Abstract
In dieser Arbeit wird die Entwicklung und empirische Überprüfung eines Kreativitätstrainings für Volksschulkinder (Ideefix) vorgestellt, das ausgehend von kreativitätsfördernden Prinzipien aus der Literatur (z. B. kognitive Stimulation, positiver Affekt) in spielerischer Form unterschiedliche Facetten der kreativen Denkleistung (verbal, figural-zeichnerisch, handlungsbezogen) stimulieren soll. Die Stichprobe setzte sich aus 146 SchülerInnen der vierten Schulstufe zusammen. Die Kinder wurden zu drei Messzeitpunkten mit verbalen und figural-zeichnerischen Kreativitätstestaufgaben sowie mit dem Test zum schöpferischen Denken getestet. Die Trainingsgruppe (n = 74) erhielt das Training zwischen dem ersten und dem zweiten Messzeitpunkt, während die Wartekontrollgruppe (n = 72) das Training zwischen dem zweiten und dem dritten Messzeitpunkt absolvierte. Das Training wurde an drei aufeinanderfolgenden Tagen (eine Schulstunde pro Tag) durchgeführt. Die Ergebnisse dieser Studie zeigen, dass das Training Ideefix eine signifikante Steigerung unterschiedlicher Facetten psychometrisch erfasster Kreativität bewirken konnte.
Background: It is commonly believed that the ability to think creatively is advantageous in a variety of areas of our everyday life and many people may thus agree with Simonton (2000) that creativity is “… a good attribute for people to possess …” (p. 151). As a matter of fact, creativity is becoming increasingly attractive across a broad variety of different scientific disciplines, amongst others in psychology, cognitive sciences, pedagogy or in the educational domain. Relevant research in this nascent field has not only uncovered some key characteristics underlying creativity, but has also shown that some facets of creativity can be improved effectively. In this context, studies were able to demonstrate beneficial effects on creativity via positive emotionality or positive affective states (Ashby et al., 1999; Baas et al., 2008). Also, cognitive-oriented approaches which intend to improve creativity-related skills by providing specific problem solving strategies or activating existing knowledge have proven to be particularly effective in this context (e. g., Crutchfield, 1970; Fink et al., 2012; Scott et al., 2004). Despite of the fact that there are some basic principles or mechanisms that could unfold positive effects on creativity, the availability of comprehensive, empirically validated training interventions for the enhancement of different creativity-related skills appears to be scarce.
Aims: In this study we present the development and empirical investigation of a creativity training (hereinafter referred to as Ideefix), which was designed to improve several facets of psychometrically determined creativity in elementary school children. The construction of the training was based on principles that have been observed as being associated with beneficial effects on creativity in the relevant literature (e. g., cognitive stimulation, positive affect, intrinsic motivation, etc.). Ideefix consisted of three-day training sessions (one hour or school lesson per day). In each session, children worked on different exercises or games which draw on different creativity-related task demands such as verbal creativity (e. g., exercises based on the classic Alternative Uses task), figural creativity (e. g., completing abstract figures in an original way), and activity-related creativity (e. g., moving creatively from one place to another). The employed training exercises (for an overview see Tab. 1) were adapted from tasks typically used in psychometric tests of creativity. The training was conducted by two experienced trainers who took great care to establish a playful, non-anxious, criticism-free atmosphere, in which the children could work on the given exercises in an intrinsically motivating, adventurous and playful way.
Methods: The sample included 146 fourth grade children in the age range between nine and 11 years who were tested at three different time points with several well-established German-speaking psychometric creativity tests (including measures of verbal and figural creativity). The inter-test interval was approximately one week. The training group (TG, n = 74) received the training between the first and the second test session, while the waiting control group (WG, n = 72) was trained between the second and the third test session. In using this design (3 test sessions × 2 experimental groups), we expected the children of the TG to show increases in creativity from the first to the second test session, while the WG should show no changes in the psychometric creativity measures during this time. The children of the WG were expected to exhibit improvements in creativity from the second to the first test session, i. e. after they completed the Ideefix training. The data of the third test session of the TG also allowed to examine whether any training effects remain stable over time.
Results: Psychometric creativity data of the children were analyzed by means of multi- and univariate two-way analyses of variance with the test session (3) as repeated measurements factor and the experimental group (TG, WG) as grouping factor. Analyses revealed significant training effects of Ideefix (i. e., significant interactions between experimental group and test session) on both verbal and figural facets of psychometrically determined creativity. This was reflected in the finding that the children of the TG (and not those of the WG) showed significant increases in verbal and figural creativity measures from the first to the second test session. As expected, the WG showed significant improvements in creativity from the second to the third test session, i. e. after they were trained with Ideefix. The psychometric data of the TG at the third test session were quite similar to those observed at the second test session, indicating that the training effects display some stability over time.
