UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The relationship of television viewing to creativity and intelligence in young school children Harrison, Linda Faye 1974

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A8 H37_7.pdf [ 3.55MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093452.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093452-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093452-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093452-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093452-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093452-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093452-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093452-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093452.ris

Full Text

THE RELATIONSHIP OF TELEVISION VIEWING TO CREATIVITY AND INTELLIGENCE IN YOUNG SCHOOL CHILDREN by Linda Faye Harrison B.A., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1972 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of Arts i n the Department of Psychology We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard The UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA November, 1974 In presenting th i s thesis 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 sha l l make it f ree ly ava i lab le for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of th i s thesis for scholar ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s representat ives. It i s understood that copying or pub l i ca t ion of th is thesis for f inanc ia l gain sha l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date Abstract An experiment was conducted i n order to c l a r i f y the r e l a t i o n -ship of t e l e v i s i o n exposure to cognitive development i n young children. Measures of c r e a t i v i t y and measures of intelligence (WISC Block Design and Vocabulary subtests) were administered to 160 Grade four and Grade seven children i n three B r i t i s h Columbia towns which differed i n t e l e v i s i o n a c c e s s i b i l i t y . The results suggested that t e l e v i s i o n exposure has d i f f e r e n t i a l effects on the two t r a i t s ' c r e a t i v i t y ' and 'intelligence'. In terms of i n t e l l i g e n c e , a positive relationship was found between t e l e v i s i o n viewing and vocabulary scores. The relationship between televiewing and crea-^ t i v i t y was found to be complicated by the type of stimulus material employed. In the case of verbal stimulus materials, children growing up without t e l e v i s i o n obtained s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher mean c r e a t i v i t y scores than children who grow up with t e l e v i s i o n . In the case of f i g u r a l stimulus materials, no clear relationship of t e l e v i s i o n ex-posure to c r e a t i v i t y emerged. Table of Contents Page ABSTRACT 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS i i LIST OF TEXT TABLES i i i LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES v LIST OF FIGURES x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS x i INTRODUCTION 1 METHOD 9 RESULTS 18 DISCUSSION 42 REFERENCES 51 APPENDIX 54 i i L i s t of Text Tables Page Table 1. Mean Comparisons for Total Fluency Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 and Mean Comparisons for Total Fluency Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex. 20 Table 2. Mean Comparisons for Total Uniqueness Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 and Mean Comparisons for Total Uniqueness Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex 22 Table 3. Mean Comparisons for Verbal Fluency Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 and Mean Comparisons for Verbal Fluency Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex. . 24 Table 4. Mean Comparisons for Verbal Uniqueness Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 and Mean Comparisons for for Verbal Uniqueness Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex 25 Table 5. Mean Comparisons for Visual Fluency Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 and Mean Comparisons for Visual Fluency Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex. . 27 Table 6. Mean Comparisons for Visual Uniqueness Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 and Mean Comparisons for Visual Uniqueness Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex 28 Table 7. Mean Comparisons for Vocabulary Scales Scores for Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 and Mean Comparisons for Vocabulary Scales Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex. 31 i i i L i s t of Text Tables (Cont'd) Page Table 8. Mean Comparisons for Block Design Scaled Scores for Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 and Mean Comparisons for Block Design Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex 33 Table 9. Mean Comparisons for Total IQ Scores for Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 and Mean Comparisons for Total IQ Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex 34 Table 10. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for the Total Sample 36 Table 11. Verbal and Visual Correlations i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 and Verbal and Visual Correlations Averaged Over Grade and Sex 37 Table 12. Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for the Total Sample '. . 39 Table 13. Intercorrelations Between the C r e a t i v i t y and In-telligence Measures for the Total Sample 40 i v L i s t of Appendix Tables Page Table 1. L i s t of Questions Concerning Television Viewing. . . . 54 Table 2. Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Total Fluency Scores - Grade x Town x Sex 2 x 3 x 2 . . 55 Table 3. Newman-Keuls Test of the Town Effect i n the Total Fluency Scores 56 Table 4. Simple Main Effects Test of the Grade x Sex Interaction i n the Total Fluency Scores 57 Table 5. Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Total Uniqueness Scores Grade x Town x Sex 2 x 3 x 2 58 Table 6. Simple Main Effects Test of the Grade x Sex Interaction i n the Total Uniqueness Scores 59 Table 7. Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Verbal Fluency Scores Grade x Town x Sex 2 x 3 x 2 60 Table 8. Newman-Keuls Test of the Town Effect i n the Verbal Fluency Scores . 61 Table 9. Simple Main Effects Analysis of the Grade x Sex Interaction i n the Verbal Fluency Scores 62 Table 10. Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Verbal Uniqueness Scores Grade x Town x Sex 2 x 3 x 2 . .63 Table 11. Newman-Keuls Test of the Town Effect i n the Verbal Uniqueness Scores 64 Table 12. Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Visual Fluency Scores Grade x Town x Sex 2 x 3 x 2 . . . . . . . 65 v L i s t of Appendix Tables (Cont'd) Page Table 13. Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Visual Uniqueness Scores Grade x Town x Sex 2 x 3 x 2 66 Table 14. Simple Main Effects and Subsequent Newman-Keuls Analysis of the Town x Grade Interaction i n the Visual Uniqueness Scores 67 Table 15. Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Vocabulary Scaled Scores Grade x Town x Sex 2 x 3 x 2 . .68 Table 16. Newman-Keuls Test of the Town Effect i n the Vocabulary Scores 69 Table 17. Simple Main Effects and Subsequent Newman-Keuls Analysis of the Town x Sex Interaction i n the Vocabulary Scaled Scores 70 Table 18. Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Block Design Scaled Scores Grade x Town x Sex 2 x 3 x 2 . . . .71 Table 19. Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Total IQ Scaled Scores Grade x Town x Sex 2 x 3 x 2 72 Table 20. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the McBride Grade Four Ss. .73 Table 21. Intercorrealtions Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the McBride Grade Seven Ss 7 4 v i L i s t of Appendix Tables (Cont'd) Page Table 22. Intercorrelations Among the Cr e a t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Creativity and Intelligence Measures for the Valemont Grade Four Ss 75 Table 23. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the Valemont Grade Seven ^ 5s 76 Table 24. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the Salmo Grade Four ^s. . . 77 Table 25. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the Salmo Grade Seven Ss. . .78 Table 26. Intercorrelations Among the Cr e a t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the McBride Grade Four Females 79 Table 27. Intercorrelations Among the Creativity Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Creativity and Intelligence Measures for the McBride Grade Four Males 80 v i i L i s t of Appendix Tables (Cont'd) Page Table 28. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the McBride Grade Seven Females 81 Table 29. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the McBride Grade Seven Males 82 Table 30. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the Valemont Grade Four Females 83 Table 31. Intercorrelations Among the Cr e a t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the Valemont Grade Four Males 84 Table 32. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the Valemont Grade Seven Females 85 Table 33. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the.Valemont Grade Seven Males 86 v i i i L i s t of Appendix Tables (Cont'id) Page Table 34. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures,>Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Creativity and Intelligence Measures for the Salmo Grade Four Females 87 Table 35. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the Salmo Grade Four Males 88 Table 36. Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures, Among the Intelligence Measures, and Between the Creativity and Intelligence Measures for the Salmo Grade Seven Females 89 Table 37. Intercorrelations Among the Creativity Measures, Among the Intelligence Meausres, and Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intellignece Measures for the Salmo Grade Seven Males 90 i x L i s t of Figures Page Figure 1. Visual C r e a t i v i t y Items 12 x Acknowledgments The writer wishes to express her sincere appreciation to Dr. Tannis M. Williams for her trust and encouragement, and her excellent advice. She would also l i k e to thank the p r i n c i p a l s and teachers i n the three towns, and especially the children who were such d e l i g h t f u l subjects. x i Although interest i n the impact of t e l e v i s i o n on human development i s widespread, and t e l e v i s i o n programs (e.g., Sesame Street) have sometimes been designed to stimulate development, the relationship be-tween cognitive development and t e l e v i s i o n exposure remains unclear. The present study was designed to assess the impact of t e l e v i s i o n viewing on the performance of school-aged children on measures of c r e a t i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e , and on the relationship between c r e a t i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e The d i f f i c u l t y of evaluating knowledge concerning the effects of t e l e v i s i o n has been pointed out by Maccoby (1964), who suggests that i t i s tempting, i f present day children are different i n some ways from the children of previous generations, to attr i b u t e the changes to t e l e -v i s i o n and the other mass media. But i t i s obvious, she comments, that todays' children are growing up i n surroundings that d i f f e r from e a r l i e r patterns of l i f e i n ways other than the accelerated use of mass media. For example, North American society has been recovering from the effects of a major war and l i v i n g i n the shadow of another one; population has shifted from r u r a l to urban to suburban areas, with accompanying changes i n the demands that are placed upon children; more.mothers are working; and income and l i v i n g standards have been rapidly r i s i n g . To sort out the effects of t e l e v i s i o n from the complex changes that are occasioned by a l l these other s h i f t s i s a d i f f i c u l t task at best. Yet the advent of t e l e v i s i o n has created a few "experiments of nature", situations i n which certain areas, while sharing i n most of the s o c i a l changes of recent times, are l a t e i n acquiring t e l e v i s i o n . 