The relationship between imagery and creativity was examined using a prediction from the theories of symbolic representation developed by Morris and Hampson [1, 2] and Kaufmann [3–6]. One-hundred and fifty-four college students completed the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory on preferred styles of problem solving and Paivio's Individual Differences Questionnaire on preferred mode of symbolic representation. At a general level, results were in the expected direction for both theories by showing a significant relationship between innovative problem-solving preference and general level of use of conscious modes of symbolic representation. However, results also supported the more specific prediction from Kaufmann's theory that subjects with an innovative preference would have a relatively stronger preference for imaginal over verbal modes of representation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
MorrisP. E.HampsonP. J., Imagery and Consciousness, Academic Press, London, 1983.
2.
MorrisP. E.HampsonP. J., Imagery: Current Developments, Routledge, London, 1990.
3.
KaufmannG., Imagery, Language and Cognition, Norwegian University Press, Oslo, 1980.
4.
KaufmannG., A Theory of Symbolic Representation in Problem Solving, Journal of Mental Imagery, 9:2, pp. 51–70, 1985.
5.
KaufmannG., Mental Imagery and Problem Solving, in Cognitive and Neuropsychological Approaches to Mental Imagery, DenisM.EngelkampJ.RichardsonJ. T. E. (eds.), Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, 1988.
6.
KaufmanG., Imagery Effects on Problem Solving, in Imagery: Current Developments, RichardsonJ. T. E.HampsonP.MarksD. (eds.), Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1990.
7.
GhiselinB., The Creative Process, New American Library, New York, 1952.
8.
HadamardF., The Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field, Dover Publications, New York, 1945.
9.
MillerA. I., Imagery in Scientific Thought: Creating 20th Century Physics, Birkhauser, Boston, 1984.
10.
ShepardR. N., Externalization of Mental Images and the Act of Creation, in Visual Learning, Thinking and Communication, RandawaR. S.CoffmanW. E. (eds.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 133–189, 1978.
11.
ForishaB. L., Creativity and Imagery in Men and Women, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, pp. 1255–1264, 1978.
12.
ForishaB. L., Mental Imagery and Creativity: Review and Speculations, Journal of Mental Imagery, 2, pp. 209–238, 1978.
13.
ForishaB. L., Relationship between Creativity and Mental Imagery: A Question of Cognitive Style?, in Imagery: Current Theory, Research, and Application, SheikhA. A. (ed.), John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp. 10–39, 1983.
14.
ShawG. A.BelmoreS. M., The Relationship between Imagery and Creativity, Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 2:2, pp. 115–123, 1982–83.
15.
ShawG. A.De MersS. T., The Relationship of Imagery to Originality, Flexibility and Fluency in Creative Thinking, Journal of Mental Imagery, 10, pp. 65–74, 1986.
16.
DorvalK. B., “The Relationships between Level and Style of Creativity and Imagery.” Unpublished master's thesis, State University College at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, 1990.
17.
IsaksenS. G., A New Dimension for Creativity Research: Examining Style and Level of Creativity, Paper presented at the KAI conference on the Hatfield Polytechnic Campus, Hertfordshire, U.K., 1987.
18.
KirtonM., Adaptors and Innovators: Cognitive Style and Personality, in Frontiers of Creativity Research: Beyond the Basics, IsaksenS. G. (ed.), Bearly Limited, Buffalo, New York, pp. 282–304, 1987.
19.
KirtonM., Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory-Manual (2nd Edition), Occupational Research Centre, Hatfield, U.K., 1987.
20.
GuilfordJ. P., The Nature of Human Intelligence, Scribner, New York, 1967.
HudsonL., Frames of Mind: Ability, Perception and Self-Perception in the Arts and Sciences, Methuen, London, 1968.
23.
ManskeM. E.DaviesG. A., Effects of Simple Instructional Bias upon Performance in the Unusual Uses Test, The Journal of General Psychology, 79, pp. 25–33, 1968.
24.
RuncoM. A.OkudaS. M., The Instructional Enhancement of the Flexibility and Originality Scores of Divergent Thinking Tests, Applied Cognitive Psychology, (in press).
25.
AndersonJ., Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications, (3rd Edition), W. H. Freeman, New York, 1990.
26.
FinkR. A., Principles of Mental Imagery, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1989.
27.
MessickS., Individuality in Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1976.
28.
PaivioA., Imagery and Verbal Processes, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1971.
29.
HiscockM., Imagery Assessment through Self-Report: What Do Imagery Questionnaires Measure?, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46:2, pp. 223–230, 1978.
30.
PaivioA.HarshmanR., Factor Analysis of a Questionnaire on Imagery and Verbal Habits and Skills, Canadian Journal of Psychology, 37:4, pp. 461–483, 1983.
31.
KirtonM., Adaptors and Innovators: Problem Solvers in Organizations, in Innovation: A Cross-Disciplinary Perspective, GrønhaugK.KaufmannG. (eds.), Norwegian University Press, Oslo, pp. 65–85, 1990.
32.
MuddS., Analytic Review of Research on the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory, Social and Behavioral Sciences Documents, 16:2, p. 58, 1986.