Discussion: The findings of this study revealed that the Ideefix training, which was conducted over a comparatively short time period of three days (one training session per day), was associated with significant training effects on different facets of psychometrically determined creativity in elementary school children. Principles such as positive affect or cognitive stimulation, the basic ingredients of Ideefix, could be considered as being among the promising candidates in improving creativity-related skills, as has likewise been shown in relevant research in this field (see e. g., Ashby et al., 1999; Baas et al., 2008; Scott et al., 2004). In addition, principles such as intrinsic motivation (Collins & Amabile, 1999) and the interactive, playful training environment (Winnicott, 1973), which were implemented in Ideefix, appear to have a crucial impact on creativity. A limitation of this study is that we assessed training effects of Ideefix only on psychometric creativity measures; in future studies it would be very interesting to investigate potential transfer effects of the training, e. g. the assessment of potential effects of Ideefix on school performance in different disciplines taught.
To conclude, this study entails some important practical implications, particularly for the pedagogical or educational domain. We are all – practitioner and scientists – challenged to attend to the question in which way the cognitive capacities of an individual can be realized to the best possible extent. Many factors that could have a positive impact on creativity in the educational setting have been proposed (Crutchfield, 1973; Hallmann, 1970; Tiggelers, 2007; Urban, 2004), and we hope that in future more and more attention is paid to the manifold means of how creativity can be enhanced effectively. With Ideefix a empirically validated training program is available that could easily be implemented in everyday school life.
Literatur
(1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity: A Componential Conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357 – 376.
(1999). A neuropsychological theory of positive affect and its influence on cognition. Psychological Review, 106, 529 – 550.
(2008). A Meta-Analysis of 25 years Mood-Creativity Research: Hedonic Tone, Activation or Regulatory Focus? Psychological Bulletin, 134, 779 – 806.
(1999). Motivation and Creativity. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 297 – 312). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(1970). Individueller Unterricht in kreativem Denken. In G. Mühle (Hrg.), Kreativität und Schule (S. 116 – 128). München: R. Piper & Co.
(1973). Schädliche Auswirkungen von Konformitätsdruck auf kreatives Denken. In G. Ulmann (Hrsg.), Kreativitätsforschung (S. 155 – 163). Köln: Kiepenheuer & Witsch.
(1982). Fremdwörterbuch. Der Duden in 10 Bänden; Bd. 5. Mannheim, Wien, Zürich: Bibliographisches Institut. 4., überarbeitete Auflage.
et al. (2012). Stimulating creativity via the exposure to other people's ideas. Human Brain Mapping, 33, 2603 – 2610.
(2006). Intervention in creativity with children aged 10 and 11 years: impact of a play program on verbal and graphic-figural creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 329 – 345.
(2004). Permission to seek freely? The effect of happy and sad moods on generating old and new ideas. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 215 – 229.
(1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444 – 454.
(1962). Factors that aid and hinder creativity. Teachers College Record, 63, 380 – 392.
(1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
(1970). Techniken des kreativen Lehrens. In G. Mühle (Hrsg.), Kreativität und Schule (S. 175 – 180). München: R. Piper & Co.
(1996). Kreativitätstest für Vorschul- und Schulkinder (KVS-P). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
(1969). Psychologie der Kreativität. München: Ernst Reinhardt Verlag.
(1957). Applied imagination (1st ed.). New York: Scribner's.
(2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: a quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 361 – 388.
(2009). A snapshot of creativity: Evaluating a quick and simple method for assessing divergent thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4 (2), 79 – 85.
(2000). Creativity: cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55, 151 – 158.
(1999). The Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity (S. 3 – 15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston: Pearson Education.
(2007). Kreativität und Schule. In F.-M. Konrad & M. Sailer (Hrsg.), Homo educabilis: Studien zur Allgemeinen Pädagogik, pädagogischen Anthropologie und Bildungsforschung (S. 65 – 78). Münster: Waxmann.
(2004). Kreativität. Herausforderung für Schule, Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft. Münster: Lit.
(2010). Test zum Schöpferischen Denken – Zeichnerisch (2. Aufl.). Frankfurt/M.: Pearson.
(2011) Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Kreativitätsdiagnostik. [Electronic version] Karg-Hefte, Beiträge zur Begabtenförderung und Begabtenforschung, 2, 18 – 27.
(1973). Vom Spiel zur Kreativität. Stuttgart: Klett Cotta.
