s 2. a: . z z ... . . _ - . .. .. .. . . . 1 :1».
3mm...9.......99.....-.. vxfim _ . . ., .. .. fimfii$fif9€¢fi
., .99.... .9”...9.9.9..999._...9,.... .. _ . . 199.999... .9
Human? .. . 9 2:5. 9 . . 4329.
I — I

x
...1.
. z.
t
a
9.

..... $3.35. 9 . a:
.v .2 1.9.44 . l. u «N .
“.mm.9w.m.9m¥nwwmfig .....99

. 59W?
.
.. .99.. .4 "Fax. .

a;
a
)
‘

                                                                  

                   

udqr‘uuu.u.u...nunhmm-H§.flci
.

  
      

    

     

 

     

K til. A.
nfimmfl LL14 Jwvruu
Hfihnxmx . . .. .. . . . 91113.1... ...; 1
9. . . . . .. . ..
. . ...”...u999 .. _. .. ... .. . .m.
.... ...-
195.4.
J55?” .

  

. _ mmmwwr
.. .. may 15.1934

            
       

  
            

                  

         
        

 

 
 

    

   

 
   
 

    

    

               

 

           

               

     

           

        

            

    

               

 

             

     

     

      

     

         

.1...

. .msfikwwnJ .. . ...... .... r . 3..”th-
.. 11...». . . . . .

  
        

       

.... a V 1‘ 1- X ‘1‘ 4-
. . . 3.9.19. 9V9mm.m91 ..9 .
.9 .919 . . .. . . ...-1.9%.. .... . ...riu..«......_...._.....9u9. . . . . . , ......
.2. .- , . . . .. .. V9 . . y... . 3.5... 6.5.3.: ...-.919- mmqfiw. .- . A. . _ 5....
.. . s ....9 1 m& 1 ..1 .9 .. ...? ...mar. .... if)... .. . .. .. .19: .1.
....n. flaw-9.9.. a: 1..M.mfismuwfi..,9....fi99u MWWQ .maafiw .mww... 9M??? . .fiAx ...... $599.99-;
I. .... 1 Ely. . 4 u. .1 I. 4.. ...x ($1. .9 J. .. v. a. . : - 1 ; . u b . ...: I ..uA.+ I .1 n .11; iv ID:- . 9 1.1. . ... .
9 21. .9 9.. .9 -. _ ... 9.9%.98 . .9 .. 9. . .7 9... 9.1.4.6? ..fiwik. . 191.95...-1. .. .. .19. ...--1491}... .
Kati-#91 o 9&2. ...... ....1....191 c. A”. 9.. 5.9.1....- . .9. WA! ... 978.715... 24...... ..o r .5 ...... 1.3%. .
. ..4 . . .. FEM? . 1h 9.. ... .1... #5.”. Ad. .. . 9%.». ...»: .. . .1! ...: . 1 9...... 3.9.9.53. 919.9141 . . .. .
_ fimflhme. fir 5.... ##3##“. ......Wmmmmhuu... .u.w.9..u..waw9w.mm.wbwmtr ..Huwhwmw4¢$. afiwmwwfimwnyu 9. fitmmufivirxmunwmnmfiqx ...-flaw"... ...Aw
9 .... 9 . .11.. .1. - .....caML.-..+1.. -..... Ark..- . v.9. 9.921.... 1.1.... ... ..1 . . 1" 9.. ..1 ... ..
.9. .....v 9......9... 9 999...... .. 99.99... 9... - gtfimié _ 99.9% .1919? , .

I21...
.. 99.1%... u... ,
: untufikmmniwi Hm“:
. . 11h. «...... 19%..1..-

h— !» "fiat”.lbbll I, l
- Hunk“!- 14..l~ 3114...: .‘AL 1 .171!!!

. 59.91.512.411 (nun-.1.
- .1. .

M5.
3 .
.
......

1.,

   

T
. . . “5&- .,
4%....“

b.2791...

4
1..
s

                

               
        

  

5‘
‘33

          
   

        
      

EL
V‘l"n.

 

 

      

  
      

 

. in} . , . 91.19.59... . 13.11.9151. 1.1... . .95ka
u...- Sm}... . ...RRu...n.-f.1;. .. .. .. thwu. fi..-.nx1...u...-..l...1.fi11-..n....-...; - .
. 1 . . . .... . .. . ... ...: :9. 1 ...-... 1 1.211... ...-.111-
. .........1..9w.99-.- 1% L ...-1.9....u. .... {.Bawfinizatfi- .11.... 11:...541 .
.1.- ..aJ! ...-W .1511... . .. ..umm. rig! 1.9.1. 9.1...9nr11199.....1.fl.s 1.1.11.3".th
o...fiat..¢ . . ..1 :1: .... 1 us. ... 1 ...». 9 alt...- 5.1.1.111. .1111» .151».U..110)|.1:
ii. 1...": . . .. ... 5...... MssW h I 1 . .. 4s. :1..1...1I.|.¢( £49m. 1.1.1.?51! 1131..
......u... a .. 31.49.19...- ........ . ...! :191LVQP . ... 1... .F...1,11...uul . 11.11.1- .. uni-1.51
«I.-. . 4...- ..... has-aim...» .. a..§...1.f..t.. _ . ..§.1L..1.L1h1.n11.h.15114111h . 1.u11.1.1....1...
. 1m... ... 1: b. . . 5.3.1.931- gxxsnu. 411.9314 . - lat-ruff. .
. 1 _ ...-... 3131.111 .. . ..
1 ..

$99.9 -99.... #9999... ..9...

i
.1

         

 

     

             

     

       

. , . . .... 1.3... ...! .9 . . - . . . .

. 49.9%.?” 9 ..b. .....1uvkaawgté1. ...a :5... ugswhhrnhfififixfififiyfi.

....r. 2 1! . .... .. .. .. .. . 1 -1131... a .11.... .
5th.“. n ... (in I a. c r 1 4. a Q. .. (9.»...rflun. .lNL-tlgdtufuvrt;x

w. 19......» :2 . . ..... .«z. 1%?hnuadahfi119nnwu.

..flylr..-9....... $1.. a.....1....1........1..1-.--1. .ulef19h89:

.flfidrflbr 11.2% ..u......-.«.!.J.I....1..9

. x n.- .. ....

   

... 2.- .
in?! _ .
... ..u . - . £15115... . .1-1.s!......1a!:..n.1.r..! . 1-1. 1.1.1... 11 >1 :1.
31:593.“. . .. . . . . . . . .. ...?hfiflurfluufiuhuuuavfiuuv. ...ufifi‘lg .n“....1u-11U111111h11nuu.1-111|1l1:
._ , .11 1 . . . . . .. . . . . . Imurwbfiufiflx-flhnuaflflnsfi. ..1 11113911111131.111-11-11 iIEH
“9.1%.? 1ka . .. .. . ... .. .
Z1 . r . ,. . _

19.5. ...: ...-4A ..sd unliauufl

. ‘9.) D g 1 . .
. . 5... .11 ....l... 1.1.}

.9 ..h
.
91%.. mud-an garmfin. . 9v. 1 .- 2.91.12! .1
- t

aha-1839.1111gu63 1.1 lib-11..-! b.1191!

 

      

          

   

   

 

..

9.1111... x... .1.“ .

...-1.99.9.9 .19....1 19.21.119.595... 91.111: .
.. .. 1

in .
...an 9.
pl:

.

 

     

9| 2..

 

a
I.

        

         

   

9..
a...

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

           

:.-.............h
31.5... ...1

1-.l)

 

 

       

                          
  

    

           

 

 

 

 

     

  

  

 

..1 ...: 9 . ..4. .. .. . . T. - -
- :11 1d. -. 9.2.5.1111: . .

. . 1.101.- 194.5299 "idol-fa t. fix-93%.]?! 11111.. 111-1111! 211.... 61111...
.11.. . .. «idly-RM... WfimnWRIthfiflk-in.{rhfi1hwn. . . flunk-MR-ffifig ..1-Huhu911H11utw-111111t1114111‘1111l11ll1111il117111111
111. -1 1.. 1112151911 . ...Ituflurar1131flfiua1fbfii . 1.11lir9uu1valluitcbu1bll1ufil1ll£11i1|l1|§h9ln11111..111111. 11-11?
-..: in... .1... 1.. .... .. . - . .1.1.-...9.1.l.ii121...1
.... . nun}? ...1.1: . . .. . 1.2.12.9 . ..- 1.1.2.... 21111 1.1 1 1 :

.7... . Maui. 2. :1..." .. .. .. _. . .
. $ukh1ufl... film ..uflxluhnnééuisliz
11:. 1935.”..wfl11? ...: 9.1319351 .411.
9a-.) give; .9 t ‘anollxi
. . . 199.199.511.99. 1 . .... ...-1... .. .Y. .1
. .....1....-........en..1u. 1 ..h 6W1... .
.15.... I... 1.... on...
.. .- K :4... . .2211 1.1.4
. . . . 1. It: ...-1 .
. . . 151.199." ...-.1 01.5.29”.- 31.11119...
.. . (am {lrw,uh..-..¥ 7-21..
. - .. .31 191-111.:1392: ..
I -II‘1§'-1l‘ ..I'llr.-I.v§.l.f .1
G“...19..91:fian.r.lsn.fi1fia 1111.1 ..
.1 6.99139331191ufll1 ....duufir!
. §4+1,1tnuv-dunfixn¢mul

 

 

..J. ...r... . ...! .0-9

 

‘1 '9'.
..

 

-|".;I'I-NI'.~ I
-. 1.111 1 .

      

 

     

        

  

-..- 1-1’.IY..1.1.1 1 - . u .. .1 L 1 1 - 111111.
. . .1 1. 1.. 1 1 . - . 1- 1.. 1 .11.. 11 v11rr. 1. 11. 4.1 - 9 ”111.1 .1 . 11 .9111... .I. .9» . O19 .11.hs 1-1. ..1 ... ”.11.! - .- . loll . 1 1 1 - 1 1 . 1 .. f.
1- . 11 I. 9'. '1..- t 5“: t: '10 '0! . [1 V‘glv l-9l.1!| 1 1 1-II. I . V- V.|.-.- - 1 1-
11-13. ..1.. .1. "1193mm.”- .1 9.41931... 4.91.941“.- -u 9.2... £111,153 .198“? .91....hfi91-1é: . 19491...- ...-$5311.91... $111.99.. 1.1.1.1119... .11.- . - - .- . . . . . - 1... 11-1 2 ..
I I - n O' '1 1 It. {I u 0 1 -. A‘t‘l- -..v'.n[l. r '1. . A1»1A 1-011 . 3 V... 1 all d‘l I . - . A 0 11 - c IV '
9:99 .wpmrkzm fiawfitfi malevnv «.mm...2.1.111-11119....ra.o-...111- 9.... 9.9.9.1. .....r...u..1.1-.-.1..11..... n 1.3139... .99....9. h..- ....i..-u.-.i.n-1....1.:.- ”.... 9191.19113955991.....1...u-¥L.fl.§ré 1- .11. , . 11

 

.....il'l .lll.

THESIS

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

I ll Ill/Ill“)!Ill/Illllllllllll Ill/l W

3 1293 01575 0452

ll

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

An Investigation Between Musical Creativity
and Personality Traits

presented by
Suzanne L. Burton

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Wdegree in Mt ion

Major professo

MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

Date q ( 31W 7

0-7639

 

LIBRARY t
Mlchlgan State
Unlversity

 

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX
to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

 

MTE DUE

MTE DUE

DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ma Woes-p.14

AN INVESTIGATION BETWEEN MUSICAL CREATIVITY
AND PERSONALITY TRAITS
BY

Suzanne L. Burton

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF MUSIC EDUCATION

School of Music

‘ 1997

ABSTRACT

AN INVESTIGATION BETWEEN MUSICAL CREATIVITY
AND PERSONALITY TRAITS

BY

Suzanne L. Burton

The purpose of this study is to investigate the
relationship between musical creativity and personality
traits. More specifically, this study is concerned with
investigating whether there is a relationship between
personality traits and a student's use of time in the
compositional processes of exploration, development,
repetition, and silence.

Twenty-five third-grade students were audio-recorded
while engaged in a 7-minute compositional session on a
keyboard. The compositional sessions were analyzed through
time analysis. To measure personality traits, all of the
students received the Children's Egrsonalitv Questionnaire.
Results from the compositional session and the Children's
Personality Questionnaire were correlated.

No statistical significance was found between
personality traits and the students' use of time during the
compositional process. However, several relationships did

approach statistical significance.

Copyright by
SUZANNE LOUISE BURTON
1997

Dedicated to my mother who knew I could do it.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank my advisor, Dr. Cynthia Taggart, for
her tremendous assistance throughout my degree program and
the writing of my thesis. Her model of excellence and
professionalism will be a constant example for me.

Appreciation is expressed to my committee members Dr.
John Kratus, and Dr. Theodore Johnson for their many
contributions in the preparation of this document.