2 Such areas can be contrasted with si m i l a r areas which have t e l e v i s i o n , and thus the characteristics of children growing up with and without t e l e v i s i o n can be compared. While there are certain r i s k s i n making comparisons of this type, (the towns may d i f f e r i n other important, but less obvious ways), the findings of several such studies (e.g., Schramm, Lyle, & Parker, 1961), have been i n s t r u c t i v e . The present study made use of a "natural" experimental setting for the general purpose of furthering t e l e v i s i o n research, with the sp e c i f i c aim of focussing on the relationship of t e l e v i s i o n viewing to c r e a t i v i t y and in t e l l i g e n c e i n young school-aged children. The relationship of TV-viewing to inte l l i g e n c e has usually been approached i n terms of effects on school performance. A pioneer, extensive study of t e l e v i s i o n effects on children made by Himmelweit, Oppenheim, and Vince (1958) i n Great B r i t a i n , and a l a t e r , also com-prehensive study by Schramm, Lyle, and Parker (1961) based on a large sample of North American children, agreed that t e l e v i s i o n has l i t t l e effect on general school performance. Schramm et a l . (1961) did note, however, i n th e i r comparison of the two communities "Radiotown" and "Teletown", that children who had been growing up with t e l e v i s i o n ap-pear to come to school with about a one-year advantage i n vocabulary. These authors commented, that so far as vocabulary represents general knowledge, i t can be said with some confidence that t e l e v i s i o n appears, to help children get off to a fast s t a r t . However, th i s advantage apparently i s not maintained. Children i n the s i x t h and tenth grades i n the two towns did not d i f f e r i n vocabulary l e v e l . The present 3 study was designed so that comparability of results with the Schramm, et a l . (1961) findings could be assessed. While research interest i n the nature of c r e a t i v i t y and the creative process has been increasing exponentially (Guilford, 1964), and while several researchers have speculated on the relationship between c r e a t i v i t y and t e l e v i s i o n viewing, most have concentrated on only two aspects of the possible relationship. The f i r s t l i n e of reasoning concerns changes i n the amount of time children with access to t e l e v i s i o n spend i n certain other forms of a c t i v i t y , and i s rep-resented by Maccoby's (1951) statement that while some t e l e v i s i o n time involves a s h i f t from other mass media to t e l e v i s i o n , much of i t i s taken from playtime, from practising musical instruments, and from other forms of a c t i v i t y which might be called 'creative' or 'productive'. Evidence concerning t h i s hypothesis i s vague. Although a survey by Shizuoda (1962) i n Japan and the Himmelweit et a l . (1958) study with a B r i t i s h sample both report no effects ofi TV-viewing on creative or expressive a c t i v i t i e s and interests, there i s l i t t l e comparability among methods used by the two studies and the measures of c r e a t i v i t y employed were crude at best. The second l i n e of reasoning concerning the relationship between c r e a t i v i t y and t e l e v i s i o n viewing i s represented by Furo (1971), who regards c r e a t i v i t y as a predisposition which controls t e l e v i s i o n be-haviour, rather than as a variable p o t e n t i a l l y affected by i t . The f i r s t attempt to empirically test t h i s hypothesis was made by Wade (1972), who argued that creative adolescents would make only limited 4 use..of the medium because they are committed to varied a c t i v i t i e s i n their l e i s u r e hours, of which media are only a small part. Her findings, while supporting the hypothesized negative correlation between crea-t i v i t y and hours per week spent watching t e l e v i s i o n (r = -.290, p < .001), do not rule out the alternative explanation of c r e a t i v i t y as a variable which i s i t s e l f affected by TV use. The present study represents the f i r s t attempt to test that hypothesis. To t a l k about " c r e a t i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e " , as i f the two terms refer to concepts at the same l e v e l of abstraction i s to assert, ac-cording to Wallach and Kogan (1965), that something akin to Spearman's G (Spearman, 1927) exists i n the area of c r e a t i v i t y . The concept of G i s based on the substantial intercorrelations among t r a d i t i o n a l i n -dices of i n t e l l i g e n c e . While evidence for s p e c i f i c a b i l i t i e s also exists (Thurstone, 1938), the fact that different i n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t i e s are appreciably intercorrelated does suggest the existence of a unified dimension of ind i v i d u a l differences, and serves as a j u s t i f i c a t i o n for assigning a single l a b e l such as " i n t e l l i g e n c e " to th i s domain. Thus, Wallach and Kogan (1965) argue, to speak of " c r e a t i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e " , i s to assert that these two concepts define dimensions of indiv i d u a l difference^ that vary independently of each other, or that are at most only minimally related. Yet several attempts to produce empirical evidence of a d i s t i n c t i o n between c r e a t i v i t y and in t e l l i g e n c e have f a i l e d . Getzels and Jackson (1962) obtained correlations between c r e a t i v i t y and in t e l l i g e n c e scores of about .3, approximately the same magnitude as the c r e a t i v i t y part-score inter c o r r e l a t i o n s . Their results 5 were obtained with measures based on Guilford's (1956) work using his Structure-of-Intellect model. Guilford (1956) conceptualized c r e a t i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e as two different processes within the 'operations' dimension of his model, and labelled them respectively divergent and convergent thinking. Yet, Guilford has also reported (Guilford & Christensen, 1956) correlations between general i n t e l l i -size gence scores and divergent thinking scores of about the same A(r = .25) as the intercorrelations among the divergent thinking tests themselves. Wallach and Kogan (1965) argued that the kinds of procedures employed by the studies described above were too varied to define a cohesive dimension that i s substantially independent of general i n t e l l i g e n c e . They developed new measures of c r e a t i v i t y which were based on Mednick's (1962) d e f i n i t i o n of creative thinking as the forming of associative elements into new combinations which either meet specified requirements or are i n some way useful. Wallach and Kogan (1965) reasoned that under conditions which would assure the appropriateness of associations a more creative person would give more verbal associations, and more that are unique, to a stimulus than would a less creative i n d i v i d u a l . They also noted that most previous attemtpts to assess c r e a t i v i t y (e.g., Guilford & Christensen, 1956; Getzels & Jackson, 1962) had consisted of giving paper-and-pencil " t e s t s " to groups of people, with time l i m i t s imposed. Wallach and Kogan (1965) suggested that i n view of the l i t e r a t u r e describing the introspections of people known to be creative (Ghiselin, 1952; Rugg, 6 1963) i t might be important to try to assess c r e a t i v i t y under a re-laxed, gamelike atmosphere i n which subjects would not f e e l that their performance was being evaluated, or that they were under pressure to produce. Wallach and Kogan (1965) studied the relationship between crea-t i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e i n 151 Grade 5 children. Their c r e a t i v i t y tasks, designed to measure associative fluency and based on Mednick's (1962) theory of an associative basis of the creative process, i n -cluded both verbal and v i s u a l items. These measures were administered to children i n d i v i d u a l l y , i n a relaxed, gamelike atmosphere, with no time l i m i t s imposed. In contrast with the results obtained by Getzels and Jackson (1962), and by Guilford and Christensen (1956), Wallach and Kogan (1965) found non-significant correlations between c r e a t i v i t y task and i n t e l l i g e n c e test scores (for 100 such correlations, average _r = .09), and s i g n i f i c a n t part-score correlations for each t r a i t (for IQ, n = 45 correlations, average _r = .51; for c r e a t i v i t y , n = 45 correlations, average _r = .41). Their interpretation was that they had succeeded i n defining a dimension of i n d i v i d u a l difference which was independent of the t r a d i t i o n a l notion of general i n t e l l i g e n c e . Since publication of these results a number of p a r t i a l r eplications of the c r e a t i v i t y - i n t e l l i g e n c e d i s t i n c t i o n have appeared (e.g., Ward, 1968; Pankoye & Kogan, 1968; Cropley & Maslany, 1969; Wallach & Wing, 1969; Williams & Fleming, 1969). Based on the work of Wallach and Kogan (1965), a main assumption of the present study i s that there exists a unified dimension of 7 in d i v i d u a l difference i n cognitive behaviour appropriately labelled c r e a t i v i t y and that the two concepts ' c r e a t i v i t y ' and 'intelligence' define dimensions of i n d i v i d u a l difference that vary independently, or that are at most only minimally related. Consistent with t h i s assumption i t i s possible to hypothesize d i f f e r e n t i a l effects of t e l e v i s i o n viewing on the two t r a i t s , for example, positive or neutral effects on i n t e l l i g e n c e and negative effects on c r e a t i v i t y . The Grade four and Grade 7 age levels were chosen for the present investigation i n order to enable a comparison of the results with the Wallach and Kogan (1965) findings, and to extend the age g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of the observed c r e a t i v i t y - i n t e l l i g e n c e d i s t i n c t i o n both downward and up-ward i n age. Selection of the Grade 4 and Grade 7 age levels also enabled a comparison of the vocabulary results with those of Schramm et a l . (1961). The s p e c i f i c hypotheses of the study were as follows. 1. C r e a t i v i t y i s a variable which i s i t s e l f affected by t e l e v i s i o n exposure, and children who grow up without t e l e v i s i o n w i l l obtain higher mean c r e a t i v i t y scores than w i l l children who grow up with t e l e v i s i o n 2. I f t e l e v i s i o n can serve as a stimulus for i n t e l l e c t u a l development, i t w i l l be most l i k e l y to affect verbal measures of i n t e l l i g e n c e which are somewhat related to informational experience. Thus, i n general, children growing up i n towns with t e l e v i s i o n reception w i l l score higher on a vocabulary test than w i l l children i n a town lacking 8 te l e v i s i o n . However, i f consistent with past findings, this effect w i l l occur only for the younger children (Grade 4) and w i l l not be maintained at the Grade 7 age l e v e l . 3. While t e l e v i s i o n i s l i k e l y to affect verbal i n t e l l i g e n c e tests scores, i t i s unlikely to affect performance - type i n t e l l i g e n c e test scores. To the extent that i n t e l l i g e n c e test performance i s environ-mentally determined,direct experience rather than information ac-cumulation would be expected to influence performance test scores. Thus, differences on the WISC block design test among children varying i n t e l e v i s i o n experience w i l l be minimal. 4. The findings of Wallach and Kogan (1965) w i l l be replicated by the present study. Low correlations between the c r e a t i v i t y and int e l l i g e n c e measures, and high intercorrelations within each set of measures w i l l be obtained, and thus the age g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of the c r e a t i v i t y -i n t e l l i g e n c e d i s t i n c t i o n w i l l be extended i n both a downward and up-ward di r e c t i o n . 