Research on creativity in the collage task within the field of Behavioral Analysis, has encountered problems in the interpretation of empirical data due to logical inconsistencies of order conceptual. The conception and measurement of the phenomenon has been based on a priori definitions of the components of creativity in the activity of Collage, made from the factors proposed by Guilford (1959) and Torrance (1962), namely: Fluency, Elaboration, Flexibility and Originality.
Keep reading this PsicologíaOnline article if you want to know more about Collage creativity: its social validation.
Index
- Introduction
- Conceptual framework
- Trouble
- Method
- Results
- Conclusions
Introduction.
An artifactuality has been evidenced between the definitions of the factors Fluency and Elaboration which determines an inversely proportional relationship between both measures, which does not allow observing effects unequivocal variables of independent variables and makes it difficult to identify generalization effects and transfer. The present research aimed to carry out a study of Social Validation of the defining and characteristic criteria of the
For this they interviewed five (5) subjects experts in the area of graphic design, advertising and creativity, three (3) men and two (2) women, aged between 26-38 years. A content analysis of said interviews evidenced the existence of social criteria to evaluate creative behavior in Collage, such as the originality, complexity, harmony, fluidity, use of color, theme, balance of the elements and experience previous. Some of these criteria coincide with the Crafting, Originality, and Flexibility factors. The Elaboration factor was highlighted for its importance, while the Fluency factor was classified as irrelevant for the evaluation of creativity in the Collage task.
Conceptual framework.
The study of creativity has been a very complex work that has aroused educational, occupational, organizational and scientific interest and has been approached from multiple perspectives. This variety of contexts in which creativity research has taken place has generated a great deal of definitions depending on the theoretical and philosophical foundations of the approach, as well as methodological interests.
Within psychology we find a very similar panorama, characterized by the diversity of conceptions about the phenomenon, as well as an intense concern to arrive at the necessary technology to introduce creativity as an objective behavior of the teaching process.
The lack of a clear and precise definition seems to be responsible for the conceptual, methodological and technological difficulties with which the rigorous study of creative behavior has been confronted, which shows the need to continue investigating the conception and intervention of this behavior.
Within the psychometric orientation and from 1950, although the conception of creativity is not totally detached from the concept of IQ, it begins to considered as a process immersed in the perception of problems and the search for solutions, which implied that all subjects could offer creative solutions, only that in different degrees. Along these lines, Guilford (1959) supports the study of creativity by approaching the theory of individual differences.
In this way, Guilford (1959) considers the creativity as an intellectual activity which is part of what he calls "divergent thinking", understanding as such that type of thinking that, faced with a specific problem, can formulate several alternative responses, as opposed to what would be the "convergent thinking" that would occur when only one solution is possible determined. A typical convergent thinking problem would be to find the result of an algebraic operation, which would be a precise number, while a The question that divergent thinking would imply would be to suggest various uses for a clip, which would involve a more open and imprecise way of thought.
On these assumptions, Guilford (1959) defines creativity as a form of thought that is triggered in a subject as a consequence of the perception of a problem and that it has several components, which were described by the author on the basis of an analysis factorial:
- Sensitivity: understood as the ability to see problems and recognize the difficulties of a situation.
- Fluency: it is related to the fertility of ideas or responses generated in a situation. It refers to the quantitative aspect, in which the quality is not so important as long as the answers are relevant.
- Flexibility: it can be identified as the qualitative aspect of creativity. It is the ability to adapt, redefine, reinterpret or take a new tactic to reach a solution.
- Elaboration: It refers to the degree of development implied by the ideas produced, corroborated through the richness and complexity shown in the execution of certain tasks.
- Originality: refers to the lowest frequency of a response in a given population. The generated solution must be unique or different from those found previously.
- Redefinition: understood as the ability to define or perceive objects or situations differently than usual, it could reflect what is commonly called "improvisation".
To establish the relationship between these factors and intellectual traits, the author included Sensitivity to Problems within the Assessment category; the Redefinition factor in the Convergent Thinking and Fluency, Flexibility, Originality and Elaboration category as part Divergent Thinking, hence these four factors have attracted the most attention in subsequent research.
Torrance (1962) defines creativity as the process of discovering problems or information gaps, forming ideas or hypotheses, testing them, modifying them, and communicating the results. He assigns creativity a global ability character and redefined the factors proposed by Guilford as follows:
- Fluency: production of a large number of ideas.
