Serotkin - Relationship Between Self-Actualization and Creativity

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-ACTUALIZATION AND

CREATIVITY AS A SELF-GROWTH PRACTICE

by

Samara V. Serotkin

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the California Institute of Integral

Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Psychology in Clinical Psychology

California Institute of Integral Studies

San Francisco, CA 2010

UMI Number: 3428138

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3428138

Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL

I certify that I have read THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-

ACTUALIZATION AND CREATIVITY AS A SELF-GROWTH PRACTICE by

Samara V. Serotkin, and that in my opinion this work meets the criteria for

approving a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the Doctor of Psychology in Clinical Psychology at the California Institute of

Integral Studies.

__________________________________________________

Mera Atlis, Ph.D., Chair Director of Clinical Training, Clinical Psychology

__________________________________________________

Lee Bach, Ph.D., External Reviewer Program Director, Michigan School of Professional Psychology

Samara Serotkin

[contact info

withheld for privacy]

May 27, 2010

Dear Ms. Serotkin:

This letter grants you permission to use up to 5 sample items from the Personal

Orientation Inventory (POI) reusable test booklet for use in your dissertation.

Your credit line should read as follows: Reproduced with permission. POI

1996 EdITS Publishers. Due to certain stipulations in our contract with the

authors we cannot grant you permission to reproduce the entire instrument.

This is our standard permission for graduate research dissertations. Please

consider this an official response. If you have any further questions please

contact me at 1-800-416-1666 or via email at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Ellen Philips

Permissions Dept

v

Samara V. Serotkin California Institute of Integral Studies, 2010 Mera Atlis Ph.D., Committee Chair

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-ACTUALIZATION AND CREATIVITY AS A SELF-GROWTH PRACTICE

ABSTRACT

Self-actualization is a term used to describe a state of fully realizing one’s

potentials. Both Abraham Maslow (1959, 1970) and Carl Rogers (1959, 1961)

spoke of self-actualization and an innate actualizing tendency all people are born

with. A specific type of creativity is hypothesized to be associated with self-

actualization by both of these authors: “self-actualizing creativity” or

“constructive creativity.” This paper explores the relationship between self-

actualizing creativity as a self-growth practice and self-actualization levels in a

group of 99 volunteers recruited from the Internet to complete an online version

of the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI; E. L. Shostrom, 1964) as well as a

questionnaire designed by the author to explore self-actualization and creative

practices of the participant. No significant relationships were found, potentially

due to methodological issues. Future research in this area is recommended to take

these methodological issues into account.

vi

Acknowledgements

Completing this dissertation has been quite a journey, and I doubt I could

have done it alone. I want to take this opportunity to thank my husband, David,

for his unfailing support and patience throughout this process. He always helped

me find my path, even when I felt quite lost and doubtful that I would ever

complete this project. I am deeply grateful for his contribution to the completion

of this journey. I also would like to thank my chair, Mera, for all of her guidance

and support. This was a learning process for both of us, and my learning

experience was certainly deepened by her contributions. I would also like to thank

my family and my friends for all of their help and support. I appreciate every bit

of it. Thank you so much. Finally, I would like to thank the little being currently

residing in my womb. Thank you so much for your perfect timing and your

motivating me through the final push to complete this major undertaking. I am a

very fortunate woman to have had all the support and love I have experienced,

through this project and beyond. I am grateful to everyone and everything that has

put me exactly where I am today.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ....................................................................................................................v

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................ vi

List of Tables and Figure ....................................................................................... ix

Chapter 1: Introduction ..........................................................................................11

Chapter 2: Review of the Literature......................................................................13

Self-Actualization ..........................................................................................13

Abraham Maslow’s motivational theory. ..............................................14

Self-actualization in psychotherapy. .....................................................19

Self-actualization research. ...................................................................21

Creativity .......................................................................................................23

The relationship between self-actualization and creativity. ..................25

Self-actualizing (SA) creativity versus special talent (ST) creativity. ..25

Researching self-actualization and creativity........................................28

Chapter 3: Method ................................................................................................36

Procedures .....................................................................................................36

Instruments ....................................................................................................37

Participants ....................................................................................................42

Chapter 4: Results ..................................................................................................46

Analyses ........................................................................................................46

Self-Actualization and POI Scores ................................................................46

Self-Reported Creative Practices ...................................................................49

Creative Attitudes ..........................................................................................51

Creative Practices and Self-Actualization .....................................................60

Chapter 5: Discussion ............................................................................................63

viii

Methodological Concerns and Limitations ...................................................63

Suggestions for Further Research ..................................................................68

References ..............................................................................................................70

Appendix A: Informed Consent .............................................................................77

Appendix B: Participant’s Bill of Rights ...............................................................79

Appendix C: Demographics Questionnaire ...........................................................80

Appendix D: Creativity Attitudes Questionnaire and Creative Practices Questionnaire .........................................................................................................81

Appendix E: Sample POI Questions and Contact Information .............................83

Appendix F: Recruitment Letter ............................................................................84

Appendix G: Summary of Items Included in Each POI Scale ...............................85

Appendix H: POI Scores Summarized by Top Three Creative Categories ...........86

ix

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURE Table 1 Scales and Subscales of the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) ...................... 39

Figure 1 Flow Chart of Participant Selection. Author’s image. .......................................... 42

Table 2 Ethnicity, Marital Status, and Employment Status of Participants (N =99) ......... 44

Table 3 Participants’ Job Types (N = 99) .......................................................................... 45

Table 4 Means and Standard Deviations of the POI Scores .............................................. 47

Table 5 Cronbach’s Alphas for POI Scale Scores ............................................................. 48

Table 6 Intercorrelational Matrix for POI Scale Scores .................................................... 50

Table 7 Coding Categories and Criteria for Creative Practices ......................................... 52

Table 8 Frequency of Engagement in Creative Practice(s) (N = 99) ................................. 53

Table 9 Means and Standard Deviations for the Creative Attitudes Scores (N = 99)........ 53

Table 10 Pearson Product Moment Correlations Between the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scales and Item 1 of the Creative Attitudes Questionnaire ........ 54

Table 11 Pearson Product Moment Correlations Between the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scales and Item 2 of Creative Attitudes Questionnaire .............. 55


Table 13 Pearson Product Moment Correlations between the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scales and Item 4 of Creative Attitudes Questionnaire .............. 57

x


Table 15 Pearson Product Moment Correlations Between the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scales and the Creative Attitudes Score ..................................... 59

Table 16 Pearson Product Correlation Coefficient Between the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scale Scores and Creative Practices ........................................... 61

Table 17 Summary of Items Included in Each Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scale ...................................................................................................................... 84

Table 18 Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scores Summarized by Top Three Creative Categories ............................................................................................... 85

11

Chapter 1:

Introduction

The creative is the place where no one else has ever been. You have to leave the city of your comfort and go into the wilderness of your intuition. What you'll discover will be wonderful. What you'll discover is yourself. –Alan Alda (1980, para. 43)

Creativity can be a transformative tool to bring a person back to his or her

own intuitive roots. Self-actualization is a term used to describe the process of

fulfilling one’s greatest potentials, or an ideal state of wellness. Creativity has

been theorized to be associated with self-actualization (Dunn, 1961; Garfield,

Cohen, & Roth, 1969; Goff & Torrance; 1991; Rhodes, 1990; Torrance, 1962,

1978). Can creative activities actually facilitate the process of self-actualization?

This project explores this question.

Both Carl Rogers (1961) and Abraham Maslow (1968) spoke of an innate

self-actualizing tendency that can propel individuals on their own path of self-

growth toward self-actualization. Self-actualization is seen as a state of being, not

a static end-point. It involves cultivating patience for the process of life as it

unfolds for the individual experiencing it. A self-actualizing individual is able to

respond to life in a flexible way that sustains self-growth.

Rogers (1961) and Maslow (1968) also identified creativity as an

important factor associated with one’s self-actualizing tendency. Both theorized

that self-actualizing people are especially creative individuals, who are able to

adapt to life in a flexible and creative way. All forms of creativity are not created

equal however. A distinction is made between special talent (ST) creativity and

12

self-actualizing (SA) creativity (Maslow, 1968). ST creativity is found in

individuals who seem to be born with a specific aptitude for something. This kind

of natural creativity seems to be possible without much effort on the individual’s

part. It is a certain level of talent that one is simply born with. SA creativity, on

the other hand, is more of a personality trait that is accessible to everyone. It is not

being creative with a single medium, it is more of a way of approaching life in

general. It is a tendency to do anything creatively (Maslow, 1968).

What Maslow called SA creativity is described by Rogers (1961) as

“constructive creativity” (p. 353). Rogers hypothesized that in order for a

constructively creative act to occur, one must have certain internal conditions:

openness to experience, an internal locus of evaluation, and the ability to toy with

elements and concepts (Rogers, 1961). It is process-focused creativity, not

dependant on external evaluation of a final product. While Rogers (1961) focused

on how a therapist can foster these conditions, this project will explore whether it

is possible to develop these conditions for oneself via creative self-growth

practices.

This project explores the relationship between self-actualization and

creativity as a self-growth practice. The creative process is defined as any activity

that an individual participates in that involves toying with new concepts or ideas,

or new ways of seeing in general, and a reliance on the self as the ultimate judge

of the work, as opposed to relying on outside sources for approval.

13

Chapter 2:

Review of the Literature

Self-Actualization

What motivates people to do what they do? It is difficult to overestimate

the value of uncovering and unleashing an individual’s own motivational force.

Any therapist who has tried to guide a client toward self-growth can appreciate

the value of the client’s personal sense of motivation and agency for change.

However, motivation can be a difficult force to cultivate and explain because

everyone presents with a unique set of values and personal motivational factors.

For example, at first glance, excluding some basic physiological motivators

(avoiding pain, seeking pleasure, etc.), factors affecting motivation do not appear

to be universal (Goldstein, 1939/1995). Consequently, any theory of motivation

must take into account a wide variety of factors.

Many theorists and philosophers have taken on the challenge of

developing a core theory of motivation (e.g., Alderfer, 1972; Festinger, 1957;

Goldstein, 1939/1995; Herzberg, 1959; Maslow, 1943). Abraham Maslow is

perhaps the best known of these theorists. His work was largely influenced by

Kurt Goldstein, to whom he dedicated his book Toward A Psychology of Being

(1968). Goldstein (1939/1995) saw basic drives as a tension-release mechanism.

Looking at the various drives that were observed in humans and in other organic

life, he asked an essential question: “Toward what are the drives driving?” (p.

195). He posited that drives create tensions that subsequently need to be released.

In “healthy” individuals, these tensions, when released, propel the individual

14

toward a higher level of complexity and depth, thus bringing self-growth. While

unhealthy individuals also seek to release the tension, they do not progress

beyond this closed loop of tension-release cycles (Goldstein, 1939/1995).

If healthy individuals are motivated to transcend this tension/release cycle,

what then drives them? What propels them to grow? Goldstein (1939/1995)

coined the term self-actualizing to describe the basic tendency of individuals to

grow deeper in complexity and to go beyond themselves. According to Goldstein,

there is only one drive: that of self-actualization. “Normal behavior corresponds

to a continual change of tension, of such a kind that over and again that state of

tension is reached which enables and impels the organism to actualize itself in

further activities, according to its nature” (p. 197). Thus, healthy people are able

to use the natural buildup of tension to propel themselves forward on the path of

actualizing their potentials.

Abraham Maslow’s motivational theory. Inspired in part by Goldstein’s

writings, Abraham Maslow presented his theory of motivation in the

Psychological Review (1943). This theory organized human needs into a pyramid-

like hierarchy that individuals were hypothesized to work through, with basic

physiological needs at the bottom and self-actualization at the top. The idea was

that individuals would expend most of their efforts and energy toward meeting

their current level of needs. Once met, higher needs would emerge and become

the focus of the individual’s attention (Maslow, 1943). At the base of Maslow’s

hierarchy are the basic physiological needs. This refers to the body’s need to

maintain homeostasis by getting the food, water, and so on that it needs to

15

survive. If one is lacking in these areas, all activities will be organized with the

priority being to meet these needs (Maslow, 1943). Once an individual is able to

satisfy these physiological needs, he or she next focuses on maintaining safety.

This might include obtaining stable shelter, developing methods of self-defense

and learning to avoid danger. Thus, the individual focuses his or her activities to

establish ways to secure the stability and safety of his or herself (Maslow, 1958).

