Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
ECONA, Interuniversity Centre for Research on Cognitive Processing in Natural and Artificial
Systems, Department of Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
Available online: 09 Nov 2011
To cite this article: Massimiliano Palmiero, Valentina Cardi & Marta Olivetti Belardinelli (2011): The Role of Vividness of Visual
Mental Imagery on Different Dimensions of Creativity, Creativity Research Journal, 23:4, 372-375
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.621857
Downloaded by [University Degli Studi Dell'Aqu], [Massimiliano Palmiero] at 07:30 09 November 2011
RESEARCH NOTE
Valentina Cardi
ECONA, Interuniversity Centre for Research on Cognitive Processing in Natural and
Articial Systems, Department of Clinical Sciences and Bio-Imaging, G. dAnnunzio
University, Chieti, Italy
Although research demonstrated that people can mentally manipulate and synthesize
visual elements into a creative object, the role that vividness of visual imagery plays on
creative imagery is still unclear. This study explored the relationships between vividness
of visual imagery and 3 dimensions of creative imagery: originality, practicality, and
mental spatial transformations of visual elements. Fifty-three participants performed
the creative mental synthesis task and completed the Vividness of Visual Imagery
Questionnaire (VVIQ). Results revealed a positive relationship between vividness and
the practicality dimension of objects. No relationship was found either between vividness
and originality or between vividness and transformational complexity. The association
vividnesspracticality seems to reect the ability to use pictorial information of imagery
when people generate functional objects that belong to specic categories. Future
research directions are discussed.
Creativity is one of the most important human information processing, being part of their actions in a wide
range of task domains. There is large agreement on the
notion that creativity involves the ability to produce a
work that is both original and appropriate (Sternberg
& Lubart, 1996). Originality or novelty refers to something new, not derived from something else, whereas
appropriateness or practicality refers to something that
matches the task constraints, and involves an actual
Correspondence should be sent to Massimiliano Palmiero, Department of Internal Medicine and Public Health, University of LAquila,
Piazzale Salvatore Tommasi 1, Building Delta 6, 67010, LAquila
(Frazione Coppito). E-mail: massimiliano.palmiero@univaq.it
Downloaded by [University Degli Studi Dell'Aqu], [Massimiliano Palmiero] at 07:30 09 November 2011
(e.g., attribute nding, conceptual interpretation, functional inference, hypothesis testing). The cycle of generative and exploratory processes can be reiterated until
the nal form of the pre-inventive structures is achieved.
However, the role of vividness of visual imagery on
creative imagery is still unclear. By using the theoretical
framework of working memory, Pearson, Loogie, and
Gilhooly (1999) found that the concurrent visual
dynamic noise, supposed to interfere with the pictorial
component of imagery, produced no signicant effect
on the creative mental synthesis task. Yet, Morrison
and Wallace (2001) found a signicant relationship
between vividness of visual imagery and divergent production of the creative mental synthesis task, but failed
to nd a signicant relationship between vividness of
visual imagery, creativity, and recognizability subscores
of objects. Finally, Palmiero, Nakatani, Raver, Olivetti
Belardinelli, and van Leeuwen (2010) found no association between vividness of visual imagery, originality,
and practicality subscores of objects generated by the
creative mental synthesis task.
Nevertheless, it should be noted that both Pearson
et al. (1999) and Morrison and Wallace (2001) did not
consider either the subscore of originality or the subscore of practicality of objects. In addition, these studies
did not consider the mental transformations showed in
the objects generated by participants. Yet Palmiero
et al. (2010) measured the originality and practicality
subscores of objects without priming participants with
object category names. Therefore, this study examined
whether individual differences in vividness of visual imagery inuence the performance on originality, practicality, and transformational complexity dimensions.
Participants were presented with the object category
name before starting the composition process. Previous
research showed that the object category name can
direct the composition of objects mostly in terms of
practicality than originality (Finke, 1990). In addition,
Palmiero et al. (2010) found correlations between vividness and subscores of the Alternative Uses Task, which
implicitly makes participants think of practical objects.
Given these ndings, vividness of imagery was hypothesized to be primarily associated to the practicality
sub-score of objects.
373
Materials
For the creative mental synthesis task, Finkes (1990)
materials were used: 15 visual stimuli plus corresponding names, and 5 different object categories (furniture,
tools, weapons, toys, transports; Figure 1 shows the
complete set of stimuli used in the creative mental synthesis task). This combination of stimuli was also
used by Abraham, Windmann, Siefen, Daum, and
Gunturkun (2006). In addition, the Vividness of Visual
Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ; Marks, 1973) was used.
The VVIQ is frequently used for measuring how vividly
individuals can form visual mental images. It consists of
16 items that describe different scenes, such as The sun
is rising above the horizon into a hazy sky. Participants
are asked to rate the vividness level for each mental
image by using a scale ranging from 1 (no image at all,
you only know that you are thinking of the object) to 5
(perfectly clear and as vivid as normal vision).
