User:L.Luciani26/sandbox

Introduction
The concept of divergent thinking (DT) began with J.P. Guilford's theory of divergent production. The goal of divergent thinking is to generate several diverse ideas about a topic within a short period of time. Divergent production was included in Guilford's structure of intellect model, which aimed at organizing human cognition. Within this model Guilford attempted to define and describe different types of divergent thinking however, divergent thinking is classically thought of as a single, creativity-relevant skill. Despite this, parts of Guilford's original conceptualization of divergent thinking have been preserved in current creative thinking theories, mainly the four categories into which he grouped divergent thinking: fluency (capacity to generate ideas), flexibility (capacity to shift ideational categories), originality (capacity to generate unusual associations), and elaboration (capacity to elaborate on an idea). Divergent thinking can be thought of as a cognitive ability that is used to respond to questions that do not have a single or fixed answer.

Divergent thinking tests are probably the most widely used psychometric measures for the examination of creative problem solving and typically game-like and require open-ended responses that are evaluated in terms of both quantity and quality. For example, a typical divergent thinking task would require a subject produce as many uses for a common object, such as a brick. The idea is that as subjects continue to produce more uses for these everyday objects, those who are strong in divergent thinking will be able to list a greater quantity of uses, as well as answers superior in quality.

Divergent Thinking and Training
Revisionist theorists advocate that divergent thinking may play an important role in creative performance if one is aware of when to utilize this skill; however most individuals have not received formal training in DT and as a result basically do not produce it at applicable instances. Many creativity training programs emphasize DT and possess the goal of maximizing availability and accessibility of the DT skill. One experiment utilized creativity training to test its effects and pre and post DT tasks of middle school children. Pre-training results yielded no significant differences between the experimental and control group of children. Following training, the experimental group improved on and outperformed the control group on creative personality, creative thinking, and DT tests. These results imply that DT does not have to be a natural mental phenomenon, as individuals can be trained to further develop this mental ability. Still, increasing the availability of DT alone, through training, will not result in expanded creativity across all task domains. This implores the question as to whether training is more beneficial to individuals who are naturally gifted and/or are already strong in DT. This is a question that still requires further research and exploration in order to be answered.

Divergent Thinking, Creativity & Intelligence
Numerous studies have utilized divergent thinking measures as predictors of academic accomplishments and many have found a positive correlation between divergent thinking scores and accomplishment in different academic areas, across a wide range of age groups. Several studies exploring this relationship have used extracurricular accomplishments as “intelligence” criteria rather than merely individual’s grades in school. One study carried out by Milgram and Milgram (1976), utilizing high-school seniors as their sample, found that divergent thinking was in fact a superior predictor of extracurricular accomplishment when compared to IQ scores.

Mark A. Runco, a leader in the study of divergent thinking, has suggested that a great deal of studies examining the relationship between DT and intelligence are very limited in criterion-related validity ; that is, the extent to which a measure is related to criteria in the real world. Runco also notes that limitations in previous research exist as a result of a disproportional focus on the quantity of creative performance in previous evaluations of the validity of DT measures, rather than quality. Obviously, this is theoretically problematic due to the fact that quality is more important that quantity in real-word settings requiring the application of creative thinking.

Runco carried out a particularly notable experiment which examined the relationship between DT and creative performance in gifted and non-gifted intermediate school students. Students were labeled as gifted or non-gifted according to IQ test based criteria; while the study utilized three DT measures and a self-report measure to assess extra-curricular performance within seven domains (writing, music, crafts, art, science, performing arts, public presentation). With regards to divergent thinking and criterion-related validity, results found the DT tests possess this type of validity in the instance of gifted children only; and even for these subjects DT appears to be solely related to the quantity of performance within particular domains. Within the study it was found that DT was related to the quantity of writing, arts, crafts and public presentation. For the non-gifted group DT scores of fluency were found to be related to the quantity of art performance. This result suggests that DT measures are not valid predictors of performance in all domains of creativity, not even for gifted individuals. More importantly, results imply that DT measures are a more valid predictor of the quantity of creative performance, rather than the quality, independent of whether individuals are gifted or non-gifted.