Once the individual develops enough trust in his or her safety, then he or she next

focuses on relationship needs and love. Here the individual seeks to establish

connection and a sense of belongingness and affection. This not only includes

being loved, but being able to give love as well (Maslow, 1958). When an

individual’s love and relationship needs are mostly met, esteem needs come into

focus. This refers to the individual’s need to have confidence in his or her self-

worth. Maslow breaks this stage into two needs: that of feeling one’s own self-

worth and that of achieving prestige and the respect of others (Maslow, 1958).

With such distinction of phases, it is easy to make the assumption that

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs rigidly requires an individual to progress through the

stages successively, completing one before moving on to the next. Progression

through these stages, however, is actually more of a fluid and flexible process.

Maslow (1954/1970) points out that needs from one level do not necessarily need

to be completely satisfied before a person begins work on the next level, he

envisioned the process as more of a gradual ebb and flow between the stages.

People can be working on satisfying more than one level of needs simultaneously.

16

After an individual has mostly satisfied the basic needs, that person’s

attention shifts to the higher need for self-actualization. In the following

statement, Maslow (1943) defines self-actualization as the tendency for one to

“…become actualized in what he is potentially. This tendency might be phrased

as the desire to become more and more what one is, to become everything that

one is capable of becoming” (p. 382). Self-actualizing individuals have been

described as:

psychologically well-adjusted and free from neurosis, psychosis, or

crippling anxiety;

more able to turn inward in a meditative way to solve personal

problems;

able to function well interpersonally with an increased capacity for

intimate contact;

more creative and spontaneous, and open to new experiences;

less conformist and more inner-directed;

having a greater sense of purpose and meaning in life

empathic and more accepting of others;

more altruistic and loving; and

able to focus their energies on the present moment, rather then

dwelling on the past or the future (Farmer, 1984; Ford & Procidano,

1990; Maslow, 1943).

Self-actualization is not an endpoint to be achieved, but is more of an

ongoing process or a way of life. Self-actualizing people continually work to

17

discern their unique core values and then to live congruently with them. It is an

ongoing process of self-growth and integration. Making growth choices like this

involves risk and courage, and may set the self-actualizing person on a difficult

path that is at odds with surrounding people and norms (O’Connor & Yballe,

2007).

This incarnation of Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs, with self-

actualization at the top, is the one most often presented in current textbooks

(Koltko-Rivera, 2006). As Maslow’s research progressed, however, he began to

realize that there was a hole in his theory: if self-actualization was truly the top

goal in motivating people, then self-actualizing people would be satisfied and not

driven toward any higher goals. Nonetheless, he found that the self-actualizing

people in his research remained engaged in the pursuit of something (Maslow,

1970). As such, it became clear to him that his theory was incomplete. He

determined that there was indeed an additional level to his hierarchy of needs:

self-transcendence. Maslow then divided his hierarchy of needs into two

categories. The physiological, safety, relationship and love, and esteem needs

became known as the “basic needs,” while self-actualization and self-

transcendence were grouped together as “growth needs” (Maslow, 1970).

Maslow hypothesized (1970) that self-actualizing people are striving

towards self-transcendence, which is the goal of going beyond oneself, or literally

transcending the self. It points at a feeling of one-ness with the world, of

egolessness and service to a greater good (Koltko-Rivera, 2006). Self-actualizing

people are drawn forward on their individual paths by the drive for self-

18

transcendence. They are able to negotiate moments of tension and stress in such a

way that they are able to minimize suffering and maximize growth.

Maslow has been criticized for implying that his theories could be applied

universally (Geller, 1982). This universal application becomes especially

problematic with regards to its emphasis on the self and self-growth, which

reflects Western cultural valuing of the self and independence (Hill, 2004).

Eastern cultures tend to value collectivism and de-emphasize the importance of

the self (Pedersen, Draguns, Lonner, & Trimble, 2002). The relationship between

culture and individualism and collectivism is a complex one, and a great deal of

variation can exist within cultures (Brewer & Chen, 2007) and one should be

careful of stereotyping, it is important to be aware of potential cultural biases

when applying theoretical ideas. While Maslow’s concept of self-actualization

does appear to value the self and self-growth, and therefore a bias towards

Western culture, this bias fades when his theory includes self-transcendence as the

ultimate driving force. Self-transcendence is the process of actually letting go of

the self for an experience of “one-ness” with the universe (Koltko-Rivera, 2006).

Interestingly, the concept of self-transcendence can be seen through various

lenses of world religions, such as “nirvana” in Buddhism and “ecstasy” in

Christianity. The concept of self-transcendence may apply to people of varying

cultural backgrounds in different ways.

While people don’t generally achieve self-transcendence, it remains a

motivating force for self-actualizing people (Maslow, 1954/1970). The closest

19

most people get to self-transcendence is through “peak experiences,” which are

characterized by the following:

feelings of limitless horizons and being simultaneously more powerful and

also more helpless then one ever was before;

feelings of great ecstasy, awe, and wonder; and

the conviction that something extremely important and valuable has

happened, leading to great transformation in the individual’s daily life

(Maslow, 1954/1970).

Maslow’s (1970) work on self-transcendence truly transcended fields as

well. It stretched beyond the field of psychology and has since also been applied

in the fields of education (Rubadeau, Garrett, & Rubadeau, 1984; Snyder, 1976)

and organizational development (Dye, Mills, & Weatherbee, 2005; Wilson &

Madsen, 2008). Additionally, his work on peak experiences and self-

transcendence appealed to the religious and esoteric community (Locke, 2002).

This led to the development of the field of transpersonal psychology, and its

Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, which Maslow helped to establish

(O'Connor & Yballe, 2007).

Self-actualization in psychotherapy. In addition to the field of

transpersonal psychology, Maslow’s (1943) motivational theory has contributed

to many theoretical orientations. Examples include psychodynamic and cognitive

behavioral therapy, which work to identify and remove the blockages that prevent

people from being able to reach their fullest potential—in other words, to self-

actualize. Maslow’s influence, however, can most clearly be seen in the fields of

20

humanistic and positive psychologies. Carl Rogers (1961), the father of person-

centered therapy and one of the founders of humanistic psychology, believed the

main curative force in psychotherapy is:

…man’s tendency to actualize himself, to become his potentialities…the directional trend which is evident in all organic and human life - the urge to expand, extend, develop, mature—the tendency to express and activate all the capacities of the organism, or the self. (p. 351)

By offering the core therapeutic conditions of unconditional positive regard,

empathy, and authenticity, a therapist helps people release their self-actualizing

tendencies (Rogers, 1961). In one of his classic studies Rogers (1961) used the

Q-Sort technique, Rogers collected data from a group of 29 clients at the

Counseling Center at the University of Chicago before, during, and after receiving

weekly individual therapy. At each interval, the participants were asked to sort a

group of 100 self-descriptive statements into 9 piles from those items most

characteristic of themselves to those viewed as least characteristic of themselves.

Rogers found that, as the client-centered therapeutic process unfolds, clients

experience a wide variety of improvements similar to Maslow’s description of

self-actualizing individuals, including understanding previously unexamined

aspects of themselves and becoming more of the following:

integrated, more able to function effectively;

similar to the person they would like to be;

self-directing and self-confident;

unique and more self-expressive;

understanding and accepting of others; and

21

able to cope with the problems of life more adequately and more

comfortably. (p. 38)

Self-actualization research. Maslow became deeply curious about the

self-actualizing person and over the years, he completed a great deal of clinical

studies that involved gathering information about individuals who appeared to be

self-actualizing. He found it difficult, however, to find many subjects for his

research because, “in our society, basically satisfied people are the exception”

(Maslow, 1943, p. 383).

In the 1960s and 1970s, there was a great deal of interest in the concept of

self-actualization, but more recently it has fallen out of favor. Currently, there is a

trend in psychology towards empirically validated treatments and brief

psychotherapies. Self-actualization can be a difficult concept to concretize and

study empirically as some researchers feel that the essential character of this kind

of experience can be lost by attempts to control and manipulate these phenomena,

so its appearance in the literature has dwindled (J. Davis, 2009).

The entire field of humanistic psychology, of which self-actualization is

only a part, has come under fire for its lack of scientific rigor and lack of balance.

The field has a history of internal conflict and passionate claims without adequate

empirical validation (Grogan, 2009). Maslow (as cited by Starcher, 2006)

developed a definition of self-actualization and then identified a group of people

that he felt fit this description. Most of his research was based on this subject

pool. He was unable to provide much actual empirical data regarding his concepts

(Starcher, 2006). His process of theory development can be described as

22

exploratory and hermeneutic in nature (Rennie, 2008). Additionally, his theory of

self-actualization evolved over time, leading to several different versions of his

theory being published, which led to some confusion and criticism of earlier

versions of the theories (Leontiev, 2008).

Geller (1982) criticizes Maslow’s theories for their emphasis and reliance

on a fundamentally positive view of human nature. Geller points out that this

theory, if applied universally as Maslow suggested it could be, fails to take into

account the existence of evil in human nature. Additionally, he discusses the

shortcomings of the theory with regards to the limitations of his description of the

final stage of self-actualization. Geller (1984) states that the end-point, or goal

stage presented in Maslow’s theory is not objectively measurable, and can not be

universally applicable.

The concept of self-actualization is a valuable one to research, however.

What therapist would not want to help clients actualize, or reach their fullest

potentials? Well-rooted in Maslow’s and Rogers’s work, the field of positive

psychology, which focuses on the study of happiness and does not focus as much

on pathology, has gained recent attention for its promise to enhance human

functioning and reduce suffering (Lambert & Erekson, 2008; Seligman &

Csikszentmihalyi, 2000b). Attempts to empirically validate the clinical use of

positive psychology have been promising (Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson,

2005). In a special issue of the American Psychologist that was devoted entirely to

the field of positive psychology, positive psychology is lauded as an essential tool

within the upcoming field of prevention (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000a).

23

Building optimism, for example, has been shown to help prevent depression

(Seligman, Schulman, DeRubeis, & Hollon, 1999).

Creativity

Similar to self-actualization, creativity can be an elusive and slippery

construct to pin down concretely (Smuts, 1992). Merriam-Webster’s (2009)

online dictionary defines creativity as “the quality of being creative,” with

“creative” defined as “the ability to create.” The definition of “create” is,

according to Webster’s “to bring into being.” A deeper way to view creativity is

as a basic problem-solving process, an “all-encompassing form of learning in that

it involves problem-solving through self-exploration, intuition, self-assessment,

and insight” (Talerico, 1986, p. 239). This basic problem-solving process can be

viewed as an evolutionary trait - one that has allowed the human race to adapt to

its ever-changing environment, and thus survive. We use creativity to adapt to

novel situations, learning to avoid danger in new ways and get our needs met in

an ever-changing world (Grossman, 1981; Richards, 2007).

Carl Rogers (1961) defined the creative process as “the emergence in

action of a novel relational product, growing out of the uniqueness of the

individual on the one hand, and the materials, events, people, or circumstances of

his life on the other” (p. 350). In other words, it is the result of a unique

individual’s interaction with his or her ever-changing world. It is an interactive

process or coping skill that exercises an individual’s cognitive flexibility (Goff &

Torrance, 1991; Rhodes, 1990; Rogers, 1961).

24

Creative thinking, then, can be seen as a way to exercise one’s cognitive

flexibility—to stretch the mind, so to speak. An individual must have a certain

amount of cognitive flexibility in order to make any meaningful changes to his or

her internal schemas and how he or she interacts with the world (Simonton,

2000). One needs to be able to look at his or her life through a creative lens.

Creative thinking, in general, has the following benefits:

encouraging the expression of feelings;

fostering confidence through the risk-taking inherent in creative

thinking;

developing communication with the unconscious; and

contributing to the development of new insights, resolution of conflict,

reduction of anxiety (Talerico, 1986, p. 231).

Creativity was the single common trait Abraham Maslow (1954/1970)

found in all of the twenty-three self-actualizing people he studied. He described

this creativity as a specific kind of inventiveness that was more a fundamental

characteristic of common human nature-a potentiality given to all human beings

at birth (Maslow, 1954/1970, p. 170). He described this trait of creativity as

something that all people are born with, but one which seems to fade for some

people over time as they grow older as they accommodate the expectations of

society. Nonetheless, every person he identified as self-actualizing continued to

demonstrate a high level of creativity, without exception. As described in the

previous section of this paper, self-actualization is a state of optimal functioning

and being psychologically well adjusted, so Maslow’s observations point to the

25

possibility that higher levels of creativity might be associated with higher

functioning and higher levels of self-actualization.