A special thank-you goes to my grandmother for all she
has done for me. Thanks are also extended to my father and
Sharon for their assistance with the data analysis. I also
wish to thank my sister and her family for "helping out with
the kids". This project would not have been possible
without them.

My thanks and love are extended to my children for
their support, encouragement, and cooperation. Most
importantly, my gratitude goes to my husband, Bill for his
unfailing love, friendship and dedication to helping me

reach higher.

Chapter
I.

II.

III.

IV.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
INTRODUCTION ........ .... .................. 1
Creativity in Music Education.............1
The Importance of Musical Creativity. .....2
Creativity................................3
Creative Process .........................4
Creative Products.............. ..... . ..... 7
Creative Person............... .......... ..7
Creativity in Music--Processes
and Products..............................ll
Musical Creativity and the Musically
Creative Person .................. . ..... ..14
Musical Creativity and Personality........18
Purpose...................................19
Problem .............. . .................... 19
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE.... ........ ..20
Introduction...................... ..... ...20
Musically Creative Person Studies ...... ...20
Personality and Music............. ....... .34
Personality Traits
and Musical Creativity .................... 36
Summary... ...... ................. ....... ..37
METHOD .................................. ..38
Subjects........................ ........ ..38
Procedural Overview ..................... ..39
Materials for the Individual
Compositional Task............ ......... ...40
Procedure for the Individual
Compositional Task........................40
Children's Personality Questionnaire......43
Procedure for Administering the
Children's Personality Questionnaire......46
Statistical Design and Analysis.. ....... ..47
RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA. ..... ..49

IntrOductionOOIOOO0.0.0..........OOOOOOO

..49

Results of the Compositional Processes....50
Children's Personality Questionnaire

Results ............. ...... ............... 51
Compositional Processes and Children' 5
Personality Questionnaire Results.........53
Interpretations ........ ........... ........ 57

vi

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS.6O

summarYOOOOOOOOOO...0.0.0.000000000000000060
Results and Conclusions...................61
Recommendations for Future Research.......63
Implications. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O 64
APPENDICES .......................................... 66
A. Human Subjects Approval...............66
B. consent Form. 0 O O O O O O O O ...... O O O O O O C O O I 67
C. Compositional Process Tally Sheet ..... 68
LIST OF REFERENCES 0 O ...... O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 69

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Compositional Process Sums, Means and
Standard Deviations......................50

2. Interjudge Reliabilities.................51
3. Compositional Process Intercorrelations..51
4. CPQ Sums, Means, and Standard Deviations.52

5. CPQ Test Manual Means and Standard

DeViationSOOOO......O...‘00.0.0.0... ..... 52
6. CPQ Intercorrelations........ ........ ....53
7. CPQ and Compositional Process

Correlations.......... .......... . ....... .55

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
1. Exploration and "B" Trait................56
2. Repetition and "I" Trait ................. 56

3. Silence and ..C" TraitOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.57

ix

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Creativity In Music Education

Creativity, like intelligence, is something all people
possess and develop in varying degrees (Sternberg, 1995).
Creative activities are fundamental to an excellent
education. with the atmosphere of contemporary education
considerably weighted toward critical thinking skills and
problem solving, creative activities can be of significance
in the development of higher order thinking skills (Henry,
1996). Also, it is through creative activities that
children can improve their mental health by expressing their
own ideas and emotions, and become fully functioning persons
as they develop all of their mental abilities (Torrance,
1963b)

The use of creativity in music education can be traced
back to a practical source by Coleman (1922) on how to
use creative musical activities with children of various
ages. In addition, studying and encouraging the musical
development of young children in a natural, discovery-based
setting was the musical goal of the Pillsbury Foundation
School. In 1937, the Pillsbury Foundation School opened in
Santa Barbara, California, with Donald Pond as the musical
director. Pond, a British composer, observed children
between the ages of 2 and 6 engaging in the discovery of

sounds and musical elements. Pond noted that repeated

opportunities for exploration of a variety of musical
instruments, in a free setting, resulted in growth of
understanding of timbre, vibration, pitch, melody, and
rhythm. The Pillsbury Studies were published as a result of
Pond's daily observations (Pond, 1978).

In 1967, the Declaration of the Tanglewood Symposium
affirmed the vitality of musical creativity in music
education (Choate, 1968). The Declaration stated that the
support and nurturing of creativity should be a primary goal
of music education. More recently, the National Standards
for Arts Education (1994) restated the importance of musical
creativity in the general music curriculum by including
composition and improvisation as valuable types of musical

achievement.

The Importance of Musical Creativity

Gordon has determined that all people have some degree
of musical potential, or aptitude (Gordon, 1989). Pond
(1981) observed that young children innately possess
musicality, with music being rooted in the child's being as
a separate way of knowing. This separate, unique way of
knowing is considered by Gardner (1983) to be one of seven
major intelligences that all human beings have to some
extent. To know music is to have a non-verbal understanding
of the musical elements and their functions. Gordon (1993)
believes that audiation, or the hearing and thinking of
music without the sound being physically present, is central
to musical comprehension. Knowing in music is expressed
through composition and performance (Sherman, 1991a). The

creative process is "the surest means of getting to know

music" (Sherman, 1991b, p. 12).

There are important implications for musical creativity
in music education. Kratus (1994b, p. 130) states the
following:

It is in the process of composing that students
wrestle with solving musical problems of syntax and
structure, unity and variety, individuality and
universality. When our students compose, they
reveal to us their understanding of how music works.
Henry (1995, p. 14) concurs stating that:
...children need to learn more than just the rules
of music: they must be actively engaged in the
creative process in order to enhance music
understanding and appreciation.
Elliott addresses the need to understand musical creativity
(Elliott, 1995, p. 222):
...the more we can clarify what musical creativity
involves the more effectively we can enable and
promote our students' efforts to achieve creative
musical results.

To grasp musical creativity, one must have an
understanding of the nature of creativity beyond the realm
of music. In the following section, a definition of general
creativity and a discussion of creativity models will ensue.
Next, the manner in which general creativity relates to

musical creativity will be examined.

Creativity

Torrance (1988) acknowledges the difficulty of defining
creativity in precise terms. However, he indicates that
creativity is a process or a product defined in terms of a
personality or environmental condition (Torrance, 1963a).
Kratus' (1985) definition is that of a property that can
relate to process, product, and person. Similarly, Balkin

(1990) suggests this creativity equation: C=3P, or

creativity is equivalent to process, product, and person.
Most researchers who investigate creativity concentrate
their exploration around one or a combination of the

process, product, or person variables (Reinhardt, 1991).

Creative Process

Four steps of the creative process, preparation,
incubation, illumination, and verification, were originally
defined by Wallas (1926). These processes, listed and
explained below, overlap in the daily stream of thought and
as one explores different problems.

1. Preparation--conscious, systematic investigation of
the problem. Voluntary work of the mind to define the scope
of the problem.

2. Incubation-~voluntary abstention from conscious
thought on the problem. Unconscious, involuntary mental
events that occur when the problem is put aside.

3. Illumination--instantaneous and unexpected
appearance of a new idea that is not influenced by the
direct effort of one's will. A flash of insight.

4. Verification--conscious effort used to refine and
test solutions to the problem as found in the preparation
stage.

The creative process model of Torrance (1966) is
similar to Wallas' in the first, third and fourth steps.
However, in the second step of the creative process a
difference arises:

1. Becoming aware of the problem--Sensing of a need or
a deficiency. Random exploration of the inadequacy, then

pinning down of the problem.

2. Thinking up possible solutions--Formulating many
possible solutions by reading, exploring, discussing, and
critically analyzing the solutions for advantages and
disadvantages.

3. Flash of insight--Birth of a new idea or solution.

4. Experimentation with possible solutions-~Testing,
revising and selecting the most promising solutions.

The creative process models of both Wallas (1926) and
Torrance (1966) both hold that the first step of the
creative process is the recognition of a need or a problem.
A thorough investigation and exploration of the problem then
occurs. However, while Wallas views the second step as
unconscious, involuntary thinking, Torrance considers the
second step as a type of brainstorming for solutions. The
third and fourth steps of the creative process are similar
in both models. Wallas (1926) and Torrance (1966) recognize
that the third step is a flash of insight, or the birth of a
new idea. Additionally, they agree that the fourth and
final step of the creative process is the refining and
testing of solutions until the most promising one is found.

Perkins believes that."purpose shapes process" (Perkins
1981, p. 101). The purpose of creating and resolving
problems that require invention is the guiding force behind
an individual's process, or method, of developing a product.
He identifies four basic steps involved in gradually
selecting a product from an infinity of possibilities:

1. Planning--The maker produces a plan for all or part
of the product.

2. Abstracting-~The maker takes ideas from the work in

progress, or other sources, instead of always working from

the initial plan.

3. Undoing--The maker undoes and redoes parts of the
work from the initial plan. It is a process of narrowing
down through a chain of plans and deriving more plans from
abstraction. The maker may undo or redo in favor of new
plans and possibilities. This is a process of trial and
error.

4. Making means into ends--The maker may be required
to derive a means to overcome obstacles presented along the
way. The development of obstacles and new problems are
viewed as a window for more product selection, thereby
initiating a new creative process.

The creative process models of Wallas (1926) and
Torrance (1966) resemble each other. Perkins' model (1981)
of the creative process, or product selection, is driven by
a person's desire for invention and begins with a maker
constructing a plan. The plan is flexible, and the maker
may use ideas gleaned from the work itself or other outside
sources. Product refinement takes place throughout the
product selection process. This contrasts with the models
of Wallas and Torrance in that their models of the creative
process have the refinement and testing of solutions as the
final step. Perkins' model acknowledges product selection
to culminate in the production of the final work. However,
unlike the models of Wallas and Torrance, Perkins recognizes
that as the process of product selection occurs, the maker
encounters new problems that do not concern the final work.
The new problems that are found along the way may act as

catalysts to reactivate the creative process.

Creative Products

A creative product is the end result of a person using
a creative process. Creative products may be verbal,
non-verbal, concrete, or abstract (Torrance, 1963a).
Attributes of a creative product include that it is
something new or original, contrasts with conformity, breaks
out of a mold, and is a successful step into the unknown.

To define qualities of a creative product, Besemer and
Treffinger (1981) reviewed more than 90 sources yielding 125
specific criteria. Three overall dimensions were found to
describe a creative product:

1. Novelty--extent of newness of the product.

2. Resolution--extent to which the product fits the
problem.

3. Elaboration and Synthesis--extent to which unlike
elements are combined into a refined, developed whole.

Originality and high quality are two descriptors cited
by Perkins (1981). Sternberg (1995) relates novelty
(originality), appropriateness (usefulness), quality (high
level of skill shown), and importance (the ability to
stimulate further work and-ideas) as primary components
of a creative product. The final test of a creative product

is being judged as creative by others (Sternberg, 1995).

Creative Person

The third and most important part of the creativity
equation is the person. Without the person there is no
process or product. Guilford, in his structure of intellect

model (1968), identified several intellectual factors of a

person who is creatively engaged:

1. Fluency--the number of appropriate responses that a
person is able to produce during a limited time.

2. Flexibility--the person's ability to produce
different types of responses.

3. Originality--the degree to which the person
produces unusual or different responses.

4. Elaboration--the person's ability to enlarge an
idea.

Guilford's model includes these factors as a person's
ability to use divergent thinking or a person's ability to
generate many possible answers to a particular problem. In
Guilford's model, the final creative act is a person's
integration of divergent and convergent (the assimilation of
many ideas into one right idea) thought processes (Guilford,
1968). To measure a person's potential for creative
thinking, Torrance developed the Torrance Tests of Creative
Thinking (1974). These tests measure an individual's
ability in each of the areas as defined by Guilford and may
be used as an indicator of one's creative potential.

A combination of features comprises the creative person
according to Perkins (1981). Cognitive style (the recurrent
patterns in the way a person approaches problems and
processes information) and artistic style (one's
individualistic qualities) help to define the creativity of
a person (Perkins, 1981). Perkins also indicates that
creative people value originality in others' work as well as
their own and hold spontaneity in high regard. In addition,
Perkins states that creative people value creativity,

realizing that those who want to be creative are most likely

to be creative and remain creative (Perkins, 1981). Another
element is one's beliefs or what one takes to be real. A
creative person believes that opportunities are vast and
waiting to be discovered and has a broad conception of what
is personally attainable (Perkins, 1981). According to
Perkins, a creative person may consciously set a work aside
for awhile or sleep on an idea. In addition, familiar
mental operations of remembering, understanding, and
recognition are employed by the creative person in
exceptional ways. Perkins states that all people have
creative abilities. Yet, it is how those abilities are used
that makes a person creative.

According to Sternberg (1995), a creative person has
certain resources that bear on creative potential. In
Sternberg's model of the creative person, there are three
types of intelligence: (a) synthetic intelligence--the
ability to redefine a problem and use resources to make
something unique; (b) analytic intelligence--the ability to
discriminate a good idea from a poor one and recognize what
ideas have potential; (c) practical intelligence--the
ability to present one's work to an audience and receive
feedback.

