1.
The
Associa+on
Between
Crea+vity
and
Psychological
Well-­‐Being
Madeline
Flanagan
Texas
A&M
University
INTRODUCTION
People
who
are
more
crea<ve
may
be
be>er
off.
Exis<ng
research
links
crea<vity
to
higher
intelligence,
certain
personality
traits,
and
be>er
coping
abili<es.
Crea<ve
individuals
are
be>er
at
problem
solving
and
have
a
more
posi<ve
percep<on
of
frustra<ng
situa<ons
(Falat,
2000).
Kimport
and
Robbins
(2012)
found
that
crea<vity
reduces
nega<ve
mood
states.
Amabile
et
al.
(2005)
measured
the
posi<ve
affect
of
crea<vity
measured
by
happiness
and
sa<sfac<on
with
each
day
at
the
workplace.
They
measured
crea<vity
with
self-­‐assessed
crea<ve
thought
and
problem
solving
and
crea<vity
by
peer
assessment.
Higher
posi<ve
affect
was
found
to
be
a
direct
consequence
of
crea<vity.
There
is
also
a
link
between
crea<vity
and
intelligence
(Getzels
&
Jackson,
1962).
A
study
on
crea<vity
and
personality
found
that
highly
crea<ve
individuals
were
more
intelligent,
were
more
socially
bold,
were
less
tense,
and
had
a
stronger
self-­‐sen<ment
than
less
crea<ve
individuals
(Mallappa
&
Upadhyaya,
1977).
The
posi<ve
effects
of
crea<vity
on
everyday
life
were
a
recurring
theme
in
literature.
The
purpose
of
the
study
was
to
inves<gate
the
rela<onship
between
crea<vity
measured
by
crea<ve
personality
and
crea<ve
behavior
and
different
aspects
of
psychological
well-­‐being
including
meaning
and
pleasure
in
life,
purpose
in
life,
sa<sfac<on
with
life,
and
happiness.
Ques+ons
or
comments?
Contact
Madeline
Flanagan
at
mmf6119@tamu.edu
STUDY
Par+cipants
One
hundred
and
sixty-­‐one
individuals
(92
female,
67
male,
2
female
to
male
transgender)
from
18
to
23
years
of
age
(M
=
18.89,
SD
=
0.981)
par<cipated
in
the
study
through
an
online
survey.
Materials
and
Procedure
• Crea<ve
Personality
(Gough,
1979)
• Par<cipants
indicate
how
much
crea<ve
and
uncrea<ve
personality
traits
describe
them
(M
=
4.32,
SD
=
0.45,
α
=
0.67).
• Crea<ve
personality
was
assessed
with
30
items
including
“insigh^ul,”
“unconven<onal,”
and
“resourceful”
(1
=
does
not
describe
me
at
all;
7
=
describes
me
very
well).
• Crea<ve
Behaviors
(Dollinger,
2003)
• Par<cipants
indicated
how
ocen
they
performed
a
list
of
28
everyday
crea<ve
ac<vi<es
(M
=
2.06,
SD
=
0.53,
α
=
0.91).
• There
were
28
items
(Examples:
“wri<ng
poems,”
“sketching,”
and
“making
a
collage”)
(1
=
never,
2
=
once
or
twice,
3
=
three
to
five
8mes,
4
=
more
than
five
8mes).
• Meaning
in
Life
(Steger,
Frazier,
Oishi,
&
Kaler,
2006)
• Par<cipants
rated
their
meaning
in
life
for
the
presence
of
meaning
in
life
(M
=
4.74,
SD
=
1.23,
α
=
0.86)
and
search
for
meaning
in
life
subscales
(M
=
4.63,
SD
=
1.38,
α
=
0.89).
• There
were
5
items
for
each
subscale.
• Par<cipants
indicated
their
level
of
agreement
with
statements
such
as
“I
understand
my
life’s
meaning”
and
“I
am
looking
for
something
that
makes
my
life
feel
meaningful”
(1
=
strongly
disagree,
7
=
strongly
agree)
.
• Pleasure
in
Life
• Par<cipants
rated
their
pleasure
in
life
for
the
presence
of
pleasure
in
life
(M
=
5.41,
SD
=
1.13,
,
α
=
0.88)
and
search
for
pleasure
in
life
subscales
(M
=
4.90,
SD
=
1.26,
α
=
0.89).
