10307_Mining Creativity – Video Game Creativity Learning Effects

Graduate Theses and Dissertations
Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and
Dissertations
2017
Mining Creativity: Video Game Creativity
Learning Effects
Jorge Alberto Blanco-Herrera
Iowa State University
Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd
Part of the Instructional Media Design Commons, and the Psychology Commons
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital
Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital
Repository. For more information, please contact digirep@iastate.edu.
Recommended Citation
Blanco-Herrera, Jorge Alberto, “Mining Creativity: Video Game Creativity Learning Effects” (2017). Graduate Theses and Dissertations.
15263.
https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/15263

Mining creativity: Video game creativity learning effects

by

Jorge A. Blanco-Herrera

A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Major: Psychology

Program of Study Committee:
Douglas A. Gentile Major Professor
Stephanie Madon
Gary Phye

The student author and the program of study committee are solely responsible for the content of
this thesis. The Graduate College will ensure this thesis is globally accessible and will not permit
alterations after the degree is conferred.

Iowa State University

Ames, Iowa

2017

Copyright © Jorge A. Blanco-Herrera, 2017. All rights reserved.
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. iv
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………………………….1
The Growth of Video Games in Society and Research ………………………………………………1
Minecraft
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3
Theories and Measures of Creativity ………………………………………………………………………..4
Trait Creativity
…………………………………………………………………………………………..5
Creative Process
………………………………………………………………………………………….5
Divergent Thinking
…………………………………………………………………………..5
Convergent Thinking ………………………………………………………………………..6
Creative Production ……………………………………………………………………………………7
Video Game Effects as Learning Experiences……………………………………………………………7
CHAPTER 2: METHODS
……………………………………………………………………………………………….13
Power Analysis ……………………………………………………………………………………………………13
Participants
………………………………………………………………………………………………………….13
Procedure ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………13
Conditions …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..13

Undirected Minecraft …………………………………………………………………………………13

Directed Minecraft …………………………………………………………………………………….14

NASCAR …………………………………………………………………………………………………14

T.V. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..14
Measures …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….15

Covariates ………………………………………………………………………………………………..15
Trait Creativity (Independent Variable)………………………………………………………..15

Divergent Thinking
……………………………………………………………………………………16

Convergent Thinking …………………………………………………………………………………17

Creative Production …………………………………………………………………………………..18

Previous Video Game Experience ……………………………………………………………….18
Procedure ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………19

Hypotheses
………………………………………………………………………………………………………….19

Cross-sectional Hypotheses ………………………………………………………………………..19

Experimental Hypotheses …………………………………………………………………………..20

Exploratory Analysis …………………………………………………………………………………21
CHAPTER 3: RESULTS
…………………………………………………………………………………………………22

Covariates and Manipulation Checks ……………………………………………………………………..22

Boredom
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..25

Engagement………………………………………………………………………………………………25

Frustration ………………………………………………………………………………………………..25
Manipulation Check 1: Creative Feeling ………………………………………………………26

Manipulation Check 2: Creative Effort…………………………………………………………26

Correlations
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………26

iii

Alternative Uses Task ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..28

Fluency
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….29

Flexibility
…………………………………………………………………………………………………30

Originality ………………………………………………………………………………………………..32

Remote Association Task ……………………………………………………………………………………..33

Alien Drawing Task
……………………………………………………………………………………………..34
CHAPTER 4: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION …………………………………………………………..37

Discussion …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..37

Limitations ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….41
Future Work ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..42
Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….44
REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………45
APPENDIX A. IRB APPROVAL …………………………………………………………………………………….55
APPENDIX B, MATERIALS ………………………………………………………………………………………….56

iv

ABSTRACT
Most psychological studies concerning the learning effects of video games have focused
on action video games. These popular games emphasize quick-paced combat, narratives, player
agency, and problem solving. Although many studies have focused on aggression or visual-
spatial cognition effects from the quick-paced combat, the problem-solving aspects have been
largely ignored. The present study seeks to expand the existing literature on video game effects
by focusing on a rarely-tested outcome: creative production.
As a game with few rules and a high amount of player freedom, Minecraft exemplifies a
game that fosters players’ abilities for creative expression. This experimental study compares the
effect of playing Minecraft on creativity measures compared to watching a TV show (passive
control), a driving game (game control), and playing Minecraft with specific instructions (an
instructional control).
A within-subjects analysis (n=350) found a significant correlation between trait creativity
and game play habits. Between-groups analyses showed that players randomly assigned to play
Minecraft without instruction demonstrated significantly higher scores on post-game creativity
measures compared to those who played Minecraft with instructions to “be creative,”, those who
played a driving game, or those who watched a television show. Results indicate that effects are
not solely predicted by game mechanics, but also by the way the player plays.