Procedure
Participants rst were instructed to familiarize the form
and the name of each stimulus for as long as they
needed. Afterward, they were introduced to the creative
mental synthesis task. For each trial, participants were
instructed to mentally assemble three visual stimuli to
generate only one creative object belonging to a specic
METHOD
Participants
Fifty-three students were recruited from the department
of psychology, at Sapienza University of Rome: 35
women (M age 28; SD 7.03) and 18 men (M
age 26.5; SD 7.01). All participants were righthanded and had no formal training in art and design
Downloaded by [University Degli Studi Dell'Aqu], [Massimiliano Palmiero] at 07:30 09 November 2011
374
TABLE 1
Multiple Correlation Matrix Coefficients
1
1. Vividness of Visual Imagery
Questionnaire
2. Practicality
3. Originality
4. Tranformational complexity
1
.368 1
1
.013
.408
.049
.112
.082 1
RESULTS
Objects were scored higher on practicality subscore
(M 3.62, SD 0.32) both than originality (M 3.07,
SD 0.34); t(52) 11.1256, p < .000001; and transformational complexity; M 2.95, SD 0.70) subscores;
t(52) 6.6085, p < .000001; whereas no statistical difference was found between originality and transformational complexity subscores; t(52) 1.1364, p > .05.
For vividness of visual imagery, Mean score was 3.84,
and SD 0.47.
Table 1 shows the multiple matrix correlation coefcients and their signicance levels. Only two correlations
reached a signicance of at least .05 level. The
Bonferroni corrections were applied using a signicant
threshold of p 0.05=6 0.0083, that is correcting the
p level for a total of 6 unique comparisons between
originality, practicality, transformational complexity
sub-scores, and vividness of visual imagery. In particular, the analysis showed that vividness of visual
imagery correlated positively with the practicality
(r .368; p 0.007) subscore. In addition, practicality
also correlated with the originality subscores (r .408;
p 0.005).
The regression analysis carried out with practicality
subscore as dependent variable and vividness of visual
imagery as independent variable revealed that vividness
predicted signicantly practicality (B-Weight 0.37,
p 0.0066, R2 Adjusted 0.1186). Vividness did not
predict either originality (B-Weight 0.013, p 0.92,
R2 Adjusted 0.000) or transformational complexity
subscores
(B-Weight 0.048,
p 0.72,
R2
Adjusted 0.000).
DISCUSSION
This study explored the extent to which vividness of
visual imagery correlates with different dimensions of
creativity, such as originality, practicality, and transformational complexity. The correlation analysis revealed
that vividness of visual imagery positively correlated
Downloaded by [University Degli Studi Dell'Aqu], [Massimiliano Palmiero] at 07:30 09 November 2011
375
REFERENCES
Abraham, A., & Windmann, S. (2007). Creative cognition: The diverse
operations and the prospect of applying a cognitive neuroscience
perspective. Methods, 42, 3848.
Abraham, A., Windmann, S., Siefen, R., Daum, I., & Gunturkun, O.
(2006). Creative thinking in adolescent with attention decit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Child Neuropsychology, 12, 111123.
Anderson, R. E., & Helstrup, T. (1993a). Multiple perspectives on discovery and creativity. In B. Roskos-Ewoldsen, M. J. IntonsPeterson, & R. E. Anderson (Eds.), Imagery, creativity and discovery: A cognitive perspective (pp. 223253). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Anderson, R. E., & Helstrup, T. (1993b). Visual discovery in mind and
on paper. Memory and Cognition, 21, 283293.
Finke, R. A. (1990). Creative imagery: Discoveries and inventions in
visualization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Finke, R. A., & Slayton, K. (1988). Explorations of creative and visual
synthesis in mental imagery. Memory and Cognition, 16, 252257.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. M., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition:
Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Marks, F. (1973). Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures.
British Journal of Psychology, 64, 1724.
Morrison, R. J., & Wallace, B. (2001). Imagery, vividness, creativity
and visual arts. Journal of Mental Imagery, 25, 135152.
Olivetti Belardinelli, M., Palmiero, M., Sestieri, C., Nardo, D., Di
Matteo, R., Londei, A., et al. (2009). An fMRI investigation on
image generation in different sensory modalities: The inuence of
vividness. Acta Psychologica, 132, 190200.
Palmiero, M., Nakatani, C., Raver, D., Olivetti Belardinelli, M., & van
Leeuwen, C. (2010). Abilities within and across visual and verbal
domains: How specic is their inuence on creativity? Creativity
Research Journal, 22, 369377.
Palmiero, M., Olivetti Belardinelli, M., Nardo, D., Sestieri, C., Di
Matteo, R., DAusilio, A., et al. (2009). Mental imagery generation
in different modalities activates sensory-motor areas. Cognitive
Processing, 10, 268271.
Pearson, D. G., Logie, R. H., & Gilhooly, K. (1999). Verbal representations and spatial manipulation during mental synthesis. European
Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 11, 295314.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity.
American Journal of Psychology, 7, 677688.