9 Method Towns. The study was conducted i n three communities i n B r i t i s h Columbia selected for the i r s i m i l a r i t y with respect to population (town = about 750, area = about 2,500), econcomic base, ethnic background of r e s i -dents, s o c i a l structure, school system, and distance from larger metropolitan areas. One of the towns "NoTel", did not have t e l e v i s i o n reception at the time of data c o l l e c t i o n (although a few residents located on h i l l s surrounding the town reported that they sometimes picked up weak signals). The second community, "OneTel", received only one channel (CBC) and reception was reported to be poor (snowy) i n certain areas or at certain times during the winter months. The th i r d town "MultiTel", was not far from the United States border. Residents not on the cable got one U.S. channel (CBS) and those sub-scribing to the cable got one Canadian (CBC) and three U.S. (ABC, CBS, and NBC) channels. Reception i n MultiTel was reported to be consistently good. The three towns thus represented a continuum of te l e v i s i o n experience. While the community without t e l e v i s i o n (NoTel) was not "pure" i n the sense of complete absence of access to t e l e v i s i o n , since a few of the residents from surrounding h i l l s reported that they sometimes received weak signals from one sta t i o n , and residents sometimes watched t e l e v i s i o n when v i s i t i n g elsewhere, fewer than 14% of the children tested had access to t e l e v i s i o n on an everyday basis. This 10 provided a sharp contrast to the two TV towns (OneTel and M u l t i T e l ) , where 100% of the children tested had access to t e l e v i s i o n on an every-day basis. Subjects. A t o t a l of 160 school children from the three towns servedvas subjects. F i f t y - e i g h t of these children, 29 from Grade Four (19 males and 10 females) and 29 from Grade Seven (14 males and 15 females), were residents of NoTel. . Fifty-three of the children, 24 from Grade Four (16 males and 8 females), and 29 from Grade Seven (12 males and 17 females), resided i n OneTel. The remaining 49 children were r e s i -dents of MultiTel, 23 of these i n Grade Four (10 males and 13 females), and 26 i n Grade Seven (11 males and 15 females). In order to ensure that a l l subjects were l o c a l residents, only those children who had resided i n the i r p a r t i c u l a r town for at least three years were included i n the study. In addition, subjects from the two t e l e v i s i o n towns (OneTel and MultiTel) had to have had a t e l e v i s i o n set i n the i r homes for a minimum period of three years. A l l children meeting these c r i t e r i a served as subjects i n order to provide samples which would be as large as possible. Dependent Variables. The measures of i n t e l l i g e n c e used were one verbal and one per-formance subtest from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). The verbal subtest was Vocabulary; the performance subtest was Block Design. Selection of the Vocabulary subtest was based on the fact that i t possesses a very high correlation with the t o t a l 11 verbal scale score, and with the f u l l scale score, of the WISC. In addition, a vocabulary test was selected so as to provide a comparison with previous results concerning t e l e v i s i o n and int e l l i g e n c e (Schramm et a l . 1961). The Block"Design subtest from the perfcrman-ce scale of the WISC was selected because of i t s high correlation with the t o t a l performance scale score and with the f u l l scale score. F i n a l l y , these two subtests were used by Wallach and Kogan (1965) as part of their group of in t e l l i g e n c e measures, and comparability of results could therefore be assessed. The c r e a t i v i t y task measures were adapted from those used by Wallach and Kogan (1965). The f i v e verbal items required the c h i l d to name uses for a common item, for example, a magazine. The f i v e v i s u a l items were simple l i n e drawings; each was drawn i n black on a white 4 x 6 inch p l a s t i c card (see Figure 1) Design The three between subject independent variables were Town (NoTel, OneTel, and Mul t i T e l ) , Grade (4 and 7), and Sex. Thus the experimental design included 12 independent groups of subjects. Due to differences i n the number of subjects available i n each town and grade, there were not equal numbers of subjects i n each group. To have randomly discarded subjects to at t a i n equal group size would have resulted i n groups s u f f i c i e n t l y small, that generalizations would have been unwarranted.: A l l subjects received each of the four dependent variable tasks, the two int e l l i g e n c e measures and the two c r e a t i v i t y measures. In V I S U A L C R E A T I V I T Y I T E M S 12 ttern Meanings 4. 5. F I G U R E 1. 13 a l l cases the order of presentation of the four dependent measures was the same, with the two c r e a t i v i t y task measures preceding the two i n t e l l i g e n c e measures. Although i t i s customary research procedure to counterbalance the order of presentation of dependent measures, this was not done i n the present study for two reasons. F i r s t , direct comparison i n an absolute sense of performance on the two kinds of measures was not meaningful. The second reason for not counterbalancing was that the atmosphere experienced by the subject i s considered by Wallach and Kogan (1965) to be a c r i t i c a l dimension of task context for the c r e a t i v i t y measures. Thus, the fact that an evaluative set i s inherent i n the presentation and nature of the two i n t e l l i g e n c e tasks led to a decision to place them l a s t i n the order of presentation. Of the two c r e a t i v i t y task measures, the f i v e verbal items were a l -ways presented second, and i n the same order. Of the two int e l l i g e n c e measures, the presentation of the Vocabulary subtest always preceded the presentation of the Block Design subtest. As the Block Design subtest was the only one of the four dependent measures which was timed, the decision to place i t l a s t i n the order of presentation was based simply on the reasoning that i t would be a more comfortable t r a n s i t i o n for the c h i l d from a non-evaluative to an evaluative atmosphere i f the timed subtest came l a s t . Procedure. Each c h i l d was tested i n d i v i d u a l l y i n a private room provided by the school. The door to the experimental room was always kept closed, and there were never any interruptions once the procedures had begun. 14 Each session began with the experimenter introducing herself to the c h i l d and saying "Hi, I have some games here. I hope you w i l l l i k e them, but f i r s t , I need to know your name." At t h i s point the child's name, age, and birthdate were taken. Following this the c h i l d was asked questions concerning his or her t e l e v i s i o n viewing experience. (A l i s t of these questions i s provided i n the Appendix, Table 1). Oyf Following the recording^the child's reply to these questions, the presentation of the four dependent measures began. The general instructions for the verbal associative task were: Now, i n this game, I am going to name an object—any kind of ob-j e c t , l i k e a l i g h t bulb or the f l o o r — a n d i t w i l l be your job to t e l l me l o t s of different ways that the object could be used. Any object can be used i n a. l o t of different ways. For example, think about string.. What are some of the ways you can think of that you might use string? (At t h i s point the experimenter l e t the c h i l d t r y ) . Yes, those are f i n e . I was thinking that you could also use s t r i n g to attach a f i s h hook, to jump rope, to sew with, to hang clothes on, and to p u l l the blinds. (The experimenter varied her suggestions so as not to duplicate any the c h i l d had provided). There are l o t s more too, and yours were very good examples. . I can see that you already understand how we play this game. So l e t ' s begin now. And remember, think of a l l the different ways you could use the object that I name. Here we go. The experimenter's explanation of the example was provided i n such a manner as to convey the fe e l i n g of suggestion rather than of 15 f i n a l i t y . The possible answers were given slowly and i n a suggesting tone, so as to provide the impression that she was thinking of them at the time. The f i v e items i n t h i s procedure, i n their order of administration were as follows: 1. " T e l l me a l l the different ways you could use a magazine." 2. " T e l l me a l l the different ways you could use a knife." 3. " T e l l me a l l the different ways you could use a shoe." 4. " T e l l me a l l the different ways you could use a button—the kind that i s used on clothing". 5. " T e l l me a l l the different ways you could use a key—the kind that i s used i n doors." The procedure for the v i s u a l associative task was then introduced to the c h i l d as follows: Here's a game where you can r e a l l y f e e l free to use your imagina-ti o n . In this game I am going to show you some drawings. After looking at each one, I want you to t e l l me a l l the things you think each com-plete drawing could be. Here i s an example—you can turn i t any way you'd l i k e to. (The experimenter than gave the example card to the child.) What could t h i s be? (The c h i l d was encouraged to try some suggestions). Yes, those are f i n e . Some other kinds of things I was thinking of were the r i s i n g sun, a porcupine, eye lashes, a brush, a carnation, and probably there are l o t s of other things too. (The experimenter's p a r t i c u l a r suggestions were varied so as not to include any given by the c h i l d ) . I can see that you already know how we play 16 th i s game. So l e t ' s begin now. Once again the experimenter's suggestions for the example were presented slowly, i n such a manner as to indicate that she was thinking of them at the time. The "pattern meanings" procedure consisted of f i v e items, i n addition to the example. Each drawing, appeared on a separate 4 x 6 inch card. The v i s u a l items are i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure 1. Each of the f i v e test cards was presented to the c h i l d with the instruc-t i o n : "here i s another drawing. T e l l me a l l the things you think this could be." In keeping with the rationale of a non-evaluative atmosphere for the c r e a t i v i t y measures, the experimenter made a determined e f f o r t during their administration to avoid any expression of verbal or be-havioural cues which would indicate to the c h i l d that he or she was under any pressure of time while responding to the ind i v i d u a l items. Following the completion of the v i s u a l c r e a t i v i t y task, the Vocabulary and Block Design subtests of the WISC were administered. In the Vocabulary subtest, the c h i l d must provide d e f i n i t i o n s for each of a number of words, arranged i n a series of increasing d i f f i c u l t y . In the Block Design subtest, the c h i l d has to assemble blocks so as to duplicate a design displayed on a card. A number of different designs are employed. The administration of Vocabulary and Block Design sub-tests followed the general procedures set down i n the WISC manual (Wechsler, 1949). The completion of the fourth dependent measure (Block Design subtest) signalled the end of the experimental session with the c h i l d . 17 Scoring. In accordance with the Wallach and Kogan (1965) method, two kinds of scores were obtained from the c r e a t i v i t y task measures. Items were scored for both Fluency (the t o t a l number of responses), and for Uniqueness (responses occurring but once i n the sample of 160 children). Responses which were repetitious or obscure (less than 1% of the t o t a l ) , were excluded from these scores. Thus, there were s i x scores for each c h i l d on the c r e a t i v i t y task items. Three of these were Fluency scores, including one for verbal items, one for v i s u a l items, and a t o t a l Fluency score; and three were Uniqueness scores (Verbal, v i s u a l , and t o t a l ) . In a l l cases r e l i a b i l i t y was calculated by multiplying two times the number of agreements obtained by two inde-pendent scorers, and dividing the resul t by the t o t a l of scorer 1 plus the t o t a l of scorer 2. Two scorers working independently and using responses to a l l items by 20 subjects reached 100% agreement on Fluency scores. Using the responses of the t o t a l sample to the item "magazine", 95% agreement was reached on Uniqueness scores. Scoring for the Vocabulary and Block Design subtests of the WISC followed the general procedures set down i n the WISC manual. Following these rules, independent scorers eventually reached 94% agreement on Vocabulary scores ( i t i s perhaps worth noting that several sessions were required to develop additional rules for scoring Vocabulary items to supplement those provided i n the WISC manual). Raw Vocabulary and Block Design scores were then converted to scaled score equivalents i n accordance with the WISC manual procedures. 