To better understand Galenson's (2001, 2006) “finder-seeker” typology of creative persons, we tested 111 undergraduates, correlating measures of each category (finder and seeker) with established psychological measures. Each participant received both a finder and a seeker score based on responses to the Creative Approach Questionnaire (CAppQ), refined by Rasch statistical analysis. Finder and seeker scores were themselves uncorrelated across participants, suggesting that Galenson's two types represent orthogonal dimensions rather than distinct categories. Higher finder scores were related to lower scores on need for cognition and Eastern thinking styles; higher seeker scores were related to higher scores on ambiguity tolerance and verbal and figural divergent thinking performance, as well as lower scores on need for cognitive closure and Western thinking styles. Most of these correlational results held when reanalyzed by stepwise regression. These findings suggest Galenson's finder-seeker typology is amenable to grounding in mainstream psychological measures.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AccominotiF. (2009). Creativity from interaction: Artistic movements and the creativity careers of modern painters. Poetics, 37, 267–294. doi: 10.1016/j.poetic.2009.03.005.
2.
BaerJ. (2011a). How divergent thinking tests mislead us: Are the Torrance Tests still relevant in the 21st century?Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 309–313. doi: 10.1037/a0025210.
3.
BaerJ. (2011b). Why grand theories of creativity distort, distract, and disappoint. International Journal of Creativity and Problem Solving, 21, 73–100.
4.
BlockJ. (1961/1978). The Q-Sort method in personality assessment and psychiatric research. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. doi: 10.1037/13141-000
5.
CacioppoJ. T.PettyR. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116.
6.
CacioppoJ. T.PettyR. E.KaoC. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306–307. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13.
7.
CarsonS. H.PetersonJ. B.HigginsD. M. (2005). Reliability, validity, and factor structure of the Creative Achievement Questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 37–50. doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1701_4.
8.
ChirumboloA.LiviS.MannettiL.PierroA.KruglanskiA. (2004). Effects of need for closure on creativity in small group interactions. European Journal of Personality, 18, 265–278. doi: 10.1002/per.518.
9.
DurmyshevaY. (2007). Creativity in academic settings: Experimental and conceptual approaches. Unpublished PhD dissertation, The City University of New York.
10.
DurmyshevaY.KozbeltA. (2010). The Creative Approach Questionnaire: Operationalizing Galenson's finder-seeker typology in a non-expert sample. International Journal of Creativity and Problem Solving, 20, 35–55.
11.
GalensonD. W. (2001). Painting outside the lines. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12.
GalensonD. W. (2006). Old masters and young geniuses: The two life cycles of artistic creativity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
13.
GardnerH. (2006). Replies to my critics. In SchalerJ. A. (Ed.), Howard Gardner under fire: A rebel psychologist faces his critics (pp. 245–312). Chicago, IL: Open Court.
14.
GilgenA. R.ChoJ. H. (1979). Questionnaire to measure Eastern and Western thought. Psychological Reports, 44, 835–841. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1979.44.3.835.
15.
GinsburghV.WeyersS. (2006). Creation and life cycles of artists. Journal of Cultural Economics, 30, 91–107. doi: 10.1007/s10824-006-9011-x.
16.
GoffK.TorranceE. P. (2002). Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.
17.
GoodenoughD. R. (1978). Field dependence. In LononH.ExnerJ.Jr. (Eds.), Dimensions of Personality. New York, NY: Wiley.
18.
JensenR. (2004). Anticipating artistic behavior: New research tools for art historians. Historical Methods, 37, 137–152. doi: 10.3200/HMTS.37.4.137-154.
19.
KaufmanJ. C.BeghettoR. A. (2009). The four-C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1–12. doi: 10.1037/a0013688.
20.
KimK. H. (2011). The APA 2009 Division 10 debate: Are the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking still relevant in the 21st century?Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 302–308. doi: 10.1037/a0021917.
21.
KnezekG.MiyashitaK. (1993). Handbook for the Young Children's Computer Inventory. Denton, TX: TCET-University of North Texas.
22.
KozbeltA. (2001). Artists as experts in visual cognition. Visual Cognition, 8, 705–723. doi: 10.1080/13506280042000090.
23.