Knowledge is another resource that a creative person
may possess and employ (Sternberg, 1995). Learning about
the field in which one hopes to become creative and gaining
a broad perspective in one's field will help to form a base
of knowledge. This base of knowledge is important, as it
might act as a springboard for ideas as well as prevent the

thinking of ideas that have been previously thought of.

10

Sternberg (1995) asserts that thinking styles affect
creativity. A person's thinking style is represented in the
ways a person approaches problems or life in general
(Sternberg, 1995). How a person chooses to engage and use
his or her creative abilities or how one chooses to use
one's intellect also reflect a person's thinking style.
Thinking styles are used to activate abilities that may
otherwise remain dormant.

Productive innovators who go beyond mere potential and
are energetic possess motivation (Sternberg, 1995). One's
motivation to be creative may be extrinsic in nature (such
as the desire for money, power, or fame) or intrinsic in
nature (such as the need for personal challenge, or self-
expression). Sternberg implies that the love of one's work
and a strong attachment to one's work are characteristics of
high energy, task focused, creative people.

Another resource from which one may draw creative
potential, as cited by Sternberg (1995), is one's
environmental context. An individual's environmental
context involves the interaction of the person with his
environment. A nurturing environment that stimulates,
encourages, and rewards a broad range of ideas fosters
original and nonconformist thinking and behaviors
(Sternberg, 1995).

Sternberg (1995) also states that personality is
important to one's creativity. Sternberg indicates that
personality traits form a person's preferred way of
interacting with the environment. Sternberg adds that
personality traits that influence one's creativity are

nonconformity, willingness to take a stand, risk taking,

11

having a sense of humor, and courage. Personality traits
such as these enable a person to face adversity, defend
one's beliefs, and remain resilient through possible
ridicule from others or through periods of self-doubt
(Sternberg, 1995).

Research on musical creativity has primarily focused on
the process, product and person aspects of creativity as
previously described. How musical creativity associates

with the preceding models will now be discussed.

Creativity in Mugig--Processes and Products

Bennett (1976) interviewed eight composers in an
attempt to remove some of the mystery surrounding musical
creation. He found that composers begin with a germinal
idea or a sketch of the composition. Next, a first draft of
the composition is produced. Composers then elaborate on
and refine the first draft until the composition is
completed. Once the composition is finished, composers
copy the final score. Bennett found that these composers
worked most productively in a tranquil, relaxed, and secure
environment.

The processes of musical creativity, established by
Kratus (1989, 1994b) are similar to the creative processes
found in Wallas' (1926) model of general creativity. These
processes allow for intermingling of each of the categories:

1. Exploration--searching; the unfolding of new ideas;
trying one new idea after the next without reference to
previous ideas.

2. Development and Silence--reworking; the revision of

ideas; an idea generated through exploration is changed in

some aspect.

12

3. Repetition--testing and verifying; the review of

ideas; testing and practicing ideas that lead to a finished

product.

Gordon believes

that the ability to audiate, or the

hearing and comprehending of music without the sound being

physically present (Gordon, 1993), is a necessary readiness

for the musically creative process (Gordon, 1989). A study

by Kratus (1994a) of
showed that students
and silence and less

than children who do

40 nine-year-olds' creative processes
who audiate better use more development
exploration during the creative process

not audiate well. The results suggest

that audiation enables students to use their compositional

time more effectively.

The compositional processes of exploration,

development, repetition, and silence (Kratus, 1989) may lead

to a musically created product. A musically created product

is the result of improvisation, composition, or performance

(Kratus, 1990). Kratus suggests this as a guide, "Music

exists as a created product when the creator means to share

it with others and structures the music in such a way that

it can be shared" (Kratus, 1991b, p. 5).

Research has shown a strong bond between children's

musically creative processes and products. Variables that

have an effect on children's musically creative processes

and resulting products have been the purpose of several

research studies.

Investigations by Kratus (1990), Reinhardt (1990), and

Henry (1995) indicate that the musically creative process

and the musically created product are closely linked and

13

that certain factors may act on those processes and
products.

Kratus (1990) analyzed ten high-success and ten low-
success compositions for compositional strategies used
during the compositional process. Differences between high-
success and low-success compositions appeared to involve how
the students used the compositional processes of
exploration, development, repetition, and silence, and nine
different compositional strategies as identified by Kratus.
Both high-success and low-success students used exploration
and repetition. However, the high-success students used
skip/step movement early in the compositional session,
developed patterns more, and used little transposition.

The low-success students mainly used exploration and very
little development. Kratus determined that at the base of a
successful composition lies certain compositional strategies
and that the process of composition determines the outcome
of the compositional product.

Repeated compositional opportunities may have an effect
on students' compositional products (Reinhardt, 1990).
Fifth-grade students' compositional products were examined
for the effect of repeated compositional opportunities. The
data suggest that repeated compositional opportunities may
result in more replicable compositional products (Reinhardt,
1990).

In addition, Henry found that instructional
techniques and music aptitude may influence the ways
students compose (Henry, 1995). Fourth-grade students'
(N=64) musically creative processes and products were

examined for the effects of instructional methods and music

l4

aptitude. The results indicate that instructional
techniques, such as pattern instruction, and music aptitude
positively influence the ways in which students use their
time while engaged in the musically creative process.

A number of variables have been found to act on the
musically creative process consequently influencing the
resulting product. An examination of the variables that are
concerned with the person component of the creativity
equation and the effect on compositional processes and
products may bring about a more comprehensive view of the

child's involvement with musical creativity.

Musical Creativity and the Musically Creative Person

To understand the person who is creatively engaged,
some researchers have focused on the person's creative
thought processes, as determined by Guilford (1981), on
musically creative activities. Vaughan and Myers (1971),
Vaughan (1977), and Gorder (1980) have examined a person's
creative thinking ability through musically created products
in terms of fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration,
ideation, and synthesis. Also, Webster's Measure of
Creative Thinking in Music, part II (MCTM-II) (Webster,
1987) has been used to assess creative thinking skills in
music. MCTM-II, intended for children between the ages of
7 to 10 uses activities designed to elicit creative
responses that are evaluated for extensiveness, flexibility,
originality, and syntax.

MCTM-II was used by Swanner (1986) to examine the
relationships between musical creativity, personality

traits, motivation, gender, music aptitude, and cognitive

15

intelligence with 69 third-grade children. Personality
traits of independence, aggression, excitability, self-
confidence, anxiety, curiosity, and imagination were related
to MCTM-II scores. However, gender, music aptitude, and
cognitive intelligence were not related to MCTM-II scores.
Swanner's results suggest that certain personality traits
may have an effect on creative thinking in music.

Schmidt and Sinor (1986) investigated 34 second-grade
students' achievement in convergent and divergent musical
tasks and the effect of gender and its interaction with
cognitive style. MCTM-II was the criterion measure for
creative thinking in music. Schmidt and Sinor found that
reflective/implusive thinking and music aptitude were not
related to MCTM-II scores. Additionally, Schmidt and Sinor
found high intercorrelations between the four MCTM-II
dimensions, and concluded that the measure was by nature
masculine oriented, as boys scored significantly higher than
girls on the measure.

MCTM-II has drawn some criticism as to what type of
creativity it is valid for. Henry remarks (1995, p. 36),
"MCTM does not appear to measure creativity in a musical
context, rather it appears to measure a child's creative use
of instruments to simulate a given situation or place."
Kratus notes that MCTM scores reflect divergent thinking and
that composition requires both divergent and convergent
thinking. He also cautions that the MCTM should not be
confused with the ability to compose as the tasks are mainly
improvisational by nature and do not allow the subject time
to reflect and revise their responses (Kratus, 1994a, pp.

116-117).

16

The age of a child can determine how a child creates
music. Kratus (1985) examined the compositional products
of 80 children for 21 different independent variables
relating to rhythmic, melodic, motivic, and phrase
characteristics. The children involved in the study were
5, 7, 9, 11, and 13 years old. Compositional products from
16 children of each age group were analyzed. Kratus found
that the use of melodic and rhythmic motives increased
consistently from the ages of 5 to 11 suggesting a
developmental pattern of musical understanding.

This was confirmed in another study by Kratus (1989).
The compositional processes and products of 60 students
aged 7, 9, and 11 were analyzed for exploration,
development, repetition, and silence using time analysis
(Kratus, 1989). Students as young as 7 can engage in
meaningful improvisation, and students between the ages of 9
and 11 are capable of composing with musical meaning.

Studies conducted by Wilson and Wales (1995), Swanwick
and Tillman (1986), and Swanwick (1996) affirm that children
create music according to a developmental progression. As
children age, their musically creative processes and
products reflect the use of more complex musically creative
processes. Barrett (1996), however, indicates that children
as young as 5 are capable of creating compositions that
exhibit structure and form, implying that the development
of musical creativity may not be associated with age.

Compositional intentions may dictate a child's
involvement in the musically creative process (Kratus,

1991). The orientation and intent of the student may

17

act upon whether and end product occurs. Intentions may be
developmental, changing from a process orientation to a
product orientation as a child's age increases. Levi (1991)
observed a shift from process to product orientation while
second-grade students were engaged in creating compositions
over a period of a semester.

Gordon (1993) believes that audiation provides the
necessary readiness for a person's musical creativity. On
the contrary Vaughan and Myers (1971) and Swanner (1986)
found no relationship between a person's musical creativity
and music aptitude. However, Auh established compositional
creativity to be related to tonal music aptitude (Auh,
1995) and Henry (1995) found that a students' music aptitude
may influence the strategies used while composing. Kratus
(1994a) determined in a study of 40 9-year-olds that a
child's ability to audiate was related to the musically
creative processes of development and silence, but
negatively related to the compositional process of
exploration. He also found that a child's ability to
audiate was related to a compositional product's tonal and
metrical cohesiveness and developed rhythm patterns.

Other aspects that affect a child's musical creativity
are musical knowledge, musical experience, and prior
compositional experience (Kratus, 1994a). Auh (1995)
found informal music experience, musical achievement and
academic grades to be influential on 5th- and 6th-grade
students' musical creativity.

Swanner studied music aptitude, personality, cognitive
intelligence, and gender and their relationship to creative

thinking in music (Swanner, 1986) and determined several

18

personality traits to be related to creative thinking in
music as measured by MCTM-II (Webster, 1987). As stated
previously, the MCTM-II may not clearly establish musical
creativity; therefore, the results of this study should be
viewed with caution.

Musical creativity is vital to music education, as it
is an important means for children to learn about and
comprehend music. To develop a complete understanding of
what the person brings to the musically creative
experience, aspects of the creatively engaged person should
be considered. Investigation of personality and its
relationship to a child's musical creativity may provide
more important information on the child's involvement in the

musically creative process.

Musical Creativity and Personality

Guilford (1959) defines personality as an individual's
unique pattern of traits. "A trait is any distinguishable,
relatively enduring way in which one individual differs from
others" (Guilford, 1959, p. 6). Sternberg (1995)
characterizes personality as stable dispositions that
comprise a preferred way of interacting with the
environment. Cattell further describes personality as
follows: "The personality of an individual is that which
enables us to predict what he will do in a given situation"
(Cattell, 1950, p. 21).

Researchers have investigated the relationship of
personality traits to musicians, music educators, music
students, and listener response (Bell, 1984; Kemp, 1981;

Lewis & Schmidt, 1991). Yet, little research has

19

been conducted on the relationship of personality to
children's musical creativity. Swanner (1986) examined the
relationship of 69 third grade students' personality traits
to MCTM-II and found personality traits of independence,
excitability, self-confidence, aggression, anxiety,
curiosity, and imagination to be related to MCTM-II scores.
Unfortunately, the results of this study cannot be
generalized to a compositional task as MCTM-II was the
criterion measure. Composition requires both divergent and
convergent thinking (Kratus, 1994a). MCTM-II largely
measures divergent thought processes and is primarily
improvisational in nature.

The study of personality traits and musical creativity
might offer more insight on the person component of musical
creativity. However, information on the relationship
between musical creativity and personality traits is
virtually non-existent. Investigation of the
relationship of children's personality traits to the
musically creative process may reveal important implications

for music education.

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to examine the
relationship of personality traits and the musically

creative process.

Problem 9: the Study

The problem of the study is as follows:

To investigate the relationship between personality
traits and the subject's use of time during the
compositional processes of exploration, development,

repetition, and silence.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction

This study is concerned with whether there is a
relationship between musically creative process and
personality traits of children. Therefore, the literature
that is related to this study is concerned with the
child and what the child brings to the musically creative
processes and products. The literature falls into the
following categories: (1) studies of characteristics of the
child engaged in musical creativity, (2) studies of
personality and music, and (3) studies of personality traits

and their relationship to a child's musical creativity.