18 Results The three independent variables employed i n the study were Town (NoTel vs OneTel vs Mul t i T e l ) , Grade (4 vs 7), and Sex. Two types of dependent variables were employed i n the experiment: measures of c r e a t i v i t y (one verbal and one visual) and measures of inte l l i g e n c e (one verbal and one performance). The two c r e a t i v i t y measures were scored for both number of associates (Fluency) and for uniqueness of associates (Uniqueness). In addition, Total Fluency • and Total Uniqueness scores were obtained by collapsing across verbal and v i s u a l items. Thus there were s i x scores for each c h i l d for the c r e a t i v i t y measures. Three kinds of scores were u t i l i z e d from the two int e l l i g e n c e measures: a verbal scaled score (Vocabulary); a per-formance scaled score (Block Design); and a Total IQ scaled score (Vocabulary plus Block Design). Thus a t o t a l of nine separate 3 x 2 x 2 between subject analyses of variance was performed, with one analysis for each dependent measure. In addition, c o r r e l a t i o n a l analyses among the c r e a t i v i t y measures, among the int e l l i g e n c e measures, and between the c r e a t i v i t y and in t e l l i g e n c e measures were carried out. Results from the analyses of variance of the c r e a t i v i t y measures are presented f i r s t , followed by the results of the IQ analyses, and then by the cor r e l a t i o n a l analyses. C r e a t i v i t y Tasks The verbal (alternate uses) c r e a t i v i t y items were scored for both Fluency and Uniqueness as were the v i s u a l (pattern meanings) c r e a t i v i t y 19 items. These two kinds of scores were also analyzed by collapsing over verbal and v i s u a l items (Total- Fluency and Total Uniqueness). Pre-sentation of the results w i l l begin with the analyses of the Total Fleuncy and Total Uniqueness scores followed by the more s p e c i f i c Verbal Fluency, Verbal Uniqueness, Visual Fluency, and Visual Unique-ness analyses. Total Fluency. The mean numbers of responses (fluency) to the c r e a t i v i t y items by boys and g i r l s at each grade l e v e l i n each town are presented i n Table 1. For the purposes of t h i s analysis scores were collapsed over berbal and v i s u a l items (Total Fluency). Results from the analysis of variance performed on these scores are presented i n the Appendix (Table 2). Two s i g n i f i c a n t sources of v a r i a t i o n emerged from t h i s analysis. Most notable was the effect of Town F(2, 148) = 3.85, p < .05). Sub-sequent analysis of th i s main effect by the Newman-Keuls procedure (Appendix, Table 3) revealed that students i n the no-television town (NoTel) produced s i g n i f i c a n t l y greater numbers of associates ( i . e . , had higher Total Fluency scores) to the c r e a t i v i t y items than did students i n the multi-channel t e l e v i s i o n town. (NoTel > Mul t i T e l , p < .05). No other pairwise comparisons were s i g n i f i c a n t . The second s i g n i f i c a n t source of va r i a t i o n emerging from the Total Fluency analysis was the Grade x Sex inter a c t i o n , F ( l , 148) = 4.50, p < .05). A breakdown of this interaction by simple main effects analyses (Appendix, Table 4) revealed a s i g n i f i c a n t effect of Grade (age) only for the performance of the males, with Grade 7 males 20 Table 1 Mean Comparisons for Total Fluency Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 Grade 4 Grade 7 NoTel OneTel MultiTel Boys 35.5 33.5 n = i 6 39.8 n = i o G i r l s 53.3 n=i o 46.0 41.0 n = i 3 Boys 49.4 n = i h 42.3 n = i 2 35.7 n = n G i r l s 50.2 n = i 5 35.3 n = i 7 23.6 n = i 5 Mean Comparisons for Total Fluency Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex NoTel 45.7 n=5 8 OneTel 38.0 n=5 3 MultiTel 38.3 21 producing more associates to the c r e a t i v i t y items than Grade 4 males (p < .01). The performance of females i n Grades 4 and 7 did not d i f f e r . When the sexes were compared at each grade l e v e l , a s i g n i f i c a n t sex difference i n performance was found at Grade 4 only, with females producing more associates than males (p < .05). To summarize, results from the analysis of the Total Fluency scores showed that NoTel children produced s i g n i f i c a n t l y greater numbers of associates to c r e a t i v i t y task items than MultiTel children. In addition an age difference was found for males only, with Grade 4 performing more poorly than Grade 7, and a sex difference occurred only i n Grade 4, with females performing better than males. Total Uniqueness. The mean numbers of unique responses for boys and g i r l s at each grade l e v e l i n each town are presented i n Table 2. For the purposes of this analysis scores were collapsed over berbal and v i s u a l items (Total Uniqueness). Results from the analysis of variance performed upon these scores are presented i n the Appendix, (Table 5). Grade emerged from t h i s analysis as a s i g n i f i c a n t source of v a r i a -t i o n F ( l , 148) = 5.28, p < .05. Grade 7 children produced s i g n i f i c a n t l y more unique responses than those i n Grade 4. However, this main effect of Grade was somewhat q u a l i f i e d by a s i g n i f i c a n t Grade x Sex i n t e r -action F ( l , 148) = 4.15, p < .05.. Subsequent simple main effects analyses of this interaction (see Appendix, Table 6) revealed that the Grade 7 childre performed better than those i n Grade 4 only i n the case of the males (p < .01). In addition, among the Grade 7 subjects, males produced more unique responses than females (p < .05). 22 Table 2 Mean Comparisons for Total Uniqueness Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 Grade 4 Grade 7 NoTel OneTel MultiTel Boys 5.7 n= 19 4.8 n = i 6 5.5 n = i o G i r l s 7.7 n = i o 7.1 n=8 5.6 n = i 3 Boys 10.0 n=i"t 8.8 n = i 2 11.0 n = i i G i r l s 10.3 n = i 5 3.6 n = i 7 7.0 n = i 5 Mean Comparisons for Total Uniqueness Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex NoTel OneTel 9.1 n=58 5.7 n=5 3 MultiTel 7.2 n=t9 23 Verbal Fluency. The mean numbers of verbal fluency responses obtained for boys and g i r l s at each grade l e v e l i n each town are presented i n Table 3. Results form the analysis of variance performed upon these data are presented i n the Appendix (Table 7). As was the case with the Total Fluency scores, Town emerged as a s i g n i f i c a n t source of v a r i a t i o n , F(2, 148) = 6.60, p < .01. Subse-quent analysis of the Town main effect by the Newman-Keuls procedure (Appendix, Table 8) revealed that children i n NoTel had higher mean Verbal Fluency scores than did children i n OneTel and MultiTel (NoTel:- > OneTel; NoTel > MultiTel, p < .01). The scores of children i n OneTel and MultiTel did not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y ( i . e . , NoTel > OneTel = MultiT e l ) . A second s i g n i f i c a n t source of va r i a t i o n emerging from the analysis of the Verbal Fluency scores was a Grade x Sex inter a c t i o n , F ( l , 148) = 4.86, p < .05). A breakdown of t h i s interaction by analysis of simple main effects (Appendix, Table 9) revealed a s i g n i f i c a n t difference for males only, with Grade 7 males performing better than those i n Grade 4 (p < .05). Verbal Uniqueness. The mean numbers of unique responses produced for verbal items by boys and g i r l s at each grade l e v e l i n each town are presented i n Table 4. Results from the analysis of variance performed on these data are presented i n the Appendix (Table 10). Town again emerged as a s i g n i f i c a n t source of v a r i a t i o n , F(2, 148) 4.95, p < .01. Subsequent analysis by the Newman-Keuls procedure (Appendix, Table 11) showed that NoTel children gave more verbal respons 24 Table 3 Mean Comparisons for Verbal Fluency Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 Grade 4 Grade 7 NoTel OneTel MultiTel Boys 24.4 n = i 9 18.8 n = i 6 20.9 n = i 6 G i r l s 35.0 n=i o 26.1 n=8 22.3 n=i 3 Boys 35.6 n=i i* 25.4 n=i2 26.6 n=i i G i r l s 32.1 n=i 5 20.5 n=i 7 23.6 n=i 5 Mean Comparisons for Verbal Fluency Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex NoTel 30.9 n=5 8 OneTel 21.9 n=5 3 MultiTel 23.4 n=t9 25 Table 4 Mean Comparisons for Verbal Uniqueness Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 Grade 4 Grade 7 Boys G i r l s Boys G i r l s NoTel 2.6 4.4 4.9 4.4 OneTel 1.6 2.1 4.1 1.2 MultiTel 3.0 2.0 1.9 2.0 Mean Comparisons for Verbal Uniqueness Scores Collapsed- Over Grade and Sex -NoTel 3.9 OneTel 2.1 MultiTel 2.2 26 that were unique i n the sample than children i n either OneTel (NoTel > OneTel, p < .05) or MultiTel (NoTel > MultiTel, p < .01). The per-formance of OneTel and MultiTel children did not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r ( i . e . , NoTel > OneTel = MultiTel). To summarize the results from the analyses of verbal c r e a t i v i t y items, children from the town without t e l e v i s i o n (NoTel) had s i g -n i f i c a n t l y higher Verbal Fluency and Verbal Uniqueness scores than did the children from either of the towns with t e l e v i s i o n , while these l a t t e r two groups did not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r . While the main effect of Town was not q u a l i f i e d by any interactions, a s i g n i f i c a n t Grade x Sex interaction did emerge i n the Verbal Fluency scores. Grade 7 boys performed better than Grade 4 boys, whereas no Grade difference was found among the performance of the g i r l s . Visual Fluency. The mean Visual Fluency scores for boys and g i r l s at each grade l e v e l i n each town are presented i n Table 5. Results from the analysis of variance performed on these data are presented i n the Appendix, Table 12. The only s i g n i f i c a n t source of va r i a t i o n to emerge from this analysis was Grade, F ( l , 148), = 4.55, p. < .05.. Older (Grade 7) sub-jects produced s i g n f i c a n t l y greater numbers of associates to the v i s u a l c r e a t i v i t y items ( i . e . , had higher mean Visual Fluency scores) than did younger (Grade 4) children. Visual Uniqueness. The mean Visual Uniqueness scores for boys and g i r l s at each grade l e v e l i n each town are presented i n Table 6. Results from the analysis of variance performed on these data are presented i n 27 Table 5 Mean Comparisons for Visual Fluency Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 NoTel OneTel MultiTel Grade 4 Boys G i r l s .15.7 18.2 16.0 19.8 18.0 18.6 Grade 7 Boys G i r l s 20.9 24.7 16.9 14.8 27.2 19.9 Mean Comparisons for Visual Fluency Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex -NoTel OneTel MultiTel 19.8 16.4 20.9 28 Table 6 Mean Comparisons for Visual Uniqueness Scores i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 NoTel OneTel MultiTel Grade 4 Boys G i r l s 3.1 3.3 3.2 5.1 2.5 3.5 Grade 7 Boys G i r l s 5.0 5.9 3.8 2.4 9.1 5.0 Mean Comparisons for Visual Uniqueness Scores Collapsed over Grade and Sex NoTel 4.4 OneTel 3.4 MultiTel 5.0 29 the.Appendix, Table 13. Grade emerged as a s i g n i f i c a n t source of v a r i a t i o n F ( l , 148) = 6.03, p < .01. However, th i s main effect of Grade was q u a l i f i e d by a s i g n i f i c a n t Grade x Town interaction, F(2, 148) = 3.82, p < .05). A breakdown of t h i s interaction by analysis of simple main effects and subsequent Newman-Keuls analyses (See Appendix, Table 14) revealed the following pattern of re s u l t s . From the point of view of a com-parison between grades i n each town, the performance of children i n Grades 4 and 7 differed only i n MultiTel (Grade 7 > Grade 4, p < .01). For both the NoTel and OneTel towns, the Visual Uniqueness scores for Grades 4 and 7 did not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y . Analysis of the same Grade x Town interaction from the point of view of a comparison among towns at each grade l e v e l revealed no s i g n i f i c a n t differences among towns for the Grade 4 children. However, at the Grade 7 age l e v e l , children i n NoTel performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than those i n OneTel (p < .05) and children from MultiTel also gave more v i s u a l responses that were unique than those i n OneTel (p < .01). There was no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the performance of Grade 7 subjects i n MultiTel and NoTel ( i . e . , MultiTel = NoTel < OneTel). To summarize, the results for the Visual c r e a t i v i t y measure were somewhat more complex than the results from the Verbal c r e a t i v i t y measure. For the Visual Fluency scores the only s i g n i f i c a n t source of v a r i a t i o n was a grade effect such that Grade 7 subjects gave more responses to v i s u a l items than Grade 4 subjects. For Visual Uniqueness, Grade 7's performed better than Grade 4's only i n MultiTel. Further-more no s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n Visual Uniqueness was obtained across 30 towns for the Grade 4 children. However for the Grade 7 students, OneTel children performed more poorly than either the multiTel or NoTel children while the performance of these l a t t e r two groups did not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r . Intelligence Measures Scoring for the Vocabulary and Block Design subtests of the WISC followed the general procedures set down i n the WISC manual. Raw Vocabulary and Block Design scores were then converted to scaled score equivalents i n accordance with the WISC manual procedures. Vocabulary. The mean Vocabulary scaled scores for g i r l s and boys i n each grade i n each town are presented i n Table 7. Results from the analysis of variance performed upon these data are presented i n the Appendix (Table 15). Town emerged as a s i g n i f i c a n t source of v a r i a t i o n , F(2, 148) = 4.36, p < .01. Subsequent analysis by the Newman-Keuls procedure (Appendix , Table 16), revealed that children from MultiTel performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y better on the Vocabulary subtest than both children from OneTel (MultiTel > OneTel, p < .05) and children from NoTel (MultiTel > NoTel, p < .05). However, this Town main effects was q u a l i f i e d by a s i g n i f i c a n t interaction with sex, F(2, 148) = 3.29, p < .05. Subsequent analysis of simple main effects (see Appendix, Table 17) revealed