Running Head: THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

Cassandra L. Reese
August 10, 2010
Research in Education
The Effect of Play on Subsequent Creativity
Dr. Edward Snyder

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

The Effect of Play on Subsequent Creativity

Introduction
Play is an elusive concept; both in its ability to be defined as well as to be researched
(Whitebread, Coltman, Jameson & Lander, 2009). Many theorists and researchers including
Johan Huizinga (1950), Jean Piaget (1962), Jerome Bruner and colleagues (1976), and others
have long sought to not only clarify the essence of play, but to also understand its effect on
development and well-being, as well as its ability to promote creative thinking (Ginsburg, 2007;
Howard-Jones, Taylor & Sutton, 2002). Carl Rogers identified the first characteristic of a
successfully creative person as having the ability to play (as cited in Gude, 2010). Along those
same lines, is it possible that play can facilitate ones creative abilities (Russ, 2003)? Indeed,
previous research in this area has found substantial statistical evidence supporting this notion
(Dansky & Silverman, 1973, 1975; Lieberman, 1977; Vandenberg, 1981). However, will this link
between play and creativity sustain as the elementary student progresses into adolescence where
self-consciousness reigns and play is no longer a primary focus? Research has found that when
rules are imposed on play, children lose some of the creativity-enhancing benefits (Ginsburg,
2007). Students at this age can face their own set of rules or apprehensions for exploring creative
interests including a desire to please the teacher, not understanding the purpose of creating,
fearing judgment for inaccurate solutions, and fearing non-conformity amongst their peers
(Gude, 2010). Yet, by playfully creating, it is possible that art can become a less self-conscious
act where students are able to look within rather than outside themselves for answers (Szekely,
1996).
The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of unstructured play, prior to beginning
a project, on the creativity of the subsequent project for tenth-grade adolescents. A previous

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

study designed by Howard-Jones, Taylor and Sutton (2002) examined an equivalent effect
among 6-7 year olds. One group of students was instructed to have free-play with salt dough
while the other copied text from the board. Following this task, both groups were asked to create
a collage of a creature using the materials provided on the table. The results of their study
showed evidence that the nature of a preceding task, structured versus unstructured, can affect
the creativity of a students subsequent task when judged by an independent panel.
Specifically, in judging creativity, the dependent variables included an overall rating of
creativity; the numbers of colors used; and the number of pieces used in the collage. Results
showed significant subsequent effect in all three aspects. The intention of this study is to assess
comparable variables in a similar project among tenth-grade art students. However, rather than
using salt dough, clay will be substituted. Additionally, the collage project will be modified to
include the creation of an imaginary landscape. For the sake of consistency, the students overall
rating of creativity will scored using Amabiles Consensual Assessment Technique. This
technique consists of having an independent panel of judges subjectively rate the creativity levels
of the students artworks (as cited in Howard-Jones et al., 2002).

Review of Literature
Many theorists including Huizinga (1950), Piaget (1962), Bruner and colleagues (1976),
and others have long sought to clarify the essence of play, as well as to understand plays ability
to promote creative thinking. Piaget theorized that play can enable children to find associations
between previously unrelated ideas (as cited in Danksy & Silverman, 1973). Following the play
theories of Piaget (1962), Dansky & Silverman (1973) completed studies in which their findings