Much research concerning DT and intelligence has failed to explore the relationship between DT and more alternative measures of intelligence such as memory and processing speed. For instance, processing speed could be related to performance on DT measures as faster processing will allow for the deriving of more solutions within a given time limit. Moreover, the greater accessibility of memory traces will allow one to draw answers from a diverse set of memories. A study by Kuhn and Holling (2009) investigated the relationship between DT and intelligence, memory, and processing speed. Results from the study discovered that all cognitive abilities explored except for memory were statistically significant predictors of DT; while the relationship between DT and processing speed was minor, although significant. However, all DT measures within the study were to be completed by participants within a strict time limit. As a result the DT tests favored participants with faster processing speed; thus possibly inflating the relationship between the two variables. Nonetheless results of the study support the idea that DT and intelligence are positively related and interacting concepts.

In regards to the relationship between divergent thinking and direct academic success many studies have found a positive correlation between the two, but the strength of this relationship does vary across studies. One such study carried out by Eastwood (1965) explored the relationship between DT and academic success across several first year college students registered in a variety of programs. It was found that students who were stronger divergent thinkers did tend to achieve greater academic success than those who were not; this was found for students registered in Arts, Science, and Agricultural Economics curricula, but not for those students registered in the Rural Science program. This positive relationship was found to be strongest for Science students. It is apparent that a positive relationship does exist between intelligence and DT, however the extent of this relationship varies across and within studies examining interaction between the two variables. Furthermore, it appears that DT measures are successful predictors of intelligence (in particular domains) at the time of studies, however this does not imply that performance on DT measures are a valid predictor of future intellectual ability.

Additional research has examined the relationship between giftedness in early adolescence and intrafamilial DT; thus exploring the possibility of a connection between genetics and DT. A distinguished study carried out by Runco and Albert (1986) entailed an investigation of the intrafamilial relationship between exceptionally gifted children and their parents on DT tasks. The study hypothesized a stronger intrafamilial relationship, with regards to DT, in the present gifted sample as compared to a non-gifted sample. Results yielded a moderately strong statistical relationship between the DT of the exceptionally gifted children (sample consisted of only boys) and their parents. The primary finding of this study is that DT of exceptionally gifted adolescent males is positively associated with the DT of their parents. These results are in direct contrast to the relationship between non-gifted children and their parents on DT measures, which typically show no relation. The study does exemplify that the relationship between parents’ and their children’s DT does appear to be a function of, or to some extent is related to, level of ability. These results indicate a relationship between genetics and DT; and possibly between genetics and intelligence. Regardless of these findings, in order to establish a true relationship between DT ability and genetics, one would need to expand the existing sample to include exceptionally gifted females and a larger sample population.

Divergent Thinking, Handedness, & Gender
Historically sinistrality (left-handedness) has been associated with low cognitive ability, as it has in fact been found that birth stress and birth risk factors are associated with an elevated percentage of left-handedness .Other researchers, however, believe sinistrality to be an advantage to cognitive ability as some neurologists suggest that the actual brain of sinistral and dextral (right-handed) individuals differ in composition. They in fact propose that left-handed individuals possess a larger corpus-callosum (neural fibers connecting the left and right hemispheres of the brain). An increased mass of neural fibers in this area may result in greater connectivity between the two hemispheres and consequently faster and more efficient processing of particular types of information. If this theoretical proposal is in fact true than sinistrality could provide an advantage in divergent thinking skills; which require quick access to associations and are positively correlated to processing speed.

A study executed by Stanley Coren (1995) explored the relationship among DT, handedness and gender through four separate experiments. The overall results of the experiments were interpreted as showing some advantage to sinistral males in divergent thinking. This conclusion was showed to be significant through the final three experiments. Moreover these results were not due to a limitation in sample size and proportion of males verse female participants; as the average number of participants (college students) in the experiments was 1,002, with females representing a greater percentage of the sample for all four experiments. The final experiment exemplified that the advantage was also not a result of simply superior cognitive ability of sinistral participants, as both right-handed male and female individuals scored slightly better on a convergent thinking task in the fourth experiment. Within the study, experiments two and three illustrate that a linear relationship exists between handedness and divergent thinking (for males only); as males become more sinistral, the divergent thinking scores steadily rise.

Within Coren’s study it was revealed that no significant relationship existed between handedness and an advantage in divergent thinking in females. It was first thought that this was the result of a confounding variable; the fact that the tasks within the DT measures tried primarily spatial skills, which males are known to possess an advantage in. In order to confirm that the scores for females were not suppressed as a result of the nature of the DT measures, the third experiment utilized DT measures that tested verbal and semantic DT skills; abilities known to be advantaged within females. Even so, in the third experiment no significant difference was found between females in DT scores as a function of handedness.