Musically Creative Person Studies

Researchers have examined the musically creative
processes and products of children in an attempt to
determine characteristics of the creatively engaged child.
MCTM-II has been used to assess creative thinking in music.
Additionally, studies have been conducted on how certain
charateristics such as personality, age, orientation and
intentionality, audiation, IQ, gender, and instructional
techniques affect a child's compositional decisions. A
review of theses studies will now be presented.

Researchers have investigated creative thought
processes in order to better understand the person who is
creatively engaged. Webster's Measures of Creative Thinking

20

21

In Music, part II (MCTM-II) (Webster, 1987) has been used to
assess creative thinking skills in music. MCTM-II is
intended for children between the ages of 7 to 10 and uses
ten activities designed to elicit creative responses such

as imitation of an ascending elevator with a Nerf ball on a
piano, imitation of a growing rainstorm on temple blocks,
and vocal improvisations of a truck or robot music through a
microphone. Children's responses are videotaped and
subsequently analyzed for extensiveness (amount of time to
elicit a musical response), flexibility (freedom of movement
from one extreme to another), originality (unique use of
sounds), and syntax (creating ideas in context of entire
piece). As a criterion measure, MCTM-II appears to involve
students in non-musical, improvisationally-oriented
activities that require divergent thinking. It is more of a
measure of a child's ability to imitate, or simulate
responses in compliance with a supplied situation or place
than a measure of how a child thinks creatively while
engaged in a musically creative task. In addition, children
are offered very little time to reflect and revise their
responses which is necessary for composition (Kratus,
1994a).

Swanner (1986) used the MCTM-II to examine the
relationships between musical creativity, personality
traits, motivation, music aptitude and cognitive
intelligence with 69 third-grade children. Data were
collected using Primary Measures of Music Audiation
(Gordon, 1986) to assess music aptitude, and the Early
School Personality Questionnaire (Cattell, 1966) to measure

personality traits. She found that personality traits of

22

independence, excitability, self-confidence, aggression,
anxiety, curiosity and imagination were related to scores on
MCTM-II. However, gender, music aptitude, and cognitive
intelligence were not related to scores on MCTM-II.

As already stated, MCTM-II is not a valid measure
for musical creativity. The relationship between the
personality traits of independence, excitability, self-
confidence, aggression, anxiety, curiosity, and imagination
and MCTM-II scores is actually based on creative thinking
in general as assessed by using musical devices. It is not
based on musically creative thinking in terms of musical
composition. The present study will investigate personality
traits in relation to musical composition.

An investigation of second-grade students'
achievement in convergent and divergent musical tasks and
the effect of gender and its interaction with cognitive
style was conducted by Schmidt and Sinor (1986). Thirty-
four second-grade students were identified as
impulsive/reflective thinkers. Data were collected using
Primary Measures of Music Audiation and MCTM-II. The
results of the study indicated that music aptitude and
reflective/impulsivity were not related to MCTM-II
scores. In addition, Schmidt and Sinor found high
intercorrelations between the four MCTM-II dimensions.
The researchers also concluded that the MCTM-II was by
nature masculine-oriented as boys scored significantly
higher than girls on the measure. The high
intercorrelations found among the four MCTM-II dimensions,
and the masculine-orientation of the measure further

support that MCTM-II is not a valid measure for musically

23

creative thinkng. The present study will use time analysis
(Kratus, 1989) to examine how students make musically
creative decisions regarding the musically creative process.
Other investigations have focused on the development
of musical creativity in children and suggest that an
important aspect of a child engaged in musical creativity is
age. Kratus (1985) examined the compositional products of
eighty children for 21 different independent variables
relating to rhythmic, melodic, motivic and phrase
characteristics. The children were 5, 7, 9, 11 and
13 years old. Compositional products from 16 children of
each age group were analyzed. Individual testing was
completed on a hand-held keyboard with each student being
asked to create a song that would "sound good to him or
her." The students were asked to begin their compositions
on the pitches C, D, E, which were labelled 1, 2, 3 on the
keyboard, and to use only the white keys. The compositions
were analyzed independently by two judges with interjudge
reliabilities ranging from .55 to .88 for the five types of
motives. Results of this study indicated that 5-to 11-
year-olds were less likely to use tonal structure in
phrases. Older children were more aware of tonality.
Repetition was common in songs from all age groups with no
significant difference found in melodic repetition among the
age groups. Kratus did find a significant difference in the
use of melodic development in both same and different
directions between 5-and 11-year-old students. The 11-
year-olds used more melodic development than the 5-year-
olds. Also, 11-year-old students used significantly more

rhythmic repetition than five-year-olds. Rhythmic

24

development was a rare feature among all age groups.
Overall, children's use of melodic and rhythmic motives
increased consistently from the ages of 5 to 11 suggesting a
developmental pattern of musical understanding. Thirteen-
year-old students were found to use fewer melodic and
rhythmic motives than 11-year-old students. This may have
resulted from cultural or peer influences, lack of
instruction, musical aptitude, or poor student attitudes.
In another study, Kratus (1989) investigated the
compositional processes and products of 60 students
ages 7, 9, and 11. There were 20 students from each
age group. The students were given 10 minutes to create
~a song on a keyboard. A cassette recording was made of
each student's compositional period. The recordings were
analyzed using the time analysis method originated by
Kratus (1989). Each of the recordings was analyzed at
5-second intervals for the musically creative processes of
exploration, repetition, development and silence.
Interjudge reliability between the judges' and the
researcher's ratings ranged from .76 to .98. Kratus
identified developmental patterns in the way children use
their compositional time. .He found that the 7-year-old
students principally used the compositional process of
exploration, some repetition and very little development.
The 9-year-old students were also found to mainly use
exploration, yet these students used more of their time for
development, repetition and silence than the 7-year-old
students. Eleven-year-old students used more of the
compositional processes of development and repetition than

the 7- and 9-year-old students. The 11-year-old students

25

also used the compositional processes of exploration and
silence less than the 7-and 9-year-old students. Those
students who were able to replicate their songs at the end
of the 10-minute compositional period were designated as
being product oriented. Those who were unable to replicate
their songs were designated as being process oriented.

The results of this study indicate a developmental
progression of musical creativity and imply that children
at 7 years of age can engage in creative musical
improvisation. The results also suggest that 9- and
11-year-old children can shape their musical ideas and
compose music with purpose.

Wilson and Wales (1995) in an exploratory study,
used a previously untried methodology of analyzing
children's musical compositions. The subjects were 7— and
9-year-old students. There were 40 students from each
age group. The students used a computer program that did
not require formal music training to create their musical
compositions. They were allowed 10 minutes of
compositional time. Post hoc analysis revealed that the
compositions could be divided into three melodic and
rhythmic developmental stages that varied according to
melodic contour, tonality, rhythmic grouping, and meter.
Wilson and Wales (1995) found that the older students
created more compositions at higher stages of complexity.
They also found that the more formal musical training
children had received, the more rhythmically complex their
compositions were and that girls produced a greater

percentage of compositions assigned to the highest stages

26

of composition than boys. This investigation supports
the developmental stages of children's composition with
the increasing age of a student being positively linked
to an increasing level of musically creative development.

Swanwick and Tillman (1986) determined a
developmental spiral consisting of eight musically
creative stages of development upon analyzing over 700
compositional products of children from 3 to 15 years of
age. Piagetian concepts of assimilation and accomodation
were applied to the musically developmental stages. The
eight stages were identified as Sensory, Manipulative,
Personal Expressiveness, Vernacular, Speculative,
Idiomatic, Symbolic and Systematic. Swanwick (1996)
later confirmed these stages in a study of 28
compositional products randomly chosen from a pool of 600
recorded compositional products by children from 4 to 15
years of age. He noted that as children aged there was
an increased tendency to use melodic and rhythmic
repetitions and that older children used more development
than younger children. These results support Kratus' and
and Wilson and Wales' observations of a developmental
progression within the musically creative process.

An investigation involving 137 compositional
products of children ranging from 5 to 12 years of age
was conducted by Barrett (1996). The intent of the study
was to analyze compositional products across a school
population to find whether there was an age group
incapable of displaying form and structure within their
compositions. Composition and observation data were

collected as part of the regular classroom music program.

27

In the school music program, students were exposed to
compositional activity approximately four times a year
with compositional tasks structured over three week
intervals to allow the children time to reflect, revise
and refine their compositions. For this investigation,
Barrett asked the students to compose a solo work that
had a beginning, middle, and end. The students were at
liberty to choose the instrumentation from those
instruments available in the classroom music program.
Barrett reports that instruments included body
percussion, recorder, voice, guitar, percussion, flute,
clarinet, and cornet. The students were not required to
notate their pieces.

The students worked on their compositions over a
3-week period. All completed works were recorded on
audio-cassette at the end of the period. The recordings
were transcribed into musical notation. Analysis of the
compositional products focused on how students used the
elements of beginning, middle, and end. Barrett (1996) used
the following definitions in her analysis:

1. Beginning--A melodic and/or rhythmic musical
event (or events) that may be described as a single unit.
2. Middle--Repetition and/or development that
occurs through the use of alternation, sequence,

inversion, diminution, or augmentation.

3. End--Indentification of closure through the
manipulation of melody, harmony, rhythm, tempo, timbre,
texture, or dynamics.

Barrett found that structure was apparent in some

way in each of the 137 compositions. Students in all

28

age groups used repetition as a structural device and
developed musical ideas through abstraction, transferral,
sequencing, and inversion. Also, students in all age
groups were able to achieve closure in their
compositions. The results of this study suggest that
children as young as 5 years of age are capable of

using structure and form in their compositions and that
the use of structure and form is not necessarily
associated with age.

Researchers have investigated the musically creative
process and resulting products in an attempt to define
developmental stages of how children create music.

Kratus (1985, 1989), Wilson and Wales (1995), Swanwick
and Tillman (1986) and Swanwick (1996) confirm that
children create music according to a developmental
progression. As children grow older their use of
musically creative processes grow more complex and their
musically creative compositions reflect that. Barrett
(1996), however, is in disagreement with these findings.
Her results suggest that children as young as five years
of age are able to engage in creating musically complex
compositions that exhibit form and structure. For the
purposes of this study, 9-year-old students will be used
as subjects, as the majority of the research indicates that
9-year-old children are capable of creating meaningful
compositions.

Differences exist between those studies that have found
a developmental progression in the ways children compose and
the study conducted by Barrett. Among the differences are

the amount of time allotted to students to create a musical

29

composition. The studies conducted by Kratus (1985, 1989)
and Wilson and Wales (1995) allowed each student 10 minutes
to create their compositions. Barrett's subjects had three
weeks to work on their compositions. Also, the mediums for
composition differed from study to study, with Kratus using
a small keyboard, Swanwick and Tillman using instruments and
voice, Wilson and Wales using a computer program, and
Barrett allowing the students free choice. Barrett may

have found that young students are able to compose with
structure and form because of their repeated opportunities
to work on their compositions, familiarity with the medium
for composition, and/or because the students were given the
parameters of creating a composition with a beginning,
middle, and end. The other studies do not impose such
parameters on the students' compositions. These differences
may account for the discrepancy between the results of these
studies.

Kratus (1991) observed that the orientation and
intentionality of a child creating a composition may be
indicative of whether an end product appears. Using
previously collected data from his 1985 and 1989 studies,
Kratus suggests that, if a child has a product orientation
toward musical creation, that child is aware of structuring
the composition so that it can be shared. On the other
hand, a child who does not intend to share or is unable to
share the music has a process orientation. A compositional
product exists if the composer can perform and then
replicate the composition. If the composition cannot be
replicated, then it cannot be defined as a compositional

product. Kratus states that a child's compositional

30

intentions may be developmental, changing from a process
orientation to a product orientation in a developmental
progression.

A child's ability to audiate has a bearing on the
compositional process and resulting product (Kratus, 1994a).
Kratus (1994a) conducted an investigation of music
audiation, compositional processes, and musical
characteristics of the resulting compositional products with
forty 9-year-old students; The students were administered
the Intermediate Measures of Music Audiation (Gordon, 1986)
and were asked to compose a 10-minute song on a synthesizer.
Time analysis (Kratus, 1989) was used by two independent
judges to determine the amount of time each student spent in
the musically creative processes of exploration, repetition,
development, and silence. Another pair of judges analyzed
the resulting products for tonal and metric cohesiveness,
use of melodic, rhythmic, repeated and developed patterns,
and extensiveness of length and pitch range. Kratus
discovered that audiation was positively related to the
musically creative process of development and silence and
that audiation was negatively related to the process of
exploration. He also found that audiation was positively
related to a musical product's tonal and metrical
cohesiveness and developed rhythmic patterns. Audiation was
found to be negatively correlated with the product's pitch
range. These results support that a child's ability to
audiate has an effect on the creative process which in turn
affects the outcome of the product.