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

supported the notion that an increase in playful activity would promote an increase in
associative fluency. Associative fluency is the measure of ones ability to generate alternative
uses for conventional objects. The study involved 90 preschool-aged children in one control
group, with no previous interaction with objects; and two experimental groups of both free play
and imitation play with various objects. Results showed that subjects in the free-play group
generated significantly more nonstandard uses for the objects versus subjects who did not receive
this opportunity. There was little difference between subjects whom imitated the play of others
versus subjects with no previous play opportunity. Though this study proved an increase in
associative fluency, it could not be determined whether it facilitated an increase or decrease in
the actual creative abilities of the subjects.
Dansky & Silverman (1975) conducted a similar study in this area with subject groups
interacting with unrelated objects prior to the assessment. The study involved 36 preschool-aged
children in three experimental groups including free play, imitated play and intellectual play.
Results were comparable to the previous study in that subjects in the free-play group generated
significantly more standard and nonstandard uses for the unrelated objects versus the other two
groups. Findings from both studies directed Dansky & Silverman to theorize that playful activity
can create an attitude, or mindset, which will allow children to generate imaginative associations.
It was later hypothesized and statistically confirmed by Pellegrini (as cited in Howard-Jones et
al., 2002) that it was the transfer of an exploratory mindset that allowed the subjects to achieve
higher levels of associative fluency. In Pellegrinis studies, children treated with adult-led
exploratory questioning were more effective at associative fluency than children engaged in free
play (Pellegrini, 1981).

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

Bruner, Jolly and Genova (as cited in Whitebread et al., 2009) conducted a similar
experiment with children by either allowing free play with the objects, or teaching children how
to use the objects. The focus of the study centered on childrens problem-solving abilities. What
was found was that although children from each group performed with the same levels of
immediate success, there was a difference in the way the children approached the problem.
Children from the taught group acquired an all or nothing disposition by giving up quickly if
they were unable to immediately succeed; whereas children from the play group were more
likely to work longer and develop strategies if their first attempt failed. Vandenberg (1981) also
found comparable results in a similar study regarding play and problem solving. In Vandenbergs
study, children whom engaged in the free play treatment performed significantly better in
difficult problem solving than children from the non-play treatment.
Beretta & Privette (as cited in Howard-Jones et al., 2002) also experimentally explored
the notion of unstructured play; however, it was taken one step further to determine whether
structured play versus flexible play had an effect on creative thinking. Rather than simply
focusing on associative fluency, creativity was determined using Torrance Tests of Creative
Thinking that included scores for over-all creative thinking, fluency, flexibility and originality.
In comparison to findings by Dansky & Silverman (1973, 1975), though children in the flexible
play group received higher scores in creative thinking, the scores were primarily comprised on
higher originality of thinking rather than fluency or flexibility. Based on their findings, Beretta &
Privette suggested for students to engage in creative types of activities directly following free
play experiences.

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

WhilefindingsbyBeretta&Privette(1990)haveconfirmedalinkbetweenunstructured
playandcreativethinkingforchildren,itremainsunknownifthislinkwillsustaininto
adolescencewhereselfconsciousnessreignsandplayisnolongeraprimaryfocus.Researchhas
foundthatwhenrulesareimposedonplay,childrenlosesomeofthecreativityenhancing
benefits(ascitedinGinsburg,2007).Studentsatthisagecanfacetheirownsetofrulesor
apprehensionsforexploringcreativeinterestsincludingadesiretopleasetheteacher,not
understandingthepurposeofcreating,fearingjudgmentforinaccuratesolutions,andfearing
nonconformityamongsttheirpeers(Gude,2010).Yet,byplayfullycreating,itispossiblethat
artcanbecomealessselfconsciousactwherestudentsareabletolookwithinratherthan
outsidethemselvesforanswers(Szekely,1996).BasedonapreviousstudybyHowardJones,
TaylorandSutton(2002),theproposedstudywillattemptanexperimentaltestofcausal
relationshipbetweenplayandcreativity.Thepurposeofthisstudyistoexaminetheeffectof
unstructuredplay,priortobeginningaproject,onthecreativityofthesubsequentprojectfor
tenthgradeadolescents.