The relationship between self-actualization and creativity. Carl Rogers

(1961) viewed creativity as a core factor in his picture of mental health and

growth. Like Maslow, he saw a deep connection between self-actualization and

creativity, hypothesizing that they both emerge from the same root. “The

mainspring of creativity appears to be the same tendency which we discover so

deeply as the curative force in psychotherapy—man’s tendency to actualize

himself, to become his potentialities” (Rogers, 1961, p. 351, emphasis added).

While Rogers (1961) envisioned the relationship between creativity and

self-actualization as both emerging from the same root, Maslow (1968)

hypothesized that a reciprocal relationship exists between creativity and self-

actualization. He saw creativity as a factor that helps propel one’s self-actualizing

tendency which in turn, helps feed one’s creativity. Much like Rogers’s (1961)

belief that the actualizing tendency and creativity are so close in nature that they

may be emerging from the same root, Maslow went so far as to suggest that

creativity and self-actualization may even be the same thing (Maslow, 1968).

SA creativity versus ST creativity. Maslow (1954/1970) made the

distinction between two kinds of creativity: ST creativity and SA creativity. ST

creativity is the kind of creativity that seems to be reserved for select individuals

born with exceptional natural talent for something—prodigies such as Mozart.

Maslow envisioned these cases as having been specially endowed with a drive

26

and a capacity with little relationship to the rest of the personality and with which,

the individual was born (p. 170).

Maslow (1954/1970), however, did not focus much of his research on ST

creativity because this kind of creativity “…does not rest upon psychic health or

basic satisfaction” (p. 170). Some may argue that all people are born with special

talents and that these talents are not recognized, supported, and fostered in some

and, therefore, left dormant. In other words, Maslow’s definition of ST creativity

may be seen as inadequate. If a person is born with special abilities or special

talents, but their basic needs are not met, they may not have the opportunity to

cultivate these special talents.

Maslow’s (1954/1970) interest lay in SA creativity, which he described as

a natural expression of a healthy personality and a potentiality with which all

humans are born. This kind of creativity is not limited to a narrow definition of

“artistic endeavors.” Rather, it is a part of whatever activity with which a person

is engaged. In this sense a shoemaker and an accountant, for example, could both

be equally creative in their work. Whatever one does can be done with a certain

attitude, a certain spirit that arises out of the nature of the character of the person

performing the act (Maslow, 1954/1970). Rogers (1961) emphasized that this kind

of creativity can be witnessed in a wide variety of situations, and that all of them

can been seen as equally creative—such as a child inventing a new game with his

playmates, Einstein formulating a theory of relativity, a homemaker devising a

new sauce for the meat, or a young author writing a first novel. There is no

attempt to set these creative activities in order of more or less creative (p. 350).

27

Another important aspect of SA creativity is that it does not emphasize the

importance of the final product in the creative act. What is important is the

creative process itself (Maslow, 1954/1970). Some authors, such as Young (1985)

and Hyatt (1992) also feel that having a final product is not essential to define an

act as creative. Young claims that being creative is more of an open and

spontaneous attitude toward life that equates creativity with good mental health.

In this view, the creative “product” becomes the process of living life and

negotiating relationships with the world. The product becomes the process. It is

living spontaneously and in the present. In other words, how you travel becomes

more important then where you go (Young, 1985, p. 80).

Richards (2007) has written extensively about the concept of “everyday

creativity,” which, like Maslow’s SA creativity, operates beyond survival and

“deficiency” needs, moving people toward realizing their higher human potential,

and even forwarding their ongoing development. She views SA creativity as a

higher level of everyday creativity, which:

… is about everyone, throughout our lives; it is fundamental to our survival. It is how we find a lost child, get enough to eat, and make our way in a new place and culture. It is not so much what we do as how we do it, whether this is at work or leisure. With our everyday creativity, we adapt flexibly, we improvise, and we try different options, whether we are raising our child, counseling a friend, fixing our home, or planning a fundraising event. (p. 26)

Everyday creativity, or SA creativity, involves learning to trust the self as an

appropriate evaluator of the creative product, or not valuing the self as a construct

in the first place. Not relying on an outside evaluator to judge the worth of the

creative product may help the creator develop trust in his or her own intuitive

28

voice. A person who is able to rely on him or herself to evaluate the worth of

something is said to have an internal locus of control, or evaluation (Capuzzi &

Gross, 1999).

Internal locus of control is a concept has been found to be associated with

happiness and creativity. For example, in a study involving 182 college students,

Pannells and Claxton (2008) found that internal locus of control was positively

correlated with higher levels of happiness and creativity. Using the Oxford

Happiness Inventory (OHI; Argyle, 2001) to measure happiness, the Runco

Ideation Behavior Scale (RIBS; Runco, Plucker & Lim, 2001) to measure

creativity, and the Rotter’s Locus of Control (Rotter, 1966), they found that

people who were identified to have strong internal locus of control had significant

correlations between their scores on the OHI and the RIBS (r(85) = 438, p < .01).

Locus of control has been found to vary across cultures, however (Srivastava,

Blakely, Andrews, & McKee-Ryan, 2007; Smith, Trompenaars, & Dugan, 1995)

and it is important to take this into account as a possible confounding factor when

discussing this concept. Individuals from Asian cultures, for example, have been

found to generally score as having more external locus of control than individuals

of North American Caucasian descent (Dyal, 1984). This suggests a possibility

that one’s self-actualization and creative experiences might have a strong

culturally-influenced component.

Researching self-actualization and creativity. Self-actualization has

been described as a picture of positive mental functioning (Farmer, 1984), and

Maslow (1970) identified SA creativity as the major common thread among

29

people he identified as self-actualizing. SA creativity is worth studying as a

possible tool to aid in self-growth. Maslow (1959), May (1959) and Rogers

(1959) all emphasize the potential of the creative process as a tool to enhance self-

growth—one that is available to the general population, not only a select few.

There is a lot of theoretical discussion about a connection between

creativity and self-actualization (Dunn, 1961; Garfield et al., 1969; Goff &

Torrance, 1991; Rhodes, 1990; Torrance, 1962, 1978). Maslow (1970) felt that

creativity and self-actualization were so connected that he felt they could be two

words describing the same phenomenon. A strong argument has also been made

for the connection between higher levels of creativity and wellness (Duncan,

1987). With such theoretical backing for the creative process as a therapeutic tool,

several researchers have taken up the gauntlet to explore the healing potential of

the creative process (Cropley, 1990; Evans, 2007; Garfield et al.,1969). One

recent example of such research was a study produced by Van Lith, Fenner, and

Schofield (2009) in which three art therapy facilitators at a psychosocial

rehabilitation program in Australia participated in a qualitative open-ended

phenomenological interview to explore the role of art making activities in mental

health recovery. These researchers developed a rich description of how these

facilitators viewed the art making process as a method in mental health

rehabilitation. They found, for example, that when people who were in a

meditative creative flow state, they were able to deal with highly traumatic

material and resolve some of these issues in ways that facilitated the mergence of

insight and personal growth (Van Lith et al., 2009). This study was exploratory in

30

nature, though, and with such a small sample size (N = 3), it should be treated as

such and the results should not be generalized beyond the initial sample. The

study does, however, point towards the usefulness of studying this idea.

One of the difficulties with establishing a clear link between self-

actualization and creativity is finding an instrument that accurately measures SA

creativity, as opposed to ST creativity. Much of the existing research that has tried

to establish a link and failed to find a significant relationship between these two

constructs (Mathes, 1978; Murphy, Dauw, Horton, & Fredian, 1976). For

example, Murphy et al. (1976) explored the relationship between self-

actualization and creativity using a sample of 177 graduate and undergraduate

students. They measured self-actualization using Shostrom’s (1964) Personal

Orientation Inventory (POI), which is one of the primary assessment tools used to

measure self-actualization. Creativity was measured using a combination of the

Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT; Torrance, 1962) and the Similes

Preference Inventory (SPI; Pearson & Maddi, 1966). The TTCT uses a

combination of verbal and figural forms to create measures of identical fluency,

flexibility, and originality. The SPI is a structured measure of the tendency toward

variety. While the authors in the Murphy et al. (1976) study listed convincing

theoretical arguments for finding a relationship between creativity and self-

actualization, the authors did not find any significant relationship between these

variables. One possible explanation they identify for the lack of support for their

hypothesis is that the instruments did not measure the constructs as clearly as

possible, pointing out the likelihood that the creativity measure (TCCT) was

31

“spelling out intellectual differences more distinctly than the self-actualizing

measures, which are measuring personality variables” (p. 43). Another possible

reason is the close relationship between the definition of self-actualization and

mental wellness. The authors note that the POI may have actually been measuring

mental wellness as opposed to fully capturing the self-actualization variable

(Murphy at al., 1976).

Mathes (1978) also attempted and failed to establish a statistically

significant relationship between self-actualization and creativity, citing problems

with construct validity for the measures of creativity. Working with a student

population of 29 male and 43 female subjects, he used the POI to measure self-

actualization and a combination of tests to measure creativity: the Remote

Associates Test (Mednick, 1967), the Generations Test (Barron, 1968), and four

other measures created by Mathes himself. These additional measures involved

having the subject draw pictures of hell and of an old man, and writing stories

based on prompts by the author. These drawings and stories were then rated for

creativity by four judges on a five point scale. The judges were “instructed to

define a creative picture or story as one that was unusual but appropriate” (p.

219). Mathes hypothesized that the lack of statistically significant findings

between any of the measures of creativity and POI (self-actualization) scores may

have been due to the differentiation between creative living and the cognitive

ability to create. In other words, just because a person appears to be living a

creative and unconventional life, this does not mean that they themselves are

exercising any creative abilities—they may simply be imitating the actions of

32

creative others. The tests that Mathes employed to measure creativity evaluated a

person’s creative activities, but failed to distinguish between a person’s creative

actions and a person’s appearance as a creative individual (Mathes, 1978).

Kalliopuska (1992), not satisfied with previous research that tried to

establish a relationship between creativity and self-actualization, conducted a

small study using 20 university students and four different measures. She used the

POI to measure self-actualization, but only used four scales from it: the Feeling

Reactivity scale, Spontaneity scale, Self-Regard scale, and the Self-Acceptance

scale. To measure creativity, she used Sauri’s Test of a Creative Way of Living

(Sauri, 1980, as cited by Kalliopuska, 1992), which is designed to measure the

extent to which a person “…is ready to apply his creative capacity to activities

and experiences as opposed to applying them to only one limited field” (p. 11).

Kalliopuska found moderate positive statistically significant relationships

between scores on the Total Creativity and Spontaneity (r = 56, p < .01), Total

Creativity and Feeling Reactivity (r = 44, p < .01), Freedom from Anxiety and

Self-Regard (r = 58, p < .01), and Freedom from Anxiety and Sufficiency of Need

Satisfaction (r = 57, p < .01). Given the small sample size, results of this study

were difficult to interpret and replication of this work with a larger sample was

recommended (Kalliopuska, 1992).

Another small study that provided interesting results was Schwarzkopf’s

(1981) unpublished master’s thesis (as cited in Cropley, 1990), which consisted of

a longitudinal study with nine adult women over the course of a year who met

weekly and engaged in various creative activities, such as knitting and sewing.

33

These women were encouraged to explore new ways of doing their crafts, like

learning new patterns or combining techniques in new ways. At the beginning and

end of the study, these women were rated on a number of personality traits and

were shown to have less anxiety in unfamiliar situations at the end of the study as

compared to the beginning, as well as increased goal-oriented behavior, more

playfulness, and increased independence. While this study had a rather small

sample size, it is important because it demonstrates the healing potential of a self-

directed creative activity for self-growth. These women were able to do work on

their own, outside of a therapy situation, to improve their level of wellness.

Citing a lack of solid empirical support the relationship between self-

actualization and creativity, Runco, Ebersole, and Mraz (1991) set out to explore

for the relationship of these variables in sixty-four undergraduate students by

using different instruments: the How Do You Think Test (HDYT; G. A. Davis &

Subkoviak, 1975), the Adjective Check List (ACL; Gough & Heilbrum, 1980),

and the Short Index of Self-actualization (SI; Jones & Crandall, 1986). The

HDYT scores all correlated significantly with the SI scores (r = .42, p <.03),

providing a moderate support for the relationship between self-actualization and

creativity. The HDYT is designed to “assess attitudes, interests, motivations,

values, and other personality and biographical matters which often characterize

creative individuals” (G. A. Davis & Subkoviak, 1975, p. 37). Since this was one

of the first studies to demonstrate such a relationship, the authors recommended

follow-up studies with different populations and larger sample sizes.