In another study regarding audiation, Henry (1995)

examined the effects of music aptitude and different

31

instructional methods on 64 fourth-grade students' musically
creative processes and products. Four intact classes were
used with one class receiving repeated compositional
opportunities and pattern instruction; the second received
repeated compositional opportunities; the third received
pattern instruction, and the fourth was the control group.
The Intermediate Measures of Music Audiation (Gordon, 1986)
was used to measure all of the participants' music aptitude.
The students were individually recorded while composing a
song at the end of a 12-week period. Using time analysis,
(Kratus, 1989) two independent judges analyzed each of

the recordings to determine the amount of time that each
child spent in exploration, repetition, development and
silence. Compositional products were analyzed by another
pair of judges for cohesiveness, pattern use, extensiveness
and students' ability to replicate their song. Significant
differences pertaining to the students' use of time spent in
the compositional processes were found. The students that
received pattern instruction and repeated compositional
opportunities used less exploration than all other groups.
Students with high music aptitude also used less exploration
than those with low music aptitude. The group that had
pattern instruction and repeated compositional opportunities
and the group that received only pattern instruction used
more development than the control group. More repetition
was used by the group that received pattern instruction than
by the control group and the group that received repeated
compositional opportunities. There were no significant

differences among the four groups in the use of silence.

32

Interestingly, the group that received pattern instruction
used more time to compose than any of the other groups.

No significant differences were found between the
compositional products' features of metric cohesiveness,
developed rhythmic patterns, repeated melodic patterns, and
compositional length for the four groups of the study.
However, there were significant interactions for tonal
cohesiveness, repeated rhythmic patterns, range, and
replication among the treatment groups and music aptitude.
Henry found that students with low music aptitude who
received repeated opportunities to compose were less able to
replicate their songs than students from all other groups.

The results of this study indicate that instructional
techniques, such as pattern instruction, and a child's music
aptitude may influence the ways that students use their time
while engaged in the musically creative processes of
composition. Furthermore, instructional methods and a
child's music aptitude may have an impact on the musically
creative process and in turn affect the outcome of the
compositional product.

Auh (1995) studied selected variables as predictors of
musical creativity in an investigation that included music
aptitude, formal and informal music experiences, musical
self-esteem, music achievement, IQ, and gender. To
determine compositional creativity, 67 fifth- and sixth-
grade students completed a 10-minute compositional task on
an alto xylophone. When students were finished with their
compositional session, they were asked to play their
composition and repeat it exactly as it was played the first

time. Then, the students' musical products were rated for

33

five dimensions: craftsmanship, musical syntax, musical
originality, musical sensitivity, and repetition of song.
Students also completed the Musical Experiences
Questionnaire (Auh, 1995), the Self-Esteem of Musical
Ability (Schmitt, 1979), the Music Aptitude Profile (Gordon,
1988), and the Music Achievement Test (Colwell, 1968). Auh
found compositional creativity to be significantly related
to informal music experience, tonal music aptitude, musical
achievement-pitch, and academic grades. Informal music
experience was determined to be the strongest predictor of
compositional creativity. What if personality traits had
been included as a selected variable? Is it possible that
personality has a bearing on compositional creativity?
Reseachers of musical creativity have centered their
investigations on aspects of the involvement of a person in
musically creative activities. Knowledge of the child who
is creatively engaged and what the child brings to the
musically creative experience will serve to deepen music
education's understanding of the musically creative process
and resulting products. Creative thought processes of
children have been examined, yet in relation to MCTM-II.
It is difficult to glean any relationship between children's
thought processes and musical creativity as there is much
speculation surrounding that measure. Most researchers
agree that children's compositional processes and products
evolve on a developmental continuum (Kratus 1985, 1989,
1991; Swanwick, 1996; Swanwick & Tillman, 1986; Wilson &
Wales, 1995). Additionally, a child's ability to audiate
has been shown to have an effect on compositional processes

and products (Auh, 1995; Henry, 1996; Kratus, 1994a).

34

Outside influences affect the child and therefore impact

a child's musical creativity. Instruction, academic grades,
and informal music experience seem to have a bearing on a
child's musical creativity (Auh, 1995; Henry, 1996).
However, there is insufficient information regarding the
relationship of a child's musical creativity to a child's
personality. A review of the investigations relating to
personality and music will serve as a foundation for the
review of the investigation concerning personality traits

and musical creativity.

Personality and Music

Kemp (1981) attempted to compile a profile of
personality traits of 55 instrumentalists and singers.
The sample was comprised of musicians who played brass,
woodwind, keyboard, and string instruments, as well as
vocalists. Cattell's High School Personality
Questionnaire (HSPQ) (Cattell, 1969) was administered to
13 17-year-old subjects and 17 25-year-old subjects.
Twenty-five 70-year-old subjects received Cattell's 16
Personality Factor test (16PF) (Cattell, 1970). Personality
traits of introversion, pathemia, and intelligence were
found to be present to a significant degree among all age
groups as compared to the normative population. The results
suggest that there may be a connection of the traits of
introversion, pathemia, and intelligence with musicians that
are 17, 25, and 70 years of age. However, more research
needs to be conducted for there to be significant meaning
for the results, as the sample size for each of the age

groups is too small for generalization of the findings.

35

In another study, Kemp (1982) compared 32 graduate
music education students to 32 college student performers
All subjects were administered Cattell's 16PF (Cattell,
1970). Both groups were found to have notable personality
differences as compared to the population as a whole. The
graduate music education students were found to exhibit
traits of extraversion, realism, and tough-mindedness, while
the college student performers were found to have traits of
sensitivity and introversion.

Bell (1984) administered Cattell's HSPQ (Cattell,
1969) to 28 high school instrumental students and
Cattell's 16PF (Cattell, 1970) to 30 undergraduate
instrumentalists. Both samples showed significant
personality differences from the normative populations
from which they were drawn. Instrumentalists in both
populations showed a greater intelligence, greater
cortical arousal, and more ability to acquire the
appropriate skills needed to play their instruments.

More recently, Lewis and Schmidt (1991)
investigated listener response to music as a function of
personality type. A sample of 328 undergraduate non-
music majors who were enrolled in music appreciation
courses were administered the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
(Myers, 1985). The subjects also completed the Music
Listener Response Scale (Hedden, 1973). The authors
stated that it appeared that individual differences in
personality may offer some explanatory power for certain
responses in listening to music, although the results of

the study were inconclusive.

36

Personality Traits and Musical Creativity

Only one study was found on the relationship between
personality traits and musical creativity in children.
Swanner (1986) explored music aptitude, cognitive
intelligence, personality, and gender in relationship to
creative thinking in music. The sample consisted of 69
third-grade students who were administered Gordon's
Primary Measures of Music Audiation (PMMA) (Gordon,
1986), Cattell's Early School Personality Questionnaire
(ESPQ) (Cattell, 1966) and Webster's MCTM-II (Webster,
1987). Cognitive intelligence was measured by IQ
scores taken from each subject's school records. No
significant relationship was found between music aptitude,
cognitive intelligence, or gender and MCTM-II scores. Yet,
personality traits of independence, excitability, self-
confidence, aggression, anxiety, curiosity, and imagination
were found to be significantly related to MCTM-II scores.
Swanner concluded that the best predictors of creative
thinking in music were the personality traits of
imagination, curiosity, and anxiety. Unfortunately, the
findings of this study cannot be generalized to a
compositional task, as MCTM-II was used as the criterion
measure for creative thinking in music. As stated before,
MCTM-II is largely improvisationally oriented and rewards
divergent thinking over convergent thinking. The act of
composition requires both types of thought processes
(Kratus, 1994a). Additionally, the value of MCTM-II for

measuring musical creativity is questionable at best.

37

Summary

These studies are related to the present one in that
the relationship of personality traits to a musical
aspect is explored. All of the studies, with the
exception of the Lewis and Schmidt study, used one of
Cattell's personality measures to describe personality
traits. The present study will use Cattell's Children's
Personality Questionnaire (CPQ) (Cattell, 1992). It is
the only personality measure specifically designed for
children from 8 through 12 years of age, and this study
will use third-grade students with a mean age of 9 as

subjects.

CHAPTER III
METHOD

Subjects
The subjects for this study are 25 third-grade

students from two intact classrooms. The elementary
school is located in a rural area consisting primarily of
Caucasian, middle, working-class citizens in lower Michigan.
Third-grade students were chosen for this research. Kratus
(1985, 1989) found that nine-year-olds were able to compose
and perform songs with a consistent tempo, were able to
reproduce their songs, used more repetition and development
and had a stronger sense of tonality than 5- and 7-year-old
children. This indicates that children as young as nine
years old can compose with meaning. The students receive
general music instruction from a music specialist for 30
minutes per week and do not participate regularly in
creative musical activities.

Approval of this study was granted by the University
Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects at
Michigan State University (see Appendix A). Consent forms
for participation were sent home to 51 students and their
parents (see Appendix B). Of the 51 forms sent home, 31
were returned to the school. Twenty-eight students and
parents responded positively to participating in the
study. Three of the responding 28 students were excluded

from the study because they indicated they had received

38

39

formal keyboard instruction on the consent form. Formal
keyboard instruction could affect how these students
approached the compositional task, contaminating the results

of the study.

Procedural Overview

At the beginning of the study, the researcher was
introduced to the participants in the study by their
classroom teachers. The purpose of this meeting was to
answer any questions the students had and to put the
children at ease with the researcher. Only one room
existed in the school that met the researcher's criteria
for a quiet environment with sufficient space for the
students to work. This room was only available at the
beginning of the study. Consequently, the students
completed the individual compositional task first.

The compositional task took each student approximately 15
minutes and was conducted over a period of 2 weeks. During
the third week of the study, Form C of the Children's
Personality Questionnaire (CPQ) (Cattell, 1992) was
administered. All students participating in the study
(N=25) were assembled in one of the classrooms for

the CPQ. A classroom teacher was present during the
testing to control for potential behavioral problems.

The administration of the test proceeded smoothly, with the
first part of the CPQ taking 45 minutes to administer and
the second part taking 35 minutes. Students were given a
10-minute break between the two parts of the test. The
researcher had full cooperation from the students, as well

as the teachers and staff of the school.

40

Materials for the Individual Compositional Task

All compositional testing took place in a storage
room adjacent to the school's computer lab. This room
had sufficient space, warmth, lighting, and no
environmental noise. The dimensions of the room were
9'10"x 6'4", which allowed students to sit at a large
student desk positioned on the long side of the room.
The researcher sat at a desk somewhat behind the student
desk and was situated so that each student could work
independently and feel comfortable to ask questions if
necessary. A Yamaha PortaSound PSS-190 keyboard was
positioned on the student desk. The PSS-190 has a three
octave range and 100 different voice settings. The toy
piano voice was chosen for the compositional task; it is
the only voice for which only one pitch sounds when
one or more keys are depressed, it has no vibrato, and the
length of the pitch decay is related to how long a key is
depressed. The toy piano has a voice range from middle C to
C-3. A Craig dual-cassette audio recorder with a built-in
microphone was placed behind the keyboard. Above the
cassette recorder, a clock with 1" sized numerals was
situated so that students could monitor their time. Gemini
MP90 high energy/low noise audio cassettes were used to

record the individual compositional sessions.

Procedure for the Individual Compositional Task

The procedure for the individual compositional task
included pre-task preparation of the student. The
researcher escorted each student to the testing site. It

took about 45 seconds to walk from the students' classroom

41

to the testing room. The researcher engaged each student in
conversation to and from the room to help create a relaxed
atmosphere and to put the students at ease. Once the
student was seated at the student desk, the researcher
familiarized the student with the keyboard by playing
imitative games using ascending and descending stepwise and
skipping movement and repeated tones. This pre-task
preparation of the student is similar to the procedure used
by Kratus (1985) in preparing his students for their
compositional session. .

After each student had been familiarized with the
keyboard, the following instructions, modelled after
Kratus (1989), were given:

I would like you to make up your own special song.

This will be your very own music. It will be music

that no one has ever heard or made up before! You

will have 10 minutes to work on it. I want you

to use the whole time to work on it. After your

time is up, I will have you play your song two times

into the tape recorder. When you make up your song,

I want you to use only the white keys. (The

researcher demonstrated the playing of white keys

and was imitated by each student.) I would also like

you to begin with the keys marked 1, 2, 3. (The

researcher demonstrated the playing of 1, 2, 3, or C,

D, E the first three keys of the keyboard and was

imitated by each student. Note: the use of C, D, E at

the beginning of a students' compositional session is

to provide a ready-made starting motive. This motive

serves the purpose of providing a place for students

42

to begin working.) The clock is here to show you how

much time you have to work on your music. Be sure to

remember your song so that you can play it two times
for me. Do you have any questions? You may begin.

(At that time, the researcher began to audio—tape the

compositional session.)

Each of the students played their composition two times
into the cassette recorder at the end of the
compositional session. As a reward, students were
allowed to explore the various settings of the keyboard.

The researcher then walked each student back to
the classroom. The entire process took approximately 20
minutes per student.