• There
were
5
items
for
each
subscale.
• Par<cipants
indicated
their
level
of
agreement
with
statements
such
as
“I
have
a
good
sense
of
what
makes
my
life
pleasant”
and
“I
am
always
looking
to
find
enjoyment
in
my
life”
(1
=
strongly
disagree,
7
=
strongly
agree).
• Purpose
in
Life
(Ryff,
1995)
• Par<cipants
affirmed
how
much
they
agreed
with
a
statement
about
their
feeling
of
purpose
in
life
(M
=
4.86,
SD
=
0.94,
α
=
0.71).
• The
scale
consisted
of
7
items
and
included
items
such
as
“I
have
a
sense
of
direc<on
and
purpose
in
my
life”
and
“I
enjoy
making
plans
for
the
future
and
working
to
make
them
a
reality”
(1
=
strongly
disagree,
7
=
strongly
agree).
• Sa<sfac<on
with
Life
(Diener,
Emmons,
Larson,
&
Griffin,
1985)
• Par<cipants
were
given
statements
rela<ng
to
how
sa<sfied
they
are
with
their
life
(M
=
4.80,
SD
=
1.21,
α
=
0.85).
• Par<cipants
indicated
their
agreement
with
5
different
statements
(e.g.,
“If
I
could
live
my
life
over
I
would
change
almost
nothing”)
(1
=
strongly
disagree,
7
=
strongly
agree).
• Subjec<ve
Happiness
(Lyubormisky
&
Lepper,
1999)
• Par<cipants
indicated
their
level
of
subjec<ve
happiness
(M
=
4.77,
SD
=
1.28,
α
=
0.82).
• Par<cipants
revealed
how
much
they
agreed
with
4
different
statements
(e.g.,
“In
general,
I
consider
myself
a
happy
person”)
(1
=
strongly
disagree,
7
=
strongly
agree).
RESULTS
• Crea<ve
personality
was
posi<vely
correlated
with
meaning
in
life,
pleasure
in
life,
purpose
in
life,
sa<sfac<on
with
life,
and
happiness,
which
suggests
that
people
with
more
crea<ve
personality
traits
have
be>er
overall
psychological
well-­‐being.
• There
was
no
rela<onship
between
crea<ve
personality
and
search
for
meaning
in
life
and
search
for
pleasure
in
life,
sugges<ng
that
people
with
more
crea<ve
personali<es
do
not
search
for
meaning
and
pleasure
in
life
any
more
or
less
than
people
without
crea<ve
personali<es
• Crea<ve
behavior
was
posi<vely
correlated
with
meaning
and
pleasure
in
life,
which
suggests
that
people
that
perform
more
crea<ve
ac<vi<es
find
more
meaning
and
pleasure
in
their
day-­‐to-­‐day
life.
• There
was
no
rela<onship
between
crea<ve
behavior
and
purpose,
sa<sfac<on,
and
happiness.
Bivariate
Correla+ons
in
Study
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1.
Crea+ve
Personality
-­‐
2.
Crea+ve
Behaviors
.04
-­‐
3.
Presence
of
Meaning
.39**
.16*
-­‐
4.
Search
for
Meaning
-­‐.06
-­‐.04
-­‐.03
-­‐
5.
Presence
of
Pleasure
.45**
.18*
.62**
.26**
-­‐
6.
Search
for
Pleasure
.10
.07
-­‐.03
.62**
.26**
-­‐
7.
Purpose
in
Life
.32**
.05
.49**
-­‐.19*
.59**
.03
-­‐
8.
Sa+sfac+on
with
life
.27**
.14
.51**
-­‐.11
.56**
.10
0.37**
-­‐
9.
Happiness
.41**
.12
.50**
-­‐.16*
.56**
-­‐.02
.35**
.53**
-­‐
Note.
*p
<
.05;
**p
<
.01.
DISCUSSION
In
conclusion,
people
that
have
more
crea<ve
personality
traits
are
more
likely
to
live
meaningful,
pleasant,
sa<sfying,
and
happy
lives,
and
individuals
that
perform
more
crea<ve
behaviors
are
more
likely
to
experience
meaning
and
pleasure
in
their
lives.
The
results
of
the
study
support
the
conclusion
that
there
is
a
link
between
crea<vity
and
quality
of
life.