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The Growth of Video Games in Society and Research
In 1999, the leading video game company had sold over a billion games across the
previous 12 years, and more than 40% of American families owned a gaming console (Dill &
Dill, 1999). This led to the average child in 1999 spending 26 minutes a day playing video games
(The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 2002). By 2012, one research group estimated the
average American adult spent 3 hours a day playing video games (Entertainment Software
Association, 2015). In 2014, the video game industry received over $22 billion in yearly revenue,
and 80% of American households owned a gaming console (Entertainment Software
Association, 2015). In the last couple of decades, video games have entrenched themselves as a
popular medium.
Concerns about the prominence of video games in children’s lives and its potential
effects on children have driven much of the video game research to date. Research into several
domains of media effects have illustrated that the behaviors players practice in games generalizes
outside of the game.
Most of this research has focused on two aspects of popular video games: violence and
visual-spatial cognition. On one hand, research on violence in video games has revealed that
players of violent video games experience increased aggression compared to non-violent video
game players (Gentile, Lynch, Linder, & Walsh, 2004; Anderson, Shibuya, Ihori, Swing,
Bushman, Sakamoto, Rothstein, & Saleem, 2010). On the other hand, players of action video
games, which require quick reactions to a variety of visual cues, benefit from faster reaction
times and increased performance in a range of visual-spatial cognitive tasks (Green, & Bavelier,
2003; Dye, Green, & Bavelier, 2009; Achtman, Green, & Bavelier, 2008). These video game
categories are not exclusive, and often refer to specific game dimensions that researchers are
2

interested in. As such, a game can fit into multiple categories and have both beneficial and
harmful effects. For example, the Call of Duty series of games is both a violent video game and
an action video game. Its gameplay requires fast paced aggression and shows both aggression
effects and visual-spatial benefits (Anderson et al., 2010; Achtman, Green, & Bavelier, 2008).
Players of prosocial video games illustrated more prosocial thoughts and behaviors than
non-prosocial video game players (Gentile, et al., 2009; Greitemeyer, Osswald, & Brauer, 2010;
Prot, et. al., 2014). Players of real-time strategy video games, which require storing and
processing multiple short- and long-term goals while simultaneously attending to new cues,
show gains in working memory (Basak, Boot, Voss, & Kramer, 2008; Basak, Voss, Erickson,
Boot, & Kramer, 2011; Kühn, Gleich, Lorenz, Lindenberger, & Gallinat, 2014).
Although the social behavioral and cognitive effects of video games are fruitful areas of
research, the video game market has genres beyond shooting and helping others. Researchers
have overlooked how games can foster creativity.
Most game genres encourage players to practice some creativity. For example, role-
playing games encourage players to create a character, a backstory, and a long-term strategy for
character development that fits into an imaginary world created in collaboration with other
players and the game designers. Competitive games often reward creative strategies with victory
against one’s opponents. Even the popular and seemingly-straightforward first-person shooter
(FPS) games engender creative practice as players rethink strategies and pursue exploits that give
them advantages in combat. Many computer games thrive on the creative practice of their
“modding” community, in which users alter (modify) the game itself to add new levels, visuals,
and modes.
3

