30 undergraduates were allowed unlimited time to “think of ways to change or improve a door knob.” One group (Short Checklist) was taught to use a 7-item checklist which suggested general categories of ideas (i.e., change colors, shape, material, design/style, size; rearrange parts; add/subtract something). A second group (Long Checklist) used Osborn's (1963) “73 idea-spurring questions” as an idea checklist. Ss in the third group were instructed in the morphological synthesis procedure in which ideas for improving one quality of an object (e.g., color or shape) are listed along one axis and ideas for improving other qualities are listed along other axes. New ideas are produced by combining ideas on various axes. The fourth group (Control) received no instruction regarding techniques. The results showed that Ss in the Short-checklist and Morphological Synthesis Groups produced the greatest total number of ideas and the greatest number of high quality ideas. While the four groups did not differ significantly in the amount of S-determined problem-solving time, Ss in the Short-checklist Group used more time than Ss in the other groups, supporting earlier findings that the short checklist is stimulating and challenging.
[1]
G. A. Davis.
Training Creativity in Adolescence: A Discussion of Strategy*
,
1969
.
[2]
M. O. Edwards.
A Survey of Problem‐Solving Courses*
,
1968
.
[3]
G. A. Davis,et al.
Effects of simple instructional biases upon performance in the Unusual Uses Test.
,
1968,
The Journal of general psychology.
[4]
Gary A. Davis,et al.
Using Idea Checklists With College Students: Overcoming Resistance
,
1968
.
[5]
S. Parnes.
Effects of extended effort in creative problem solving.
,
1961
.
[6]
Sidney Jay Parnes,et al.
A source book for creative thinking
,
1962
.
[7]
L. Shulman,et al.
Modes of thinking in young children
,
1965
.
[8]
J. G. Mason.
How to Be a More Creative Executive
,
1960
.
[9]
S. Parnes.
Creative behavior guidebook
,
1967
.