The degree to which creativity is domain-specific or domain-general remains hotly contested, but there is at least one area of agreement: people have different creativity profiles. In this study, we asked 241 students to give self-ratings of their creativity in different domains. These ratings were then studied for inter-correlations. We also examined how such self-assessments in diverse domains relate to other measures of cognitive ability and to creativity as measured with a personality scale. In general, if students viewed themselves as generally creative, they also viewed themselves as creative in different areas. The only area that was not correlated with general creativity ratings was mathematics.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmabileT. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997–1013.
2.
AmabileT. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity.Boulder, CO: Westview.
3.
AndersonJ. R.RederL. M., & SimonH. A. (1996). Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher, 25, 5–11.
4.
BaerJ. (1991). Generality of creativity across performance domains. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 23–39.
5.
BaerJ. (1993). Divergent thinking and creativity: A task-specific approach.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6.
BaerJ. (1994a). Divergent thinking is not a general trait: A multi-domain training experiment. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 35–46.
BaerJ. (1994c). Why you still shouldn't trust creativity tests. Educational Leadership, 52, 72.
9.
BaerJ. (1996). The effects of task-specific divergent-thinking training. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30, 183–187.
10.
BaerJ. (1998). The case for domain specificity in creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 173–177.
11.
BarronF., & HarringtonD. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 439–476.
12.
ContiR.CoonH., & AmabileT. M. (1996). Evidence to support the componential model of creativity: Secondary analyses of three studies. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 385–389.
13.
CrammondB. (1994). We can trust creativity tests. Educational Leadership, 52, 70–71.
14.
GardnerH. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences.New York: Basic Books.
15.
GoldbergL. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In MervieldeI.DearyI.de FruytF., & OstendorfF. (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7; pp. 7–28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
16.
GuilfordJ. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267–293.
17.
GuilfordJ. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence.New York: McGraw-Hill.
18.
HocevarD. (1976). Dimensionality of creativity. Psychological Reports, 39, 869–870.
19.
HocevarD. (1979). The unidimensional nature of creative thinking in fifth-grade children. Child Study Journal, 9, 273–278.
International Personality Item Pool (2001). A Scientific Collaboratory for the Development of Advanced Measures of Personality Traits and Other Individual Differences [Online]. Available at http://ipip.ori.org/.
22.
Karmiloff-SmithA. (1992). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23.
KaufmanJ. C., & BaerJ. (2004). Heisenberg's haiku, Madonna's math: Why it's hard to be creative in every room of the house. In SternbergR. J.GrigorenkoE. L., & SingerJ. L. (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 3–20). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
24.
PaulosJ. A. (1988). Innumeracy: Mathematical illiteracy and its consequences.New York: Vintage Books.
25.
PluckerJ. A. (1998). Beware of simple conclusions: The case for the content generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 179–182.
26.
PluckerJ. A. (1999). Reanalyses of student responses to creativity checklists: Evidence of content generality. Journal of Creative Behavior, 33, 126–137.
27.
PluckerJ., & RuncoM. (1998). The death of creativity measurement has been greatly exaggerated: Current issues, recent advances, and future directions in creativity assessment. Roeper Review, 21, 36–39.
28.
RuncoM. A. (1987). The generality of creative performance in gifted and nongifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31, 121–125.
29.
RuncoM. A. (1989). The creativity of children's art. Child Study Journal, 19, 177–190.
30.
RuncoM. A. (1990). Implicit theories and ideational creativity. In RuncoM. A. & AlbertR. S. (Eds.), Theories of creativity (pp. 234–252). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
31.
RussellM. T., & KarolD. L. (1994). The 16PF Fifth Edition Administrator's Manual.Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
32.
SternbergR. J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607–627.
33.
SternbergR. J. (1990). Metaphors of mind.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
TorranceE. P. (1974). Torrance tests of creative thinking: Norms-technical manual.Lexington, MA: Gin.