Games like Minecraft (a game that has sold over 100 million copies) don’t revolve
around helping others, shooting people, or fast-paced action. They revolve around open-world
exploration of a virtual “sandbox,” player-created content, and manipulation of game rules to
accomplish player created goals (Duncan, 2011). The game allows players to explore unique
worlds and create anything they can imagine in that world. With games fostering creativity,
would playing games with creative elements have an impact on players’ creativity, in a manner
analogous to the way playing games with violent elements influences players’ aggression? These
games offer academia new avenues of research into possible creativity benefits.
Minecraft
Minecraft in particular is a game especially tuned to foster creativity. It can be thought of
as Legos: the Video Game. Players in the game have been able to rebuild locations (real or
fictional): Battlestar Galactica, Westeros, London, Earth, etc. They have built fully functional
droid armies, computing systems, and cities with electrical systems and running water. The self-
motivated players create these complex systems in a game with very basic rules and properties,
otherwise known as mechanics.
The core game mechanic of Minecraft is to create and implement ideas within the
constraints of the game. This may seem vague, but that is because the game itself is vague. When
a player begins to play Minecraft, they see a world of blocks procedurally generated in front of
them. They are not given any narrative of the game world, any instruction of how to play the
game, any goals, or rules. The player has to decide how to react to this game world. Do they
explore the world by walking around? Do they explore the limits of their character by
experimenting how their character reacts to different keyboard commands or interaction with the
environment? Once they realize they can collect (mine) the blocks that make up the world, do
4

they choose to keep collecting or do they decide to organize the blocks in order to craft some
new structure?
If players decide to create objects they tend to follow a creative process of coming up
with ideas (ideating), deciding which ideas they want to pursue (evaluation), and then figuring
out how to carry out those ideas (creative problem solving). Minecraft is an effective tool for
creative expression because it allows for a wide range of creative expression. The game has the
potential to foster many different creative products.
Theories and Measures of Creativity
It is hard to operationalize creativity. In the multidisciplinary creativity literature, there
are over 100 different descriptions of creativity (Ackoff & Vergara, 1981). There is little
consensus or agreed upon organizational framework in the creativity literature. Some argue that
creativity is little more than originality or novelty. A common viewpoint describes creativity as
novelty and appropriateness (Paletz, & Peng, 2008). Creativity can also be described with the
criteria of divergent thinking: novelty, elaboration, fluency, and flexibility (Guilford, 1966).
Mumford, Mobley, Uhlman, Reiter-Palmon, and Doares (1991) have also proposed a cyclical
and dynamic description of creativity as problem construction, information encoding, relevant
category search, specification of fitting categories, combination of category information,
reorganization of categories, idea evaluation, implementation of ideas, and monitoring. Finally,
some models summarize creativity as ideation-evaluation cycles influenced by knowledge and
motivation (Basadur, Graen, & Wakabayashi, 1990).
Given the variety of creativity definitions, it is outside the scope of this study to make
claims about the effects of video games on creativity as a single construct. Instead, this study
employs a range of creativity-related measures and refers to findings specific to those particular
5

measured aspects of creativity. However, in an attempt to cross the breadth of the field and its
definitions, the measures selected for this study will attempt to capture and analyze several of the
dimensions along which creativity has been conceptualized. These approaches to creativity
assess it either as an individual difference, cognitive process, or with regard to its products.
Trait Creativity. The individual differences approach analyzes the difference between
high-creativity people and low-creativity people by self-reported measures, peer reports,
motivation, attitudes, and adjective checklists. As a tool that allows for a great variety of creative
expression, Minecraft, might attract high creativity individuals. Additionally, since playing
Minecraft usually involves creative practice, playing Minecraft should result in higher reports of
creativity. The Imaginative Capability Scale will be used as a measure of self-report trait
creativity. This scale is based on Liu and Noppe-Brandon’s description of imagination as the
ability to conjure new possibilities and realities, conceive of ideas deliberately or intuitively, and
make connections between things that previously seemed to not have a connection (2009). Their
self-reported motivations, past experiences and products, attitudes, personality traits, self-
conceptions, and interests have all proven to be valid predictors of real-life creative
accomplishments (Hocevar, 1981).
Creative Process. The cognitive process approach focuses on understanding divergent
thinking and convergent thinking as the cognitive processes that underlie creativity.
Divergent Thinking. Divergent thinking focuses on measuring the ability to come up
with ideas or ideate, in the language of this literature. It can also be conceptualized as the ability
to overcome functional fixedness. Functional fixedness is the inability to perceive objects as
having functions other than those for which they are commonly used (Amabile, 1983). For
example, functional fixedness might not allow participants to give responses other than cutting
6

