Behavior Analytic Studies of Creativity: A Critical Review

Abstract

Studies that treat creativity as operant behavior were critically reviewed. Of the twenty studies, most met minimal requirements for methodological adequacy; all provided at least some evidence for increased creative responding. Major difficulties involved potential confounds between instructions and contingencies, lack of an independent record of the training interaction, lack of social validation data, and very limited evidence for generalization. Several issues were discussed: problems in the behavioral definition of creativity, objections to the use of contingent reinforcement, and the need for empirical analysis of the creative process.As noted by Bijou (1979) and Sloane, Endo, and Della-Piana (1980), the experimental analysis of behavior is often criticized for failure to deal with complex human phenomena such as creativity. Such a criticism is no longer tenable: Studies conducted over the past 13 years clearly address the experimental analysis ofcreativity. What remains unclear is the methodological and conceptual adequacy of these studies and whether the research has dealt with the special problems of creativity. Recent reviews by Goetz (1982) and Sloane et al. (1980) have summarized some ofthe behavioral work but have not provided a comprehensive and critical review.In this paper, we review published studies on the training of creativity as operant behavior. The behavior analytic conception of creativity will first be described, followed by a review of the methodological characteristics and findings of the empirical studies. Finally, we will discuss some ofthe difficulties raised by the analysis of such a complex, subjective, and highly valued activity as creativity. Specifically, the discussion will focus on problems in (a) the definition of a creative response, (b) the use ofcontingent reinforcement, and (c) the analysis of the creative process.The studies included in this review were

Entrepreneurial Creativity and Growth

“…On the one hand, [82][83][84] state that rewards are appropriate and desirable for creative performance. Nickerson [85] claim that given that an important factor for creative accomplishment is establishing purpose and intention to be creative, rewards can encourage such a creative orientation.…”

Impact of Intangible Assets on Profitability of Hong Kong Listed Information Technology Companies

“…Laursen (2003) stated that reward and bonus to a grass-root employee for minor progress can boost such incremental innovation activity regardless of the particular company in which the incentive system is implemented. In addition, extrinsic incentives, for example, monetary compensation can motivate employees to participate on innovation activity (Winston & Baker, 1985). Moreover, employee"s behaviors are changeable so extrinsic factors can result in expected performance and behavior.…”

“…High level of creativity can be resulted for rewarding employee"s divergent thinking (Winston & Baker, 1985;Edwards, 1989). In addition, lots of experimental researches indicated that large economic compensation positively relates to employees" incremental innovative activity.…”

Operant variability: Evidence, functions, and theory

“…Whether the variability required for creativity can be reinforced is relevant to whether creativity itself can be reinforced. The latter question has led to contentious debate, with some arguing that reinforcement facilitates creativity (Cameron & Pierce, 1994;Eisenberger & Cameron, 1996;Stokes, 2001;Winston & Baker, 1985) and others focusing on detrimental effects of reinforcement (Amabile, 1983;Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999).…”