Effects of Cognitive Style And Context on Creativity.
Abstract
The study examined the effects of cognitive style and context on students’ creativity using one hundred and twelve (112) participants drawn from Capital City Secondary School Awka, Nigeria.
Participant’s responses from the Group Embedded Figure Test (GEFT) and Divergent Thinking Task (DTT) used in measuring cognitive style and creativity respectively were subjected to 2-way- ANOVA statistical test.
The results of the analysis shows that a significant main effect was observed for cognitive style, F (1, 108) = 8.07, p < .05 with the field-independent (M = 13.63, SD = 3.50) performing better on creativity task than the field-dependent (M = 11.75, SD = 3.69), which confirmed hypothesis I.
Also, a significant main effect was observed for context, F (1,108) = 6.88, p < .05 with the same environmental context (M = 13.55, SD = 3.32) performing better on creativity task than the different environmental context (M = 11.82, SD = 3.89), which also confirmed hypothesis II.
The implications of the findings have shown that field-independent and field-dependent students perform differently to the same and different environmental context on creativity tasks. And, suggestions were made for further study.
Table Of Contents
Title Page i
Approval Page ii
Dedication iii
Acknowledgment iv
Table of Content vi
List of Tables viii
List of Appendices ix
Abstract x
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction 1
Statement of Problem 16
Purpose of Study 17
Operational Definitions of Terms 18
CHAPTER TWO
Literature Review 19
Theoretical Background 19
Empirical Review 27
Summary of Literature Review 44
Hypotheses 45
CHAPTER THREE
Method 46
Participants 46
Materials 46
Procedure 49
Design/ Statistics 52
CHAPTER FOUR
Results 53
Summary of the Findings 55
CHAPTER FIVE
Discussion 56
Implication of Study 59
Limitations of Study 60
Suggestions for Further Research 60
Summary and Conclusion 61
REFERENCES 62
APPENDICES 81
Introduction
Background Of Study
There has always been a great interest in how the great creative minds manage to invent something completely new.
Before now, scientific researchers have worked with the questions, how it is possible to walk down a road no man has walked before, or to put ideas into a new perspective?
Unfortunately, these creative minds are mostly not able to explain how they came up with the unexpected, or from what source they got their inspiration, so creativity is still surrounded by a mystical atmosphere (Weisberg, 1993).
Creativity is one of the most complicated concepts in psychology. There is no universal agreement on what creativity actually is (Wallace, 1986).
Definitions of creativity differ, but they have in common their emphasis on people’s ability to produce products that are not only high in quality but also novel (Sternberg, 2001).
Thus, the concept of creativity is defined differently but nevertheless many authors agree that creativity involves characteristics connected with the ability to find or do something new.
The realization of the creative ability depends, not only on knowledge and skills, but also on the use of quick and different kinds of information found in tasks requiring this ability.
Creativity is that characteristic of human behavior that seems the most mysterious, and yet most critical to human advancement.
References
Allen, T. J. (1973). Communication networks in R & D laboratories. R&D Management 1:14-21.
Allen, T. J. (1977). Managing the Flow of Technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Alvermann, D. E., & Boothby, P. R. (1986). Children’s transfer of graphic organizer instruction. Reading Psychology, 7(2), 87-100.
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity. New York, Springer-Verlag
Amabile, T. M. (1994). The “Atmosphere of pure work”: Creativity in research and development. In: W.R. Shadish and S. Fuller (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Science. New York, Guilford Press.
Amabile, T. M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review Sept- Oct: 77-87.