Divergent thinking is not a general trait: A multidomain training experiment

Twenty-one second-grade subjects received divergent-thinking training and 20 matched subjects received training in solving mathematical word problems. All subjects were then given five tasks: telling stories, writing stories, writing poems, writing mathematical word problems, and making collages. Experts evaluated the creativity of each product. The divergent-thinking groups scored significantly higher than controls on the story-telling, story-writing, and poetry-writing tasks. The lack of correlations among scores on the five tasks, however, suggests that several task-specific factors, rather than one general factor, led to observed group differences. This is consistent with previous research using subjects untrained in divergent thinking in showing that divergent thinking is not a general trait. An important and controversial issue in creativity research and theory is whether creativity is (a) a general capacity that influences an individual's performance across many domains, or (b) a widely diverse collection of skills and knowledge, each contributing to creative performance in only a single domain (Bamberger, 1990). The former assumption—that general creativityrelevant traits, skills, attitudes, or habits of thought exist—has guided much research and theory in creativity (e.g., Amabile, 1983; Darley, Glucksberg, & Kinchla, 1986; Kogan, 1983; Perkins, 1981; Tardif & Sternberg, 1988; Torrance & Presbury, 1984). This monolithic view has recently been challenged, however, by a number of writers (Gardner, 1988; Gruber & Davis, 1988; Runco, 1987; Tardif & Sternberg, 1988; Winner, 1982). Among creativity theorists who argue for domain specificity, there is a tendency to focus on creativity of the highest order (e.g., Gruber & Davis, 1988). In contrast, those who view creativity as a more general trait tend to see creativity as a continuum, with genius at one end and everyday problem solving at the other (e.g., Amabile, 1983; Richards, 1990; Richards & Kinney, 1990). Because genius is hard to find, researchers in this camp typically run studies that compare what might be termed the "garden variety" creative performances of ordinary This material is based on work supported under a National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship. A version of this article was presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association in Washington, DC, in August of 1992. It was the winner of the 1992 Daniel E. Berlyne Award which was sponsored by Division 10 of the APA. Correspondence and requests for reprints should be sent to John Baer, 12 N. Clinton Ave., Wenonah, NJ 08090. Creativity Research Journal 35 D ow nl oa de d by [ . J oh n B ae r] a t 1 2: 25 0 3 Ju ly 2 01 4