A secondary finding of the study was males largely outperform females in divergent thinking task, regardless of handedness. Despite this result, there exists much controversy over gender superiority within the study of divergent thinking. For instance, studies such as Kim and Michael (1995) and Baer (2008) report higher DT task scores and an overall advantage in DT for females over males, while other research advocates gender superiority on DT to be a function of the type of DT task being tested. Thus, the precise role of gender within DT in not entirely clear at this point in time.

Divergent Thinking, Personality, and Mood
Traditionally cognition and personality have been conceptualized as distinct and separate domains, as intelligence is thought of a set of intellectual abilities, whereas personality can be viewed as a collection of enduring dispositions. Studies that do examine the relationship between intelligence and various personality traits typically show moderate correlations. Conversely, creativity/divergent thinking seem to hold an intermediate position with respect to their relation to personality dynamics; as the ability required to perform well on DT measures requires both an ability to think fluently, flexibly, originally, and elaborately and an disposition to do so.

In a study by Robert McCrae (1987), the relationship between various personality characteristics and DT/creativity was explored. Within the sample DT was found to be consistently associated with self-reports and ratings of openness to experience, but not with neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness or conscientiousness. There are various explanations for this association; for example, open and closed individuals may only differ in DT test performance (as opposed to differing in levels of DT), as more open individuals may be interested in, for example, generating or imagining several answers in a DT task. Another interesting explanation is that individuals who easily generate new ideas may develop interests in varied experiences; and, possibly, their openness to new experiences has facilitated an expanded and more diverse understanding of things in the world. From this study it is reasonable to conclude that openness to experience is a common characteristic of creative individuals and strong divergent thinkers.

A less explored disposition is that of risk-taking; a disposition that can be argued to be relatable to openness to experience. If an individual is more open to new and unknown experiences, they are probably more likely to possess a higher risk-taking disposition when compared to the average individual or those lower in openness to experience. In a study complete d by Jose (1970) the affiliation between DT and risk-taking was examined in a sample of middle-school children. There was no relationship found between risk-taking and DT, however a positive correlation was found amongst risk-taking and convergent thinking. These results exemplify the need for more research in the area of relationships among various dispositions, and their subsequent association with DT.

An additional curious area of research is mood and DT; that is, will an individual’s current mood affect their DT performance. One such study investigated the effect of mood induction on the divergent thinking of a sample of third-grade children. Many would presume a happy mood to be associated with increased DT, while a sad or angry mood to be negatively correlated with DT; however, this was not found. Overall, the study found the exact opposite; that negative mood inductions resulted in an increase of DT flexibility and originality, while positive mood inductions yielded suppressed DT ability. The findings of this study were surprising, but do lend support to the investigation of affect and creativity. DT is also found to be associated to REM sleep, as many studies have confirmed that REM sleep contributes to divergent thinking and encourages adjustment to novel situations. Additional research exploring the relationship between levels of REM sleep, mood and DT could contribute beneficial and innovative information to the overall understanding of DT.

Divergent Thinking and Supplementary Topics
Other topics of interest concerning DT include group composition and brain diseases. Some research has been conducted exploring the relationship between group dynamics and DT. One such study found that interactive groups were better at evaluating ideas than generating them; a more convergent-type task. Nominal groups, on the other hand, were more successful at generating ideas (a DT styled task) as opposed to generating ideas. These results have implications for the relationship between group dynamics, performance, and DT ability.

Patients with schizophrenia, a degenerative brain disease, often show deficits in verbal fluency; however few studies have considered the impairment of verbal fluency from the viewpoint of DT. In a study evaluating divergent thinking in patients with schizophrenia; healthy control subjects and schizophrenic patients were administered several DT fluency measures. Schizophrenic patients displayed significant deficits in DT, with particular difficulty in producing ideas requiring concept flexibility and originality. The current study was able to establish a relationship between schizophrenia and deficits to individual facets of DT. Moreover, if schizophrenia is associated with DT deficits, then it is possible to associate damaged brain regions in schizophrenic patients with mediation of DT abilities and/or function. Further research in this area can also lend support to cognitive and behavioral rehabilitation programs for schizophrenic patients and is of great interest and use to the field of cognitive neuroscience.