a s i g n i f i c a n t difference among the towns for males only (p < .01). Further analysis 31 Table 7 Mean Comparisons for Vocabulary Scaled Scores for Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 NoTel OneTel MultiTel Grade 4 Boys G i r l s 9.4 11.2 11.3 11.3 12.9 11.6 Grade 7 Boys G i r l s 9.5 10.0 10.6 8.8 11.8 10.1 Mean Comparisons for Vocabualry Scaled Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex NoTel OneTel MultiTel 9.9 10.4 11.4 32 by the Newman-Keuls procedure (Appendix, Table 17) showed that males i n MultiTel obtained s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher mean vocabulary scaled scores than those i n NoTel (MultiTel > NoTel, p < .01) and males i n OneTel also earned s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher vocabulary scores than those i n NoTel (OneTel > NoTel, p < .05). The performance of male children from the two towns with t e l e v i s i o n did not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r (OneTel = MultiTel > NoTel). Not unexpectedly, Grade also emerged as a s i g n i f i c a n t source of va r i a t i o n F ( l , 148) = 6.77, p < .01. Older (Grade 7) students per-formed s i g n i f i c a n t l y better on the Vocabulary subtest than did younger (Grade 4) students. Block Design. The mean Block Design scaled scores for boys and g i r l s at each grade l e v e l i n each town are presented i n Table 8. Results from the analysis of variance performed upon these scores are presented i n the Appendix (Table 18). Sex emerged as the only s i g n i f i c a n t source of v a r i a t i o n , F ( l , 148) = 8.26, p < .01. Male children had higher scores than female children on the Block Design subtest. This finding i s consistent with past research i n which boys by the early school years do consistently better than g i r l s on s p a t i a l tasks such as the WISC Block Design subtest ;(Maccoby, 1966). Total IQ. The mean combined Vocabulary and Block Design scaled scores (Total IQ) for boys and g i r l s at each grade l e v e l i n each town are presented i n Table 9. Results from the analysis of variance performed upon these scores are presented i n the Appendix (Table 19). 33 Table 8 Mean Comparisons for Block Design Scaled Scores for Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 Grade 4 Grade 7 Boys G i r l s Boys G i r l s NoTel 11.4 10.5 11.8 11.6 OneTel 11.4 9.3 12.0 10.5 MultiTel 12.5 10.3 11.2 9.6 Mean Comparisons for Block Design Scales Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex NoTel 11.4 OneTel 10.9 MultiTel 10.8 34 Table 9 Mean Comparisons for Total IQ Scores for Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 NoTel OneTel MultiTel Grade 4 Boys G i r l s 20.9 21.7 22.6 20.7 25.4 21.9 Grade 7 Boys G i r l s 21.4 21.6 22.6 19.7 23.1 19.7 Mean Comparisons for Total IQ Scores Collapsed Over Grade and Sex NoTel 21.4 OneTel 21.4 M u l t i t e l 22.2 35 Sex emerged as the only s i g n i f i c a n t source of v a r i a t i o n , F ( l , 148) = 5.5, p < .05. This finding i s presumably a result of the large sex difference for the Block Design subtest scores; when the two kinds of scores were combined (Vocabulary and Block Design), the difference s t i l l held. Correlational Analyses The (P.earson product-moment) correlations among the c r e a t i v i t y measures for the sample of 160 children are shown i n Table 10. The four c r e a t i v i t y indices were very strongly intercorrelated. While i t i s recognized that the two kinds of t o t a l scores (Total Fluency and Total Uniqueness) are contaminated ( i . e . , they are part-whole cor-r e l a t i o n s ) , they have been included i n the table for the sake of completeness. Fourteen of the f i f t e e n correlations are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l and the remaining correlation reaches the .05 l e v e l of significance. In addition, for the sample as a whole, the two verbal indices of c r e a t i v i t y (fluency and uniqueness scores on the alternate uses task) are substantially correlated with the two v i s u a l (pattern meanings) indices (see Table 11). While i t can be seen from the table that t h i s finding does not hold when the smallest subgroups are considered (very small sample s i z e ) , of the 24 possible correlations, 14 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l and an additional 3 reach the .05 l e v e l of significance. Only 7 correlations f a i l to reach significance. These results are simi l a r to those of Wallach and Kogan (1965). Table 10 Intercorrelations Among the C r e a t i v i t y Measures for the Total Sample (N = 160) 2 3 4 5 . 6 1. Uses Uniqueness .77 .36 .44 .49 .76 2. Uses Fluency .49 .59 .58 .73 3. Patterns Uniqueness .83 .17 .86 4. Patterns Fluency .36 .81 5. Total Fluency .37 6. Total Uniqueness For 158 df, ry's of .16 and .21 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 37 Table 11 Verbal and Visual Correlations i n Each C e l l of Design 3 x 2 x 2 N o T e I Grade 4 Grade 7 Boys G i r l s Boys G i r l s Fluency .88** .73* .82** .86** Uniqueness .66** .66* .51* .79 0 n e T e 1 Grade 4 Grade 7 Boys G i r l s Boys G i r l s ,66** .21 .08 .64** .60** .60 .25 .24 M Boys .75** > .75** u Grade 4 1 G i r l s .65** .39 t \ Grade 7 e 1 Boys .70** .01 G i r l s .87** .91** Verbal and Visual Correlations Averaged Over Grade and Sex (Fisher _r to z transformations) Fluency Uniqueness NoTel .79** .66** OneTel .43** .44** MultiTel .76** .61** ** p < .01 * p < .05 38 The correlations among the in t e l l i g e n c e measures for the sample as a whole are presented i n Table 12. Vocabulary and Block Design scaled scores are p o s i t i v e l y correlated and as i n the case of the c r e a t i v i t y indices reported i n Table 10, the co e f f i c i e n t i s s i g n i f i -cant at the .01 l e v e l . (The two part-whole correlations i n column three are included for the sake of completeness although their high positive correlation would be expected). These findings for the int e l l i g e n c e measures are not surprising and simply r e f l e c t the already well-established fact that t r a d i t i o n a l measures of in t e l l i g e n c e generally tap, i n addition to more s p e c i f i c a b i l i t i e s , a single underlying dimension of indiv i d u a l v a r i a t i o n . The correlations between the c r e a t i v i t y and in t e l l i g e n c e measures are presented i n Table 13. The correlations between c r e a t i v i t y and int e l l i g e n c e for the sample as a whole are quite low. While two of the eighteen _r.'s are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l and an additional 6 reach the .05 l e v e l of significance, no correlation exceeds .23. (This finding holds i n spite of the inclusion i n the table for the sake of completeness of the part-whole c o r r e l a t i o n s — T o t a l IQ, Total Uniqueness, Total Fluency, which would be expected to be spuriously/, high). In summary, the findings of the cor r e l a t i o n a l analyses of the Intelligence and Cr e a t i v i t y measures very closely replicate those of Wallach and kogan (1965). Correlations between the two sets of measures are consistently low and intercorrelations within each measure are high. Tables have been incouded i n the Appendix (Tables 20 through 37) 39 Table 12 Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for the Total Sample (N = 160) 2 3 1. WISC Vocabulary .35 .79 2. WISC Block Design .85 3. Total I.Q. For 158 df, r^.'s of .16 and .21 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 40 Table 13 Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for the Total Sample (N = 160) WISC Vocabulary WISC Block Design WISC I.Q. 1. Uses Uniqueness .14 .13 .16 P <.05 2. Uses Fluency .09 .16 p <.05 .15 3. Paterns Uniqueness .10 .07 .10 4. Patterns Fluency .17 p <.05 .13 .18 P <.05 5. Total Fluency .16 p <.05 .22 p <.01 .23 P <.01 6. Total Uniqueness .14 .13 .17 P <.05 For 158 df, r_. 's of .16 and .21 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 41 which supply these correlations for each of the possible subgroups i n the study. In general the pattern of results for each of the subgroups mirrors the findings reported above for the sample as a whole. 42 Discussion The low correlations obtained between the c r e a t i v i t y and i n -telligence measures and high correlations within each set of measures strongly replicate the findings of Wallach and Kogan (1965) and others (Ward, 1968; Pankove & Kogan, 1968; Cropley & Maslany, 1969; Wallach & ! 1 Wing, 1969; Williams &.iFleming, 1969). Thus strong s t a t i s t i c a l support i s provided for a main assumption underlying the present study, namely that c r e a t i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e are cohesive dimensions of in d i v i d u a l v a r i a t i o n that are substantially independent of one another. The sex difference i n performance on the Block Design subtest ( i . e . , boys obtained higher mean scaled scores than g i r l s ) , i s also consistent with past studies (Maccoby, 1966). These replications of results from previous studies lend c r e d i b i l i t y to those aspects of the present study which provide new information, namely the results from both the c r e a t i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e measures as they relate to t e l e v i s i o n exposure. Considering i n t e l l i g e n c e f i r s t , the pattern of results supported the hypothesized relationship of t e l e v i s i o n viewing to the two aspects of i n t e l l e c t u a l development measured. In general, children growing up i n the towns with t e l e v i s i o n had higher vocabulary scores than the children i n the town lacking t e l e v i s i o n , and i n the case of boys the difference was s i g n i f i c a n t . There were, however, no s i g n i f i c a n t The Wallach-Kogan research was based on a sample of American f i f t h graders, and the p a r t i a l r e p l i c a t i o n s c i t e d above have extended the age g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of the observed c r e a t i v i t y - i n t e l l i g e n c e d i s t i n c t i o n both downward and upward. The present study, however, provides the f i r s t r e p l i c a t i o n with children at the Grade 4 and Grade 7 age l e v e l s , and i s the f i r s t to u t i l i z e a Canadian sample. 43 differences among the mean Block Design scores obtained by the children i n the three towns. These findings support the reasoning that to the extent that i n t e l l i g e n c e i s environmentally determined, t e l e v i s i o n can serve as a stimulus for those aspects of verbal i n t e l l e c t u a l development which are related to information accumulation, but does not p a r t i c u l a r l y affect those aspects of i n t e l l e c t u a l development re-flected by performance-type i n t e l l i g e n c e test scores. I f the l a t t e r are influenced at a l l by the environment, they are influenced more by dire c t experience than by information accumulation. The vocabulary findings of the present study are similar to those of Schramm, Lyle, and Parker (1961) who found that children growing up with t e l e v i s i o n appear to come to school with about a one-year ad-vantage i n vocabulary over children growing up without t e l e v i s i o n . For the boys i n the present study the vocabulary advantage of the te l e v i s i o n children was also about one year. For g i r l s , while the vocabulary difference among the towns was not s i g n i f i c a n t , i t was i n the same dire c t i o n ( i . e . , the g i r l s i n the t e l e v i s i o n towns had higher mean vocabulary scores than the g i r l s i n NoTel), but the gain was not as large as that shown by the boys. The present findings do d i f f e r from those of Schramm et a l . (1961) i n one respect. When assessing older children i n the s i x t h and tenth grades Schramm et a l . (1961) found that the children i n the two towns "Radiotown" and "Teletown" did not d i f f e r i n vocabulary l e v e l . In other words, the television-related vocabulary advantage held only for children entering school. In the present study the one-year vocabulary advantage seen i n the Grade 4 boys from the 44 two t e l e v i s i o n towns was also shown by the Grade 7 boys. I t i s d i f f i c u l t to speculate on this discrepancy i n findings with only two studies as a basis for comparison, and the question concerning age-related d i f -ferences i n the relationship between t e l e v i s i o n and vocabulary scores must therefore be l e f t open. The results pertaining to verbal c r e a t i v i t y provided strong support for the hypothesis that c r e a t i v i t y i s a variable which i t i t s e l f af-fected by t e l e v i s i o n exposure. The children growing up i n the town without t e l e v i s i o n had s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher Verbal Fluency and Verbal Uniqueness scores than did the children from either of the two towns with t e l e v i s i o n . This finding i s especially