obtained in this study revealed unexpected correlations between some of the ego states. 49 It is suggested that future research account for this by using multi-variate analysis techniques. 5. There is an indication of an elevated ego state profile for the higher creative group of this study. Another study might focus on this as a possible personality characteristic. APPENDIX A PERSONAL RESPONSE QUESTIONNAIRE PERSONAL RESPONSE QUESTIONNAIRE Directions: Listed below are a number of statements concerning personal attitudes and traits. Read each item and decide whether the statement is True or False as i t pertains to you personally, and mark i t on the answer sheet provided. 1. When in a difficult or tense situation, my stomach churns and my hands sweat. 2. I usually get upset i f I don't get my own way. 3. I like to leave as few things to chance as possible. 4. Many people are forgetting that i t is only through hard work that they will reach the top. 5. I am seen as being a stubborn person. 6. I seem to have developed a capacity for independent thinking, as opposed to many who conform to other people's thoughts and ideas. 7. When people tell me that I should do something, I have a tendency to do just the opposite. 8. I usually try to live up to the expectations of others. 9. It bothers me that there are not enough people today with the cou-rage to stand up for what is right. 10. I usually estimate the risks of making a decision before actually making i t . 11. When I am happy, everyone seems to know i t . 12. I think that I am more observant than most people. 13. When I see people that are weak and unassuming, I try to make sure that others don't take advantage of them. 14. I feel comfortable following a strong leader. 15. People are not moral enough today. 16. I often wonder what "they" will say about things that I do. 17. There are too many unproductive people in the world. 18. Most people should go to church more often than they do. 19. If I do something that I don't want to do, I usually do i t grudgingly. 20. It is important for me to analyze all situations thoroughly before I act. 21. My first reaction when told to do something is to say "No." 22. I often find myself in situations where I am the leader and other group members depend on me for guidance. 23. It takes a lot to convince me to do something when I don't want to do i t . 24. I find that I want to comfort people who are having bad times. 25. You are judged by the company you keep. 26. When wandering through a store, I find that I like to touch and feel many of the store's goods. 27. What people need today is more discipline. 28. I usually act the way I feel, rather than controlling my emotions. 29. I have a tendency to talk and laugh loudly in my interactions with others. 30. When people don't see things my way, I really get frustrated but try to hide i t . 52 31. I have difficulty getting along well with most leaders. 32. One way of stopping wrong-doing is to severely punish people who break the law. 33. I often find myself using expressions like "Wow!", "Gosh!", etc.. 34. When confronted with adversity, I either sulk or withdraw. 35. It is important to know how to "get around people". 36. I feel uncomfortable when people express negative emotions such as anger, boredom, etc.. 37. I am careful not to laugh or talk too loudly. 38. If something seems that i t may become a problem, I try to think of alternative solutions. 39. I dislike other people telling me what I "ought" or "should" do. 40. I feel most important when I am helping others. 