The article chosen for this critique paper is The Impact of Physical Exercise on Convergent and Divergent Thinking. The study is based on the theory in which creative thinking is propelled by “bodily movements”. This study is testing creative thinking through convergent and divergent thinking methods. To clarify convergent thinking is the thought processing in which when presented with a standard question, it is the ability to provide a correct answer in its correspondence, with no need for abstract thinking. On the other hand, divergent thinking is the thought process which seeks creative and abstract thinking to uncover possible outcomes out of the norm, hence the term “thinking outside the box”. The researchers in this experiment were aiming to find in convergent thinking the rapidness and accuracy of answers of the participants, and with the divergent thinking as many ideas possible for a single issue.
The study presented in this article is an experimental study. In order to test the theory of whether physical exercise provokes positive results in creative thinking an elaborate and detailed experiment needed to be designed. In the experiment the independent variable is the level of athleticism of the participants in the study. The dependent variable is the performance on the convergent thinking task and the divergent thinking task.
The method behind the research study consisted of ninety-six, native Dutch speakers, of good health. There were 48 females and 48 males, and among them 48 were athletes and the other half were non-athletes. Of the athletic group of participants, the average age was 20.6 with a BMI=22.3, and the non-athletic group of participants with the average age of 20.7 with a BMI=22.2. All the participants participated for either an energy bar and sports drink, or one study credit. The system used to distinguish between what classified the participants as either athletic or non-athletic, was if the participant exercised a minimum of 3 times a week for the past 2 years they were deemed athletic, if the participant exercised 1 time a week or less over the past 2 years they fell under the non-athletic category. All the participants had normal blood pressure, along with no history of drug use or medication. In experiment the method of physical activity for participants was as follows: at rest participants simply sat on a Kettler Cycle with no action, at moderate activity level participants cycled on an average pace of Level 8, and at a high intensity activity level the participants’ cycles were cycling on a high Level 16, at full throttle. Between testing and physical activity heart rate, blood pressure, and moods of participants were measured (Pleasure x Arousal Grid). The first method of testing was for convergent thinking, this task required participants to determine a common link when presented three words (Ex: “time,” “hair,” “stretch”); each session consisted of 10 diverse items. The second method of testing was for divergent thinking, this task required the participants to provide as many possible uses for a total of six household items (“pen,” “towel,” “bottle”); within the three sessions, 1 of these items was completed. The results for this task in specific were determined upon flexibility (in majority), but also could be determined by originality and fluency. The overall flow of the experiment consisted of the following: Group A (testing during exercise) 24 of the athletic participants and non-athletic participants were consented, had their baseline measurements taken, then 6 participants (of each category) were at rest, 6 (of each category) in moderate activity (heart rate and blood pressure tested again), and 6 (of each category) in high intensity activity (heart rate and blood pressure tested again); Group B (testing after exercise) 24 of the athletic participants and non-athletic participants were consented, had their baseline measurements taken, then 6 participants (of each category) were at rest, 6 (of each category) in moderate activity (heart rate and blood pressure tested again), and 6 (of each category) in high intensity activity (heart rate and blood pressure tested again).
After conducting the experiment, researchers found that the non-athletic participants did not benefit from mild physical activity in their performance of creative tasks, but non-athletes did. Researchers believe that the reason for non-athletic paticipants’ negative performance might have been due to an “ego-depletion”, while for the athletic participants their positive performance could have been due to their habits of “automated action-control routines”, or the amount of oxygen flow disabling the possible outcome of “ego-depletion”.