After all students had completed the compositional
task, each student's use of time during the compositional
session was measured by time analysis. This method of
analysis was developed by Kratus (1989) and is used to
measure the amount of time one spends in the musically
creative processes of exploration, development, silence,
and repetition while engaged in creating a composition.

At the onset of data analysis, the researcher discovered
that not all students used the entire 10-minutes for

the compositional task. However, all of the students did
compose for at least 7 minutes. The researcher decided
to use data from only the first 7 minutes of the
compositional task for the compositional process data
analysis.

Two judges independently rated the students'
compositional processes. The judges included the researcher

and a secondary-level band, choral and general music

43

instructor with a master's degree in music education. To
rate which compositional processes occurred most frequently
during the students' 7-minute compositional sessions, the
judges listened to and analyzed each of the audio-tapes for
the processes of exploration, development, repetition, and
silence by marking an "E" for exploration, "D" for
development, "R" for repetition, and "S" for silence when
they heard that particular process dominate a 5-second
interval. The researcher tallied the amount of 5-second
intervals each judge had marked for E, D, R, or S on a
rating form (see Appendix C).

Prior to listening to the audio-cassettes, the
second judge was trained in the use of the compositional
process terminology and printed tally form. The
following definitions (Kratus, 1989) were used for the
compositional processes of exploration, development,
silence, and repetition:

1. Exploration-~musical sounds that are unlike any
other music played previously.

2. Development--musical sounds that are somewhat
like music that has been played before.

3. Silence--no musical sounds.

4. Repetition--musical sounds that are the same as
music that has been played previously.
The judges listened to three sample recordings of students'

compositional processes, rated the samples, and discussed

the results.

Children's Personality Questionnaire

After the completion of the individual compositional

44

task, the students' personality traits were measured with
Cattell's Children's Personality Questionnaire (CPQ)
(Cattell, 1992). Administration of the test took place
in a classroom setting during the third and final week of
the study. The CPQ is intended for children ages 8 through
12 and measures a set of 14 factorially independent
dimensions of personality as well as four second-order
dimensions. These dimensions, or personality source traits,
are identified by letters of the alphabet A through Q4.
Additionally, there are technical names that give the
most accurate meaning for the traits, but are less
understandable for lay discussion. Cattell (1992)
provides the alphabet identifier, and the bi-polar title
used in psychological literature as well as a description
for use by lay people in the test manual. The fourteen
dimensions of personality are listed below with the
alphabet identifier and a general description of the bi-
polar traits (Cattell, 1992, p. 10):

1. A--reserved/warmhearted

2. B--dull/bright

3. C--affected by feelings/emotionally stable

4. D--phlegmatic/excitable

5. E--obedient/dominant

6. F--sober/enthusiastic

7. G-—expedient/conscientious
8. H--shy/venturesome

9. I--tough—minded/tender-minded
10. J--zestful/reflectful
11. N--forthright/shrewd

12. O-—self-assured/guilt-prone

45

13. Q3--undisciplined/controlled

14. Q4--relaxed/tense

Second-order factors may be viewed as broader
influences, or organizers of personality (Cattell, 1992) and
may be found by factor-analyzing the intercorrelations among
the primary factor scores. The second-order factors may be
interpreted as follows (Cattell, 1992, p. 39):

1. Extraversion vs. Introversion--A factor that
predicts the child's seeking or avoiding social
interaction.

2. High Anxiety vs. Low Anxiety--A factor that
may indicate a relatively permanent characteristic of
an individual, a transitory mood, or a combination of the
two.

3. Tough Poise vs. Tenderminded Emotionality--A
factor that may express an individual's level of
cortical alertness, quick reaction time, energy level,
and level of sensitivity.

4. Independence--A single factor that is associated
with the ability to maintain higher criticalness of
judgment, precision and exactitude of performance,
aggressiveness, and creativity.

The CPQ is a pencil and paper test that requires
the student to mark the box that best describes him or
her. There are four forms of CPQ, with each form divided
into two sections of 70 questions each. Although
reliabilities are the highest when two of the four forms
are combined, this researcher decided to use one form of
the test due to the long administration time for each form

of the test (90 minutes for each form). Also, Cattell

46

reports that low reliability coefficients on some of the
personality factors, "...probably tell more about the
stability of the trait than the construction of the test"
(Cattell, 1992, p. 13). Therefore Form C, with test-
retest reliabilities ranging from .50 to .78 for the 14
personality factors as reported in the test manual, was

used.

Procedure for Administering Lee Children's Personality
Questionnaire '3

The procedure for administering the CPQ was taken from
the CPQ test manual (Cattell, 1992). Once the students
were assembled in the classroom, the researcher passed
out the test booklets and pre-sharpened pencils. A
classroom teacher was present during the administration of
the CPQ, to control for any potential behavioral problems.
Before opening the test booklets, the researcher told the
students that the CPQ would provide information on what
students like to do and that each student should choose the
answer that best describes him or her. Two sample questions
are provided in the test booklet. All students completed
these questions prior to beginning the test to assure the
researcher that all of the students understood how to
provide their answers in the test booklets.

The researcher then asked for any questions the
students might have and stated that students should raise
their hands if there were any questions during the testing
period. When all questions were answered, the researcher
began the test. Upon the advice of the classroom teachers,

the researcher read each question aloud to the students.

47

This was done to control for the reading ability and
attention spans of some of the students. After the testing
had started, the researcher moved rapidly around the group
to ensure that the students were answering all of the
questions and that the pace of the test was neither too slow
nor too fast.

The first part of Form C of the CPQ took 45 minutes
to administer. The researcher gave the students a 10-
minute break before beginning the second part of Form C.
This procedure was repeated for part two of Form C. Part
two took 35 minutes to administer.

After completion of the test, the researcher had
the students look over their test booklets to be sure that
all questions had been answered. The researcher then

collected the test booklets and pencils.

Statistical Design egg Analysis

At the conclusion of the individual compositional
task, the researcher calculated the amount of time each
student spent in the compositional processes of
exploration, repetition, development, and silence.
Interjudge reliabilities were calculated for the
compositional dimensions of exploration, repetition,
development, and silence. Additionally, the means,
standard deviations and intercorrelations were calculated
for each of the compositional processes.

For the CPQ, the researcher hand-scored each student's
test booklet and computed each subject's raw scores
for the 14 personality traits. Once the raw scores

had been obtained, N-stens (the normalized distribution

48

of where an individual stands in comparison to a given
population) were calculated for each of the personality
traits. N-stens from the 14 personality traits were used
used to determine the four second-order factors and to
plot out each student's personality profile. The means
and standard deviations were calculated for each of the
personality traits of the CPQ, and the intercorrelations
between the source traits were determined.

To determine the relationship between each of the
personality traits and time spent in each of the
compositional processes, a Pearson-Product moment
correlation was used for each of the personality
traits and the amount of time spent in each of the
compositional processes. To determine the relationship
between each of the second-order factors and time spent
in each of the compositional processes, a Pearson-Product
moment correlation was used for each of the second-order
factors and the amount of time spent in each of the
compositional processes. A significant correlation
(p< .05) between a personality trait or second-order
factor and amount of time spent in one of the
compositional processes indicates that the personality
trait, or second—order factor is related to how one
spends time in the compositional processes of

exploration, repetition, development, and silence.

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

Introduction

This investigation is concerned with the relationships
of third grade students' personality traits to their use of
exploration, development, repetition, and silence while
composing. To examine these relationships, each student
participated in a 7-minute individual compositional session.
Two independent judges listened to the audio-recording of
each of the students' compositional sessions and rated each
of the sessions for the amount of time spent in exploration,
development, repetition, and silence. The judges recorded
their analysis on a printed sheet that was pre-marked with a
total of 84 5-second intervals. To determine personality
traits the CPQ (Cattell, 1975) was administered to each
student. The CPQ measured 14 independent and four second—
order personality traits for each student. This chapter
begins by discussing the analysis and results of the
students' compositional processes. Next, a discussion of
the analysis and results of the Children's Personality
Questionnaire will follow. Finally, the analysis, results,
and interpretations of the correlations between the

compositional processes and the CPQ will be presented.

49

50

Results pf Lflg Compositional Processes

The researcher totalled the amount of time each
student spent in the compositional of processes of
exploration, development, repetition, and silence from the
printed forms of the independent judges' analysis
and calculated the means and standard deviations for the
compositional processes. Table 1 presents the sums, means,
and standard deviations for each of the four compositional
processes. The students spent the majority of time in

exploration and repetition, followed by development and then

silence.

Table l

Compositional Process Sums, Means, and Standard Deviations

 

Exploration Development Repetition Silence

 

Sum 1614 762 1586 222
Mean 64.56 30.48 63.44 8.88
S.D. 32.51 24.82 27.77 12.92

 

Interjudge reliabilities were determined for each of
the compositional processes. Interjudge reliabilities,
as presented in Table 2, were high for the compositional
processes of exploration, development, and silence. The
interjudge reliability was moderately low for the process of
repetition, indicating a discrepancy between the judges
interpretation of the definition of that process.

Intercorrelations among the four compositional
processes were calculated and found to be low, as expected.
Table 3 shows that all of the compositional processes had

negative intercorrelations with one another with the

51

exception of one relationship. The intercorrelation between

repetition and silence was .11.

Table 2

Interjudge Reliabilities

 

 

Exploration .859
Development .904
Repetition .558
Silence .916
Table 3

Compositional Process Intercorrelations

 

E/D -0.38O E/R -0.673
E/S -o.132 D/R -o.305
D/S -o.374 R/S 0.113

 

E=Exploration; D=Development; R=Repetition; S=Silence

Children's Personality Qpestionnaire Results

Raw scores for the 14 personality traits were
totalled and converted into N-sten scores using a table
provided in the CPQ manual and the four second-order
personality traits were calculated. Table 4 presents
the sums, means and standard deviations for the personality
traits and second-order factors. Means and standard
deviations for the second-order factors were markedly
different from those as reported in the test manual (see
Table 5). This variance may be due to the small sample size
of the present study.

Intercorrelations of the 14 personality traits were
calculated (see Table 6). Overall, intercorrelations

were moderate with the highest correlation (.85) found

52

between the factors of Q4 (relaxed/tense) and D

(phlegmatic/excitable).

were found between the second-order factors as the 14

primary traits contribute to the four secondary traits.

As expected, high intercorrelations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4
CPQ Sums, Means, and Standard Deviations
A B C D E F G H I
Sum 143 136 130 112 92 133 133 135 116
Mean 5.72 5.44 5.2 4.48 3.68 5.32 5.32 5.4 4.64
S D. 1.69 1.60 1.77 1.73 2.32 1.62 2.05 1.55 2.13
J N 0 Q3 Q4 EX TP ANX IND
Sum 121 120 133 144 115 132 136 132 118
Mean 4.84 4.8 5.32 5.76 4.6 5.26 5.45 5.29 4.72
S.D. 1.99 2.27 2.42 2.04 1.63 0.76 1.16 0.84 0.66
(N=25)
Table 5
CPQ Test Manual Means and Standard Deviations
A B C D E F G H I
Mean 7.08 5.97 6 17 4.27 4.16 4.68 6.60 5.66 4.22
S.D. 1.82 2.16 2 12 1.98 1.88 2.05 2.23 1.79 2.26
J N 0 Q3 Q4 EX TP ANX IND
Mean 4.46 3.78 4.56 6.99 4.10 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
S.D. 1.88 2.16 1.68 1.88 1.96 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0

 

(N=2218)

Table 6

CPQ Intercorrelations

53

 

 

 

 

A B C D E F G H I
A .10 .32 -.60 -.33 -.23 .78 -.09 .22
B .42 -.19 -.24 -.02 -.03 .07 .14
C -.43 -.02 -.22 .31 .15 .31
D .56 .32 -.74 .20 -.35
E .35 -.50 .41 -.41
F -.31 .45 .37
G -.22 .35
H -.00
I .22 .14 .31 -.35 -.41 -.37 .35 .00
J .02 .15 .28 -.04 -.23 -.27 -.03 -.51 -.20
N -.45 .07 .42 .60 .36 .36 -.73 -.07 -.58
O -.02 .07 .00 .02 -.23 -.13 .04 .06 -.00
Q3 .48 .35 .44 -.74 -.56 -.40 .68 -.20 .49
Q4-.49 .26 .50 .85 .43 .19 -.64 .03 -.18
EX .07 .09 .01 .32 .64 .75 -.21 .74 -.33
TP-.69 .16 .30 .73 .75 .53 .53 -.82 .46
AN-.63 .25 .65 .85 .40 .39 .75 .04 -.46
IN-.03 06 .16 .13 .41 .03 -.00 .16 -.14

J N O Q3 Q4 EX TP AN IN
I -.20 -.58 -.00 .49 -.18 -.33 -.65 -.46 -.14
J .25 -.13 .13 .05 -.43 -.15 .02 .26
N -.05 -.67 .56 .22 .64 .73 -.04
O -.02 .02 -.11 -.01 .24 .02
Q3 -.69 -.47 -.78 -.83 .25
Q4 .19 .55 .83 .10
EX .55 .25 .13
TP .72 .14
AN .- -.05
IN '

Compositional Processes and Children's Personality

Questionnaire Results

To determine whether a statistically significant
relationship (p<.05) exists between third grade students'
personality traits and the amount of time spent in each
of the four compositional processes the Pearson Product
Moment correlation formula was used. The total time

spent in the process of exploration was correlated with

54

the N-sten scores from each of the 14 personality traits
and four secondary personality factors. The same

analytic procedure was applied for development, repetition,
and silence.