41. My whole body tenses when someone tells me I have to do something. 42. I find myself being open and spontaneous with other people. 43. I find that being really nice to people helps get me things that I want. 44. You just don't get service any more like you used to. 45. I usually come to the aid of friends who are in difficulty. 46. I tend to agree rather than argue with other people about concepts of right and wrong, ideas about what to do, plans, programs, systems, procedures, etc.. 47. I would enjoy working in the area of helping others. 48. I tend to argue rather than agree with people about concepts of right and wrong, ideas about what to do etc.. 49. When I feel angry I let people know. 50. Some people say that I have a chip on my shoulder. 51. I see myself as being a person with good foresight. 52. I enjoy doing "stupid" things just for the fun of i t . 53. It's disgusting the way taxes keep going up to support people on social welfare. 54. I tend to look at "all the facts" and plan carefully before starting some action. 55. I have a tendency to support the underdog.. 56. I think children should be taught to help other people as much as possible. 57. I enjoy making decisions for the good of other people. 58. It disturbs me that people are losing sight of traditional and conservative ways of doing things. 59. Many people need to be protected from society. 60. Teenagers would be better off i f they listened to and learned from the experiences of older people. KEY TO PERSONAL RESPONSE QUESTIONNAIRE 53 Items are answered True or False and all are keyed True. Items are keyed to the correct ego states as follows: ;SC0.RE % Critical Parent - 4, 9, 15, 17, 18, 25, 27, 32, 44, 53, 58, 60. /12 Nurturing Parent - 13, 22, 24, 40, 45, 47, 55, 56, 57, 59. /io Adult - 3, 6, 10, 12, 20, 38, 51, 54. / 8 Adaptive Child -1,8, 14, 16, 30, 35, 36, 37, 43, 46/ /io Rebellious Child - 2, 5, 7, 19, 21, 23, 31, 34, 39, 41, 48, 50. /12 Natural Child - 11, 26, 28, 29, 33, 42, 49, 52. / 8 54 BIBLIOGRAPHY Amundson, N. "Transactional Analysis with Children." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alberta, 1975. Anderson, H.H. Creativity and its Cultivation. New York: Harper & Row, 1959. Anastasi, Anne & Schaeffer CE. "Biographical Correlates of Artistic and Literary Creativity in Adolescent Girls." Journal of Applied  Psychology, 1959, 53, (4), 267-273. Barron, F. "An Ego-strength Scale which Predicts Response to Psychology." Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1953a, (17), 327-333. Barron, F. "Complexity-Simplicity as a Personality Dimension." Journal  of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 1953b, 68, 163-172. Barron, F. Creativity and Psychological Health. Princeton, New Jersey: Van Norstrand, 1963. Barron, F. "The Psychology of Creativity." In T.M. Newcomb (Ed.) New  Directions in Psychology II. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965, 3-134. Barron, F. "The Disposition Toward Originality." In P.E. Vernon (Ed.), Creativity, Selected Readings. Baltimore: Penguin, 1970, 273-288. Barron, F. & Taylor, C.W. (Eds.) Scientific Creativity: its Recognition  and Development. New York: Wiley, 1963. Beckstrand, P.E. "TA as a Means of Teaching Writing in High School." Transactional Analysis Journal, 1973, 3 (3), 161-163. Berne, E. "Ego States in Psychotherapy." American Journal of  Psychotherapy, 1957, 71, 293-308. Berne, E. Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy. New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1961. Berne, E. "The Psychodynamics of Intuition. Psychiatric Quarterly, 1962, 36, 294-300. Berne, E. Principles of Group Treatment. New York: Grove Press, 1966. Berne, E. What do You Say After You Say Hello? New York: Bantam Books, 1972] 55 Buros, O.K. The Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook. New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, 1965. Cattell, R.B. "Personality of Artists and Writers." Journal of Clinical  Psychology, 1958, 14, 107-111. Cattell, R.B. & Butcher, H.J. The Prediction of Achievement and  Creativity. New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co. Inc., 1968. Cattell, R.B. & Drevdahl, J.E. "A Comparison of the Personality Profile (16PF) of Eminent Researchers with that of Eminent Teachers and Administrators and of the General Population." British Journal of  Psychology, 1955, 46, 248-261. Chambers, J.A. "Relating Personality and Biographical Factors to Scientific Creativity." Psychological Monograph, 1964 78, (7). Crockenburg, S. "Creativity Tests: A Boon or Boondoggle for Education." Review of Educational Research, 1971, 42, (1), 27-45. Cronbach, Lee, J. Essentials of Psychological Testing. (2nd Ed.) New York: Harper, 1960. Cropley, A.J. "Some Canadian Creativity Research." Journal of Research  and Development in Education, 1971, 4, (3), 113-115. Cross, P., Cattell, R.B. & Butcher, H.J. "The,Personality Pattern of Creative Artists." British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1967, (37), 292-299. Crutchfield, R.S. "Conformity and Character." American Psychologist, 1955, 10, 191-198. Crutchfield, R.S. "Conformity and Creative Thinking." In H.E. Gruber, G. Terrell, and M. Wertheimer (eds.), Contemporary Approaches to  Creative Thinking, New York: Atherton Press 1962, 120-140. Crutchfield, R.S. & Helson, B. "Mathematicians: The Creative Researcher and the Average Ph.D." Journal of Consulting and Clinical  Psychology, 1970, (34), 250-257. Delias, M. & Gaier, E.C. "Identification of Creativity: The Individual." Psychological Bulletin, 1970, 73, (1), 55-73. Drevdahl, J.E. "Factors of Importance for Creativity." Journal of  Clinical Psychology, 1956, 12, 21-26. 56 Drevdahl, J.E., and Cattell, R.E. "Personality and Creativity in Artists and Writers." Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1958, 707-711. Ernst, K. Games Students Play. Milbrae, California: Cejestiali.Arts,1972. Federn, P. Ego Psychology and the Psychoses. New York: Basic Books, 1952. Fine, R. Psychoanalysis. In R. Corsini (ed.) Current Psychotherapies. Itasca, Illinois: F.E. Peacock Pub. Inc., 1973. Freed, A.M. TA for Kids. Sacramento, California: Alvyn M. Freed, 1971. Freeman, J. & H.J. Butcher. A Selective Review of Research (2nd ed.) London: Society for Research into Higher Education, Ltd., 1971. Frenkel-Brunswik, Else, "Mechanisms of Self-deception." Journal of  Social Psychology. (SPSSI Bulletin) 1939, 10, 409-420. Frenkel-Brunswik, Else. "Intolerance of Ambiguity and Distortion of Reality in Personality Centred Studies of Perception." In Blake & Ramsey (eds.) Perception: An Approach to Personality. New York: Ronald, 1951. GetzelJ.W. & Jackson, P.W. Creativity and Intelligence. New York: Wiley, 1962. Ghiselin, Brewster. The Creative Process. New York: Mentor Books, 1955. Golann, S.E. "The Psychological Study of Creativity." Psychological  Bulletin, 1963, 60, 548-565. Gough, H.G. & Woodworth, D.G. "Stylistic Variations among Professional Research Scientists." Journal of Psychology, 1960, 49, 87-98. Gruber, H.E.:Terrell, G. and Wertheimer M. (Eds.). Contemporary Approaches to Creative Thinking. New York: Atherton Press, 1962. Guilford, J.P. "Creativity." American Psychologist, 1950 (5), 444.454. Guilford, J.P. "Three Faces of Intellect." American Psychologist, 1959, (14), 469-479. Guilford, J.P. "Creativity: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow." Journal of  Creative Behavior, 1967, 4, 3-14. 