34

While the Schwartzkopf (1981, as cited in Cropley, 1990) and Runco et al.

(1991) studies are promising, overall, the available research on SA, or everyday

creativity, appear to be slim and of varying quality. Most of the available research

is plagued by small sample sizes, and limited scope. Most importantly, little effort

has been made to adequately distinguish between SA and ST creativity. If only

SA creativity is associated with self-actualization, and most of the existing

research lumps SA and ST creativity together, then it would make sense that

much of this research has not been able to find a clear relationship between

creativity and self-actualization. There is good reason, however, to persist with

exploring this slippery construct. Based on the work of Maslow

(1943,1958,1959,1968,1970) and Rogers (1959,1961) especially, and supported

by more contemporary researchers such as Richards (1990), there is evidence that

SA creativity has the potential to be a useful tool for enhancing mental health and

self-growth.

Maslow’s (1959) concept of SA creativity was known by other names as

well. Rogers (1961) described a similar phenomenon as “constructive creativity.”

Rogers hypothesized that in order for a constructively creative act to occur, one

must have certain internal conditions: openness to experience, an internal locus of

evaluation, and the ability to toy with elements and concepts (Rogers, 1961). His

definition is process-focused, not depending on external evaluation of a final

product. One way to foster mental health is to foster creativity in everyday life

situations (Cropley, 1990; Duncan, 1987; Schwarzkopf, 1981, as cited in Cropley,

1990). While Rogers focused on how a therapist can facilitate this creativity

35

growth, this writer explores whether it is possible to develop these conditions for

oneself via creative self-growth practices.

This study examines the relationship between self-actualization and

creativity as a self-growth practice. People who participate in some kind of

creative self-growth practice are hypothesized by this writer to be more self-

actualizing, on average, than people who do not participate in this kind of

practice. Since creative self-growth practices are not clearly defined in the

literature, each participant defines their own practices. This will allow for an

investigation of the relationship between how participants define their creative

self-growth practices and their levels of self-actualization.

36

Chapter 3:

Method

Procedures

Participant recruitment and data collection were completed via the

Internet. The informed consent (Appendix A), participant’s bill of rights

(Appendix B), a brief demographics questionnaire (Appendix C), and all survey

questions were posted on the Internet using a site designed for creating web

surveys: surveymonkey.com. The survey questions consisted of a questionnaire

developed by this researcher investigating the participants’ creative practices

(Appendix D) and an electronic version of the Personal Orientation Inventory

(POI). Permission was granted to this researcher from EdITS, the publisher of the

POI, to administer these questions in this format (Appendix E).

Participants were volunteers recruited from a mass email sent to this

researcher’s colleagues, asking them to forward the email to their family and

friends inviting them to participate in the study (Appendix F). Additionally,

participants were solicited from websites that allow for research recruitment, such

as Craigslist.org. All potential participants were given a website link that directed

them to the surveymonkey.com questionnaire. Before gaining access to the

questions, participants were asked to read through the informed consent and the

participant’s bill of rights and were required to electronically confirm that they

had read and understood the contents of these documents. Participants were then

asked whether they were under 18 years of age or whether they did not live in the

United States. Participants who answered “yes” to either of these questions were

37

excluded from the study due to the fact that the POI can only be scored for

individuals 18 years or older and that the normative sample only included people

residing in the United States. After completing this step, questionnaires were

forwarded to the participants. Upon completion of the survey, participants were

offered a chance to submit their email address, if they wished, to be entered in a

raffle for the chance to win one of two $50 Amazon.com gift certificates.

The Surveymonkey website assigned code numbers to each participant.

Each participant’s responses to the POI questions were sent to the EdITS

Corporation for scoring with the code numbers assigned by surveymonkey as the

only identifying information. The POI results were returned to the researcher in

the form of 16 scale and subscale scores for each participant. These scores were

used to measure the participants’ level of self-actualization

Instruments

Self-actualization was measured by the Personal Orientation Inventory

(POI; Knapp, 1976/1990), which is currently the best available tool for measuring

self-actualization. This test was adapted for online administration by the author

of this paper with the approval of EdITS, the test’s publisher. The POI consists of

150 two-choice comparative value judgment items reflecting values and behavior

seen to be of importance in the development of self-actualizing individuals

(Shostrom, 1964). Test takers are asked to select one statement of a pair that they

feel is most true to them. Clinically derived scales, comprising items grouped into

two major scales and ten subscales, are used in comparing the responses to

normative samples (Knapp, 1976/1990).

38

The POI was developed by Shostrom (1964) to differentiate self-

actualized from non-self-actualized individuals according to differences in their

beliefs and value orientations (Shostrom, 1964). The test’s conceptualization of

the self-actualizing person is based on Maslow’s (1954/1970) descriptions of self-

actualizing people. Initial development of the test item pool was based on

observed value-judgment problems seen by private-practice therapists. The POI

consists of 2 major ratio scales and 10 subscales. These scales are presented in

Table 1.

Maslow (1971) was a part of the development and testing of the POI and

supported its use in research of self-actualization: “there is today a standardized

test of self-actualization. Self-actualization can now be defined quite

operationally, as intelligence used to be defined, i.e., self-actualization is what

that test tests. It correlates well with external variables of various kinds” (p. 28).

Since Maslow’s original assertions about the POI, the validity of the POI has been

tested by administering the test to adults who have been identified as self-

actualizing, to non-self-actualizing adults, and to normal adults, who are neither

self-actualized nor non-self-actualized (Shostrom, 1987). Mean scores of the self-

actualized adults were consistently higher on 11 of the 12 scales than the mean

scores for normal adults. Additionally, mean scores of the non-self-actualized

adults were consistently lower than mean scores of the normal adults on all 12

scales, the ratio scales as well as the subscores (Shostrom, 1987). Statistically

significant differences between the self-actualizing group and non self-actualizing

group were found at the .05 level on all scales and subscales except for the Nature

39

Table 1 Scales and Subscales of the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI)

No. of items Abbreviation Scale name and description

23 TI/TC Time Ratio (Time Incompetence/Time Competence): degree to which one is “present” oriented

127 O/I Support Ratio (Other/Inner): whether reactivity orientation is basically toward other or self

26 SAV Self-Actualizing Value: affirmation of primary values of self-actualizing persons

32 Ex Existentiality: ability to situationally or existentially react without rigid adherence to principles

23 Fr Feeling Reactivity: sensitivity of responsiveness to one’s own needs and feelings

18 S Spontaneity: freedom to react spontaneously or to be oneself

16 Sr Self Regard: affirmation of self because of worth or strength

26 Sa Self Acceptance: affirmation or acceptance of self in spite of weaknesses or deficiencies

16 Nc Nature of Man: degree of the constructive view of the nature of man, masculinity, femininity

9 Sy Synergy: ability to be synergistic, to transcend dichotomies

25 A Acceptance of Aggression: ability to accept one’s natural aggressiveness as opposed to defensiveness, denial, and repression of aggression

28 C Capacity for Intimate Contact: ability to develop contactful intimate relationships with other human beings, unencumbered by expectations and obligations

Note. A higher score on a scale indicates a greater presence of that characteristic. Author’s table; data from E.L. Shostrom (1987), Personal Orientation Inventory Manual (San Diego, CA: EdITS),p.5.

40

of Man subscale. These findings indicate that the POI demonstrates adequate

construct validity.

As reported by Shostrom (1987), validity has also been examined by

comparing results of the POI with results of other psychosocial tests such as the

the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI, Eysenck & Eysenck, 1963) and the

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI, Hathaway & McKinley,

1951). Test-retest reliability, with a one-week interval, of the POI is estimated at

0.71 for the Time Ratio and 0.77 for the Support Ratio (Shostrom, 1987).

Concurrent validity data, describing correlations of POI measurements with that

of various other standardized measurements of personality are available in a

number of studies presented and reviewed by Knapp (1971). Shostrom (1987)

asserted that, in general, the psychometric characteristics of the POI are at a level

similar to other personality inventories and constitute a reasonable presumption of

reliability.

Creative practices were measured by a creative practices questionnaire

(CPQ) created by the writer of this paper (Appendix D). This questionnaire was

designed to clarify the kind of creative practice that would be suggested by

Rogers’s (1961) description of the factors associated with constructive creativity:

openness to experience, absence of external evaluation, and the ability to toy with

elements or concepts (Rogers, 1961). Whether or not these elements are really

being used in the process is only known to the individual. As Richards (2007) put

it, “The mishap of a broken jar of jam on the floor is probably not creative. Yet,

seeing, appreciating, and photographing its accidental pattern of deep red and

41

sparkling glass might still be” (p. 5). One may create something that seems

creative to the outside observer, but may only have occurred by accident. Due to

the self-defined nature of the creative act, self-report was relied upon in this

measure.

The CPQ is divided into two parts: the first part asked participants whether

or not they currently engaged in creative practices, and if they did, they were

asked to describe their creative practices and how frequently they engaged in

them within an open-ended question format. Responses to this question were

coded by the researcher for the types of creative activities the individuals engaged

in, as well as the frequency with which they engaged in creative Activities. The

second part of the CPQ consists of the Creative Attitudes Questionnaire (CAQ)

designed to measure attitudes about creativity held by the participant. The

following five statements listed below were rated by participants based on the

extent to which each statement was true for them, using a seven point likert-type

scale, ranging from “almost always true” to “almost never true.”

“It is important to me that others see and appreciate my creative

products.”

“I enjoy my creative process, regardless of the outcome.”

“It is important to me that my end product looks like I planned it from

the start.”

“My creative process is a kind of meditation- when I get very focused

on the task at hand.”

42

“It is important to me that my creative practices communicate

something specific to others who witness it.”

Participants

As illustrated in Figure 1, 198 participants began the questionnaire, and

124 (62.6%) made it to the end page of the questionnaire. Of these 124

participants, 7 stated that they did not engage in any creative activities at all.

These participants were excluded from analyses because it was not a large enough

group to allow meaningful comparisons with those who engaged in current

creative practices. An additional 18, or 9.1 % of the original pool of prospective

participants, were excluded for either not completing enough POI questions or for

not completing the essay question describing their creative practices. According

to the test publisher, the cutoff point for scoring a POI scale is subjectively

decided by the scorer. The individual who scored the tests for this study used a

50% cutoff. In other words, in order for a scale score to be obtained, a participant

would need to have responded to at least half of the items contained within that

scale. After excluding the incomplete questionnaires, 99 participants were left for

the data analysis.

Figure 1. Flow Chart of Participant Selection. Author’s image.

198 began the survey

74 did not complete

the survey

124 made it to end page of the survey

7 identified as not engaging in any creative activity

117 identified as engaging in some sort

of creative activity

18 did not complete enough items for

scoring

99 eligible participants in the final sample

43

Most of the sample consisted of young adults, although there was a large

age range, with only 2 participants over 65 years of age and 4 under the age of 21

(Mage = 34.60, SD = 13.19, age range: 19-82). Overall, the sample was not as

diverse as the researcher had originally expected. It was predominantly, 89%

(n = 88) female. As shown in Table 2, a large proportion of participants was

Caucasian, with less than 10% of the sample identifying with all other ethnicities.

The majority of the participants also stated that they were married or in a

committed relationship, were employed (either full or part-time), and about half

were full-time or part-time students.

Participants were asked what kind of job they engaged in either currently

or in the past, in an open-ended format. Aggregated responses are displayed in

Table 3.The most common employment types were Childcare/Education/

Librarian, the Arts, and Direct Human Service. Income levels were also collected

(Mincome = $55,596.33, SD = $50,161.98, income range = $0-$400,000)

suggesting that the income levels varied widely, but the majority of the

respondents made enough money to get their basic needs met. Three (3.45%) of

the respondents to this question stated that they had zero income. Twelve elected

to not respond to the inquiry about their income level.

