SATIATION OF DIVERGENT AND CONVERGENT THINKING AND ITS EFFECT ON THE NEED FOR NOVELTY

The present experiment was designed to determine differential effects if any, on high- and low-creative Ss need for novelty after being satiated with experiences requiring convergent and divergent thinking. High- or low-creative Ss were identified by the remote associates test. The S was assigned to either a divergent satiation thinking condition or to a convergent satiation thinking condition and performed the requisite tasks in each. Following satiation, the S performed a task which enabled E to identify differences in Ss responsiveness to novelty. The general hypothesis of the study was that high-creatives who were satiated with convergent thinking tasks would choose significantly more words of the class nouns or nonnouns of words which lead to novel associations than would high-creatives who were satiated with divergent thinking tasks. Among the low-creatives, those Ss who were satiated with convergent thinking experiences were hypothesized to choose more words of the class of words which led to novel associations than the low-creatives who were satiated with divergent thinking experiences.