In an effort to find brief and relatively simple methods of fostering creativity, Ss molded clay sculptures, first in a pretest condition and then 1 wk. later within either a 30-min. sensorily enriched environment or in the same control environment following 10-min. mild sensory deprivation. Following completion of both sculptures, Ss and six judges independently rated them for creativity. No environmental effects upon self-rated or judge-rated creativity were found. Correlations between self- and judge-ratings were low. The results suggest that effects on creativity by altered sensory environments may be difficult to produce.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ChildI. L.The experts and the bridge of judgment that crosses every cultural gap. Psychology Today, 1968, 2 (7), 24–29.
2.
FuerstK.ZubekJ. P.Effects of sensory and perceptual deprivation on a battery of open-ended cognitive tasks. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1968, 22, 122–130.
3.
GatesJ.Mobile reflected light images: A description of a process for stimulating aesthetic and creative behavior in students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 1968, 2, 58–62.
4.
KrippnerS.The psychedelic state, the hypnotic trance, and the creative act. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 1968, 8, 49–67.
5.
LesterE.Intermedia: Tune in, turn on—and walk out?New York Times Magazine, 1968, May 12, 30–31, 66–76.
6.
MaddiS. R.CharlensA. M.MaddiD.SmithA. J.Effects of monotony and novelty on imaginative productions. Journal of Personality, 1962, 30, 513–527.
7.
ShagerR. W.SchultzC. B.KleinS. P.Points of view about preference as tools in the analysis of creative products. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1966, 22, 83–94.
8.
SuedfeldP.VernonJ.Stress and verbal originality in sensory deprivation. Psychological Record, 1965, 15, 567–570.