44

Table 2 Ethnicity, Marital Status, and Employment Status of Participants (N =99)

Demographic Frequency Percent (%)

Ethnicity

White/Caucasian American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian American Hispanic/Latino/Latina Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

91 5 5 3 1

91.92 5.05 5.05 3.03 1.01

Black/African American 0 0.00

West Indian/Caribbean 0 0.00

Other Reporting Multiple Ethnicities Not reporting ethnicity

2 7 2

2.02 7.07 2.02

Marital status

Married / in committed relationship Single / never married Separated / divorced Widowed

60 32 7 0

61.00 32.00 7.00 0.00

Employment status

Employed full-time 49 49.49

Employed part-time 23 23.23

Unemployed & seeking employment 7 7.07

Unemployed & not seeking employment 16 16.16

Not reported 4 4.04

45

Table 3 Participants’ Job Types (N = 99)

Job type Frequency Percent (%)

Childcare / education / librarian 21 21.21

Arts 16 16.16

Direct human service 15 15.15

Student 12 12.12

Management 9 9.09

Science / engineering / research 9 9.09

Technology 8 8.08

Retail 7 7.07

Clerical / administrative assistant 3 3.03

Legal 2 2.02

Retired 2 2.02

Law enforcement 1 1.01

Other 7 7.07

Unknown / not reporting 4 4.04

46

Chapter 4:Results

Analyses

Internal consistencies of the POI scales were calculated using Cronbach’s

alpha. To further explore the relationships between the POI scales, an

intercorrelational matrix was calculated. Internal consistencies of the creative

attitudes questionnaire items were also explored by calculating an

intercorrelational matrix. The relationships between self-actualization levels (as

measured by the POI scale scores) and the creative practices (as measured by the

frequency of engagement in and the variety of creative practices) were explored

by calculating Pearson’s r and the corresponding p-values.

Self-Actualization and POI Scores

The POI scale scores are summarized in Table 4. Also included are data

from comparative samples, as reported by Shostrom (1964). The means in the

current study did not vary widely from those presented by Shostrom, but it is

important to note that the data provided by Shostrom are quite old (1964). In

addition to containing the relatively old data, more detailed information from the

original Sholstrom’s samples were not available. Consequently, mean

comparisons could not be calculated.

Cronbach’s alpha is a standard measure of reliability used to estimate the

internal consistency of test items (Breakwell, Hammond, & Fife-Schaw, 2002).

As shown in Table 5, the internal consistencies for most of the scales were below

the generally acceptable range of 0.70 (Breakwell et al., 2002). The only

47

Table 4

Means and Standard Deviations of the POI Scores

POI scale

Current study (N = 99)

Shostrom (1987)

Self-actualizing (N = 29)

Normal adults

(N = 158)

Non-self-actualizing

(N=34)

M SD M SD M SD M SD

Time Competent 15.40 3.22 18.9 2.5 17.7 2.8 15.8 3.6

Time Incompetent 7.09 3.26 - - - - - -

Inner Directed 83.62 10.83 92.9 11.5 87.2 13.6 75.8 16.2

Outer Directed 40.10 10.99 — — — — — —

Self-Actualizing Value

20.92 2.86 20.7 3.6 20.2 3.0 18.0 3.7

Existentiality 20.70 4.19 24.8 3.5 21.8 5.1 18.9 5.4

Feeling Reactivity 14.67 3.16 16.3 2.8 15.7 3.3 14.3 3.8

Spontaneity 12.25 2.77 12.7 2.9 11.6 3.0 9.8 3.4

Self Regard 11.74 2.35 12.9 1.9 12.0 2.7 10.2 3.3

Self Acceptance 14.61 3.46 18.9 3.5 17.1 4.0 14.2 4.0

Nature of Man 11.40 2.22 12.3 2.2 12.4 1.9 11.3 2.0

Synergy 7.29 1.23 7.6 1.2 7.3 1.2 6.2 1.9

Acceptance of Aggression 15.32 3.40 17.6 3.1 16.6 3.7 14.7 3.5

Capacity for Intimate Contact

17.85 3.62 20.2 3.4 18.8 4.6 16.5 4.3

Time Ratio 3.16 2.57 7.7 — 5.1 — 2.9 —

Support Ratio 2.35 1.05 3.3 — 2.5 — 1.4 —

48

Table 5 Cronbach’s Alphas for POI Scale Scores

POI Scale Chronbach’s

Alpha

Time Competent 0.40

Time Incompetent 0.57

Inner Directed 0.01

Outer Directed 0.85

Self-Actualizing Value 0.40

Existentiality 0.34

Feeling Reactivity 0.38

Spontaneity 0.38

Self Regard 0.41

Self Acceptance 0.39

Nature of Man 0.45

Synergy 0.45

Acceptance of Aggression 0.38

Capacity for Intimate Contact 0.36

Time Ratio 0.44

Support Ratio 0.45

exception was the Outer Directed scale, with alpha level of 0.85, which

demonstrates strong reliability. Overall, internal consistency coefficients are

consistently lower than those reported by Shostrom (1987).

49

To further evaluate the psychometric properties of the POI, an

intercorrelational matrix was calculated to explore the relationships among its

scales. As is shown in Table 6, most of the scales were found to be intercorrelated

at statistically significant levels, indicating that the scales measured similar

characteristics. Shostrom (1987) also reported high intercorrelations among the

sales, ranging from .02 to .64.

It is worth noting that, while the scales have been shown to be

intercorrelated, Cronbach’s alphas for the individual scales are not high. This

indicates that the items within the scales did not vary together, but the full scales

were correlated with one another. One possible reason for this is that the scales

were not intended to represent independent dimensions, so some test items

contribute to more than one scale (Shostrom, 1987). The overlapping items may

also contribute to the high intercorrelations among scales. The majority of the

items within the POI belong to multiple scales (83.33%) while only 16.67% of the

items belong to only one scale. All of the items in every subscale are used in more

than one scale. With such a large percentage of overlapping items, the

intercorrelations are not a meaningful measure of internal consistency. See

Appendix G for a complete list of which items belong to each scale and which

items overlap.

Self-Reported Creative Practices

Participants’ responses to the short essay question “Please describe your

creative practice(s) and how frequently you engage in them” were coded by the

researcher to identify the types of creative activities the participants engaged in as

50

Table 6 Intercorrelational Matrix for POI Scale Scores

TC TI Id O SAV Ex Fr S Sr Sa Nc Sy A C T-R S-R TC -.92** .60** -.51** .42** .56** .39** .57** .65** .49** 0.14 .34** .31** .46** .83** .41** TI -.92** -.52** .64** -.36** -.53** -.36** -.49** -.65** -.43** 0 -.30** -.28** -.44** -.84** -.52** Id .60** -.52** -.81** .66** .81** .74** .79** .72** .69** .33** .49** .65** .79** .37** .80** O -.51** .64** -.81** -.55** -.71** -.66** -.63** -.71* -.55** -0.07 -.46** -.59** -.72** -.42** -.92** SAV .42** -.36** .66** -.55** .48** .48** .63** .61** .21* .48** .67** .40** .40** .22* .49** Ex .56** -.53** .81** -.71** .48** .46** .61** .53** .64** 0.09 .44** .49** .66** .39** .72** Fr .39** -.36** .74** -.66** .48** .46** .65** .47** .35** 0.14 .37** .72** .72** .28** .62** S .57** -.49** .79** -.63** .63** .61** .65** .60** .45** .22* .34** .52** .62** .40** .59** Sr .65** -.65** .72** -.71** .61** .53** .47** .60** .39** .22* .41** .43** .60** .44** .58** Sa .49** -.43** .69** -.55** .21* .64** .35** .45** .39** 0 .23** .49** .47** .34** .57** Nc 0.14 0 .33** -0.07 .48** 0.09 0.14 .22* .22* 0 .37** -0.11 0.07 0 0.1 Sy .34** -.30** .49** -.46** .67** .44** .37** .34** .41** .23* .37** .40** .39** .18* .37** A .31** -.28** .65** -.59** .40** .49** .72** .52** .43** .49** -0.11 .40** .65** .23* .55** C .46** -.44** .79** -.72** .40** .66** .72** .62** .60** .47** 0.07 .39** .65** .34** .67** T-R .83** -.84** .37** -.42** .22* .39** .28** .40** .44** .34** 0 .18* .23* .34** .36** S-R .41** -.52** .80** -.92** .49** .72** .62** .59** .58** .57** 0.1 .37** .55** .67** .36**

Note. TC = Time Competence; TI = Time Incompetence; Id = Inner Directed; O = Outer Directed; SAV = Self-Actualizing Value; Ex = Existentiality; Fr = Feeling Reactivity; S = Spontaneity; Sr = Self-Regard; Sa = Self-Acceptance; Nc = Nature of Man; Sy = Synergy; A = Acceptance of Aggression; C = Capacity for Intimate Contact; TR = Time Ratio; SR = Support Ratio. *p < .01 **p < .05, two-tailed

50

51

well as how frequently they engaged in creative practices. Thirteen main creative

practices categories were identified. These categories and the coding criteria are

summarized in Table 7.

The total number of creative categories each participant’s response

qualified for was calculated and used as a measure of the variety of creative

practices participants engaged in (Mvariety = 3.15, SD = 1.66, Range = 1-9).

Frequencies of engagement in creative practice(s) are reported in Table 8. More

than half (56%) of the participants reported engaging in an almost daily creative

practice. Relatively few (11%) participants reported engaging in creative activities

less than once per week.

Creative Attitudes

Participants’ attitudes about creativity were measured using the brief

Creative Attitudes Questionnaire (CAQ) created by the researcher. Each Likert-

type response was assigned a number from 1-7, with 7 being assigned to the

response “almost always true,” and 1 being assigned to the response “almost

never true.” Three out of the five items were designed to have higher numerical

responses corresponding to the responses most in line with Rogers’s descriptions

of Constructive Creativity. Two of the five were designed to have the lower

numerical responses corresponding to Rogers’s descriptions of Constructive

Creativity, so the numbers assigned to these items were assigned in reverse order,

with 1 being assigned to “almost never true” and 7 being assigned to “almost

always true.” This way, higher scores for all items would be associated with

creative attitudes most in line with Rogers’s descriptions of Constructive

52

Table 7

Coding Categories and Criteria for Creative Practices

Creative practice category Coding criteria

Writing engagement with written forms of expression (poetry, journaling, creative writing, reading)

Visual creating with 2-dimensional forms of art (drawing, photography (including photo editing in photoshop), painting, pastel work, collage (including scrapbooking), other graphic design work).

Theater theater, acting, storytelling

Music playing instruments, singing, songwriting

Crafts creating with 3-dimensional forms of art (sculpting, ceramics, sculpture, flower arranging, handcrafts, interior decorating, cooking, gardening)

Technology use of computers and technology (multi-media production, creating flyers, blogging, web design, tv/video work, computer programming)

Spiritual spiritual practices (meditation, self-reflection & self-work (not specifically connected to psychotherapy), spiritual mentoring)

Psychotherapy engagement in psychotherapy (including planning for groups)

Physical focusing on one’s physical being (sports, exercise, mountaineering, martial arts, walking, massage/energy healing, dance)

Interactions interacting with people creatively (teaching, parenting, presentations, social planning)

Imagination general engagement in imaginary processes (roleplaying games, imagination work/creating fantasies in head, seeing with the intent to create with an image later on)

Way of Life creativity as a way of life- (“it’s the way I always interact with the world”)

Other genealogy, creative ways of saving money, appearance, marketing, research planning

53

Table 8

Frequency of Engagement in Creative Practice(s) (N = 99)

Frequency of engagement Frequency Percent(%)

6-7 times per week 56 57

4-5 times per week 1-3 times per week Twice per month Once per month Less than monthly Not reporting

12 22 6 2 1 0

12 22 6 2 1 0

Creativity. A summary of the results from this questionnaire are displayed in

Table 9. None of the item means were below 3.00, which indicates that most of

the participants’ creative attitudes were in line with Rogers’ description of

constructive creativity.

Table 9

Means and Standard Deviations for the Creative Attitudes Scores (N = 99)

Item Creative attitude statement M

(n = 99) SD

1 “It is important to me that others see and appreciate my creative products.”

3.00

1.46

2 “I enjoy my creative process, regardless of the outcome.” 3.78 1.68

3 “It is important to me that my end product looks like I planned it from the start.”

5.85 1.32

4 “My creative practice is a kind of meditation- where I become very focused on the task at hand.”

4.48 1.73

5 “It is important to me that my creative practices communicate something specific to others who witness it.”