Methods
Statement of Problem
The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of unstructured play, prior to beginning
a project, on the creativity of the subsequent project for tenth-grade adolescents.
Participants

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

Site. Millcreek School District is a public school located within the city of Erie,
Pennsylvania. McDowell Intermediate High School includes both freshman and sophomores
(Millcreek, 2009).
Population. Millcreek School District includes 7,500 students in seven elementary
schools, three middle schools, one intermediate high school and one senior high school. The
demographics of McDowell Intermediate High School include 95% White, 2% African
American, 2% Hispanic, 1% Asian/Pacific Islander and <1% American Indian/Alaskan Native.
The mean household income for the Millcreek area is $41,490 (Millcreek, 2009; McDowell IHS,
n.d.).
Sample and Sampling. Tenth grade art students from McDowell Intermediate High
School in Millcreek Public School District, ranging in age from 15 to 16 years, will be included
in the research study. The study will conduct quasi-experimental research using a convenience
sample of a pre-existing group of 60 tenth-grade art students. The sample will then be randomly
divided into two groups (A and B) of 30 using simple random sampling by means of a random
number generator. Teachers selected for judging the final artworks will include a convenience
sample of seven student art teachers approaching the end of their teacher training and seven
expert art teachers from Millcreek School District who are experienced in sophomore-level art
education.
Design. Theresearchstudywillimplementarepeatedmeasuresdesigninwhicheach
groupwillreceiveeitherastructuredwritingassignmentoranunstructuredplaytreatmentprior
tocreatingacollage.Thefollowingday,atthesametime,eachgroupwillthenperformthe
alternativeprecedingtreatmentpriortocreatingacollage.Thestudywillconsistoffour

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

assessments,twopergroup,todeterminetheeffectivenessoftheprecedingtaskonthestudents
creativeresults.Usingadesignwithtwoexperimentalgroups,ratherthanoneexperimental
groupandonecontrolgroup,willhelptoreducethevariabilityofthetreatmenteffects.
Procedures
The research study will implement quantitative quasi-experimental research using a
repeated-measures design. Quasi-experimental research will be used due to the fact that random
assignment of the sample is impossible with a pre-existing convenience sample. As a means to
minimize the effects of alternative explanations for changes to the dependent variable,
randomization using a random number generator will be used to divide the students into two
experimental groups of 30 students; A and B. Randomly selecting students for the treatment
groups will allow all students an equal chance of being selected; hence minimizing opportunities
for bias. Yet, in a convenience sample, opportunities for bias cannot be eliminated in entirety.
The study will commence with a convenience sample of 60 tenth-grade art students in
one classroom. Using a random generator, students will be randomly divided into two groups of
30; A and B. Both groups will be experimental in that they will both receive treatment from the
independent variables, a structuredwritingassignmentoranunstructuredplayactivity,andbe
assessedfortheeffectofsuchtreatments.Oncethestudentshavebeendividedintotheir
designatedgroups,GroupAwillbeaccompaniedfromtheclassroombyateacherandtakento
anotherclassroom.Inthisroom,studentswillengageinunstructuredfreeplaywithclay.
Studentswillbeseatedingroupsof34atrectangulartables.Claywillbeprovidedtostudentsin
preformedmoundsofapproximatelythesamesize.Theonlyinstructionspermittedwillinclude

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

Dowhateveryouwantwithit,andadultinteractionwillbekepttoaminimum.Intheother
classroom,studentsfromGroupBwilltakepartinastructuredwritingassignmentthatisto
includecopyingnotesconcerningfamousartistsfromtheboard.Studentswillalsobeseatedin
groupsof34atrectangulartables.Pencilsandlinedpaperwillbeprovidedtothestudents.The
onlyinstructionspermittedwillincludeCopythenotes,wordforword,onthelinedpaper.If
anystudentscompletetheassignmentbeforethetimeiscomplete,thestudentswillbeinstructed
torepeatthewrittentask.Bothpretreatmentactivitieswillcontinueforthedurationof25
minutes.Oncethetimerequirementhasbeenmet,GroupAwillthenbeescortedbacktothefirst
classroomtoengageinthesubsequentcreativeactivity.
OnceGroupAhasbeenassimilatedbackintotheoriginalclassroom,bothgroupswillbe
instructedtomakeacollageofanimaginarylandscapeusingthematerialsprovidedonthetable.
Studentswillbeseatedingroupsofsixatrectangulartables.Materialsprovidedoneachtable
aretoincludethefollowing:asheetofpaperforeachstudenttomakeacollage,100sheetsof
tissuepaper(10sheetsof20differentcolors),8gluespreaders,8pencilsand8pairsofscissors.
Studentswerepermitted35minutestocompletetheircollage.Theonlyinstructionspermitted
willincludeUsingonesheetofpaperandthematerialsprovidedatyourtable,pleasecreatethe
mostinterestingimaginarylandscapeyoucan.Priortobeginning,pleasewriteyournameonthe
backofyourcollage.Thetimetocompletethisactivityis35minutes.Oncetheactivityis
complete,allartworkswillbecollectedandstudentswillbepermittedtodismiss.
Thefollowingday,atthesametime,theentireprocedurewillberepeatedwiththe
groupscompletingthealternativeprecedingtaskpriortocreatingacollage.Specifically,Group