The results indicated no statistically significant
relationships (p<.05) between the amount of time spent in
exploration, development, repetition, and silence and any of
the 14 personality traits or four secondary factors (see
Table 7).

However, three correlations approached statistical
significance. Exploration was found to be positively
correlated with the B factor personality trait of low
intelligence vs. high intelligence at the .391 level,
indicating that children with a higher degree of
intelligence may use more exploration (see Figure 1). This
relationship was closest to the critical level of .396.
Repetition was found to be negatively correlated with the I
factor personality trait of tough-minded vs. tender-minded
emotionality at the -.376 level, suggesting that tough-
minded children may use more repetition than tender-minded
children (see Figure 2). Finally, silence was found to
be positively correlated with the C factor personality trait
of emotional instability vs. emotional stability at the
.301 level, indicating a possible relationship between
emotional stability and the use of more silence among

children during the compositional process (see Figure 3).

55

Table 7

CPQ and Compositional Process Correlations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E D R S
A
Reserved/Warmhearted 0 -.011 -.110 -.043
B
Dull/Bright .391 -.137 -.299 .030
C
Affected/Stable .170 -.279 -.041 .301
D
Phlegmatic/Excitable —.194 .167 .130 -.044
E
Obedient/Dominant -.147 -.038 .231 -.097
F
Sober/Enthusiastic .024 .296 -.O49 -.279
G
Expedient/Conscientious .025 -.101 .064 -.115
H
Shy/Venturesome -.150 -.060 .171 .183
I
Tough-minded/Tender-minded .088 .109 -.376 .052
J
Zestful/reflectful -.052 .161 -.103 .059
N
Forthright/Shrewd .104 .140 -.120 .004
O .
Self-assured/Guilt-prone -.089 -.024 .042 .213
Q3
Undisciplined/Controlled .168 -.153 -.165 .073
Q4 .
Relaxed/Tense -.126 .225 .010 -.067
Extraversion/Introversion -.088 .126 .116 -.053
Tough Poise/Tender-minded -.157 -.014 .268 .076
High Anxiety/Low Anxiety -.138 .241 .043 -.095
Independence -.257 .033 .175 .273

 

p<.05; E=Exploration; D=Development; R=Repetition; S=Silence

120 r f T 1
_ T
i « 9
Z 100 *r _ _ .. 8
2 I — .. 7
o U) 80 T /\\ / FY \ . \f—
‘5 E g 50 /4 \‘x /I\\ l .i\ ELI/F Vr\ I\ 0 6
31 g 8 "'\ ' ll“ ' \C/ " 5
D m I I . 4
5' m 40 -
. I -3
a . * .
WU UH U ll '2
L 1
0 t h I: r t ‘. : 4 : : ; ‘ :U: : ,; : : : . :7 4 . O
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910111213141516171819202122232425
INDIVIDUAL SUBJECTS
Figure 1: Exploration and "B" Trait
l::l REPETIT
+ I
120 v 1 T
.. /'\ fl 7
z 100 " \ ,/ \
Z 1 \ "I \ _ __ 7;
/ ..—
gcn 80:~ —— / y] ' T3 ’1 PT UM I
P-D / V(
at: __
a 8 6° " l ‘ IV
a: m —
ll. U) .. T ('1 fi\ 78‘ r
o 40 J' I, / V
35' r/ V V l-
: 20 -1 , fl /
I I
l i ll
0 ..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

56

 

 

CZ] EXPLOR

__._._—B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

O

O—‘NOD-50IOJNQCO

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910111213141516171819202122232425
INDIVIDUAL SUBJECTS

Figure 2: Repetition and "I" Trait

B TRAIT N-STENS

I TRAIT N-STENS

57

 

[:l SILENCE

—-_C

 

 

 

I
‘1

O-‘NUJLUIOJNQCO

45 -— Q
40 *~ ,1 /\ /
:2 t I r- I
I \\\ / \ f‘

[>3

25 -- -
20 -- - _
15 ~»-
10 --

l
I l
O BIB. Pl ' ' ‘
12 3 4 5 6 7 8 910111213141516171819202122232425
INDIVIDUAL SUBJECTS

USE OF SILENCE IN
SECONDS
C TRAIT N-STENS

l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I
l
l
I
I
i

|
l ....
I D D
. I
I' 1 1 :11 1 1:11 .[:|. 1 1 1:11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
. I I I T Y T t r r I l l

fi I I fir

 

Figure 3: Silence and "C" Trait

Interpretations
The results of this study yielded no statistically

significant relationships between third grade students'
personality traits and how they used their time while
engaged in the musically creative processes of exploration,
development, repetition and silence. This may have resulted
from several factors.

The small size of the sample (N=25) may have had an
impact on the results of the study making it difficult to
attain statistical significance. Additionally, the small
sample size could account for the discrepancies between the
means and standard deviations for the 14 personality traits
and four second order personality factors as reported in the
CPQ test manual and the means and standard deviations found

in this study.

58

Using only one form of the CPQ may have had an effect
on the results of that measure. The CPQ was found to be the
only personality trait measure appropriate for third grade
students. Additionally, it was the only measure available
that gave a broad description of third grade students'
personalities. However, administration of one form of the
CPQ takes approximately 90 minutes. The test manual
recommends administering two separate forms for the highest
reliabilities on all of the personality factors. This
researcher decided to use one form of the test due to the
length of time for administration of the test, and the
length of time the subjects would have needed to be released
from regular classroom activities to take the test.
Reliabilities may have increased for the personality traits
had more than one form of the CPQ been used, and higher
reliabilities might have yielded a significant relationship
between compositional processes and personality traits.

Interjudge reliabilities may have had an impact on
compositional process results. Although interjudge
reliabilities were high for the compositional processes of
exploration, development, and silence, the interjudge
reliability for the compositional process of repetition was
disappointing at .55. This indicates only a moderate level
of agreement on the definition of the process term
"repetition" between the two independent judges. Had the
interjudge reliability been higher for the process of
repetition, the compositional process totals would have been
different and the results of this study would have been
affected.

Finally, it is possible that the results of this study

59

demonstrate there is no meaningful relationship between
musical creativity and personality, specifically, that
no relationship exists between students' use of time during

the compositional process and personality traits.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

This investigation was conducted to examine the
relationship of personality traits and the musically
creative process of the composer. More specifically, this
study was concerned with investigating the relationship
between personality traits and third-grade students' use of
time during the compositional processes of exploration,
development, repetition, and silence.

A review of related literature revealed only one
similar study. Swanner (1985) investigated the
relationship between creative thinking in music and music
aptitude, cognitive intelligence, personality and gender
in a study involving 69 third-grade students.

Personality traits, measured by Cattell's Early School
Personality Questionnaire (Cattell, 1966), of

independence, excitability, self-confidence, aggression,
anxiety, curiosity, and imagination were found to be
significantly related to MCTM-II (Webster, 1987) scores.
However, the results of Swanner's study cannot be
generalized to a compositional task because MCTM-II does not
measure the compositional process.

This investigation included 25 third-grade students
from a small, rural public school district in lower

Michigan. A total of 51 consent forms were sent home

60

61

with the students from two third-grade classrooms. Of
the 31 forms that were returned, only 25 met the criteria
for participation in the study. The length of the study was
three weeks.

All of the students completed a 7—minute
compositional task, on a keyboard, that was audio—
recorded by the researcher and later analyzed by two
independent judges for the amount of time spent in the
compositional processes of exploration, development,
repetition, and silence. In addition, all students were
administered the Children's Personality Questionnaire (CPQ)
(Cattell, 1976). The CPQ was used to measure 14 independent
personality traits and four second-order personality traits
for each student. Pearson Product Moment correlations were
used to determine whether a relationship existed among the
four compositional processes and the 14 personality traits

and four second-order personality factors.

Results and Conclusions

No statistically significant (p<.05) relationship
was found between the compositional processes of
exploration, development, repetition, and silence and the
14 personality traits and four second-order factors. It
appears that no relationship exists between third-grade
students' musically creative processes of exploration,
development, repetition, and silence, and their personality
traits. However, three relationships approached statistical
significance:

1. The relationship between the compositional process

of exploration and personality trait of low intelligence vs.

62

high intelligence was found to be positively correlated.
More exploration may be used by students with a higher
level of intelligence.

2. The relationship between the compositional
process of repetition and the personality trait of tough-
minded vs. tender-minded emotionality was found to be
negatively correlated. More repetition may be used
by those students who are tough-minded, self-reliant,
practical and realistic.

3. The compositional process of silence was found
to be positively correlated with the personality trait of
emotional instability vs. emotional stability. More
silence may be used by those students who are emotionally
stable, mature, and calm.

Certain explanations exist as to why no significant
relationship was found among the four compositional
processes and the 14 personality traits and four second-
order personality factors. The small size of the sample may
have had an impact on the final outcome of the study.

Using only one form of the CPQ may have decreased the
reliabilities of the personality traits and second-order
personality factors being measured. With low reliabilities
it is difficult to find statistical significance.

Interjudge reliability on the compositional process of
repetition was unsatisfactory. It is possible that with a
high level of agreement between the judges a significant
relationship between compositional processes and personality

traits might have been determined.

63

Recommendations fie; Future Research

The following recommendations reflect the need for
further investigations regarding students' compositional
processes and products and their relationships to
personality traits.

The review of related literature reflected little
research on the relationship between personality traits
and the musically creative processes of children.

Although no statistically significant relationships were
found, this study may be used as a model for replication,
with a larger sample. A larger sample may produce different
results. An investigation with a larger, and more diverse
sample would also produce results that would be applicable
to a larger population.

When replicating this study using time analysis for
compositional processes, all judges need clear and extensive
training on the process rating system. High or low
interjudge reliabilities would have an influence on the
statistical significance of a study.

Replication of this study using two forms of the
Children's Personality Questionnaire (Cattell, 1975)
might also be useful. The reliabilities for the
personality traits would be higher. A study's results
may be affected by higher personality trait reliabilities.

Music education might benefit from further study
of personality traits and their relationships to the
compositional processes. Giving students repeated
opportunities for composition and relating the resulting
processes and products to personality traits would provide

additional information on how children create music.

64

Future research could include the study of intelligence
and its relationships to aspects of musical creativity.
Statistical significance was approached between the
compositional process of exploration and the personality
trait of intelligence. Intelligence was measured in terms
of a child's general mental ability by the CPQ. Studying
intelligence and how it relates to aspects of musical
creativity may result in a deeper understanding of

children's musical creativity.

Implications

Children learn and know music through active
participation in musically creative activities. It is
through creativity that higher levels of thinking such as
application, evaluation, and synthesis are employed. For
music education to structure a sequentially ordered
curriculum with creativity at its base, the musically
creative elements of process, product, and person must be
understood. The majority of research in musical creativity
has centered around the process and product components of
creativity. Although no relationships were determined
among musically creative processes and personality traits
of the students in this study, more research needs to be
conducted on the person aspect of musical creativity.
Comprehending how children approach musically creative
activities, and understanding how a person functions
while creatively engaged, will serve to advance music
education. With a deeper understanding of the children
who are creatively engaged, music education will be

further enabled to structure music curricula and

65

musically creative activities for optimal student

learning.

APPENDIX A

 

OFHCEOF
RESEARCH
AND
GRADUATE
STUDIES

University Committee on

Human Subjects
(UCRIHS)

Micmgan State University
246 Administration Building
East Lansing. Michigan
48824-1046

MNMSNNI
FAX3517/432-117I

APPENDIX A

A4l<3l1l(3/\PV SYTAKIIE

 

U P1 I'V

May 6, 1997

E II S l 1' Y

TO‘ SXEtfiiiiZagifiéi

RE: IRB#:

97-159

TITLE: AN INVESTIGATION BETWEEN MUSICAL CREATIVITY AND

PERSONALITY TRAITS

REVISION REQUESTED: N/A
CATEGORY: 2-I
APPROVAL DATE: 05/05/97

The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects'(UCRIHS)

review of this project is complete.. I am pleased to adv1se that the

rights and welfare of the human subjects appear to be adequately
rotected and methods to obtain informed consent are appropriate.

herefore,
above.

RENEWAL:

REVISIONS:

PROBLEMS/
CHANGES:

the UCRIHS approved this.project and any rev1sions listed

UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year, beginning with
the approval date shown above. Investigators planning to
continue a project beyond one year must use the green renewal
form (enclosed with t e original agproval letter or when a
project is renewed) to seek u date certification. There is a
max1mum of four such exped1te renewals possible. Investigators
wishing to continue a prOject beyond that time need to submit it
again or complete rev1ew.