4.66 1.36

54

Pearson’s r correlation coefficients were calculated to examine the

relationships between the POI scales and each Creative Attitudes Questionnaire

item (see Tables 10–14). In order to control for the increased Type I error

associated with running multiple tests, a Bonferroni adjustment was made, setting

the alpha level to .003 (Breakwell et al., 2002). With this correction, no

statistically significant relationships were found between the creative attitudes

items and the POI scores.

Table 10 Pearson Product Moment Correlations Between the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scales and Item 1 of the Creative Attitudes Questionnaire

Item 1 responsesa

POI scale Pearson’s r p-value

Time Competent 0.14 0.16 Time Incompetent -0.17 0.09 Inner Directed 0.10 0.30 Outer Directed -0.15 0.15 Self-Actualizing Value 0.10 0.35 Existentiality 0.16 0.11 Feeling Reactivity -0.03 0.79 Spontaneity 0.04 0.71 Self Regard 0.15 0.14 Self Acceptance 0.08 0.43 Nature of Man -0.02 0.85 Synergy -0.07 0.50 Acceptance of Aggression -0.10 0.33 Capacity for Intimate Contact 0.02 0.86 Time Ratio 0.19 0.05 Support Ratio 0.14 0.18 a Item 1 = “It is important to me that others see and appreciate my creative products.”

55

Table 11 Pearson Product Moment Correlations Between the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scales and Item 2 of Creative Attitudes Questionnaire

Item 2 responsesa

POI Scale Pearson’s r p-value

Time Competent -0.16 0.11

Time Incompetent 0.20 0.05

Inner Directed -0.13 0.20

Outer Directed 0.21 0.03

Self-Actualizing Value -0.27 0.01

Existentiality -0.17 0.09

Feeling Reactivity -0.12 0.23

Spontaneity -0.11 0.29

Self Regard -0.21 0.04

Self Acceptance 0.04 0.68

Nature of Man -0.08 0.42

Synergy -0.23 0.03

Acceptance of Aggression -0.06 0.54

Capacity for Intimate Contact -0.20 0.05

Time Ratio -0.18 0.08

Support Ratio -0.12 0.23

a Item 2 = “I enjoy my creative process regardless of the outcome.”

56


Item 3 responsesa


Time Competent 0.10 0.34

Time Incompetent -0.10 0.32

Inner Directed 0.05 0.61

Outer Directed -0.08 0.46

Self-Actualizing Value 0.04 0.68

Existentiality 0.07 0.50

Feeling Reactivity 0.02 0.81

Spontaneity 0.05 0.64

Self Regard -0.00 0.98



Synergy 0.08 0.44


Capacity for Intimate Contact 0.04 0.68

Time Ratio 0.14 0.18

Support Ratio -0.00 0.10

a Item 3 = “It is important to me that my end product looks like I planned it from the start.”

57

Table 13 Pearson Product Moment Correlations between the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scales and Item 4 of Creative Attitudes Questionnaire

Item 4 responsesa







Existentiality -0.00 0.97



Self Regard 0.10 0.34

Self Acceptance -0.05 0.59


Synergy 0.03 0.73

Acceptance of Aggression 0.31 0.02



Support Ratio 0.13 0.19

a Item 4 = “My creative process is a kind of meditation—where I become very focused on the task at hand.”

58


Item 5 responsesa












Nature of Man 0.02 0.82

Synergy 0.04 0.67

Acceptance of Aggression 0.04 0.69




a Item 5 = “It is important to me that my creative practices communicate something specific to others who witness it.”

A total Creative Attitude Score was calculated for each participant by

adding the total of all items on the CAQ (Mcreativity = 15.21, SD = 3.93, range

59

= 6-26). Pearson’s r correlation coefficients were then calculated to explore the

relationship between these creative attitudes and the POI scale scores. As is

demonstrated in Table 15, no significant correlations were identified between

these measures.

Table 15 Pearson Product Moment Correlations Between the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scales and the Creative Attitudes Score

Total Creative Attitude Score








Feeling Reactivity -0.05 0.63

Spontaneity -0.06 0.54



Nature of Man 0.03 0.74

Synergy 0.01 0.93





60

Creative Practices and Self-Actualization

To further explore the relationship between self-actualization and

creativity, Pearson’s r correlation coefficients were calculated to examine the

relationships between the POI scales and frequency and variety of creative

practices (see Table 16). In order to control for the increased Type I error

associated with running multiple tests, a Bonferroni adjustment was made, setting

the alpha level to .003 (Breakwell et al., 2002). With this correction, no

statistically significant relationships were found between the measures of

creativity (frequency of practice, variety of practices) and the POI scores.

Since no statistically significant relationships were found between self-

actualization levels and the frequency and variety of creativity practices, it was

determined useful to explore more deeply whether or not the types of creative

practice significantly affected POI levels. In other words, did people who engaged

in one creative practice differ significantly in self-actualization levels then people

who engaged in other creative activities? To investigate this question, the three

most popular categories for creative activities were identified as Visual (n = 60),

Crafts (n = 58), and Writing (n = 43). The participants whose creative activities

included these top three categories were identified, and the means were calculated

for each POI scale for each group (see Appendix H). There was overlap between

the groups, as some participants may have qualified for all three groups. The

means appear to be similar across all three groups.

One possible reason the researcher did not identify any significant

relationships may have been that the current study did not have enough power.

61

Table 16

Pearson Product Correlation Coefficient Between the Personal Orientation

Inventory (POI) Scale Scores and Creative Practices

Creative practice(s)

Frequency Variety

POI Scale Pearson’s r p-value Pearson’s r p-value

Time Competence 0.14 0.17 0.10 0.35

Time Incompetence -0.14 0.18 -0.09 0.40

Inner Directed 0.14 0.18 0.09 0.40

Outer Directed -0.14 0.15 -0.09 0.37

Self-Actualizing Value 0.07 0.47 -0.10 0.32

Existentiality 0.10 0.34 0.13 0.21

Feeling Reactivity 0.23 0.02 0.15 0.14

Spontaneity 0.16 0.10 0.11 0.29

Self Regard 0.16 0.12 -0.07 0.50

Self Acceptance 0.00 0.96 0.12 0.23

Nature of Man -0.06 0.54 -0.15 0.13

Synergy 0.05 0.63 -0.07 0.48

Acceptance of Aggression

0.10 0.33 0.07 0.47

Capacity for Intimate Contact

0.10 0.33 0.11 0.29

Time Ratio 0.11 0.28 0.07 0.51

Support Ratio 0.07 0.49 0.11 0.27

Power is a measure of the probability that a test will reject the null hypothesis

when the alternative hypothesis is true. Using G*Power, a program designed to

calculate statistical power (Buchner, Erdfelder, & Faul, 2001), a post-hoc power

analysis was conducted on the Pearson’s r tests, resulting in a power of 0.86,

62

which means that if the null hypothesis was false, to the degree we expect, the

probability is 0.86 that the results of the experiment would lead us to reject the

null hypothesis. This level of power falls within the acceptable range of .80 and

above (Breakwell et al., 2002).

63

Chapter 5: Discussion

The hypothesis self-actualization and creative self-growth practices would

be significantly correlated was not supported by this study. There are several

potential explanations for this outcome. The measures used in this study were

fraught with methodological concerns, which are important to take into account.

Methodological Concerns and Limitations

Many POI scales were found to be significantly intercorrelated, but to

have low internal consistencies. The high intercorrelations between scales may be

the result of overlapping items among the scales, since the scales are not intended

to measure separate dimensions (Shostrom, 1987). Since the intercorrelations may

have been inflated due to item overlap, it would be difficult to determine construct

validity of individual subtests. This reduces the level of reliability that can be

assigned to the results of this test for the sample collected. While the POI scales

appear to be related to the same variable, which would be expected, the scales are

not consistent internally. This suggests concerns with reliability of the POI and

the accuracy with which this measure can be said to measure self-actualization

can come into question as well. Consequently, it is recommended that future

studies employ larger samples to allow for factor analysis and Item Response

Theory as better ways to address and explore these concerns.

As previously described in the literature review, creativity is a notoriously

difficult variable to accurately measure (Mathes, 1978; Murphy et al., 1976).

There are multiple definitions of creativity (Smuts, 1992) and various instruments

have been developed to measure these different types of creativity, with varying

64

success (Richards, Kinney, Benet & Merzel, 1988). This study attempted to

isolate the process-oriented self-actualizing creativity several different ways, all

of which relied on self-report. While self-report questionnaires are efficient and

can be useful for their ease in administration as well as the flexibility they offer

the researcher (Breakwell et al., 2002), they can also be fraught with

methodological problems, such as response bias and “faking good.” For example,

participants in this study may have been tempted to respond to the questionnaire

items in such a way that reflects how they would like to be, as opposed to how

they really are. In the short essay question asking the participants to describe their

creative practices, it is impossible to know whether a participant’s response is a

realistic reflection of their current creative practices or if it is more of a reflection

of what they aspire to with their creative practices. If a person intends to engage

in creative practices five days per week and reports this in their essay, but in

reality only manages to do so once or twice a week, the measure is not accurately

capturing their practices.

According to Robson (1993), self-report questionnaires should be very

carefully constructed in order to allow for any meaningful interpretation. It is

usually desirable to conduct pilot studies when constructing new questionnaires to

obtain information about construct validity and reliability, and to use this

information to improve the psychometric properties of the questionnaire. Due to

time and resource constraints, no pilot studies were conducted with the portion of

the questionnaire that was to measure creativity. It is possible that if pilot studies

65

had been conducted, the quality of the test items could have been improved to

increase the new measure’s reliability and validity.

The self-report questionnaire developed for this study, the Creative

Attitudes Questionnaire, was designed to measure one main underlying variable:

the extent to which participants’ attitudes about creativity were in line with

Rogers’s (1961) concept of constructive creativity. As is noted in the literature

review, this variable is a complex, multidimentional, and dynamic theoretical

construct that is difficult to operationalize. With only five items, the Creative

Attitudes Questionnaire may have limited its reliability, and consequently, was

overall unable to adequately measure a variable this complex. In retrospect, it

would have been a good idea to have used additional measures of creativity to

investigate convergent, and possibly divergent, validity of this instrument.

Additionally, responses to the “creative practices” short essay question

were varied in quality and quantity. Some participants described their creative

practices in great detail, others used simple descriptors, such as “fresh.” This

made coding for creative categories difficult. Aggregation of data involves a

significant judgment by the investigator. One way to increase the quality of self-

report questionnaires is to limit the number of open-ended questions (Robson,

1993). Future studies would benefit from offering a list of possible creative

activities, asking participants to check off the ones they engage in, with a text box

marked “other” for participants to write in any creative activities they are

involved in that do not fit the prewritten categories. This would have reduced the

66

amount of open-ended questions that required coding. Another option would have

been to use multiple coders to aggregate the data.

Another methodological concern regarding this essay question is that the

“frequency of creative practice” question yielded varying results and proved quite

difficult to capture effectively in coding. Some answered this question in vague

terms (ie “sometimes” or “infrequently”). Some identified a pattern of creative

“bursts” that would ebb and flow, such as “…often, a month or two will go by,

then I'll sew for a few hours everyday/all day on weekends until I finish a few

projects” or “…most of my creativity is directed into sewing, which I tend to do

in great binges once every couple of months or so.” Some others identified

seasonal creative activities, such as gardening. There is the potential, therefore,

that some of this information may have been misinterpreted in the coding process,

leading to not fully or accurately capturing the variable being measured. Future

research of this type would be best conducted using multiple coders to reduce the

potential for coding error.

A final concern about this essay question also failed to capture some

important variables, such as the quantity of time spent in creative activities. Most

participants responded with how often they engaged in creative practices, but not

how long they would engage in them at a stretch. In retrospect, this was important

information that should have been captured. A person may, for example, engage

in a creative activity daily, but for only five minutes at a time. Another person

may only engage in an activity once per week, but for several hours that one day.

Since this information was not collected, it is impossible to accurately capture

67

how much time participants actually spent engaged in creative activities, a key

variable I had expected to be able to identify.

This study did not take into account sociocultural and cultural variables

that may affect participants’ creativity. Gunersel (2009) conducted a study

exploring common factors among Turkish writers and found that creative output

was associated with, for several of the participants in the study, social and cultural

events that they were reacting to. In moments of cultural upheaval, creative output

was affected in various ways. Jasinowski (2002) and Lubart (1990) also

emphasize the importance of taking cultural spiritual traditions may affect one’s

creative practices. Future research should include assessment of social or cultural

events that may have affected participants’ creative outputs.