- Flexibility: production of a wide variety of ideas.
- Elaboration: development, embellishment or embellishment of an idea
- Originality: use of ideas that are unusual.
The study of creativity from the behavioral perspective has contributed greatly in terms of its evaluation, measurement and training, which is evidenced in the reviews made by authors such as Goetz (1982) and Winston and Baker (1985) of the research carried out in the last 20 years (Lacasella, 1998).
Within this approach, research on creative behavior has started from the study of various response modalities and has covered three major areas: psychomotor skills, language and plastic expression. Within the first one, the response modalities studied have been building with blocks, improvisation with tools, and body language. Regarding language, the response modalities that have been worked on include writing stories, associating words and illustrating concepts through writing. Finally, in the area of plastic expression, research has focused on response modalities such as drawing with crayons, markers, stencils or tempera, easel painting and Collage, the latter being the one of interest in our study.
In an extensive review by Lacasella (1998) of the research that has been carried out on creativity in the field of Behavioral Analysis reveals that almost all of these have based their measures of creativity on the factors described by Guilford (1959) and Torrance (1960), although the behaviors were systematized for each of the response modalities (drawing, painting, Collage, etc.) used by each author.
Problem.
Most of the work carried out in this area has been found with difficulties at the conceptual level Of the investigation. The studies carried out on creative behavior understood specifically in relation to the Collage task and that have used topographic definitions of behavior based on the factors described by Guilford (1959) and Torrance (1962), namely, Fluency, Flexibility, Elaboration and Originality, have therefore started from the a priori definition of the elements that must be taken into account for the measurement of such conduct. As Lacasella (1995) suggests, a deep analysis of these studies reveals logical incongruities that make it difficult to interpret the empirical data. obtained and question the validity of the definitions used, since they make debatable the consideration that the creativity.
One approach in the area consisted of experimental evaluation of two types of contingencys of reinforcement on some components of creative behavior in Collage carried out by Lacasella (1987). In addition to the conclusions derived from the empirical data that he obtained, he also pointed out certain conclusions of a conceptual nature in relation to an interaction found between the factors Fluency and Elaboration that made it difficult to observe the unequivocal effects of the independent variable, as well as to evaluate the generalization of the response to other factors, especially to Originality.
This inescapable interaction seemed to be due to a given conceptual artifactuality between these factors, since such As defined by the researcher, the increase in one of them necessarily led to a decrease in the other. Similar results were obtained by later works of this line of research that started from the same definitions of the factors proposed by Lacasella (1987). Namely, based on the factors described by Guilford (1959) and Torrance (1962), Lacasella (1987) elaborated the definition of them in specific relation to the Collage task as follows:
- Fluency: number of combinations in each Collage session.
- Flexibility: number of different uses of each figure, in combination, across all Collages.
- Elaboration: number of figures used in each combination.
- Originality: number of new combinations across all sessions.
In these definitions, combination was understood as the use of two or more figures to produce a shape different, that they should be superimposed or at least exist between them a distance no greater than one centimeter. In order to illustrate the artifactuality that occurs between the Fluency and Elaboration factors, we could analyze the following example: a total of 20 figures were delivered to the individual, the maximum score that can be obtained in Fluency is 10 points, since it is the highest number of combinations that can be made with 20 figures, that is, 10 combinations of 2 figures each, therefore, simultaneously the individual is obtaining the minimum possible score in Elaboration, since he only used 2 figures in each combination.
With a view to solving the problem, Lacasella (1995) carried out a social validation study directed to determine what are the criteria used by the social community to evaluate a product as creative. The results showed the existence of certain criteria that guide the evaluation of creativity in the Collage, some of them coinciding with those proposed by Guilford (1959) and Torrance (1962) of the following way:
- Fluency: number of shapes it performs.
- Elaboration: Collage complexity.
- Originality: ability to perform unexpected forms.
This author made a first attempt to clarify the definition of creative behavior in the task of Collage, offering some insights on the conception of the elements that constitute it. It seems that, indeed, the factors described by Guilford (1959) and Torrance (1962) are defining elements of this behavior, but are they as defined so far? specifically in relation to the Collage task? Does the Elaboration defined socially as Collage complexity necessarily refer to the number of figures used in each combination, for example? And, therefore, is the interpretation of the empirical data obtained for the moment in faithful correspondence with the phenomenon of creativity?