57 Hall, W.B. & MacKinnon, D.W. "Personality Inventory Correlates of Creativity among Architects." Journal of Applied Psychology, 1969, 53, (4), 322-326. Hammer, E.F. Creativity. New York: Random House, 1961. Hargreaves, D.J. and Bolton, N. "Selecting Creativity Tests for Use in Research." British Journal of Psychology, 1972, 63, 451-462. Harris, T.A. I'm OK - You're OK. New York: Harper and Row, 1967. Harvey, O.J., Hoffmeister, J.K., Coates, C, and White, B.J. "A Partial Evaluation of Trrrance's Test of Creativity." American  Educational Research Journal, 1970, 7, 359-372. Heasterly, S.O. The Parent Package: To Raise a Winner. Little Rock, 1974. Helson, R. "Personality Characteristics and Developmental History of Creative College Women." Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1967a, 76, 205-206. Helson, R. "Sex Differences in Creative Style." Journal of Personality, 1967b, 35, 214-233. Helson, R. "Women Mathematicians and the Creative Personality." Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1971, 36, 210-220. Hurley, J.R. "Ego-state Identificability: Toward Better Research." Transactional Analysis Journal, 1973, 3, (3), 32-33. Hurley, J.P. & Porter, H.K. "Child Ego States in the College Calssroom." Transactional Analysis Bulletin, 1967, (6), 28. James, M. & Jongeward, D. Born to Win: Transactional Analysis with  Gestalt Experiments. Don Mills, Ontario: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1971. James, M. The OK Boss. Don Mills, Ontario: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1975. Kealy, L. "Personal Response Questionnaire." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alberta, 1975. MacKinnon, D.W. "Creativity and Images of the Self." In R.W. White (Ed.)' The Study of Lives. New York: Atherton Press, 1963. MacKinnon, D.W. "The Nature and Nurture of Creative Talent." American  Psychologist, 1962, 17, 484-495. 58 MacKinnon, D.W. "Personality and the Realization of Creative Potential." American Psychologist, 1965, 204, (4), 273-281. MacKinnon, D.W. The Personality Correlates of Creativity: A Study of American Architects. In P.E. Vernon (Ed.) Creativity: Selected  Readings. Baltimore: Penguin, 1970. McClelland, D.C. On the Psycho-Dynamics of Creative Physical Scientists in H.E. Gruber, G. Terrell, M. Wertheimer. (Eds.) Contemporary  Approaches to Creative Thinking. New York: Atherton Press, 1962. McClelland, D.C. The Calculated Risk: An Aspect of Scientific Performances. In C.W. Taylor & F. Barron (Eds.) Scientific Creativity: Its  Recognition & Development. New York: Wiley, 1963. McCormick, P. "T.A. and Behavior Modification: A Comparison Study." Transactional Analysis Journal, 1973, (1), 10-14. National Educational Association, 1971. Time, Aug. 20, 1973, 36. Osborne, A.F. Applied Imagination (3rd Ed.) New York: Scribner's, 1963. Ostling, J.r. Creativity: t. [An Evolutionary Process for Getting on With People, Ideas, Opportunities. Vallejo, California: Addresso Set, 1974. Parloff, M., Datta, L., Kelman, M. and Hand!on, J. "Personality Characteristics which Differentiate Male Adolescents and Adults." Journal of Personality, 1968, 36, (4), 528-552. Parnes, S.J. and Harding, H.F. (eds.) A Source-book for Creative Thinking. New York: Charles Scribner's & Son Ltd. 1962. Parnes, Sidney J. & Meadow, A. Development of Individual Creative Talent. In Scientific Creativity: Its Recognition and Development. F. Barron & C.W. Tayler (Eds.) New York: Wiley, 1963. Penfield, W. "Memory Mechanism." A.M.A. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 1952, 67, 178-198, with discussion by L.S. Kukie, et al_. Roe, A. "A Psychological Study of Eminent Biologists." Psychological  Monograph, 1951a, 54 (14). Roe, A. "A Psychological Study of Physical Scientists." Genetic  Psychological Monograph 1951b, 43, 121-239. Roe, A. The Making of a Scientist. New York: Dodd-Mead, 1952. 59 Roe, A. "A Psychological Study of Eminent Psychologists and Anthropologists and a Comparison with Biologists and Physical Scientists." Psychology Monograph, 1953, 57, (2). Rogers, CR. Towards a Theory of Creativity. In Vernon, P.E. (Ed.) Creativity: Selected Readings. Baltimore, Penguin, 1970. Schaeffer, CE. "The Self-Concept of Creative Adolescents." Journal of  Psychology, 1969, 72, (2), 233-242. Schaeffer, CE. and Anastasi, A. "A Biographical Inventory for Identifying Creativity in Adolescent Boys." Journal of Applied  Psychology. 1968, 52, (1), 42-48. Stanley, J. and Hopkins, K. Educational and Psychological Measurement  and Evaluation. (5th edition) Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972. Snyder, B. "Creative Students in Science and Engineering." Universities  Quarterly, 1967, 21, (2), 205-218. Steiner, C. Games Alcoholics Play. New York: Grove Press, 1971. Steiner, C. Scripts People Live. New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1974. Taylor, CW. (Ed.) The 1955 University of Utah Research Conference on the Identification of Creative Scientific Talent. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1955. Taylor, CW. (Ed.) The 1957 University of Utah Research Conference on the Identification of Creative Scientific Talent. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1959. Taylor, CW. and Barron, F. (Eds.) Scientific Creativity: Its Recog- nition and Development. New York: Wiley, 1963. Taylor, CW. & Holland, J. Predictors of Creative Performance. In CW. Taylor (Ed.) Creativity: Progress and Potential. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964. Thorndike, R.L. "The Measurement of Creativity." Teachers College Record. 1963, 64, 422-424. Thomson, G. "The Identification of Ego States." Transactional Analysis  Journal. 1972, 11, (4), 46-61. Torrance, E.P. "Explorations in Creative Thinking in Early School Years." Education, 1960, 81: 216-220. 60 Torrance, E.P. Norms-Technical Manual. Research Edition. 1966, Princeton, New Jersey: Ginn & Co., 1966. Torrance, E.P. "Predictive Validity of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking." Journal of Creative Behavior. 1972, 6, (4), 236-252. Torrance, E.P. & Dauw, D.C. "Mental Health Problems of Three Groups of Highly Creative High School Seniors." Gifted Child Quarterly, 1965b, 9, 123-127. Torrance, E.P. & Dauw, D.C. "Aspirations and Dreams of Three Groups of Creativity Gifted High School Seniors and Comparable Unselected Groups." Gifted Child Quarterly, 1965a, 9, 177-182. Transactional Analysis Behavior. Time, August 20, 1973 36-37. Treffinger, D.J. & Poggio, J.P. "Needed Research in the Measurement of Creativity." Journal of Creative Behavior. 