This study did not collect information about how strongly people felt

about their creative activities. This might also have been an additional way to

capture the self-actualizing creativity variable. It is possible that there may have

been a difference between people who passively engage in creative activities and

those who engage in them fully and meditatively. The sample collected was a

convenience sample based on whomever elected to respond to the call for

participants. This led to a mostly homogenous sample, with over 90% of the

respondents being white and 89% female. With such a biased sample, external

validity is low and any results cannot be generalized to a larger population

(Breakwell et al., 2002).

68

Suggestions for Further Research

Despite its methodological limitations, this study identified several

variables within the construct of creativity that would need to be taken into

account in future research in this area, such as the phenomena of creative “bursts”

people can engage in, the relationship to sociocultural factors that may affect

creative output, as well as clarifying the quantity of time one engages in creative

activities, not just the frequency with which one engages in creative activities.

Additionally, this research has underscored the importance of asking closed-ended

questions in self-report surveys such as this. Due to the complexities involved

with the variables studied, future research might do well to employ a more mixed-

methods design that integrates qualitative interview data with quantitative

measures.

While the research within this project did not support the hypothesis, it

would be impossible to draw any conclusions about the relationship between self-

actualization and creativity due to the methodological issues involved with this

research. This should not deter future researchers from studying these variables.

With the rise in positive psychology in the field today, there is a trend to focus on

human potential and strengths. Self-actualization and creativity are useful

constructs to research that are relevant to the human potential movement, but as is

demonstrated in this study, they can be difficult constructs to measure. The POI is

the primary tool that currently exists to measure self-actualization, but it is an

outdated measure originally developed in the 1950s. Psychometric instrument

development and standards have come a long way since the development of the

69

POI, which could benefit from some of these developments by potentially being

redesigned. It is this author’s hope that this research underscores the need for

newer, more psychometrically reliable and valid measurements of these complex

variables. With more reliable and valid measurements of these constructs, future

research can more effectively explore the question about the relationship between

creativity and self-actualization.

70

References

Alda, A. (1980). The wilderness of your intuition. Commencement address at Connecticut College, New London, CT. Retrieved from the Humanity Initiative website: http://humanity.org/voices/commencements/ speeches/index.php?page=alda_at_connecticut

Alderfer, C. P. (1972). Existence, relatedness, and growth: Human needs in organizational settings. New York, NY: Free Press.

Argyle, M. (2001). The psychology of happiness. New York, NY: Routledge.

Barron, C. F. (1968). Creativity and personal freedom. New York, NY: Van Nostrand.

Breakwell, G. M., Hammond, S., & Fife-Schaw, C. (2002). Research methods in psychology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Brewer, M. B., & Chen, Y.-R. (2007). Where (who) are collectives in collectivism? Toward conceptual clarification of individualism and collectivism. Psychological Review, 114(1), 133–151. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.1.133

Buchner, A., Erdfelder, E., & Faul, F. (2001). How to use G*Power. Retrieved from the Institut für Experimentelle Psychologie Heinrich-Heine-Universität website: http://www.psycho.uni-duesseldorf.de/aap/projects/gpower/how_to_use_gpower.html.

Capuzzi, D., & Gross, D. R. (1999). Counseling and psychotherapy: Theories and interventions (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Simon & Schuster.

Cropley, A. J. (1990). Creativity and mental health in everyday life. Creativity Research Journal, 3(3), 167–178.

Dauw, D. C. (1968). Creativity research on actuaries. Journal of Creative Behavior, 2(4), 274–280.

Davis, G. A., & Subkoviak, M. J. (1975). Multidimensional analysis of a personality-based test of creative potential. Journal of Educational Measurement, 12(1), 37–43.

Davis, J. (2009). Complementary research methods in humanistic and transpersonal psychology: A case for methodical pluralism. Humanistic Psychologist, 37(1), 4–23. doi: 10.1080/08873260802394475

Duncan, D. F. (1987). Creativity and mental wellness. Health Values: Achieving High Level Wellness, 11(3), 3–7.

71

Dunn, H. L. (1961). High level wellness. Oxford, England: R. W. Beaty.

Dyal, J. (1984). Cross-cultural research with the locus of control construct. In H. M. Lefcourt (Ed.), Research with the locus of control construct (Vol. 3, pp. 209–206). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Dye, K., Mills, A. J., & Weatherbee, T. (2005). Maslow: Man interrupted; Reading management theory in context. Management Decision, 43(10), 1375–1396. doi: 10.1108/00251740510634921

Evans, J. E. (2007). The science of creativity and health. In I. Serlin (Ed.), Whole person health care, Vol.3: The arts and health (pp. 87–105).Westport, CT: Praeger.

Eysenck, H., & Eysenck, S. (1963). The Eysenck Personality Inventory. San Diego, CA: EdITS/Educational and Industrial Testing Service.

Farmer, R. (1984). Humanistic education and self-actualization theory. Education, 105(2), 162–172.

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Oxford, England: Peterson Row.

Ford, G. G., & Procidano, M. E. (1990). The relationship of self-actualization to social support, life stress, and adjustment. Social Behavior and Personality, 18(1), 41–51. doi: 10.2224/sbp.1990.18.1.41

Garfield, S. J., Cohen, H. A., & Roth, R.M. (1969). Creativity and mental health. Journal of Educational Research, 63(4), 147–149.

Geller, L. (1982). The failure of self-actualization theory: A critique of Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 22(2), 56–73.

Geller, L. (1984). Another look at self-actualization. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 24(2), 93–106.

Goff, K., & Torrance, E. (1991). Healing qualities of imagery and creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 25(4), 296–303.

Goldstein, K. (1995). The organism: A holistic approach to biology derived from pathological data in man. New York, NY: Zone Books. (Original work published 1939)

Gough, H. G., & Heilbrum, A. B. (1980). Adjective Check List manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

72

Grogan, J. L. (2009). A cultural history of the humanistic psychology movement in America. Dissertation Abstracts International, 69A(7-A), 2758. (Publication no. AAT 3311487)

Grossman, F. G. (1981). Creativity as a means for coping with anxiety. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 8(3–4), 185–192. doi: 10.1016/0197-4556(81)90030-7

Gunersel, A. B. (2009). A qualitative case study of the impact of environmental and personal factors on prominent Turkish writers. Psychology of the Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 3(4), 222–231. doi: 10.1037/a0015592

Hathaway, S., & McKinley, J. (1951). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. New York, NY: Psychological Corporation.

Herzberg, F. (1959). The motivation to work (2nd ed.). Oxford, England: Wiley.

Hill, C. E. (2004). Helping skills: Facilitating exploration, insight, and action (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Hyatt, K. S. (1992). Creativity through intrapersonal communication dialog. Journal of Creative Behavior, 26(1), 65–71.

Jasinowski, R. W. (2002). Morimura Yasumasa: A cross-cultural study in the self-portrait, self-definition, and the creative process (Japan). Dissertation Abstracts International, 62A(10–A), 3214. (Publication no. AAT 3031305)

Jones, A., & Crandall, R. (1986). Validation of a short index of self-actualization. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12(1), 63–73. doi: 10.1177/0146167286121007

Kalliopuska, M. (1992). Creative way of living. Psychological Reports, 70(1), 11–14. doi: 10.2466/PR0.70.1.11-14

Knapp, R. R. (1971). The measurement of self-actualization and its theoretical implication. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.

Knapp, R. R. (1990). Personal Orientation Inventory Handbook (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: EdITS Publishers. (Original work published 1976)

Koltko-Rivera, M. E. (2006). Rediscovering the later version of Maslow's hierarchy of needs: Self-transcendence and opportunities for theory, research, and unification. Review of General Psychology, 10(4), 302–317. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.10.4.302

Lambert, M. J., & Erekson, D. M. (2008). Positive psychology and the humanistic tradition. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 18(2), 222–232. doi: 10.1037/1053-0479.18.2.222

73

Leontiev, D. A. (2008). Maslow yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 48(4), 451–453. doi: 10.1177/0022167808320536

Locke, K. J. (2002). Self-transcendence in relation to self-actualization and the effect on motivation in the church (Viktor Frankl). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63A(4–A), 1389. (Publication no. AAT 3050699)

Lubart, T. I. (1990). Creativity and cross-cultural variation. International Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 39–59. doi: 10.1080/00207599008246813

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.

Maslow, A. H. (1958). A dynamic theory of human motivation. Cleveland, OH: Howard Allen.

Maslow, A. H. (1959). Creativity in self-actualizing people. In H. H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation: Addresses presented at the international symposia on creativity at Michigan State University (pp. 83–95). New York, NY: Harper & Brothers.

Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. Oxford, England: Van Nostrand.

Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row. (Original work published 1954)

Maslow, A.H. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature. New York, NY: Arkana/Penguin Books.

Mathes, E. W. (1978). Self-actualization, metavalues, and creativity. Psychological Reports, 43(1), 215–222.

May, R. (1959). The nature of creativity. In H. H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation: Addresses presented at the international symposia on creativity at Michigan State University (pp. 55–68). New York, NY: Harper & Brothers.

Mednick, S. A. (1967). Remote Associates Test. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin.

Merriam-Webster. (2009). Creativity. Accessed online at: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/creativity

Murphy, J. P., Dauw, D. C., Horton, R. E., & Fredian, A. J. (1976). Self-actualization and creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 10(1), 39–44.

74

O'Connor, D., & Yballe, L. (2007). Maslow revisited: Constructing a road map of human nature. Journal of Management Education, 31(6), 738–756. doi: 10.1177/1052562907307639

Pannells, T. C., & Claxton, A. F. (2008). Happiness, creative ideation, and locus of control. Creativity Research Journal, 20(1), 67–71. doi: 10.1080/10400410701842029

Pearson, P. H., & Maddi, S. R. (1966). The Similes Preference Inventory. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 30(4), 301–308. doi: 10.1037/h0023540

Pedersen, P. B., Draguns, J. G., Lonner, W. J., & Trimble, J. E. (Eds.). (2002). Counseling across cultures (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Rennie, D. L. (2008). Two thoughts on Abraham Maslow. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 48(4), 445–448. doi: 10.1177/0022167808320537

Rhodes, C. (1990). Growth from deficiency creativity to being creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 3(4), 287–299.

Richards, R. (1990). Everyday creativity, eminent creativity, and health: "Afterview" for CRJ issues on creativity and health. Creativity Research Journal, 3(4), 300–326.

Richards, R. (Ed.). (2007). Everyday creativity and new views of human nature: Psychological, social, and spiritual perspectives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Richards, R., Kinney, D. K., Benet, M., & Merzel, A. P. (1988). Assessing everyday creativity: Characteristics of the Lifetime Creativity Scales and validation with three large samples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(3), 476–485. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.3.476

Robson, C. (1993). Real world research. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Rogers, C. R. (1959). Toward a theory of creativity. In H. H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation: Addresses presented at the international symposia on creativity at Michigan State University (pp. 69–82). New York, NY: Harper & Brothers.

Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcements. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1–28.

75

Rubadeau, D. O., Garrett, B., & Rubadeau, R. (1984). A guide to motivational procedures for instruction. Retrieved from ERIC database: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ (Document no. ED332752)

Runco, M. A., Ebersole, P., & Mraz, W. (1991). Creativity and self-actualization. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. Special Issue: Handbook of self-actualization, 6(5), 161–167.

Runco, M. A., Plucker, J. A., & Lim, W. (2001). Development of psychometric integrity of a measure of ideational behavior. Creativity Research Journal. Special Issue: Commemorating Guilford's 1950 Presidential address,13(3–4), 393–400. doi: 10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_16

Seligman, M., Schulman, P., DeRubeis, R., & Hollon, S. (1999). The prevention of depression and anxiety. Prevention and Treatment, 2, Article 8. Retrieved from: http://www.positivepsychology.org/depprevseligman1999.pdf/

Seligman, M. E., & Czikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5

Seligman, M. E., & Czikszentmihalyi, M. (Eds.). (2000). Happiness, excellence, and optimal human functioning [Special issue]. American Psychologist, 55(1).

Seligman, M. E., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60(5), 410–421. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.60.5.410

Shostrom, E. L. (1964). Personal Orientation Inventory. San Diego, CA: EdITS.

Shostrom, E. L. (1987). Manual for the Personal Orientation Inventory (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: EdITS.

