Self-reported Creativity, Creativity, and Intelligence

 

Micha Park,               Jungmo Lee, .Doug. W. Hahn

Center for Cognitive Science,   Department of Psychology

Yonsei University,         SungKyunKwan University

 

Introduction. Is creativity related to other constructs such as intelligence or school achievement? The relationship between intelligence and creativity has been shown to range from nothing to a substantial correlation (Wallach & Kogan, 1965; Sternberg, 1985b). The magnitude of the relationship still remains controversial (for a review, Sternberg & O¡¯hara, 1999). Although the remarkable progress has been made in understanding creativity and intelligence, the varied definitions of the constructs kept the contribution of each research limited. Thus we first consider the tasks used in our study. Creativity measures used most commonly in the literature require divergent thinking whereas intelligence or school achievement tests are most focused on convergent thinking. A word association task asks subjects to write the associated words with the given word. This task requires divergent thinking. Similarly, other creativity measures such as the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking(TTCT) or a word association task would not relate to either intelligence or school achievement.

What could we expect when we simply ask people to rate their own creativity? Would those who think of themselves as more creative show higher performance on the standardized creativity measures? The correlation between self-rated and standardized measures might help further understand creativity. This study explored the relationship among self-rated creativity, objective creativity measures, intelligence, and school achievement.    

Method. Two hundred undergraduate students took a subtest of the TTCT and the Cattell¡¯s culture-free intelligence test. They also rated their own creativity on a scale and responded on a word association task. Grades from a course based on exams and reports were used as data for school achievement. The TTCT was scored according to the streamlined scoring guide. The TTCT produced scores for fluency, originality, elaboration, and creative strength. We added score for originality (called K-originality) based on responses of Korean students.

Presented at 2002 APA Annual Convention, Aug. 22-25, Chicago, USA.

Address correspondence to: Micha Park, Center for Cognitive Science, Yonsei University, Seodaemoon-Gu Shinchon-Dong, Seoul, KOREA. E-mail: micha@psylab.yonsei.ac.kr

Results. None of the TTCT scores was related either to fluid intelligence or to school achievement (see Table 1 and Table2). The self-rated creativity was significantly correlated with the TTCT scores(originality, K-originality, elaboration, and creative strength) except fluency. It also showed a significant correlation with the number of word association but not with either fluid intelligence or academic achievement. We compared the high self-rated creativity group with the low self-rated group. The high creativity group produced more numbers of word association and higher scores in originality, K-originality, elaboration and creative strength than the low creativity group (t(79)=3.30, 4.94, 2.56, 3.32 respectively, all p<.05; See Table 3 for means and standard deviations). However, the two groups showed only a marginal difference in fluency (t(79)=1.76, p=.08). They did not differ either in intelligence (t(78)=1.62, ns) or in school achievement(t(79)=.07, ns).

Conclusions. The findings support the claim that creativity (regardless of self-rated or measured by a standardized test) is not related to either intelligence or school achievement. This study also shows that each individual can evaluate one¡¯s creativity with certain accuracy. We speculate that creativity is an aspect of each individual which reveals itself in certain aspects of the person¡¯s behaviors/thoughts. What¡¯s interesting, intelligence shares the same characteristic. We suggest that creativity and intelligence are different aspects or dimensions of our behavior with little overlap.

 

References.

Sternberg, R. J. (1985b). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), 607-627.

Sternberg, R. J., & O¡¯Hara, L. J. (1998). Creativity and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg(Ed.), Handbook of Creativity(pp.251-272). Cambridge University Press.

Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children: A study of the creativity-intelligence distinction. New York: Holt, Reinhart, & Winston.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Brain Korea 21 project in 2002.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1. Means and standard             Table 3. Performance on the measures of

Deviations of the measures                the high vs. low self-rated creativity group

 

Low group

High group

Fluency

15.08(4.24)

16.94(5.17)

Originality

11.41(3.32)

14.09(3.93)**

K-originality

 5.31(3.12)

 8.88(3.28)**

Elaboration

1.27(.50)

1.59(.67)*

Strength

  .76(1.56)

 2.19(2.32)**

Intelligence

127.94(10.99)

132.16(12.43)

School ach.

79.68(6.49)

79.78(8.29)

Word ass.

 6.00(2.41)

 7.82(4.54)*

 

    

Mean

SD

Self-rated.

4.30

1.23

Fluency

15.51

4.94

Originality

12.31

4.17

K-originality

6.96

3.88

Elaboration

1.32

4.56

Strength

1.34

1.86

Intelligence

129.62

11.40

School ach.

78.85

6.53

Word ass.

6.64

3.34

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N=49           N=32
N=198,                                      * P<.05,  ** p<.01 (t-test)

Colored area: TTCT scores                   School ach.=School achievement

Self-rated.=self-rated creativity              Word ass.=Word association

School ach.=School achievement

Word ass.=Word association

 

Table 2. Correlations among the measures

 

 

Creativity

(self-rated)

Flu

Ori

K-o

Ela

Str

Int

Sch

Fluency (Flu)

.08

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Originality (Ori)

 .18*

.87**

 

 

 

 

 

 

K-originality (K-o)

  .27**

.56**

.78**

 

 

 

 

 

Elaboration (Ela)

 .18*

.08

.07

.27**

 

 

 

 

Strength (Str)

  .24**

.02

.21**

.48**

.55**

 

 

 

Intelligence (Int)

.12

.07

.11

.07

.10

.12

 

 

School ach. (Sch)

-.01

.12

.12

.10

.13

.09

.06

 

Word asso. (Wor)

 .19*

.07

.14

.24**

.33**

.32**

.16*

.08

School ach.= School achievement, Word asso.=Word association

* p<.05, **p<.01

 


110th Annual Convention of American Psychological Association

August 22-25, 2002, McCormick Place, Chicago, Ill, U. S. A.

(Saturday, August 24, 2002, 1PM; Poster Session: Motivation, Cognition, and Learning in Educational Contexts; Psoter Presentation D-11)