interesting i n l i g h t of the results reported above for verbal i n t e l l i g e n c e measure. Although the children from the two t e l e v i s i o n towns scored highest on the verbal measure of i n t e l l i g e n c e , they did not also earn higher verbal c r e a t i v i t y scores. On the contrary, i t was the children who did least w e l l on the Vocabulary subtest (NoTel subjects) who did best on the verbal c r e a t i v i t y measure. I t can thus be concluded that although both the the procedures designed for studying c r e a t i v i t y require the exercise of verbal s k i l l , the child's a b i l i t y to display c r e a t i v i t y [as defined by Wallach and Kogan (1965)] has l i t t l e to do with whether or not the c h i l d exhibits the behaviour that w i l l earn him or her a high score on a measure of verbal i n t e l l i g e n c e . This finding that the relationship.between t e l e v i s i o n and verbal c r e a t i v i t y was diametrically opposite to the relationship between t e l e v i s i o n and verbal i n t e l l i g e n c e provides a further demonstration of the r e l a t i v e orthogonality of c r e a t i v i t y and 45 in t e l l i g e n c e . The pattern of results for the v i s u a l measure of c r e a t i v i t y (pattern meanings procedure) were unexpected, and i n sharp contrast to those for the verbal (alternate uses) procedure. The only consistent pattern to emerge was an age difference i n performance such that Grade seven children i n a l l three towns obtained higher Visual Fluency scores than Grade 4 children. In the case of Visual Uniqueness, t h i s age difference occurred i n MultiTel only, while among the Grade 7 students those i n OneTel produced fewer unqiue responses than either students i n NoTel or MultiTel. This d i v e r s i t y i n results between the verbal and v i s u a l c r e a t i v i t y measures i s the more perplexing since for the sample as a whole, the two verbal indices of c r e a t i v i t y (fluency and uniqueness) derived from the alternate uses procedure are substantially correlated with the two v i s u a l indices (fluency and ^uniqueness) derived from the pattern 2 meanings procedure (see Table 11) . Thus the pattern of relationships within each town i s the same. The question can be raised concerning the extent to which the over-a l l pattern of results for the v i s u a l c r e a t i v i t y measure obtained i n the present study may be concealing more substantial relationships within p a r t i c u l a r subgroups of subjects. For example, i t i s possible that When the smallest subgroups are considered, 7 of the possible 24 correlations do not reach the .05 l e v e l of significance (see Table 11). This finding undoubtedly r e f l e c t s the l a b i l i t y of correlations for small samples. 46 t e l e v i s i o n viewing experience may f a c i l i t a t e the use of v i s u a l stimulus materials such that the performance of children i n the t e l e v i s i o n towns <was raised to the l e v e l of the children i n NoTel. A closer examination of the relationship between time spent viewing t e l e v i s i o n by indiv i d u a l subjects within each town and performance on v i s u a l and verbal c r e a t i v i t y items i s proposed as the next stage of analysis of the present data. (Such an analysis would also allow a re-examination of the verbal c r e a t i v i t y results to see i f the powerful relationship seen across the three towns i s reproduced within each town). Other investigators have also reported various discrepancies i n cross-sectional data for verbal and f i g u r a l stimulus materials. For example, the mean fluency score difference between the Wallach and Kogan (1965) middle-class f i f t h graders and the Wallach and Wing (1969) college freshmen favoured the l a t t e r sample ( i . e . , the older subjects had higher fluency scores), but the discrepancy was considerably larger for verbal than for f i g u r a l items. The finding (Ward, Kogan & Pankove, 1972) that black disadvantaged fifth-graders were less productive than th e i r middle-class counterparts on verbal items, but somewhat more productive on f i g u r a l items i s also of interest. These authors sug-gested that perhaps a task such as alternate uses favours subjects with richer experiential repertoires, whereas f i g u r a l tasks may have more to do with the organization and a c c e s s i b i l i t y of repertoires. In spite of the considerable generality demonstrated i n the present work and i n previous research for various tasks and indices of c r e a t i v i t y , there apparently are very d i s t i n c t differences between verbal and 47. and.nonverbal tasks, and there i s a need for studies which are ex-p l i c i t l y directed toward the issue of ve r b a l - f i g u r a l differences. The variations just delineated within the c r e a t i v i t y domain make i t equally apparent that investigations pertaining to the optimal conditions re-quired for the enhancement of c r e a t i v i t y w i l l have to specify what sort of c r e a t i v i t y the investigator has i n mind. A further issue remains concerning the verbal c r e a t i v i t y findings. What l i n k s can be proposed to account for the observed relationship be-tween t e l e v i s i o n exposure and creative a b i l i t y as expressed i n the alternate uses task? One way of conceptualizing t h i s issue has been suggested by Wallach and Kogan (1965). Although these authors were not concerned with the effects of t e l e v i s i o n viewing per se, they pointed out that i n the case of both the number and the uniqueness of the as-sociational responses that a person can generate under various circum-stances the cognitive units i n question must be 'capable' of production or generation i f there i s to be any hope of their being produced. That i s , they must exist i n some kind of stored form i n the f i r s t place; were they not part of the individual's behavioural repertoire they could not be generated under any circumstances. Thus, Wallach and Kogan (1965) point out, i f we assess a person's capacity to generate cognitive elements, one factor influencing that person's performance as a c e i l i n g or upper bound i s the extensiveness of his or her repertoire. In addition, Crockett (1965) postulates what may be called the "frequency of i n t e r a c t i o n " hypothesis, that cognitive complexity varies with the degree to which an in d i v i d u a l "interacts frequently and intimately" 48 with environmental objects i n a pa r t i c u l a r domain. Some indirect support for these notions has been rpovided by the present study. On a purely observational l e v e l , a difference was noted between the types of responses given to the verbal stimulus items by the children i n the no-television town and those i n the t e l e v i s i o n towns. For example, to the alternate uses item 'knife', children i n the town with-out t e l e v i s i o n tended to give a much wider range of alternates. In addition to the common category of response "to cut food", many of these children included responses such as: to cut tent pegs, to skin an animal, to cut rushes to use as torches, etc., while the children from the two t e l e v i s i o n towns tended to give mainly single category responses such as to cut butter, to cut bread, to cut tomatoes, etc. For the moment however, hypotheses concerning differences i n be-havioural repertoires between children i n the three towns remain purely conjectural and are only suggested as a possible focus of future investigations. In terms of the present data however, a category range analysis of the c r e a t i v i t y measures i s planned as a p a r t i a l empirical test of th i s notion. In a study employing the Wallach and Kogan (1965) c r e a t i v i t y items, Ward (1966) found that most of the responses given by a l l subjects i n his sample could be placed into one "most common" category for each item and that a l l other responses could also be placed i n one of a few categories, (e.g., for uses for a cup, s i x categories were s u f f i c i e n t — u s e s related to drinking; use as a con t a i n e r — other than for l i q u i d s ; use as a toy; use as a weapon; ..useifor .or i n decoration; and household uses). Thus a "category range" score could 49 be calculated for each c h i l d for each of the c r e a t i v i t y items. Such an analysis would also provide futher information concerning the v i s u a l c r e a t i v i t y r e s ults. The issue of whether c r e a t i v i t y i s best viewed as a variable which i s i t s e l f affected by t e l e v i s i o n viewing, or as a predisposition which controls t e l e v i s i o n behaviour deservesfurther discussion. While the present results provide support for the former interpretation, they obviously do not rule out the l a t t e r nor do they rule out the p o s s i b i l i t y of a complex interaction between the two variables. This same issue can also be raised concerning the relationship between t e l e v i s i o n viewing and i n t e l l i g e n c e . Fortunately, a follow-up of the present study i s planned for 1976 (at which time NoTel w i l l have had t e l e v i s i o n for two years), and thus an excellent opportunity exists to c l a r i f y these relationships. I t w i l l be possible at that time to compare the present scores obtained by the children i n NoTel on both measures of c r e a t i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e , with those obtained by these same children after they have been viewing t e l e v i s i o n for two years. The present study was conducted i n the hope of c l a r i f y i n g the re-lationship of t e l e v i s i o n exposure to cognitive development i n young children. The results suggest that t e l e v i s i o n exposure has d i f f e r e n t i a l effects on the two t r a i t s ' c r e a t i v i t y ' and 'intelligence'. In terms of i n t e l l i g e n c e , the findings of the present study support the hypotheses of a positive relationship between t e l e v i s i o n viewing and verbal i n t e l l i g e n c e (vocabulary) socres, and no relationship between televiewing 50 and performance (block design) scores. The relationship between t e l e -viewing and c r e a t i v i t y was complicated by the type of stimulus material employed. In the case of verbal stimulus materials, children growing up without t e l e v i s i o n obtained s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher mean c r e a t i v i t y scores than children growing up with t e l e v i s i o n . In the case of f i g u r a l stimulus materials, no clear relationship between t e l e v i s i o n exposure and c r e a t i v i t y emerged. 51 References Crockett, W. H. Cognitive complexity and impression formation. In B. A. Maher (Ed.), Progress i n experimental personality research. Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press, 1965 Cropley, A. J . , and Manslany, G. W. R e l i a b i l i t y and f a c t o r i a l v a l i d i t y of the Wallach-Kogan c r e a t i v i t y tests. B r i t i s h Journal of Psychology, 1969, 60, 395-398. Furu, T. Television and children's l i f e : a before-after study. Japan Broadcasting Corporation, 1962. Getzels, J. W. and Jackson, P. W. Cr e a t i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e . New York: Wiley, 1962. Ghiselin, B. (Ed.) The Creative Process. New York: Mentor, 1955. Guilford, J. P. The structure of i n t e l l e c t . Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1956, 53, 267-293. Guilford, J . P. and Christensen, P. R. A factor-analytic study of verbal fluency. Rep, psychol. lab., No. 17. Los Angeles: University of Southern C a l i f o r n i a , 1956. Guilford, J. P. Some new looks at the nature of creative processes. In N. Frederiksen and H. Gulliksen (Eds.), Contributions to mathematical psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1964. Pp. 161-176. Himmelweit, H. T., Oppenheim, A. N., and Vince, P. Television and the c h i l d . Published for the N u f f i e l d Foundation. New York, London, Ontario: Oxford University Press, 1958. Maccoby, E. E. Television: i t s impact on school children. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1951, 15, 421-444. 52 Maccoby, E. E. Effects of mass media. Review of Child Development  Research, 1. New York: Russell Sage, 1964. Maccoby, E. E. (Ed.), The Development of Sex Differences. Stanford University Press: Stanford, C a l i f o r n i a , 1966. Mednick, S. A. The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 1962, 69, 220-232. Pankove, E., and Kogan, N. Creative a b i l i t y and r i s k taking i n elementary-school children. Journal of Personality, 1968, _36, 420-439. Rugg, H. Imagination. New York: Harper, 1963. Schramm, W., Lyle, J . , and Parker, E. B. Television i n the l i v e s of  our children. Stanford, C a l i f o r n i a : Stanford University Press, 1961. Spearman, C. The a b i l i t i e s of man. New York: Macmillan, 1927. Thurstone, L. L. Primary mental a b i l i t i e s . Psychometric Monographs, No. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1938. Wade, S. E. Adolescents, c r e a t i v i t y and media. American Behavioural S c i e n t i s t , 1971, JL4, 341-351. Wallach, M. A., and Kogan, N. Modes of thinking i n young children: A study of the c r e a t i v i t y - i n t e l l i g e n c e d i s t i n c t i o n . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965. Wallach, M. A., and Wing, C. W. J r . The talented student: A v a l i d a t i o n of the c r e a t i v i t y - i n t e l l i g e n c e d i s t i n c t i o n . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969. Ward, W. C. Reflection-impusivity i n kindergarten children. Child Development, 1968, 39, 867-874. 53 Ward, W. C, Kogan, N., and Pankove. Incentive effects i n children's c r e a t i v i t y . Child Development, 1972, 43, 669-676. Williams, T. W. and Fleming, J. W. Methodological study of the re-lationship between associative fluency and i n t e l l i g e n c e . Developmental  Psychology, 1969, 1, 155-162. APPENDIX 54 Table 1 L i s t of Questions Concerning Television Viewing"*" 1. Have you ever had a t e l e v i s i o n at home? 2. Do you have a t e l e v i s i o n which i s working at home now? If yes: a) How long have you had your television? b) How many hours do you watch t e l e v i s i o n on school days? On weekends? If No: a) Do you ever watch t e l e v i s i o n at anyone else's house? I f so b) How often do you watch there? c) How many hours do you watch there on school days? On weekends?. d) For how long have you been going there to watch television? The nature of the questions and the exact order i n which they were asked was based upon the ind i v i d u a l child's responses. I t was not possible to follow an exact format as there was so much va r i a t i o n i n the t e l e v i s i o n viewing h i s t o r i e s of the children. Table 2 Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Total Fluency Score - Grade x Town x Sex - 2 x 3 x 2 Source SS Town 2433.33 Grade 6.18 Sex 832.31 Town x Grade 590.95 Town x Sex 445.74 Grade x Sex 1419.02 Town x Grade x Sex 682.93 Error 46653.26 df MS F 2 1216.66 3.86 1 6.18 0.02 1 832.31 2.64 2 295.47 0.94 2 222.87 0.71 1 1419.02 4.50 2 341.47 1.08 148 315.22 56 Table 3 Newman-Keuls Test of the Town Effect i n the Total Fluency Scores Source Town SS 2433.33 df 2 MS 1216.06 F 3.86 2 . < .02 Order Treatments i n Order of Positions 1 OneTel 38.00 MultiTel 38.33 3 NoTel 45.74 Truncated Range S x q .95 S x q .99 2 6.80 8.99 3 8.16 10.21 NoTel NoTel OneTel ... MultiTel OneTel 0.33 MultiTel 7.74 p < .07 7.42 p < .05 Table 4 Simple Main Effects Test of the Grade x Sex Interaction i n the Total Fluency Scores Mean Scores Grade 4 Grade 7 Males 35.48 (n=44) 43.05 (n=37) Females 46.29 (n=31) 40.75 (n=48) Source SS df MS F P_ Sex for Grade 4 2126 .39 1 2126.39 6.75 P < .05 Sex for Grade 7 116 .92 1 116.92 0.35 Grade for Males 4284 .95 1 4284.95 13.59 P < .01 Grade for Females 577 .28 1 577.28 1.83 Error 148 58 Table 5 '. Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Total Uniqueness Scores - Grade x Twon x Sex - 2 x 3 x 2 Source SS df MS F ; £ Town 139.94 2 69.97 1.60 Grade 231.41 1 231.41 5.28 < .03 Sex 17.55 1 17.55 0.40 Town x Grade 70.48 2 35.24 0.80 Town x Sex 67.92 2 33.96 0.78 Grade x Sex 182.22 1 182.22 4.16 < .05 Town x Grade x Sex 54.85 2 27.43 0.63 Error 6484.03 148 43.81 59 Table 6 Simple Main Effects Test of the Grade x Sex Interaction i n the Total Uniqueness Scores Mean Scores Males Females Grade 4 5.32 (n=44) 6.68 (n=31) Grade 7 9.95 (n=37) 6.90 (n=48) Source SS df MS F p Sex for Grade 4 36.60 1 33.60 0.77 Sex for Grade 7 194.41 1 194.41 4.44 p < .05 Grade for Males 430.49 1 430.49 9.83 p < .01 Grade for Females 0.90 1 0.90 0.02 Error 148 43.81 60 Table 7 Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Verbal Fluency Scores - Grade x Town x Sex - 2 x 3 x 2 Source SS df MS Town 2711.59 2 Grade 314.79 1 Sex 84.24 1 Town x Grade 67.04 2 Town x Sex 117.89 2 Grade x Sex 998.83 1 Town x Grade x Sex 160.13 2 Error 30389.85 148 1355.80 314.79 84.24 33.52 58.95 998.83 80.06 205.34 6.60 1.53 0.41 0.16 0.29 4.86 0.39 < .01 < .03 61 Table 8 Newman-Keuls Test of the Town Effect i n the Verbal Fluency Scores Source Town SS 2711.59 df 2 MS 1355.80 F 6.60 P_ < .01 Order 1 Treatments i n Order OneTel of Positions f 21.98 Truncated Range S x q .95 S x q .99 MultiTel 3 NoTel 23.41 30.97 2 3 5.49 6.59 7.26 8.24 One Tel MultiTel NoTel OneTel MultiTel 1.43 NoTel 8.98 p .01 7.56 p .01 62 Table 9 Simple Main Effects Analysis of the Grade x Sex Interaction i n the Verbal Fluency Scores Mean Scores Grade 4 Grade 7 Males 21.52 (n=44) 29.65 (n= =37) Females 27.42 (n=31) 25.29 (n= =48) Source SS df MS F P_ Sex for Grade 4 632.33 1 632.33 2.08 Sex for Grade 7 396.62 1 396.62 1.93 Grade for Males 1327.11 1 1327.11 6.46 P < Grade for Females 85.26 1 85.26 0.42 Error 148 205.33 63 Table 10 Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Verbal Uniqueness Scores - Grade x Town x Sex - 2 x 3 x 2 Source SS df MS Town 114.56 Grade 9.94 Sex .3.11 Town x Grade 22.50 Town x Sex 18.78 Grade x Sex 22.11 Town x Grade x Sex 30.98 Error 1711.89 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 148 57.28 9.94 3.11 11.25 9.39 22.11 15.49 11.57 4.95 0.86 0.27 0.97 0.81 1.91 1.34 < .01 64 Tab lie 11 Newman-Keuls Test of the Town Effect i n the Verbal Uniqueness Scores Source Town SS 114.56 df 2 MS 57.28 F 4.95 P_ < .01 Order Treatments i n Order of Positions 1 OneTel 2.18 MultiTel 2.20 3 NoTel 3.95 Truncated Range S x q .95 S x q .99 2 1.39 1.79 3 1.56 1.96 OneTel MultiTel NoTel OneTel MultiTel 0.02 NoTel 1.77 p < .05 1.75 p < .01 65 Table 12 Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Visual Fluency Scores -4 Grade x Town x Sex - 2 x 3 x 2 Source Town Grade Sex Town x Grade Town x Sex Grade x Sex Town x Grade x Sex Error SS df 428.92 2 369.13 1 4.53 1 436.83 2 275.29 2 164.53 1 159.57 2 11998.57 . 148 MS F £ 214.46 2.64 369.13 4.55 < .04 4.54 0.06 218.42 2.69 137.65 1.70 164.53 2.03 79.78 0.98 81.07 66 Table 13 . Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Visual Uniqueness Scores - Grade x Town x Sex - 2 x 3 x 2 Source SS df MS Town 46.71 Grade 122.50 Sex 2.13 Town x Grade 155.28 Town x Sex 33.03 Grade x Sex 63.16 Town x Grade x Sex 59.53 Error 3002.56 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 148 23.35 122.50 2.13 77.64 16.52 63.16 29.77 20.29 .1.15 6.04 0.10 3.83 0.81 3.11 1.47 < .02 < .03 67 Table 14 Simple Main Effects and Subsequent Newman-Keuls Analysis of the Town x Grade Interaction i n the Visual Uniqueness Scores Mean Scores Grade 4 Grade 7 NoTel 3.21 (n=29) 5.52 (n=29) OneTel 3.83 (n=23) 3.07 (n=30) MultiTel 3.09 (n=23) 6.77 (n=26) Source SS_ ' df . MS F Grade for NoTel 77.41 1 77.41 3.81 Grade for OneTel 7.51 1 7.51 0.37 Grade for MultiTel 165.47 1 165.47 8.15 Town for Grade 4 7.39 2 3.69 0.18 Town for Grade 7 201.16 2 100.58 4.96 p < .01 p < .05 Newman-Keuls Test of the Significant Effect of Town for Grade 7 Source Town for Grade 7. Order Treatments i n Order of Position T Truncated Range S x q .95 S x q .99 OneTel NoTel MultiTel SS 201.16 1 OneTel 3.17 OneTel df MS 2, 100.58 2 NoTel F 4.96 5.52 MultiTel 6.67 2 3 2.28 - . 2.74 3.02 3.43 NoTel 2.35 p< .05 p < .05 MultiTel 3.60 p< .01 1.25 68 Table 15 Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Vocabulary Scaled Scores - Grade x Town x Sex - 2 x 3 x 2 Source SS df MS Town 54.75 Grade 42.51 Sex 4.64 Town x Grade 6.51 Town x Sex 41.30 Grade x Sex 14.63 Town x Grade x Sex 1.08 Error 928.84 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 148 27.37 42.51 4.64 3.25 20.65 14.63 0.54 6.28 4.36 6.77 0.74 0.52 3.29 2.33 0.09 < .02 < .01 < .04 69 Table 16 Newman-Keuls Test of the Town Effect i n the Vocabulary Scores Source Town SS 54.75 df 2 MS 27.37 F 4.36 P_ < .02 Order Treatment i n Order of Positions 1 NoTel 9.93 2 OneTel 10.42 MultiTel 11.39 Truncated Range q x .95 q x .99 0.96 1.27 1.15 1.44 NoTel OneTel NoTel OneTel 0.48 MultiTel 1.46 p <.05 0.97 p <.05 MultiTel Table 17 Simple Main Effects and Subsequent Newman-Keuls Analysis of the Town x Sex Interaction i n the Vocabulary Scaled Score Mean Scores NoTel OneTel M u l t i T e l l Males 9. 52 (n=33) 11.07 (n= =27) 12. 14 (n=21) Females 10. 48 (n=25) 9.73 (n= =26) 10. 82 (n=28) Source SS df Ms F P_ Sex for NoTel 13.24 1 13.24 2.11 Sex for OneTel 23.90 1 23.90 3.81 Sex for MultiTel 20.95 1 20.95 3.34 Town for Males 93.77 2 46.89 7.47 P K Town for Females 16.60 2 8.30 1.32 Error 148 6.28 ,01 Newman-Keuls Test of the Significant Effect of Town for Males Source Town for Males SS 93.77 Order Treatments i n Order of Position Truncated Range S x q .95 S x q .99 df 2 1 NoTel 9.52 2 1.37 1.81 MS 46.89 F 7.47 2 OneTel 11.07 NoTel NoTel OneTel MultiTel OneTel 1.56 p< .05 p < .01 MultiTel 12.14 3 1.64 2.05 MultiTel 2.63 p< .01 1.07 Table 18 Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Block Design Scales Scores - Grade x Town x Sex - 2 x 3 x 2 Source SS Town 7.28 Grade 1.90 Sex 76.41 Town x Grade 35.77 Town x Sex 16.63 Grade x Sex . 5.36 Town x Grade x Sex 0.14 Error 1368.03 df MS F 2 3.64 0.39 1 1.90 0.21 1 76.41 8.27 2 17.88 1.93 2 8.31 0.90 1 5.36 0.58 2 0.07 0.01 148 9.24 72 Table 19 Source Table for the Analysis of Variance of the Total I.Q. Scales Scores - Grade x Town x Sex - 2 x 3 x 2 Source SS df MS Town 39.66 Grade 26.43 Sex 118.72 Town x Grade 41.28 Town x Sex 109.59 Grade x Sex 2.28 Town x Grade x Sex 2.00 Error 3178.91 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 148 19.83 26.43 118.72 20.64 54.80 2.28 1.00 21.48 0.92 1.23 5.52 0.96 2.55 0.11 0.05 < .02 73 Table 20 Intercorrelations Among the Cr e a t i v i t y Measures for McBride Grade Four (N=29) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .83 .63 .84 .48 .95 2. Uses Fluency .61 .81 .72 .83 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .66 .39 .82 4. Patterns-Fluency .43 .85 5. Total-Fluency .49 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade Four (N=29) 2 3 I.:. WISC - ..Vocabulary . 55 ,89 2. WISC - Block Design ,87 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Creativity and Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade Four (N= 29) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness . 18 .09 .16 2. Uses-Fluency . 20 .14 .20 3. Pattern-Uniqueness .11 .13 .13 4. Patterns-Fluency .21 .11 .18 5. Total-Fluency .26 .27 .30 6. Total-Uniqueness .17 .11 .16 For 27 df, r.'s of .367 and .470 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively 74 •Table 21 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for McBride Grade Seven (N=29) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .75 .55 .63 .36 .88 2. Uses-Fluency .58 .77 .39 .75 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .79 .38 .87 4. Pat terns-Fluency .40 .81 5. Total-Fluency .42 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade Seven (N=29) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .51 .83 2. WISC - Block Design .90 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade 7 (N=29) WISC Vocabulary WISC Block Design Total IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .27 -.03 .11 2. Uses-Fluency .04 .04 .05 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .33 .13 .25 4. Patterns-Fluency .09 -.02 .02 5. Total-Fluency .04 -.05 -.01 6. Total-Uniqueness .34 .05 .20 For 27 df, r.'s of .367 and .470 are si g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively 75 Table 22 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for Valemont Grade Four (N=24) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .81 .59 .40 .76 .87 2. Uses-Fluency .57 .39 .90 .76 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .63 .69 .90 4. Patterns-Fluency 67 .59 5. Total-Fluency .81 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures For Valemont Grade Four (N=24) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .34 .78 2. WISC - Block Design .85 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Valemont Grade Four (N=24) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness . 16 .18 .21 2. Uses Fluency .10 .24 .21 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .22 .10 .19 4. Patterns-Fluency .47 .44 .55 5. Total-Fluency . 19 .34 .33 6. Total-Uniqueness .22 .16 .23 For 24 df, r.'s of .388 and .496 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 le v e s l respectively. 