for a knife. In contrast, an example of divergent thinking would be to use the top of a knife as a
straightedge to draw a line. Due to Minecraft’s open-world design and lack of instruction,
player’s first step in playing is to practice ideation. They have to come up with their own goals,
their own ideas of how to play the game, what to create, and how they will achieve their goals.
Divergent thinking will be captured using the Alternative Uses Task. This task requires
participants to generate as many possible appropriate answers for a problem as they can, an
exercise in ideation (Guilford, 1966). The Alternative Uses Task is commonly used as a measure
of divergent thinking and functional fixedness.
Convergent Thinking. In contrast to divergent thinking, convergent thinking is the ability
to evaluate ideas and to identify the optimal idea that fits a particular criterion. In Minecraft, this
thought process is seen when players need to decide on a plan of how to effectively carry out
construction projects and mining strategies. Effective land survey strategy to find required
materials, proper management of resources, combination of blocks to create tools, and proper
combination of tools to create complex mechanisms is necessary to create a lot of the possible
structures in the game. Out of game convergent thinking can be seen in things like crossword
puzzles, creative problem solving scenarios, shopping for the most price efficient items, etc.
Convergent thinking will be captured using the Remote Association Test developed by
Mednick (1962). This task measures creativity from the associative theory perspective by testing
participants’ ability to derive a single correct answer from a set of criteria (Cropley, 2006). The
assumption is that creative thinkers have flat associative hierarchies as opposed to steep
associative hierarchies. Flatter associative hierarchies increase the likelihood of forming novel
connections between concepts. The Remote Association Task is commonly used as a measure of
7

creativity (Akbari Chermahini, Hickendorff, & Hommel, 2012; Chermahini, & Hommel, 2012;
Colzato, Wildenberg, & Hommel, 2013).
Creative Production. The creative products approach analyzes creative practice through
the products participants are asked to write, draw, or create. The relevant domain skills,
motivations, and cognitive processes of the creative person coalesce into a creative product.
Since the creative product is the culmination and expression of all the creative aspects of the
person it has been argued to be the most valid way to measure creativity. The players in
Minecraft have a lot of practice in making products. Most of the game’s public servers to group
play centers around players banding together to make creative products. The collaboration,
creation, sharing, and modifying of creative products is seen as a core experience for Minecraft
players.
Creative production will be captured using the Alien Drawing Task. In the Alien Drawing
Task participants are instructed to imagine and draw a creature living on a planet very different
from Earth (Ward, 1994; Ward, Finke, & Smith, 1995), They are encouraged to be as creative
and imaginative as they can, and not to worry about how well drawn the alien is. Measuring
creativity of a person’s product is a direct method of measuring their creativity (Feldhusen, &
Goh, 1995; Polman, & Emich, 2011; Maddux & Galinsky, 2009; Miller & Tal, 2007;
Kharkhurin, 2009).
Video Game Effects as Learning Experiences

As Minecraft offers players the ability to practice creative production and processes, it
also offers them the learning experiences in creativity. These learning experiences can lead to
Minecraft having a creative learning effect on players. Researchers often conceptualize the
effects of video games on their players as a series of learning experiences (Gentile et al., 2009).
8

The effects of video games can sometimes generalize beyond the game environment, transferring
to other, related domains. For example, in a first-person shooter, players practice solving their
problems (a population of bad guys) through aggression (shooting said bad guys). This
aggression is rewarded through points, game progression, positive feedback, and other game
mechanisms. Over periods of frequent practice, these short term learning encounters become
more deeply ingrained and show longer-term effects on aggressive behavior, cognition, and
affect, both inside and outside the game world (Anderson et al., 2010).
Gentile and colleagues (Gentile & Stone, 2005; Khoo & Gentile, 2007; Stone & Gentile,
2008) have suggested the amount, content, context, structure, and mechanics of video games
influence the lessons they teach their players. This confluence of factors can be understood
through the General Learning Model (Gentile et al., 2009). In this model, learning occurs from
the interaction of a person with their environment (see Figure 1). This interaction influences the
person’s internal state which, in turn, influences their reaction to the situation (their appraisal of
the situation, decision making process, and behavior). Their reaction leads them to a learning
encounter. If their reaction led to success in their interaction with the situation, then those
appraisals, decision making processes, and behaviors are reinforced. In contrast, if the reactions