Simonton, D. (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55(1), 151–158. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.151

Smith, P. B., Trompenaars, F., & Dugan, S. (1995). The Rotter Locus of Control Scale in 43 countries: A test of cultural reliability. International Journal of Psychology, 30(3), 377–400. doi: 10.1080/00207599508246576

Smuts, H. E. (1992). An interactional approach to creativity. South African Journal of Psychology, 22(2), 44–51.

76

Snyder, T. R. (1976). Affective education: A teacher's manual to promote student self-actualization and human relations skills. Retrieved from ERIC database: http://www.eric.ed.gov/. (Document no. ED159582)

Srivastava, A., Blakely, G. L., Andrews, M. C., & McKee-Ryan, F. M. (2007). Mechanisms linking nationality and subjective well-being in managers in China and the United States. Journal of Managerial Issues, 19(4), 494–516.

Starcher, P.L. (2006). The relationship between self-actualization and caring behavior in nurse educators. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Dissertation Abstracts International (Publication Number AAT 3248403.)

Talerico, C. (1986). The expressive arts and creativity as a form of therapeutic experience in the field of mental health. Journal of Creative Behavior, 20(4), 229–247.

Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talents. Edgewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

Torrance, E. P. (1978). Healing qualities of creative behavior. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 3(3), 146–158.

Van Lith, T., Fenner., P., & Schofield, M. J. (2009). Toward an understanding of how art making can facilitate mental health recovery. Australian E-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health, 8(2), 1–11. Retrieved from http://amh.e-contentmanagement.com/archives/vol/8/issue/2/article/3245/ toward-an-understanding-of-how-art-making-can.

Wilson, I., & Madsen, S. R. (2008). The influence of Maslow's humanistic views on an employee's motivation to learn. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 12(2), 46–63.

Young, J. G. (1985). What is creativity? Journal of Creative Behavior, 19(2), 77–87.

77

Appendix A: Informed Consent

Samara Serotkin, a doctoral candidate at the California Institute for

Integral Studies in San Francisco is conducting a study on self-actualization and

creative self-growth practices. Participation in this study involves completing an

online survey.! !

To help protect your confidentiality, the survey will not contain

information that will personally identify you. We will not collect identifying

information such as your name or IP address. The results of this study will be

used for scholarly purposes only. All data will be stored in a password protected

electronic format, using SSL encryption. At the end of the survey, you will be

offered a chance to provide your email address to be entered into a raffle to win

one of two $50 Amazon.com gift certificates. If you choose to submit your email

address, it will only be accessed by this researcher to contact you if you win the

raffle. Nobody else will have access to your e-mail information, which will be

destroyed after completion of this research project. Chances of winning depend on

the number of participants in this study. No other compensation, either monetary

or resulting from the experience itself, is offered or guaranteed. ! !

Your participation in this research study is voluntary. You may choose not

to participate. If you decide to participate in this research survey, you may

withdraw at any time. If you decide not to participate in this study or if you

withdraw from participating at any time, you will not be penalized in any way.

! !

78

If you have any concerns or questions regarding your rights as a

participant in this study, or if you feel that you have been placed at risk because of

your participation in this study, you may report them to Chair of the Human

Research Review Committee, California Institute of Integral Studies, 9 Peter York

Way, San Francisco, CA 94109, telephone (415) 674-5555, extension 157.! !

By checking “yes” below, I certify that I am over 18 years of age and that

I agree to participate in this study and that I have read and understood the

information contained in this consent form.

______ Yes

______ No

79

Appendix B: Participant’s Bill of Rights

As a research participant, you have the right to... ! !

- be treated with dignity and respect; ! !

- be given a clear description of the purpose of the study and what is expected of

you as a participant; ! !

- be told of any benefits or risks to you that can be expected from participating in

the study; ! !

- know the research psychologist's training and experience; ! !

- ask any questions you may have about the study; ! !

- decide to participate or not without any pressure from the researcher or his or

her assistants; ! !

- have your privacy protected within the limits of the law; ! !

- refuse to answer any research question, refuse to participate in any part of the

study, or withdraw from the study at any time without any negative effects to you;

- be given a description of the overall results of the study upon request. ! !

- discuss any concerns or file a complaint about the study with the Human

Research Review Committee, California Institute of Integral Studies, 1453

Mission Street, San Francisco, CA 94103. ! !

By checking "yes" below, you indicate that you have read and understood the

information in this bill of rights.

______ Yes

______ No

80

Appendix C: Demographics Questionnaire

What is your age? _____

What state do you currently live in? ______

What is your gender? _____ What is your race/ethnicity? (please check all that apply) _____Hispanic/Latino/Latina _____Black or African American _____Asian American _____White/Caucasian _____Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander _____American Indian or Alaska Native _____West Indian/Caribbean _____ Other (please specify) __________________________________ What is your marital status? (Please check one) _____Single/never married _____Married/in a committed relationship _____Separated/Divorced _____Widowed What was your household’s annual income in 2009? (If possible, please estimate to the nearest $5000) ______________ In the past 6 months, have you been a student at an educational institution? (e.g. college or university?) _____No _____ Yes (part-time) _____ Yes (full-time) What is your current employment status? _____Employed/self employed full time _____ Employed/self-employed part-time _____ unemployed–seeking employment _____ unemployed–NOT seeking employment What is your main professional occupation? (even if right now you are not currently employed or working in this occupation)

81

Appendix D: Creativity Attitudes Questionnaire and Creative Practices Questionnaire

For each of the following statements, please check the statement that most accurately reflects the extent to which the statement is true for you.

Almost always

true Usually

true Often true

Occa-sionally

true

Some-times but

infreq-uently true

Usually not true

Almost never true

“It is important to me that others

see and appreciate my

creative products”

“I enjoy my creative process, regardless of the

outcome”

“It is important to me that my end product looks like I

planned it from the start”

“My creative practice is a kind of meditation—where I become very focused on the task at hand”

“It is important to me that my

creative process communicate

something specific to others who witness it”

Please describe your creative practices and how frequently you engage(d) in

them:

82

Appendix E: Sample POI Questions and Contact Information

Due to copyright restrictions, the Personal Orientation Inventory in its entirety

cannot be reprinted here. Presented below are five sample questions from the POI.

For additional information regarding the POI, please contact the test’s publisher:

EdITS Publishers; PO Box 7234; San Diego, CA 92167.

Please read each statement and decide which of the two paired statements

most consistently applies to you. Please select the statement which is TRUE or

MOSTLY TRUE as applied to you. If neither statement applies to you, or if they

refer to something you don't know about, do not select either statement and move

on to the next item. Remember to give YOUR OWN opinion of yourself and do

not leave any items blank if you can avoid it.

1. a. I am bound by the principle of fairness.

b. I am not absolutely bound by the principle of fairness.

2. a. When a friend does me a favor, I feel that I must return it.

b. When a friend does me a favor, I do not feel that I must return it.

3. a. I feel I must always tell the truth.

b. I do not always tell the truth.

4. a. No matter how hard I try, my feelings are often hurt.

b. If I manage the situation right, I can avoid being hurt.

5. a. I feel that I must strive for perfection in everything that I undertake.

b. I do not feel that I must strive for perfection in everything that I

undertake.

Reproduced with permission of the publisher, from E. L. Shostrom (1964).

Personal Orientation Inventory. San Diego, CA: EdITS.

83

Appendix F: Recruitment Letter

***Participants Needed for Research Study***

I am conducting a research study for my dissertation to measure

the effects of individuals’ creative practices. This study involves

taking a questionnaire online, which should take between 30 and

45 minutes. In order to compensate you for your time, after

completing the survey you will be given a chance to be entered

into a raffle to win one of two $50 Amazon.com gift certificates.

If you are interested in participating in this study, please go to

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/serotkin

Thank you for your participation.

84

Appendix G: Summary of Items Included in Each POI Scale

Table 17 Summary of Items Included in Each Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scale

Scale Items within scalea TC 48,59,82,87,88,90,102,104,105,110,111,112,113,125,129,133,136,140,

142,143,144,145 I 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,2

7,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,83,84,85,86,89,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,103,106,107,108,109,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,126,127,128,130,131,132,134,135,137,138,139,141,146,147,148,149,150

SAV 6,10,20,27,36,38,43,68,80,89,92,98,99,100,103,114,118,121,123,128,133,135,138,141,146,147

Ex 1,2,3,5,8,9,11,18,19,21,31,36,44,45,54,56,57,64,67,74,80,86,89,92,96,98,111,124,130,143,148,149

Fr 4,10,13,15,16,33,38,47,52,53,55,58,61,62,69,76,91,93,94,95,101,117,131

S 1,6,27,35,41,52,54,62,68,74,81,84,85,86,101,123,137,138 Sr 7,16,31,32,38,39,40,48,60,68,78,118,121,128,132,149 Sa 3,5,12,14,22,24,26,28,29,37,41,42,48,50,63,65,66,70,71,72,77,87,107,

128,134,150 Nc 36,40,43,73,78,83,92,98,115,116,119,122,126,139,141,147 Sy 36,80,89,92,98,137,141,144,146 A 13,24,33,56,63,93,109,118,122,123,131,135,146 C 1,2,8,19,21,25,33,36,44,45,49,52,53,54,55,57,60,61,67,70,76,81,103,1

08,106,107,117,127 Note. The Time Incompetence scale is not included here because the items that comprise it are identical to those within the Time Competence scale. The items are reciprocal—a positive response to one results in a negative response on the other. The Outer Directed scale is not included for the same reason: It has a reciprocal relationship with the Inner Directed scale. TC = Time Competence; I = Inner Directed; SAV = Self-Actualizing Value; Ex = Existentiality; Fr = Feeling Reactivity; S = Spontaneity; Sr = Self-Regard; Sa = Self-Acceptance; Nc = Nature of Man; Sy = Synergy; A = Acceptance of Aggression; C = Capacity for Intimate Contact. a Items in bold indicate items that are used in more than one scale.

85

Appendix H: POI Scores Summarized by Top Three Creative Categories

Table 18 Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) Scores Summarized by Top Three Creative Categories

Creative category

POI Visual (n = 60) Crafts (n = 58) Writing (n = 43)

Scale M Mdn SD M Mdn SD M Mdn SD

TC 15.35 16.00 3.19 15.47 16.00 3.22 15.05 15.00 3.31

TI 7.20 7.00 3.26 7.10 7.00 3.21 7.40 7.00 3.43

Id 83.92 84.50 11.64 83.90 85.50 11.71 82.81 83.00 11.70

O 40.12 41.00 11.29 40.10 39.00 11.18 40.26 41.00 11.01

SAV 20.78 22.00 2.81 20.69 22.00 2.96 20.81 21.00 3.10

Ex 20.87 20.50 4.43 20.78 21.00 4.30 20.51 20.00 4.46

Fr 14.85 15.00 3.15 14.81 15.00 3.09 14.58 14.00 3.18

S 12.28 13.00 2.86 12.38 13.00 2.94 11.86 12.00 3.15

Sr 11.72 12.00 2.54 11.69 12.50 2.64 11.56 12.00 2.58

Sa 14.73 16.00 3.67 15.00 16.00 3.57 14.56 15.00 3.62

Nc 11.27 11.50 2.16 11.31 11.50 2.08 11.28 11.00 1.97

Sy 7.24 7.00 1.19 7.19 7.00 1.27 7.34 7.00 1.24

A 15.40 16.00 3.72 15.30 16.00 3.41 15.34 15.50 3.88

C 18.07 19.00 3.65 17.91 19.00 3.81 17.67 18.00 3.49

TR 3.02 2.29 2.30 3.04 2.29 2.36 2.91 2.29 2.22

SR 2.37 2.10 1.10 2.34 2.10 0.98 2.32 2.02 1.07

Note. There is some overlap between creative categories because some people reported participating in more than one creative activity. TC = Time Competence; TI = Time Incompetence; Id = Inner Directed; O = Outer Directed; SAV = Self-Actualizing Value; Ex = Existentiality; Fr = Feeling Reactivity; S = Spontaneity; Sr = Self-Regard; Sa = Self-Acceptance; Nc = Nature of Man; Sy = Synergy; A = Acceptance of Aggression; C = Capacity for Intimate Contact; TR = Time Ratio; SR = Support Ratio.

Serotkin - Relationship Between Self-Actualization and Creativity

Documents

Transcript of Serotkin - Relationship Between Self-Actualization and Creativity