1972, 6, (4), 253-266. Vernon, P.E. (Ed.) Creativity: Selected Readings. Baltimore: Penguin 1970. Wallach, M.A. Creativity. In P.H. Mussen (Ed.), Manual of Child  Psychology. Vol. 1. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1970. Wallach, M.A. & Kogan, N. Modes of Thinking in Young Children. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1965. Weiss, E. Principles of Psychodynamics. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1950: Welsh, George S. "Creativity and Intelligence: A Personality Approach." Institute for Research in Social Science. University of North Carolina, 1975. Wyer, R.S. "Behavioral Correlates of Academic Achievement: Conformity Under Ach-and Affiliation-incentive Conditions." Journal of  Personality and Social Psychology. 1967, 6, (3), 255-263. Yamamoto, K. "Creative Thinking: Some Thoughts on Research." Exceptional  Children, 1964, 30, 403-410. Yamamoto, K. "Effects of Restriction of Range and Test Unreliability on Correlation Between Measures of Intelligence and Creative Thinking." British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1965, 35, 300-305. Yamamoto, K. "Validation of Tests of Creative Thinking: A Review of Some Studies." Exceptional Children. 1965b, 31, 281-290. VARIABLE ON THE VERTICAL AXIS IS C R E A T E : VARIA8LE CN THE HCRIZCNTAL AXIS IS CP )p ^ THE'".'" AND ARE PREDICT ED P cTFi TSl TH E~ I S_tTSED 1^  HE RE "PREoTcf 15'" PbTNTS~~c6VEFroTTTTo INfS 136.0 / / 1 13 6. 0 ' 133.6 • 131.2 / 1- 12 8. 8 / / 126.4 124.0 / 1 121.6 / 119.2 / 116.6 112.0 / / 114.4 112.0 109. 6 / 1 107.2 / 1 104.6 / 102.4 / 1 1 100.0 1 I' 97.60 1 1 9 5.20 1 92.80 88.00 I 1 1 • 1 90.40 '-" * " ~ ~ 88.00 / 1 1 85.60 / / . * 1 1 1 1 83.20 • 1 80.80 / 1 73.40 / 1 • * • 76.0 0 / 1 73.6 0 / 71.20 / • • • . 6 8 . 0 0 / 1 66.4 0 64.00 . 1 l 64.00 / — — 61 .60 / * 1 • ' 59.2 0 i>-/ 5o.80 I 54.4 0 / 1 52.00 / 1 49 .60 1 / 1 I 47.20 1 44.80 40.00 / / 1 42.40 40.00 37.60 / / 1 35.20 32.80 / 30.40 / 28.00 / 25.60 / 23.20 / 2 i . 8 0 16.00 / 2 16.40 -n\tinniinnt/itiu\nIIIIiiiinu\iinnui\tiinirii\iiriiuii\TriTrrnr\TulVrnmiT]niH\ " ' ~ "'" " 0. 5000E-01 0.2400 0.4300 0.6200 0.8100 1 .000 DISTANCE B ETW EEN SLASHES ON THE X-AXIS IS 0. 9500F-02 —• ° • — — •—-— . ——— J VARIABLE ON THE VERTICAL AXIS IS CREATE r ~ ' ~ \ VARIABLE CN THE HCRIZOMTAL AXIS IS MP . THE "." AND ""**' AREPPFDICTLDPCINTSSTHE"*"IS USED WHEPEPRE DI CT EDPOINT SCOVERDATA PO INT S " ~ " ? 136.0 - 1 / / 13 6. 0 133. 6 13 1.2 / 1 128. 0 / • 126. 4 / 124.0 / 1 121.6 / . • ' 119.2 / 116.8 112.0 7 / 114.4 112.0 109.6 / l 107.2 / 1 104.8 / 102.4 - / / / 2 1 100. 0 97.60 / 1 ' 95.20 / / 1 92. 80 90.40 88.00 l * I 88.00 / / . l / i i 1 *• 1 85.cO 83.20 80.80 / i 76.40 / • . l . / 1 1 76.00 73.60 / . * . * 71.20 / . . . / • 1 6fi. 80 66.40 64.00 - . 1 / 1 64.00 61.60 / I ~ " "59.20-/ ~'" 56. 80 / 54.40 / l 52.00 " / l / .-- l / . 2 49.60 47.20 44.8 0 40.00 si v . i — / 42.40 40.00 3 7.60 1 / 1 35.20 / XJ— - - - _ _ _ 32.80 3 0.40 / 28.00 25.60 2 3.20 / 20.80 16.00 / 1 \ r-1 18.40 16.00 •• //1/////////I/////////I/////////|/////////|/////////|//////////////////|/////////|/////////| 0.1000 0.2800 0.4600 0.6400 0.8200 ' 1.000 DISTANCE BETWEEN SLASHES CN THE X-AXIS IS 0.9000E-02 VARIABLE CN THE VERTICAL AXIS IS CREATE VARIABLE ON THE HORIZONTAL AXIS IS A THE A N D A R E PREDICTEC PCINTS; THE"*" ISUSEDWHEREPREDICTEDPOINTSCOVERDATAPOINTS f 136.0 - - 1 136.0 •> / 133. 6 — / 131. 2 / 1 128.8 / 126.4 / 124.0 / - 1 121.6 / 119.2 / 1 16. 8 / 114.4 112.0 — 112.0 / 109. 6 / 1 107.2 / i 104. 8 / 102. 4 / 1 1 \ 100.0 / • 1 97. 60 / 1 95.20 / 92.80 / 1 90.40 88.00 - 1 1 * 88.00 / 2 85.60 / • . 