Figure 1. Simplified figure of General Learning Model.
9

lead to failure, the learner’s behavior can be punished. Learners can reappraise their actions at
any point in the cycle, but usually do so after the learning encounter. The cycle then starts again
as the learner continues to interact with the evolving situation.
Minecraft’s potential benefit to creative measures can be analyzed through the lens of the
General Learning Model. At the start of the game a randomly generated world is created in front
of the person. They are surrounded by a world comprised of blocks representing the substance of
the world: water, dirt, stone, trees, metals, lava, and more. The game does not ask or direct the
player to do anything. The situation is a game world with no instructions and unknown rules to
the person. The person has to decide how to react to the world (and the learning encounter

Figure 2. Detailed Figure of the General Learning Model.
Situation
Person
Present Internal State
Affect
Cognition
Arousal
Appraisal, Decision, and Behavior
Immediate Appraisal
Sufficient Processing Resources
Reappraisal
Learning
Encounter
Reappraisal
Impulsive
Action
Thoughtful
Action
10

begins; see figure 2). If they have no game experience, they might have to experiment with the
controls to learn how to interact with the game. Their present internal state has no memory of
what the keys do, and they are curious about how to interact with the game. As such they decide
to press keys and see how the game reacts. They start to learn how the keyboard keys control the
game through trial and error. If they have experience with games, they might remember the
standard control scheme most games use, and go on to either understand the rules of the game
world or create their own goals in the game.
The person can have their first interaction with the completely modifiable and explorable
game world with no instruction, they may begin picking a direction to explore and walking off in
that direction. Alternatively, they could start clicking on the world around them, which would
translate into digging into the ground or chopping down a tree. Whatever they choose to do is a
product of who they are as a person, and how the game world has influenced their internal state.
If they are familiar with games focused on exploration or if they find the experience discovery
rewarding, the person may decide to dig around. If they are familiar with simulation games or if
they find building things to be rewarding, they may start to trying to understand how to build
structures.
According to the General Learning Model, the player can take an impulsive action or a
thoughtful action. An impulsive action is likely to happen if they do not have sufficient mental
resources to process the situation or if they think the current outcome of their actions will be
insignificant or unsatisfactory. If, on the other hand, the outcome is something they care about
and they have enough mental resources to dedicate to thinking, they are likely to make a
thoughtful action. For a player digging in Minecraft, they are not likely to make a thoughtful
decision for every block they mine. The action is repetitive, common, and depending on the
11

player’s set up can take anywhere from 1 to 10 seconds per block to mine. The action does not
demand much attention or thought to be done well. Their goal is to dig in a certain direction or
gather a certain type of block. If they keep seeing the same type of block, they are likely to
impulsively continue digging. If they see a lava block, suddenly the outcome of their decision
becomes important (virtual life or death): The player must make a thoughtful action to avoid the
lava.
Once players decide on a course of action, the game immediately gives them feedback. If
they decided to run in one direction to explore, they will be rewarded with more to see as the
game generates new landscapes. Thus, the act of exploration is rewarded. If they decided to dig
down into the world to gather resources so they can then build a shelter, they might find minerals
or other useful materials, which would also be rewarding. If they dig incorrectly or build a
sloppy shelter the player may find themselves punished by the monsters that inhabit the world.
Over time, the player learns that they must think about how they gather and use resources. Every
action in the game will have feedback available for the player. Most of the game mechanics
revolve around the player being able to explore, gather resources, use the resources to modify
their environment, and to understand the constraints of the game world. Minecraft provides the
player a multitude of learning experiences. Over multiple play sessions and repeated learning
encounters, players could experience benefits to their creative processing and production.
Creative practice in video games could have practice effects similar to aggressive practice
and visual cognitive practice in games. Playing video games with creative practice should have
short term creativity effects, which leads to long term creativity effects as seen in other media
effects. In fact, many game journalists, teachers, and games-for-good advocates have reported
uses of Minecraft as an educational intervention in school to teach students about science, math,
12

engineering, and social dynamics (DeBruler, Freidhoff, Kennedy, & Cavanaugh. 2016). These
groups praise the level of creativity that the game brings out in players. At the time of writing
this paper, there have been no empirical studies on Minecraft or any other game being able to
improve a player’s creative practice. This study is focused on providing evidence that Minecraft
can have a short term benefit players’ performance on creativity measures. If a short term benefit
is found, future studies will have to find long term benefits to provide evidence for learning.