UCRIHS must review any changes in procedures involving human
subjects, rior to in1tiat1on of t e change. If this is done at
the time o renewal, please use the green renewal form. To
revise an approved protocol at any other time during the year
send your written request to the CRIHS Chair, requesting rev1sed
approval and referencing the project's IRB # and title. Include
in your request a description of the change and any revised
instruments, consent forms or advertisements that are applicable.

Should_either of the following arise during the course of the
work, 1nvestigators must not1 y UCRIHS promptly: (1) roblems
(unexpected Side effects, comp aints, etc.) involving uman
subjects or (2) changes in the research environment or new
information indicating greater risk to the human sub ects than
existed when the protocol was previously reviewed an approved.

If we can be of any future help, please do not hesitate to contact us
2-1

at (517)355

Sincerely,

  
 
  

UCRIHS Chai
DEW:bed

cc:/§nzanne
\

avid E. Wright,

-2180 or FAX (517)4 171.

 
  

r

L. Burton

665

APPENDIX B

PARENTAL PERMISSION FORM

Dear Parent or Guardian:

-My name is Suzanne Burton. I am a master’s degree
candidate in music education at Michigan State University
in East Lansing, Michigan. I am working on a thesis on
personality traits and musical creativity. With the
intention of contributing to the improvement of music
learnin and teaching, I am conducting an investigation
with third grade students. Therefore, I am writing to you
in request for your agreement on your child’s participation

in th1s study.

Your child will be asked to compose a song on a keyboard
instrument within a seven minute time frame. This will
require the student to leave the classroom for about 15
minutes. Also, he/she will be asked to take two short
music listening tests and the Children’s Personality
Questionnaire. Each of the listening tests will take 20
minutes and will be administered during the regularly
scheduled music class time. The Personality Questionnaire
will take 60-90 minutes and will be given during a time that
has been blocked by the classroom teachers. If you wish to
know the results of your child’s tests, I will be happy to
share them with you. Testing will begin the latter part of
April, 1997 and should be completed by the middle of May,

1997.

The music teacher of your child, Mrs. Glenda Kreger, and
the third grade teachers have offered their cooperation with
this project. The researcher and the teachers will know the
identities of the children who participate in this study.
Yet, only the researcher will know each child’s results of
the study. Your child's results will be kept entirely
confidential and will remain anonymous in the report of any
research findings. Participation in this research project
is voluntary and will not affect your child’s grades in any
way. Also, you may withdraw your child from this study at
any time without penalty to your child. Please complete the
bottom portion of this sheet and have your son or daughter
return it to school as soon as possible. Should you have any
questions or concerns please contact me at 688-4768.

Sincerely,

Suzanne Burton

Your child’s name:

 

Your child's birthdate:='

Has your child received instruction on a keyboard instrument?
(circle one) YES NO

If yes, please explain:

 

Would you agree on your child’s participation in this
research project? (Circle one) YES NO

Parent or Guardian signature: Date:

 

Child’s signature: Date:

 

67

APPENDIX C

APPENDIX C

Subject name Judge

Compositional Processes

E=Exploration, D=Development, R=Repetition, S=Silence

O:05_____ 2:05_____ . 4:05_____ 6:05_____
0:10_ 2:10____ 4:10_____ 6:10____
0:15_ 2:15__ 4:15_ 6:15,—
o:2o__ 2:2o__. 4:20__ 6:20___
0:25_____ 2:25_____ 4:25_____ 6:25_____
0:30_____ 2:30_____ 4:30_____ 6:30_____
0:35_____ 2:35_____ 4:35_____ 6:35_____
0:40_____ 2:40_____ 4:40_____ 6:40_____
O:45_____ 2:45_____ 4:45_____ 6:45_____
0:50_____ 2:50_____ 4:50_____ 6:50_____
0:55_____ 2:55_____ 4:55_____ 6:55_____
1:00__ 3:00____ 5:00__ 7:00___
1:05_ 3:05____ 5:05—
1:10___ 3:10____ 5:10—
1:15_____ 3:15_____ 5:15_____
l:20_____ 3:20_____ 5:20_____
1:25_____ 3:25_____ 5:25______
1:30_ 3:30__ 5:30___
l:35_____ 3:35_____ 5:35_____
1:40__ 3:4o__:_ _ 5:40___
1:45_____ 3:45_____ 5:45_____
1:50__ 3:50_ 5:50___
l:55_____ 3:55_____ 5:55_____
2:00_____ 4:00_____ 6:00_____

68

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Auh, M. (1995). Prediction of musical creativity in
composition among selected variables for upper
elementary students. (Doctoral dissertation, Case
Western Reserve University, 1995).

Balkin, A. (1990). What is creativity? What is it
not? Music Educator's Journal, Z§(9), 29-32.

 

Barrett, M. (1996). Children's aesthetic decision-
making: An analysis of children's musical discourse as
composers. Journal p; pee International Society for
Music Education, 28, 37-62.

 

Bell, C. R. (1984). Personality differences among
musical instrumentalists. Psychology pf Music, 1;(2),
83-93.

Bennett, S. (1976). The process of musical creation:
Interviews with eight composers. Journal pf Research
ip Music Education, 25, 3-13.

Besemer, S. & Treffinger, D. (1981). Analysis of
creative products. Journal p; Creative Behavior, 15,
158-178.

Cattell, R. B. (1950). Ap introduction pp personality
study. London: Hutchinson House.

Cattell, R. B. (1966). Early school personality
questionnaire. Champaign, IL: Institute for
Personality and Ability Testing.

Cattell, R. B. (1969). High school personality
questionnaire. Cham aign, IL: Institute for
Personality and Ability Testing.

Cattell, R. B. (1970). Sixteen personality factor
test. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and
Ability Testing.

Cattell, R. B. (1992). Hepdbook for the children's
personality guestionnaire. Champaign, IL: Institute
for Personality and Ability Testing.

 

Coleman, S. (1922). Creative music for children.
New York: Putnam.

 

69

70

Choate, R. (Ed.). (1968). Documentary report pp t e
Tanglewood Symposium. Washington, D.C.: Music
Educator's National Conference.

Elliott, D. (1995). Music Matters. New York: Oxford
University Press.

 

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames 2; mind. New York: Basic
Books.
Gorder, W. (1980). Divergent production abilities as

constructs of musical creativity. Journal pf Research
ip Music Education, ee, 34-42.

Gordon, E. E. (1986). Primary measures pf music audiation
and Intermediate measures 9; music audiation, manual.
Chicago: G.I.A.

Gordon, E. E. (1989). Audiation, music learning theory,
music aptitude, and creativity. In J. W. Richmond
(Ed.), Proceedings pf the Suncoast Music Education

Forum pp Creativity (p. 78). Tampa: University of
Southern Florida.

 

Gordon, E. E. (1993). Learning seguences ip music.
Chicago: G.I.A.

Guilford, J. P. (1959). Personality. New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Guilford, J. P. (1968). Intelligence, creativity, and
their educational implications. San Diego: EDITS

 

 

Hedden, S. K. (1973). Listener's responses to music in
relation to autochthonous and experiential factors.
Journal 9: Research ip Music Education, 21, 225-238.

Henry, W. (1995). The effects of pattern instruction,
repeated composing opportunities, and musical aptitude
on the compositional processes and products of fourth
grade students. (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1995).

Henry, W. (1996). Creative processes in children's
musical compositions: A review of the literature.

Reston, VA: Music Educator's National Conference.

Kemp, A. (1981). The personality structure of the
musician: I. Identifying a profile of traits for the
performer. P§VCholoqy pf Music, 2(1), 3-14.

Kemp, A. (1982). Personality traits of successful music
teachers. Psychology pf Music, Special Issue, 72-75.

Kemp, A. (1996). The musical temperament. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

71

Kratus, J. (1985). Rhythm, melody, motive, and phrase
characteristics of original songs by children aged five
to thirteen. (Doctoral dissertation, Northwestern
University, 1985). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 46, 3281A.

Kratus, J. (1989). A time analysis of the compositional
processes used by children ages 7 to eleven. Journal
pf Research 1p Music Education, ;1(1) 5-20.

 

Kratus, J. (1990). Characterization of the compositional
strategies used by children to compose a melody.
Canadian Music Educator, Special International
Society for Music Education Research Edition, ee,
95-103.

 

Kratus, J. (1991a). Orientation and intentionality
as components of creative musical activity. Research
Perspectives ip Music Education, gy 4-8.

Kratus, J. (1991b). Structuring the music curriculum
for creative learning. In D.L. Hamann (Ed.),
Creativity ip the classroom: The best pf MEJ, (pp. 43-
48). Reston, VA: Music Educator's National Conference.

Kratus, J. (1994a). Relationships among children's
music audiation and their compositional processes and
products. Journal pf Research 1p Music Education,
5(1), 115-130.

Kratus, J. (1994b). The way children compose. In
H. Lees (Ed.), Musical Connections: Tradition and
Change. Tampa, FL: Proceedings of the let World
Conference of the International Society for Music
Education.

Levi, R. (1991). Investigating the creativity process:
The role of regular musical composition experiences for
the elementary child. Journal pf Creative Behavior,
25(2), 123-136.

Lewis, B. E. & Schmidt, C. P. (1991). Listener's
response to music as a function of personality type.
Journal 9: Research 1p Music Education, ;e(4), 311-321.
Moorhead, G. & Pond, D. (1978). Music for young children.
Santa Barbara, CA: Pillsbury Foundation for
the Advancement of the Arts. (Original work published
1941-1951).

Myers, I. B. & Mc Caulley, M. H. (1985). Manual: A
guide pg the development and use pf the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists Press.

National Arts Education Associations. (1994). National
standards for arts education. Reston, VA: Mu51c
Educator's National Conference.

72

Perkins, D. N. (1981). The mind's best work.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Pond, D. (1981). A composer's study of young children's
innate musicality. Bulletin of the Council for

——_—

Research ip Music Education, 68, 1-12.

Reinhardt, D. A. (1991). The effect of repeated
compositional experience on the tonal structure of
fifth-grade students' compositions. (Doctoral
dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, 1990).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 51, 3663A

Schmidt, C. P. & Sinor, J. (1986). An investigation of the
relationship among music audiation, musical creativity,
and cognitive style. Journal 9; Research ip Music
Educationi ;e(3), 160-172.

Sherman, R. (1991a). Creativity and the condition of
knowing in music. In D. L. Hamann (Ed.), Creativity ip
the classroom: The Best pf Meg, (pp. 7-10). Reston,
VA: Music Educator's National Conference.

Sherman, R. (1991b). Creativity and the condition of
knowing in music, part II. In D. L. Hamann (Ed.),
Creativity 1p the claeeroom: The best pf MEJ, (pp. 11-
16). Reston, VA: Music Educator's National Conference.

Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the
crowd: Cultivating creativity 1p e culture pf
conformity; New York: Simon & Schuster.

Swanner, D. (1985). Relationships between musical
creativity and selected factors including personality,
motivation, musical aptitude, and cognitive
intelligence as measured in third grade children.
(Doctoral dissertation Case Western Reserve University,

1985). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46,
3646A.

Swanwick, K. & Tillman, J. .(1986). The sequence of
musical development: A study of children's
compositions. British Journal p: Music Education, gy
305-339.

Swanwick, K. (1996). Further research on the musical

development sequence. Early Childhood Connections,
e(2), 42-44. ‘

Torrance, E. P. (1963a). Creativity. Washington D.C.:
National Education Association.

 

 

Torrance, E. P. (1963b). Education and the creative
potential. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.

Torrance, E. P. (1966). Guiding creative talent.

 

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Creative Education Foundation.

73

Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance tests p: creative
thinking. Lexington, MA: Personal Press.

Torrance, E. P. (1988). The nature of creativity as
manifest in its testing. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The
nature e: creativity: Contemporary psychological
perspective, (pp. 43-75). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Vaughan, M. (1977). Musical creativity: Its
cultivation and measurement. Bulletin pf the Council
for Research ip Music Education, pg, 72-77.

Vaughan, M. & Myers, R. E. (1971). An examination of
musical process as related to creative thinking.
Journal e: Music Education, 12(3), 337-341.

Wallas, G. (1926). The art pf thought. New York:
Harcourt Brace.

Webster, P. R. (1987). Refinement of a measure of creative
thinking in music. In C. K. Madsen & C. A. Prickett
(Eds.), Applications 9; research ip music behavior
(pp.257-271). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Webster, P. R. (1988). Creative thinking in music:
Approaches to research. In T. Gates (Ed.), Music
Education ip pee United States: Contemporary Issues.
Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Wilson, 8. & Wales, R. (1995). An exploration of
children's musical compositions. Journal pf Research
ip Music Education. 43(2), 94-111.

 

   

“711111111111117171“