In order to answer these questions, we consider that Social Validation would be a useful procedure to clarify the definition specifies the factors that must be taken into account for the measurement of creative behavior in the Collage task, since as Lacasella points out (1998),
"Social validation as a procedure is a way that allows the clarification of the behaviors and / or skills necessary to describe a scientific fact, since its definition not only responds to a scientific problem but must also reflect the canons established by society, which is the one that ultimately decides when a behavior is relevant or not, creative or no... "(p. 22-23).
Specifically, the objectives pursued were a) to explore the existence of social criteria to evaluate the creative component in the Collage task and b) evaluate whether these criteria coincide with the measures used so far for the registration of creativity in Collage.
Method.
For this, five (5) experts in the area of graphic design and plastic arts as graphic designers, artists, advertising creatives and psychologists contacted in design firms and advertising companies. The interviews were carried out according to a semi-structured format, elaborated following a funnel approach, that is, following a sequence that starts of general questions and continues with more restricted items, thus avoiding that the first questions prepare the later answers of the interviewed.
The members of the jury were interviewed in their respective workplaces, having agreed to an appointment in previous personal or telephone contact. The fundamental purposes of the investigation were explained to them in general lines and a sample of the material that had been used in creativity studies at Collage, in the form of products made by some Sixth Grade Education students Basic
The interviews were conducted by the experimenters and recorded on audiotapes. Once carried out, these were transcribed and the information was subsequently emptied into special content analysis formats that allowed the data to be recorded and analyzed.
Results.
1) Analysis of the concept of creativity
The first question of the interview was: What is creativity for you? In it, the interviewer had to investigate especially the generic concept and the reference to the novelty. Most experts agreed that creativity finds its origin in an innate aspect of the human being, which refers to necessarily to originality and that is related to the solution of problems not only in the field of plastic arts, but also in life everyday. The following table presents a summary of the information obtained through this question:
Table 1. Elements considered in the definition of creativity
Elements considered Proportion of experts who referred to the element
to. Creativity is an innate aspect 3/5
b. Creativity is doing something new in reference to what already exists 5/5
c. Creativity is not limited to the realm of the arts 3/5
d. Creativity is a process that involves problem solving 4/5
2) Analysis of the concept of Collage:
The second question of the interview was: How do you define Collage? Most of the experts interviewed agreed to define it as a product made from various components that allow it to fulfill a function. Table 2 summarizes the information obtained through this question:
Table 2. Elements considered in the definition of Collage.
Elements considered Proportion of experts who referred to the element
The collage is a conjugation of elements 5/5
The collage fulfills an objective or function 4/5
3) Analysis of the criteria for evaluating creativity in Collage:
At this point in the interview, the interviewer presented the experts with products of the Collage activity made by Sixth Grade Basic Education children. After that, the third question was asked: What are the criteria that you would use to evaluate creativity in Collage? In it, the interviewer had to investigate the reference to the factors described by Guilford and Torrance. Various opinions and a variety of criteria were obtained to consider for the evaluation of creativity in Collage, without However, most of the interviewees agreed to consider originality and complexity as the most important aspects. important. The following table summarizes the information obtained through this question:
Table 3. Criteria considered to evaluate creativity in Collage.
Criteria considered Proportion of experts who referred to the criterion
Originality 5/5
The complexity of Collage 4/5
Weather 2/5
Abstraction or symbolism of Collage 2/5
Meaning of Collage 2/5
Harmony 2/5
Fluency 1/5
Use of color 1/5
Thematic 1/5
The balance 1/5
Subject's prior experience 1/5
4) Analysis of the opinions of the experts about the measures used in psychology for the evaluation of creativity in Collage:
The experimenter presented the experts with an overview of the description of the factors that according to Guilford (1959) and Torrance (1962) constitute creativity, by way of introducing and commenting on the measures defined by Lacasella (1987) in relation to the task of Collage. The following question was then asked: what do you think about these definitions? The responses of the interviewees were varied, even though most of them agreed to refer to Elaboration as a relevant factor. The following table presents a summary of the information obtained through this question:
Table 4. Opinions of the experts about the measures used in psychology for the evaluation of creativity in Collage.