13

CHAPTER 2: METHODS
Power Analysis
Jackson et al. (2012) showed a correlation of .60 between video game play and trait
creativity. Given an effect size of .60, a beta of .20, and an alpha of .05, the minimum sample
size per group in a two-tailed hypothesis is 45. Throughout the video game effects literature,
effect sizes are commonly measured around .20. Given an effect size of .20, a beta of .20, an
alpha of .05, and 4 conditions, the minimum sample size per group is 70. For this study, the
target sample size per group was 80 to have sufficient power (Faul, Erdfelder, Buchner, & Lang,
2009; Soper, 2016).
Participants
IRB approval was obtained before recruiting participants. Three hundred fifty-two (190
females, mean age = 19.33, SD = 1.67) participants were recruited from Iowa State University’s
Department of Psychology’s research participation pool. The pool is composed of undergraduate
psychology and communication students. Students were compensated for their participation in
studies through course credit, and could withdraw from the study at any time without penalty.
Conditions
Undirected Minecraft. There were four conditions in this study: Undirected Minecraft,
Directed Minecraft, NASCAR, and T.V. In the Undirected Minecraft condition, participants
played Minecraft in survival mode after a brief tutorial on how to play the game. Survival mode,
in contrast to creative mode, does not give players unlimited resources, health, unrestricted
travel, and ability to manipulate the basic rules of the game. Instead, players must gather
resources themselves, their movements are restricted by in-game gravity and walls (which they
can mine through), and they can die from a variety of perils. Challenges or difficulties to work
14

against provide players with a motivation and a framework to work around (Reiter-Palmon,
Mumford, & Threlfall, 1998). The survival mode was chosen for both Minecraft conditions to
capture how people would most naturally play Minecraft, and to give participants challenges to
overcome in the game.
Directed Minecraft. The second condition, Directed Minecraft (instructional control)
was identical to the Undirected Minecraft condition, except participants were explicitly
instructed to “play as creatively as [they could].”
NASCAR. The third condition, the NASCAR condition, was an active control condition.
The Minecraft conditions will be compared to the NASCAR condition to examine if any
creativity effects came from video games in general or from the specific creative game
mechanics in a game like Minecraft. Participants in this condition played a NASCAR car racing
game in race mode after a brief tutorial on how to play the game. The NASCAR racing car game
involved participants driving a NASCAR race car on an oval track for forty minutes. Instead of
having to make decisions on where to go, how to play, what to create, what to modify, or solve a
variety of problems, participants in the NASCAR condition had to drive straight and turn left.
NASCAR should still provide the general engagement of any video game play, while lacking the
complexity and depth of decision making required in creative games, like Minecraft.
T.V. The fourth condition was a passive control condition in which participants watched
an episode of the TV show, Crocodile Hunter. A condition without a game was desired to
examine if creativity was driven by interactivity alone (i.e., all of the video game conditions),
and to examine how well the NASCAR condition functioned as a control condition. Since
boredom primes creativity and sitting without anything to do for forty minutes would be quite
15

boring, a T.V. episode was chosen to keep participants occupied and hopefully equally engaged
(Feldhusen, & Goh, 1995). This episode had the least amount of animals common in phobias.
Measures
Covariates. It is possible that any differences found in the measures of creativity could
be due to aspects of the conditions other than the ability to practice creative problem solving.
For example, if one condition is more boring than another, that condition might yield higher
creativity scores because boredom is known to be a positive predictor of creativity (Bench &
Lench, 2013). Similarly, some conditions might have effects on mood or motivation by being
more engaging or frustrating. Therefore, we asked participants how bored, engaged, and
frustrated they felt in their condition. If conditions are different on these aspects, it would be
important to control for those differences to ensure that differences in creativity are likely due to
differences time practicing creative behaviors rather than to boredom, engagement, or frustration.
That is, we desire to test whether creative game mechanics are the most likely explanation for
any differences in creativity.
Participants were also asked how creative they tried to be in their condition as a
manipulation check. The Minecraft conditions were expected a priori to be more creative, more
engaging, slightly more frustrating, and less boring than the other conditions.
Trait Creativity (Independent Variable). The Imaginative Capability Scale is a 29-item
measure of trait creativity in which participants indicate their agreement with each given
statement on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). In a factor-analysis with a
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of .939 (indicating proper sampling for factor analysis), Liang and
Chia (2014) found the Imaginative Capability Scale to have three factors. Factor 1, initiating
imagination, includes items related to novelty, productivity, and exploration. Factor 2,
16