KozbeltA. (2008a). E. H. Gombrich on creativity: A cognitive-historical case study. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 93–104. doi: 10.1080/10400410701842128.
24.
KozbeltA. (2008b). Gombrich, Galenson, and beyond: Integrating case study and typological frameworks in the study of creative individuals. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 26, 51–68. doi: 10.2190/EM.26.1.e.
25.
KozbeltA. (2008c). One-hit wonders in classical music: Evidence and (partial) explanations for an early career peak. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 179–195. doi: 10.1080/10400410802059952.
26.
KozbeltA. (2008d). Longitudinal hit ratios of classical composers: Reconciling “Darwinian” and expertise acquisition perspectives on lifespan creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2, 221–235. doi: 10.1037/a0012860.
27.
KozbeltA. (2011). Theories of creativity. In RuncoM. A.PritzkerS. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity (2nd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 473–479). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-375038-9.00223-5
28.
KozbeltA. (2012). Process, self-evaluation, and lifespan creativity trajectories in eminent composers. In CollinsD. (Ed.), The act of musical composition: Studies in the creative process (pp. 27–51). Farnham, UK: Ashgate Press.
29.
KozbeltA.BeghettoR.RuncoM. A. (2010). Theories of creativity. In SternbergR. J.KaufmanJ. C. (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (2nd ed., pp. 20–47). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511763205.004
30.
KozbeltA.DurmyshevaY. (2007). Lifespan creativity in a non-Western artistic tradition: A study of Japanese ukiyo-e printmakers. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 65, 23–51. doi: 10.2190/166N-6470-1325-T341.
31.
KruglanskiA. W.WebsterD. M.KlemA. (1993). Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 861–876. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.65.5.861.
32.
LinacreJ. M.WrightB. D. (1991/2000). A user's guide to WINSTEPS. Chicago, IL: MESA Press.
33.
LubartT. I. (1999). Creativity across cultures. In SternbergR. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 339–350). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
34.
MacDonaldA. P. (1970). Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity. Psychological Reports, 26, 791–798. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1970.26.3.791.
35.
NielsenB. D.PickettC. L.SimontonD. K. (2008). Conceptual versus experimental creativity: Which works best on convergent and divergent thinking tasks?Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2, 131–138. doi: 10.1037/1931-3896.2.3.131.
36.
NisbettR. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners think differently… and why. New York, NY: Free Press.
37.
O'HaraL. A.SternbergR. J. (2000–2001). It doesn't hurt to ask: Effects of instructions to be creative, practical, or analytical on essay writing performance and their interaction with students' thinking styles. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 197–210. doi: 10.1207/S15326934CRJ1302_7.
38.
PluckerJ. A. (1999). Is the proof in the pudding? Reanalyses of Torrance's (1958 to present) longitudinal data. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 103–114. doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1202_3.
39.
RaschG. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danmarks Paedogogiskse Institut (Chicago: MESA Press, 1980).
40.
SimontonD. K. (1997). Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career landmarks and trajectories. Psychological Review, 104, 66–89. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.104.1.66.
41.
SimontonD. K. (2004). Creativity in science: Chance, logic, genius, and zeitgeist. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139165358
42.
SimontonD. K. (2007). Creative life cycles in literature: Poets versus novelists or conceptualists versus experimentalists?Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1, 133–139. doi: 10.1037/1931-3896.1.3.133.
43.
SternbergR. J. (1988). Mental self-government: A theory of intellectual styles and their development. Human Development, 31, 197–224. doi: 10.1159/000275810.
44.
WardT. B.SmithS. M.FinkeR. M. (1999). Creative cognition. In SternbergR. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 339–350). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
45.
WebsterD. M.KruglanskiA. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049–1062. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.1049.
46.
WeisbergR. W. (2006). Creativity: Understanding innovation in problem solving, science, invention, and the arts. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
47.
WitkinH. A.DykR. B.FatersonH. F.GoodenoughD. R.KarpS. A. (1962). Psychological differentiation. New York, NY: Wiley.
48.
WitkinH. A.GoodenoughD. R. (1981). Cognitive styles: Essence and origin. New York, NY: Wiley.
49.
WonderJ.BlakeJ. (1992). Creativity East and West: Intuition vs. logic?Journal of Creative Behavior, 26, 172–186. doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.1992.tb01174.x.
