Repp raises several issues that call into question the validity of my analysis Most important, he questions my interpretation of Kraepelin's and Jamison's view of mania and creativity I discuss this issue first because, if Repp is correct, there is no purpose in going further Repp also questions the validity of the measure I used to test the notion that mania increased the quality of Schumann's output I will also respond to this criticism
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndreasenN.C. (1987). Creativity and mental illness. Prevalence rates in writers and their first-degree relatives. American Journal of Psychiatry, 144, 1288–1292.
2.
EysenckH.J. (1994). The measurement of creativity. InBodenM. A., (Ed). Dimensions of creativity (pp199–242) Cambridge, MAMIT Press.
3.
HayesJ.R (1981). The complete problem solverPhiladelphiaFranklin Institute Press.
4.
HoldenC. (1987, April). Creativity and the troubled mindPsychology Today, 21, 9–10.
5.
JamisonK.R. (1993). Touched with fire Manic-depressive illness and the artistic temperament. New York, Free Press.
6.
KraepelinE. (1921). Manic-depressive insanity and paranoia (BarclayR. M.RobinsonG. M., Ed). LondonChurchill Livingstone.
7.
RichardsR.KinneyD.K. (1990). Mood swings and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 3, 202–217.