conceiving imagination, includes items related to sensibility, intuition, concentration,
effectiveness, and dialectics. Factor 3, transforming imagination, includes items related to
crystallization and transformation. They found goodness of fit to be acceptable (𝝌2 = 1867.17, df
= 374, p < .005, RMSEA = .078, SRMR = .068, CFI = .96, NFI = .95, TLI = .96). They also found the composite reliability of each factor was initiating imagination = .90, conceiving imagination = .92, and transforming imagination = .89. Standardized factor loadings for the Imaginative Capability Scale ranged from .52 to .80, implying convergent validity. Discriminant validity was also found with chi-squared differences and confidence intervals for inter-factor correlations. Because the Imaginative Capability Scale is a trait measure of creativity, and is thus not expected to be affected by the gameplay manipulation, we will be assessing its relationship with participants’ habitual game playing. Divergent Thinking. In the Alternative Uses Task, participants were given two minutes to list as many uses as they could for a knife, two more minutes for a paperclip, and two more minutes for a newspaper (Wallach & Kogan, 1965). The Alternative Uses Task is commonly used as a measure of creativity and has demonstrated a Chronbach’s alpha value from .81 to .90 (Vosburg, 1998; Chung, 2012; Silvia, Winterstein, Willse, Barona, Cram, Hess, Martinez, & Richard, 2008; Silvia, Martin, & Nusbaum, 2009). This measure is assessed in three categories: fluency, flexibility, and originality. Fluency is scored as the total number of responses. Flexibility is scored as the number of different categories similar responses could be organized into (e.g. “to stab” and “to slash” might be grouped into one categorical type). Originality equaled how uncommon each particular idea is. Scoring originality involves comparing the responses of the single participant to the responses from all the participants. Responses given by only 2-5% of the participants are unusual and score one point, and responses given by 1% or 17 fewer of the participants are rare and score two points. The originality score was divided by the total number of responses to avoid contamination concerns (avoiding the fluency score from affecting the originality score). Several studies have supported the validity of this scoring method (Silvia, Winterstein, Willse, Barona, Cram, Hess, Martinez, & Richard, 2008; Silvia, Martin, & Nusbaum, 2009; Benedek, Mühlmann, Jauk, & Neubauer, 2013; Beaty, Silvia, Nusbaum, Jauk, & Benedek, 2014). Plucker (1999) reviewed 20 years of Alternative Uses Tasks data and found a predictive validity of .70 with future creative achievement. Treffinger (1985) found test-retest reliabilities between .60 and .70. In the current study, the Alternative Uses Task had a Cronbach’s alpha of .827. The data from the Alternative Uses Task will be analyzed by category (fluency, flexibility, and originality) using a univariate analysis of covariance to compare scores across conditions. Convergent Thinking. In the Remote Association Test participants were shown 30 triplets of words with the task of finding one word that was associated with each word in the triplet. For example, bag would be remotely associated with sleeping, bean, and trash (sleeping bag, bean bag, trash bag). The order of presentation for the triplets was randomized. Participants were instructed to work as quickly and as accurately as possible in the 15 minutes given to them. Remote Association Task scoring is done by totaling the number of correct responses from 30 problems. Data from the Remote Association Task will also be analyzed with a univariate analysis of covariance to compare scores across conditions. In previous work, the Remote Association Test has demonstrated a Cronbach’s alpha of .85. (Morgan, D’Mello, Abbott, Radvansky, Haass, & Tamplin, 2013). Moderate correlations with the Raven’s Matrix test and insight problems (both exams designed to measure mechanisms of creative thinking) have convergent validity (r= .47, r=.39, respectively; Chermahini, 18 Hickendorff, & Hommel, 2012). Scores on the Remote Association Test have also shown a .70 correlation with ratings from instructors in a university level design course (Kasof, 1997). To avoid a possible floor or ceiling effect, only items with a solution rate between .70 - .30 from a previous study were selected (Bowden & Jung-Beeman, 2003). Creative Production. In the Alien Drawing Task, participants were given seven minutes to imagine and draw a creature that had developed on a world much different from Earth. This task requires participants to actively generate novel material, and is seen as a practice of creativity through creative production. The drawing is scored on criteria in three categories; eyes, limbs, and bilateral symmetry (Kozbelt, & Durmysheva, 2007). Creatures with the Earth norms of bilateral symmetry, two eyes, and four limbs received zero points in each category. Creatures with superficial asymmetry, with more or fewer than two eyes, and with more or fewer than four limbs received one point per category. Creatures with asymmetry, no relevant eye structure, or no relevant limb structure received two points in each category. Since the Alien Drawing Task has participants produce a creative product, it is a face valid measure of creative production. After the scores of both raters are compiled and averaged, the data from the Alien Drawing Task are analyzed with a univariate analysis of covariance to compare scores across conditions. Previous Video Game Experience. The Video Game History Questionnaire is a self- report survey of the participant’s video game use. Participants were asked to name five of their favorite games, how often they have played them in the last few years, and how creative they found their video game experience to be for each. Frequency and creative perception were reported on 7-point scale questions. creative game exposure was calculated by multiplying self- reported frequency of play by self-reported creativeness of game played (similar to the method of calculating aggressive game exposure used in Anderson et. al.,2008). 19 Procedure Before arriving at the lab, participants were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions. Participants read and signed an informed consent form detailing their rights, a summary of the activities they would participate in, and possible risks. They also completed a sheet asking for basic demographics: age, gender, race, and social-economic background. Participants played or watched their respective game or show for approximately 45 minutes. Afterwards, they were instructed to complete four measures of creativity: the Alternative Uses Task, Remote Association Task, Imaginative Capability Scale, and Alien Drawing Task. The order of the creativity measures was randomly presented across the conditions. The Video Game History Questionnaire, covariate questions, and manipulation checks were administered last. An attention check question was randomly inserted into the survey portion of the study to catch any participants that were inattentive to the study. Hypotheses Cross-sectional Hypotheses. In order to replicate previous studies, bivariate correlations between trait creativity (measured the Imaginative Capability Scale) and video game play habits will be analyzed (Jackson et al., 2012). Replication is important to establish that the possible video game effect is significant enough to be seen long term. A correlation between game play and creativity measures would suggest a relation between the two. Another relation in the video game literature is the negative relation between grade point average and video game playing habit. Generally, grade point averages correlate negatively with overall video game playing habits and positively with creativity. Nonetheless, some video game playing habits correlate positively with creatively. It is possible, therefore, that there may be an indirect positive relationship between game playing habits and grade point average mediated 20 through trait creativity. This analyzes expands the current literature from simply asking if there is a relation between video game habits and grades to can the relation be positive in some cases and negative in others. H1a: If creative people are drawn to games or games provide players opportunity practice creative production, then trait creativity (measured by Imaginative Capability Scale) will correlate positively with game playing habits (measured by the Video Game History Questionnaire). H1b: If game playing habits correlate positivity with creativity and negatively with grade point average, then video game playing habits will have an indirect positive relationship with grade point average mediated by trait creativity. Experimental Hypotheses. Through the lens of the General Learning Model the Minecraft conditions should provide participants with learning encounters that benefit creative practice and processes. The NASCAR condition and the T.V. condition should not provide this practice and hence, the Minecraft conditions should perform better in the creativity measures than the non-Minecraft conditions. H2a: If the creative practice in Minecraft can lead to short-term creativity benefits to divergent thinking, then performance on the Alternative Uses Task should be higher in the Minecraft Conditions than in the NASCAR and T.V. conditions. H2b: If the creative practice in Minecraft can lead to short-term creativity benefits to convergent thinking, then performance on the Remote Association Test should be higher in the Minecraft Conditions than in the NASCAR and T.V. conditions.