76 Table 23 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for Valemont Grade Seven (N=29) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .74 .31 .35 .71 .78 2. Uses-Fluency .25 .30 .87 .61 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .69 .54 .73 4. Patterns Fluency .72 .73 5. Total-Fluency .81 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for Valemont Grade 7 (N=29) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .32 .71 2. WISC - Block Design .89 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Valemont.Grade Seven (N=29) WISC Vocabulary WISC Block Design Total IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .30 .15 .25 2. Uses-Fluency .35 .12 .26 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .32 .20 .30 4. Pat t ems-Fluency .41 .36 .46 5. Total-Fluency .46 .28 .42 6. Total-Uniqueness .42 .33 .44 For 27 df, r.'s of .367 and .470 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 77 Table 24 s Intercorrelations Among the Cr e a t i v i t y Measures for Salmo Grade 4 (N=23) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .73 .54 .41 .59 .90 2. Uses Fluency .63 .71 .89 .78 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .83 .80 .85 4. Patterns-Fluency .94 .68 5. Total Fluency .78 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade Four (N=23) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .28 .69 2. WISC - Block Design .88 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade Four (N=23) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .33 .32 .40 2. Uses-Fluency .20 .37 .37 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .35 .13 .27 4. Patterns-Fluency .25 .18 .26 5. Total-Fluency .25 .32 .36 6. Total-Uniqueness .39 .27 .39 For 21 df, R.'s of .413 and .526 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 78 Table 25 Intercorrelations Among the Cr e a t i v i t y Measures for Salmo Grade Seven (N=26) 2 3 4 5 6 ...Uses^Uniqueness .65 .39 • 31 -.10 .59 2. Uses-Fluency .71 .70 -.14 .78 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .93 -.39 .97 4. Patterns-Fluency -.16 .89 5. Total-Fluency :37 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade Seven (N=26) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .31 .81 2. WISC - Block Design .80 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade Seven (N=26) WISC Vocabulary WISC Block Design Total IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .03 -.09 -.03 2. Uses-Fluency .20 .14 .21 3. Patterns-Uniqueness -.06 .03 -.01 4. Patterns-Fluency .04 .01 .03 5. Total-Fluency .16 .13 .17 6. Total-Uniqueness -.04 .01 -.02 For 24 df, R.'s of .388 and .496 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 79 Table 26 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for McBride Grade 4 Females (N=10) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .70 .66 .86 .77 .97 2. Uses Fluency .59 .73 .99 .72 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .53 .61 .80 4. Patterns-Fluency .82 .83 5. Total-Fluency .78 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade 4 Females (N=10) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .80 .95 2. WISC - Block Design .94 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures..for.McBride Grade 4 Females (N=10) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .15 .49 .34 2. Uses-Fluency -.05 .49 .22 3. Patterns-Uniqueness -.21 .10 -.06 4. Patterns-Fluency .15 .54 .36 5. Total-Fluency -.01 .51 .25 6. Total-Uniqueness .06 .41 .25 For 8 df, r.'s of .632 and .765 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 80 Table 27 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for McBride Grade 4 Males (N=19) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .92 .65 .87 .16 .94 2. Uses-Fluency .68 .88 .43 .90 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .70 .34 .86 4. Patterns-Fluency .22 .88 5. Total-Fluency .24 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade 4 Males (N= =19) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .55 .89 2. WISC - Block Design .87 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade 4 Males (N=19) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .13 -.07 .03 2. Uses-Fluency .25 .02 .16 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .20 .14 .20 4. Patterns-Fluency .17 .01 .11 5. Total-Fluency .31 .28 .34 6. Total-Uniqueness .17 .01 .10 For 19 df, r.'s of .433 and .549 are si g n i f i c a n t at .05 and .01 levels respectively. 81 Table 28 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for McBride Grade 7 Females (N=15) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .78 .79 .78 .23 .91 2. Uses-Fluency .66 .86 .42 .74 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .86 .39 .97 4. Patterns-Fluency .43 .87 5. Total-Fluency .35 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade 7 Females (N=15) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .55 .85 2. WISC - Block Design .90 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade 7 Females (N=15) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .29 .30 .34 2. Uses-Fluency .01 .13 .08 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .18 .16 .19 4. Patterns-Fluency .09 .15 .14 5. Total-Fluency .05 .26 .19 6. Total-Uniqueness .24 .22 .26 For 15 df, r.'s of .482 and .606 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 82 Table 29 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for McBride Grade 7 Males (N=14) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .78 .51 .73 .44 .93 2. Uses-Fluency .56 .82 .37 .79 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .63 .40 .78 4. Patterns-Fluency .41 .79 5. Total-Fluency .48 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade 7 Males (N=14) ;. ::• ,> 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .48 .81 2. WISC - Block Design .90 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for McBride Grade 7 Males (N=14) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .28 -.20 .00 2. Uses-Fluency .10 -.02 .03 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .57 .11 .36 4. Patterns-Fluency .04 -.25 -.14 5. Total-Fluency .03 -.30 -.18 6. Total-Uniqueness .44 -.09 .15 For 14 df, r.'s of .497 and .623 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 83 Table 30 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for Valemont Grade 4 Females (N=8) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .90 .60 .53 .96 .88 2. Uses-Fluency .54 .21 .93 .79 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .68 .71 .90 4. Patterns-Fluency .53 .68 5. Total-Fluency .93 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for Valemont Grade 4 Females (N=8) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .34 .74 2. WISC - Block Design .88 3. Total I.Q. Intercorrelations Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Valemont Grade 4 Females .(N=8) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness -.24 .70 .38 2. Uses-Fluency -.39 .45 .12 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .00 .74 .52 4. Patterns-Fluency .21 .83 .70 5. Total-Fluency -.26 .68 .35 6. Total-Uniqueness -.13 .81 .50 For 8 df, r.'s of .632 and .765 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the levels respectively. .05 and .01 84 Table 31 Intercorrelations Among the Cr e a t i v i t y Measures for Valemont Grade 4 Males (N=16) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .77 .60 .25 .55 .88 2. Uses-Fluency .56 .66 .81 .74 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .49 .57 .90 4. Patterns-Fluency .83 .42 5. Total-Fluency , .63 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for Valemont Grade 4 Males (N=16) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .38 .82 2. WISC - Block Design .83 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Valemont Grade 4 Males WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .44 -.22 .12 2. Uses-Fleuncy .80 .24 .62 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .41 -.30 .06 4. Patterns-Fluency .70 .34 .62 5. Total-Fluency .70 .30 .60 6. Tot al-Uniquene s s .49 -.29 .11 For 16 df, r.'s of .468 and .590 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. Table 32 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for Valemont Grade 7 Females (N=17) 85 1. Uses-Uniqueness 2. Uses-Fluency 3. Patterns-Uniqueness 4. Patterns-Fluency 5. Total-Fluency 6. Total-Uniqueness 2 .70 3 4 5 6 .24 .23 .55 .67 .46 .64 .94 .68 .60 .57 .87 .85 .58 .70 Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for Valemont Grade 7 Females (N=17) 1. WISC - Vocabulary 2. WISC - Block Design 3. Total IQ 2 .13 3 .57 .88 Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Valemont Grade 7 Females (N=17) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness -.07 .11 .05 2. Uses-Fluency .15 .22 .25 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .13 .14 .18 4. Patterns-Fluency .26 .09 .20 5. Total Fluency .21 .20 .26 6. Total-Uniqueness .04 .15 .14 For 17 df, r.'s of .456 and .575 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 86 Table 33 Intercorrelations Among the Cr e a t i v i t y Measures for Valemont Grade 7 Males (N=12) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .77 .25 .36 .80 .75 2. Uses-Fluency .05 .08 .81 .53 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .74 .46 .66 4. Patterns-Fluency .64 .83 5. Total-Fluency .89 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the..Intelligence Measures for Valemont Grade 7 Males (N=12) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .39 .74 2. WISC - Block Design .90 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Cr e a t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for VAlemont Grade 7 Males (N= 12) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .26 .05 .15 2. Uses-Fluency .30 -.04 .14 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .35 .18 .29 4. Patterns-Fluency .47 .53 .60 5. Total-Fluency .56 .27 .45 6. Total-Uniqueness .42 .35 .45 For 12 df, r.'s of .532 and .661 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 87 Table 34 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for Salmo Grade 4 Females (N=13) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .49 .39 .08 .31 .82 2. Uses-Fluency .42 .65 .90 .55 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .75 .65 .84 4. Patterns-Fluency .91 .51 5. Total-Fluency .58 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade 4 Females (N=13) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .43 .78 2. WISc - Block Design .90 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade 4 Females (N=13) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .06 .11 .11 2. Uses-Fluency .03 .48 .34 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .31 .27 .34 4. Patterns-Fluency .17 .39 .36 5. Total Fluency .11 .48 .38 6. Total-Uniqueness .23 .23 .27 For 13 df, r.'s of .514 and .641 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 88 Table 35 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for Salmo Grade 4 Males (N=10) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .92 .75 .60 .76 .95 2. Uses-Fluency .80 .75 .89 .93 3. Patterns-Uniquenss .92 .95 .91 4. Patterns-Fluency .95 .78 5. Total-Fluency .89 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade 4 Males (N=10) 2 3 IV. WISCVocabulary -.03 .54 2. WISC - Block Design .82 3. Total IQ i Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade 4 Males (N=10) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .52 .43 .66 2. Uses-Fluency .42 .40 .58 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .53 .19 .47 4. Patterns-Fluency .36 .06 .25 5. Total-Fluency .41 .26 .46 6. Total-Uniqueness .56 .36 .62 For 10 df, r.'s of .576 and .708 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 89 Table 36 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for Salmo Grade 7 Females (N=15) 2 3 4 5 6 1. Uses-Uniqueness .86 .91 .75 -.23 .96 2. Uses-Fluency .90 .87 .01 .90 3. Patterns-Uniqueness .75 -.28 .98 4. Patterns-Fluency .37 .77 5. Total-Fluency -.26 6. Total-Uniqueness Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade 7 Females (N=15) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .09 .73 2. WISC - Block Design .73 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade 7 Females (N=15) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design IQ 1. Uses-Uniqueness .01 -.28 -.18 2. Uses-Fluency -.00 .04 .02 3. Patterns-Uniqueness -.09 -.08 -.12 4. Patterns-Fluency .18 -.13 .03 5. Total-Fluency .34 .08 .28 6. Total-Uniqueness -.05 -.15 -.14 For 15 df, r.'s of .482 and .606 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 90 Table 37 Intercorrelations Among the Crea t i v i t y Measures for Salmo Grade 7 Males (N=ll) 2 1. Uses-Uniqueness -.02 2. Uses-Fleuncy 3. Patterns Uniqueness 4. Patterns-Fluency 5. Total-Fluency 6. Total-Uniqueness 3 . 4 5 6 -.01 -.05 .30 .09 .69 .70 -.39 .69 .98 -.52 .99 -.52 .97 -.48 Intercorrelations Among the Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade 7 Males (N=ll) 2 3 1. WISC - Vocabulary .34 .82 2. WISC - Block Design .81 3. Total IQ Intercorrelations Between the Crea t i v i t y and Intelligence Measures for Salmo Grade 7 Males (N=ll) WISC WISC Total Vocabulary Block Design I ( * 1. Uses-Uniqueness .12 .34 .28 2. Uses-Fluency .40 .21 .37 3. Patterns-Uniqueness -.18 -.02 -.13 4. Patterns-Fluency -.15 -.04 -.12 5. Total-Fluency .02 .22 .14 6. Total-Uniqueness -.17 .01 -.10 For 11 df, r.'s of .553 and .684 are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 and .01 levels respectively. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

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"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093452/manifest

Comment

Related Items