2 83.20 / 1 1 • * * 80.80 / 1 76.40 / * * . . 76.00 / 1 73.60 7 . * 1 71.20 / • • ' • • • 68.80 / 1 66.40 64.00 V i 64. 00 61.60 / 59.20 / 56. 80 / 54.40 / '1 52.00 / 1 4V. 60 / 1 47.20 / 1 l 44 .80 / 1 42. 40 40.00 — 40.00 / 37.60 / 1 35.20 / - 32.80 / 3 0.40 / 28.00 / 25.60 / • 23.20 / 2C. 80 / 1 1 18.40 16.00 - 16.00 / / I / / / / / / / / / I/////////1 n inn II |/////////\i////////l/////////|/////////17777/7/77 j 7777 7/777 i 7777777/"/ 1 -0.0 0.2000 0.4000 0.6000 0.8000 l . 000 >- DISTANCE BETWEEN SLASHES CN THE X-AXIS IS 0.1000E-01 VARIABLE CN THE VERTICAL AXIS IS CREATE VARIABLE ON THE HORIZONTAL AXIS IS AC - .«'7 > THE "." AND ARE PRECICTED PCINTS; THE »*•• IS USED WHERE PREDICTED POINTS COVER DATA POINTS 136.0 / / 1 136.0 ^ 133.6 131.2 / / / 1' 128.8 126.4 124. 0 / / / 1 - 121.6 119.2 116. 8 112.0 / / 114.4 112.0 109. 6 / / / 1 <£> 107.2 1 04. 8 102. 4 / / / 1 1 .1, 1/ 100.0 97.60 95.20 88.00 / -/ OD • 92.80 90.4 0 — A 1 . ^ . 88.00 / / . / 2 . * * * 85.60 33.20 8 0.60 / / / 1 * 1 1 . * 78 .40 76.00 73.6 0 / 1 / / * • . . . 1 • 71.20 s 68.80 66.40 64.00 / 1 1 64. 30 61. 60 1 I 1 59.20 / / / 1 56.8 0 54.40 52.00 / / / 1 1 1 1 49.60 47.20 44. 80 40.00 / / 1 42 .40 40. 00 37.60 / / / 1 35.2 0 32.80 30.40 / / / 2 8.00 25.60 23.20 16.00 / / 1 \ 2 0.80 16.40 16 .00 //I/////////1/////////i/////////1 /////////1/////////1//77//777l/////////1/////////i//7//////i 0.1000 0.2400 0.3800 0.5200 0.6600 DISTANCE BETWEEN SLASHES CN THE X-AXIS IS 0.700GE-02 nnuin i ' 0. 3000 • 3> VARIABLE ON THE VERTICAL AXIS IS CREATE VARIABLE CN THE HORIZONTAL AXIS IS PC THE "." AND "*" ARE PREDICTEDPCINTS;THEIS USED WHEREPREDICTED POINTS COVER DATA POINTS r 136.0 / / 1 1 36. 0 133.6 131.2 1 / 128.8 / 126.4 / 124.0 / i 121. 6 / / 119.2 116.8 ,— 112.0 / / 114.4 112.0 109.6 / i 107. 2 / i 104.8 / 102.4 / ~ w i 100.0 / / H i 97.60 95.2 0 / . . . i 92.80 90 .40 88.00 - • * * i 88. 00 / / / 2 1 2 • • . 85.60 83.20 1 80.80 —4 / / 1 / 1 * 1 • * 78.40 76.00 73.60 t o / . * 1 71.20 / / • • • 1 • • 68.80 66.40 64.00 / i i 64.00 61.60 • i 59.20 .*i i i / 56.80 54.40 52.00 / / / i i . i 49 .60 47.20 44.80 40. 00 / / i 42.40 4 0.00 37.60 / i 35.20 / 32.8 0 / 30.40 / 28 .00 / 2 5.60 / 23.20 16.00 / / i 1 20.80 18.40 16.00 //I/////////I/////////|/////////| /////////|/////////|////7/777(777777777i 77777/7771777/777771777777777 I -J 0.80COE-01 0.2300 0.3800 0.5300 0.6800 0.8300 DISTANCE BETWEEN SLASHES ON THE X-AXIS IS 0.7500E-02 c • - r ^ . VARI ABLE VARIABLE ON ON THE VERTICAL AXIS IS CREATE THE HCRIZONTAL AXIS IS NC (J) S THE "." AND ARE PREDICTED PCINTS; THE "*" IS USED WHERE PREDICTED POINTS COVER DATA POINTS 136.0 / / 1 13 6. 0 133. 6 131.2 s / / / 1 128.8 126.4 124.0 / / / 1 121.6 119. 2 116.8 112.0 / / 114.4 112.0 109.6 / / / ... 1 x. 107. 2 1 104.8 102.4 1 1 / 1 1 1 1 100.0 97.60 95.20 / / '" 1 " — 92.8 0 90.40 88.00 - 1 1 1 88.00 / / / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 • 85.60 83.20 80.80 / / / 1 1 1 * . • 76.40 76.00 1 73.60 / / / • • 1 1 1 71.20 . 6 H ; e o 66.40 64.00 / • 1 1 64. 00 61 .60 / 1 1 59.2 0 / / / 1 56.80 54.40 52.0 0 / / / 1 1 1 1 49.60 47.20 44 .80 40.00, / / 1 42.40 40.00 37.60 / 1 / / 35.20 32.80 : 30.40 / / / 28.00 25.60 23.2 0 16.00 / / 1 1 20. 80 is.40 16.00 //I / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / \ /////////\///////// \///17/7/I[771111 111 \ T/ln7/T/ \ 7177717/I \ //11111 //\ 0.1000 0.2800 0.4600 0.6400 0.8200 1.000 L DISTANCE BETWEEN SLASHFS tN THF X-AXIS . n.<jnonF-n? 


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items