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

10

AwillbeinstructedtoengageintheunstructuredfreeplaytreatmentwhileGroupBwill
remainintheoriginalclassroomtoperformthestructuredwritingassignmenttreatment.All
othertasksandrequirementswillbeimplementedinthesamemannerasthedaybefore.After
completionofbothreversetreatments,thecollageswillbescoredbyanindependentpanelof10
judges.
Instruments
Independent Variables. The independent variables, or treatments, in the study include
the use of two preceding tasks, a structured writing assignment and an unstructured play activity.
The structured treatment will include a writing assignment of copying notes concerning famous
artists from the board. The unstructured treatment will include free-play with a mound of clay.
Both groups will be experimental in that they will receive both treatments in reverse of the other.
Ultimately, students will be statistically assessed using the dependent variables to determine the
effectiveness of the preceding task on the students creative results.
Dependent Variables. The dependent variables, or assessment, in the study include the
judging of the creativity of the final student collages. Specifically, the dependent variables
include an overall rating of creativity; the numbers of colors used; and the number of pieces used
in the collage.
The overall rating of creativity will be scored using Amabiles (1982) Consensual
Assessment Technique. The Consensual Assessment Technique has received much use and
validation in the field of creativity. Inter-rater reliabilities have fared more than sufficient with
coefficient alphas typically ranging between .70 and .90 (Amabile, 1982, 1996; Baer, Gentile &

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

11

Kaufman, 2004; Howard-Jones et al., 2002). Procedures for Amabiles technique typically
consist of having an independent panel of blind judges, knowledgeable in the area of
assessment; subjectively rate the creativity levels of the students artworks. Judges are blind in
that they are only made aware of the task given to the students and not the experimental
conditions. This norm-referenced technique provides a general measure of creative value in
that it is scored according to independently-formulated criteria by the panel of judges (as cited
in Howard-Jones et al., 2002). The research study will incorporate a total of 10 judges: 7 student
art teachers approaching the end of their teaching training and 3 expert art teachers all of
whom are experienced in sophomore-level art education. As the criteria for scoring is subjective,
once all scores are collected, inter-judge reliability will be established using Cronbachs alpha
amongst the panel of student teachers and the panel of expert teachers. The measurements will
then be assessed to determine whether a correlation exists between the two. If a positive
correlation does exist, the scores will then be added together to create a final score for each
outcome (Howard-Jones et al., 2002).
In addition to scoring the students artwork based on the Consensual Assessment
Technique, student creativity will also be determined by counting the range of colors used, as
well as the number of tissue paper pieces incorporated in the students collages. Means and
standard deviations for the 3 dependent variables will then be calculated and compared for each
preceding task of writing and play. Analysis will be performed on the means of dependent
variables using an ANOVA. This analysis of variance will determine the effect the preceding
task has had upon subsequent creativity (Howard-Jones et al., 2002).
Threats to Validity

