Capacity versus motivation as competing explanations of individual differences in children's divergent ideational production¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · 1 claim (1 for) · 1 study (1 causal), q3 · 0 of 1 report an effect size · 1 claim rests on one study

Description¶

The article frames two competing explanations for why children differ on divergent-thinking tasks. Under a capacity account, children who produce more ideas differ in their associative repertoire, so that "increased motivation should not help the child who lacks relevant associations to draw closer to one with a larger repertoire". Under a motivational account, productive children are more intrigued by unusual problems or more desirous of pleasing the examiner, so uniformly raising task motivation should reduce individual differences. The study tests these by rewarding idea production and examining whether regression slopes flatten.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• A manipulation that raises task motivation uniformly across subjects so that the range of motivation is substantially reduced

Constraints¶

• The test assumes the reward raised low-motivation children's motivation to approach that of initially high-motivation children, an assumption the article states cannot be fully verified

Target Learners¶

• elementary school children

Target Learning Objectives¶

• divergent ideational production
• creative fluency

Claims¶

• Concrete Reward Increases Mean Ideational Fluency [+M]

Related Theories¶

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Ward, William C., Nathan Kogan, and Ethel Pankove. (1970). Motivation and Capacity in Children's Creativity. Research Bulletin. Educational Testing Service. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED045766