Opinions noted Proportion of experts who referred to the opinion
Workmanship is an important factor 5/5
Non-compliance with the Fluency factor 5/5
Non-compliance with the definition of Elaboration 1/5
Flexibility is a relevant factor 4/5
Originality is an important factor 1/5
General agreement with all factors 2/5
Disagreement with the precision of the measurements 2/5
5) Analysis of the opinions that the interviewees contributed to solve the problem of artifactuality that occurs between the definitions of Fluency and Elaboration:
Finally, the interviewer explained the problem of conceptual artifactuality present between the definitions of the Fluency and Elaboration factors. proposed by Lacasella (1987) in the measure of creativity in Collage, which was exemplified through the Collages worked on in the interview. The fifth question was: what do you consider? Do you have any suggestions? The experts interviewed provided various suggestions to solve this conceptual problem and all of them agreed on modify or eliminate the Fluency measure, most of them arguing the impossibility of observing this factor in the task of Collage. The following table summarizes the information obtained through this question:
Table 5. Expert opinions regarding the artifactuality problem present between the Fluency and Elaboration factors
Opinions noted Proportion of experts who referred to the opinion
Modify the definition of the Fluency factor 5/5
Impertinence of the Fluency factor as a measure of creativity in Collage 3/5
The Manufacturing factor is the most important measure 2/5
Agreement with the definition of the Manufacturing factor 2/5
Conclusions.
In relation to the creativity concept, apparently the most important aspect of this phenomenon responds to the novelty of the creative product and according to the jury, it consists of an innate capacity of individuals that can be developed from the daily practice, whose exercise is not limited to the field of the arts and which involves a process of resolution of problems. Furthermore, Collage is not only a form of graphic expression for whose execution various materials are used, but it also pursues an objective or function.
In accordance with the results obtained by authors such as Ryan and Winston (1978), Lacasella (1995), Villoria (1989) Antor and Carrasquel (1993), Chacón (1998) and Marín and Rattia (2000), the Social Validation procedure was an effective instrument to identify that there are social criteria that judge a product as creative and decide the social validity of the scientific conception of the facts, so it was a useful procedure to estimate and define a phenomenon as complex as Creativity and factors associated with it.
In addition, it was found that many of the aspects indicated by the experts as relevant when identifying creativity, coincide with the factors considered important in the definition of this phenomenon in some research currents in psychology. These results are consistent with those obtained by Lacasella (1995), in whose Validation study Social it was evidenced the allusion of the experts to relevant elements of creativity related to the novelty, fluidity, elaboration and flexibility of ideas.
Specifically in relation to the Collage task, an inquiry without precedent approaches, in our study it was found that some of the aspects indicated by the Experts conform to most of the measures used so far to record creativity in this task, such as the Elaboration, Originality and Flexibility.
Also, apparently the Elaboration factor is very relevant and valid for the measurement of creative behavior in Collage. Similarly, the experts did not present objections to the definition of the Originality and Flexibility factors.
However, the Fluency factor was excluded from said social criteria since most of the experts considered it irrelevant for the evaluation of this behavior in the case of the Collage activity.
Regarding solving the conceptual artifactuality present between the definitions of the Fluency and Elaboration factors as components of creative behavior In the Collage task, it was found that despite the fact that fluency figures as a component to be considered in the evaluation of creativity, all the experts highlighted the need to modify the definition of the Fluency factor in relation to the Collage task because it does not correspond to this phenomenon in a valid.
Additionally, most experts indicated that they consider that the Fluency factor in itself is not very valid for measuring the creativity in the case of the Collage task, which alludes to the impossibility of defining this component in a way that can be measured or be observed. For this reason, they recommended ruling out the Fluency factor as a measure of this behavior.
Finally, among the most important recommendations of this work, the need to expand the field of research in relation to the phenomenon of creativity, given the need to address the process and not just the product or perhaps incorporate the study of language, which can open new doors to understanding such complex behavior as creativity.
This article is merely informative, in Psychology-Online we do not have the power to make a diagnosis or recommend a treatment. We invite you to go to a psychologist to treat your particular case.
If you want to read more articles similar to Creativity in collage: its social validation, we recommend that you enter our category of Personality.
