Creative abilities in identical and fraternal twins

Abstract

The present research set out to investigate the possibility of a genetic component in creative ability The pool of subjects for this study consisted of 117 pairs of twins, 13–19 years of age, divided into 28 pairs of identical males, 19 pairs of fraternal males, 35 pairs of identical females, and 35 pairs of fraternal females. A battery of ten creativity tests, including five developed by Guilford, and one measure of verbal intelligence were administered to each subject. The majority of intraclass correlations for both the monozygotic and dizygotic twins on the 11 measures attained statistical significance, with the correlations tending to be somewhat higher in the identical twin groups. When the intrapair variances of the identical and fraternal twins were contrasted directly on the various tests, there were few statistically significant results. Intercorrelations between the 11 tests compared two at a time revealed higher correlations in the monozygotic group, indicating a somewhat more consistent performance from test to test. The overall results, however, failed to provide convincing evidence of a genetic component in creativity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Anastasi, A., and Schaefer, C. E. (1969). Biographical correlates of artistic and literary creativity in adolescent girls.J. Appl. Psychol. 53: 267–263.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anastasi, A., and Schaefer, C. E. (1971). The Franck Drawing Completion Test as a measure of creativity.J. Genet. Psychol. 119: 3–12.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Barron, F. (1965). The psychology of creativity. InNew Directions in Psychology II, Holt, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barron, F. (1969),Creative Person and Creative Process, Holt, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Berger, R., and Guilford, J. P. (1963)Plot Titles, Manual, Sheridan Supply Co., Beverly Hills, Calif.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Borgatta, E., and Corsini, R. (1964).Quick Word Test Manual, Harcourt, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cederlof, R., Friberg, L., Jonsson, E., and Kaij, L. (1961). Studies on similarity diagnoses in twins with the aid of miiled questionnaires.Acta Genet. 11: 338–362.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Christensen, P. F., and Guilford, J. P. (1959).Manual for the Christensen-Guilford Fluency Tests, Sheridan Supply Co. Beverly Hills, Calif.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Domino, G. (1969). Maternal personality correlates of son's creativity.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 33: 180–183.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gershon, A., and Guilford, J. P. (1963).Manual for Possible Jobs, Sheridan Supply Co., Beverly Hills, Calif.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Jablon, S., Neel, J. V., Gershowitz, H., and Atkinson, G. F. (1967). The NAS0NRC twin panel: Methods of construction of the panel, zygosity diagnosis and proposed use.Am. J. Hum. Genet. 19: 133–161.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ladner, J. (1971). Enhancement of productive thinking in institutionalized mental retardates. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fordham University.

  13. Maltzman, I. (1960). On the training of originality.Psychol. Rev.,67: 229–242.

    Google Scholar 

  14. McReynolds, P., and Acker, M. (1968)The Obscure Figures Test: Manual for Administration, Behavioral Research Laboratory, Veterans Administration Hospital, Palo Alto, Calif.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mednick, S., and Mednick, M. T. (1967).Examiner's Manual: Remote Associates Test, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Olive, H. (1972). Sibling resemblances on divergent thinking.,J. Genet. Psychol. 120: 155–162.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Parnes, S., and Meadow, A. (1959). Effects of brainstorming instructions on creative problem solving by trained and untrained subjects.J. Educ. Psychol. 50: 171–176.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Scarr, S. (1968). Environmental bias in twin studies. In Vandenberg, S. G. (ed.),Progress in Human Behavior Genetics, Johns Hopkins Press, p. 205–213.

  19. Schaefer, C. (1969a).Preliminary Manual—Originality Scale FDCT, author, New York.

  20. Schaefer, C. (1969b).Similes Manual, Center for Urban Education New York.

  21. Smith, J. T. (1965). A comparison of socioenvironmental factors in monozygotic and dizygotic twins, testing an assumption. In Vandenberg, S. G. (ed.),Methods and Goals in Human Behavior Genetics, Academic Press, New York, p. 45–61.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Taylor, D., Berry, P., and Block, C. (1957). Does Group Participation When Using Brainstorming Facilitate or Inhibit Creative Thinking? Technical Report No. 1, Yale University, Department of Psychology, Office of Naval Research.

  23. Vandenberg, S. G. (ed.) (1968).Progress in Human Behavior Genetics. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Welsh, G. S. (1959).Welsh Figure Preference Test, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, Calif.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wilson, R. C., Christensen, P. R., Merrifield, P. R., and Guilford, J. P. (1960).Alternate Uses Manual, Sheridan Supply Co., Beverly. Hills, Calif.

    Google Scholar 

  26. World Health Organization (1966). The use of twins in epidemiological studies. Report of the WHO meeting of investigators on metholology of twin studies.Acta Genet. Med. Gemellol. 15: 109–128.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dr. Marvin Reznikoff.

Additional information

This study was funded by the Connecticut Research Commission.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reznikoff, M., Domino, G., Bridges, C. et al. Creative abilities in identical and fraternal twins. Behav Genet 3, 365–377 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01070219

Download citation

Keywords

  • Intraclass Correlation
  • Convincing Evidence
  • Genetic Component
  • Identical Twin
  • Fraternal Twin