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

12

There are numerous threats to both the internal and external validity of the research
design. Primarily, as the research is quasi-experimental by means of a convenience sample, there
is an internal threat of nonequivalence of participants and an external threat of nongeneralizability. With a threat of nonequivalence of participants, it is impossible to entirely prove
that the independent variables, unstructured play and structured writing, are the sole reasons for
changes to the dependent variable assessment. Additionally, with a convenience sample, it is not
randomly selected from a population; making the treatment groups incapable of being
statistically predictable. However, by providing a detailed description of the students in the
sample, it may be possible for others to generalize the research for other sophomore-level art
students.
Treatment fidelity may also be an internal threat if any of the experimental groups are not
approached in the exact same manner for both days. Possibilities for incorrect treatments could
include a teacher providing more directions than directed or allotting the students more or less
time during one of the treatments. To prevent these occurrences, specific word-for-word
instructions will be provided to all participating teachers prior to beginning each day of
experimentation.
As the research implements a repeated-measures design, there is an internal threat of
regression toward the mean and an external threat of pretest sensitization. In any experiment
where students undergo multiple testing, there is the likelihood for students with extreme
scores to become less extreme and regress towards the mean the second time around. Also,
because the students will be making the same collage in two different instances, there is a threat
of pretest sensitization. In effect, there is a possibility that students can be influenced during the

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

13

creation of the second collage by experiences from the first collage. These influences could
potentially include an increase in creativity scores; an increase in the number of tissue paper
pieces used; or an increase in the number of colors used. In addition, because the experiment
occurs over a two-day span, there is a possibility of a threat of attrition, or students dropping out
of the experiment.

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

14

References
Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997-1013.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in Context. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Baer, J., Gentile, C., & Kaufman, J. (2004). Extension of the consensual assessment technique to
nonparallel creative products. Creativity Research Journal, 16(1), 113-117. Retrieved from
Academic Search Complete database.
Bruner, J. S., Jolly, A., & Sylva, K. (1976). Play: Its role in evolution and development. New
York: Basic Books.
Dansky, J., & Silverman, I. (1973). Effects of play on associative fluency in preschool-aged
children. Developmental Psychology, 9(1), 38-43. doi:10.1037/h0035076.
Dansky, J., & Silverman, I. (1975). Play: A General Facilitator of Associative Fluency.
Developmental Psychology, 11(2), 104.
Gude, O. (2010). Playing, creativity, possibility. Art Education, 63(2), 31-37. Retrieved from
Education Research Complete database.
Howard-Jones, P., Taylor, J., & Sutton, L. (2002). The effect of play on the creativity of young
children during subsequent activity. Early Child Development & Care, 172(4), 323-328.
Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Huizinga, J. (1950). Homo Ludens: A study of the play element in culture. Boston, MA: Beacon
Press.
Lieberman, J. (1977). Playfulness: Its relationship to imagination and creativity. New York;
United States: Academic Press.

THE EFFECT OF PLAY ON SUBSEQUENT CREATIVITY

15

McDowell IHS. (n.d.). Retrieved July 27, 2010 from

http://www.greatschools.org/pennsylvania/erie/1499-McDowell-IHS/#from..HeaderLink
Millcreek Township School District. (2009). Retrieved July 27, 2010 from
http://www.edline.net/pages/mtsd
Pellegrini, A. D. (1981). A sequenced questioning paradigm as a general facilitator of
preschoolers associative fluency. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 52(2), 649-650. Retrieved
from Biological Abstracts database.
Piaget, J. (1962). Play, Dreams and Imitation in Childhood. New York: Norton.
Russ, S. (2003). Play and creativity: developmental issues. Scandinavian Journal of Educational
Research, 47(3), 291. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Szekely, G. (1996). Circus. Art Education, 48(4), 44-50. Retrieved from Education Research
Complete database.
Vandenberg, B. (1981). The role of play in the development of insightful tool-using strategies.
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly: Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27(2), 97-109.
Whitebread, D., Coltman, P., Jameson, H., & Lander, R. (2009). Play, cognition and selfregulation: What exactly are children learning when they learn through play?. Educational
& Child Psychology, 26(2), 40-52. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.