Abstract
Measures of creativity (complexity-simplicity preferences) and social and political attitudes were obtained from 52 Louisiana university students about a month before the U.S. Senate election. Of interest was the reason for liking or disliking the candidate David Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan and Nazi sympathizer. The creativity measure was significantly related to liking or disliking Duke: liking Duke was associated with preference for simplicity, which suggests low creativity. Although students showed preferences for some of the social and political variables, these variables were not related to attitude toward Duke. Finally, the simple, anonymous measurement procedures used here accurately predicted that Duke would do well in the campaign and receive more than 50% of the white vote. This is in stark contrast with the predictions of political pollsters and experts who seriously underestimated his strength.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper & Row.
Attneave, F., & Arnoult, M. D. (1956). Methodological considerations in the quantitative study of shape and pattern perception. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 452–471.
Barron, F. (1990). Creativity and psychological health: Origins of personal vitality and creative freedom. Buffalo, NY: Creative Education Foundation.
Birkhoff, G. D. (1933). Aesthetic measure. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Eisenman, R. (1968a). Complexity-simplicity and reaction to threatening information. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 32, 638–641.
Eisenman, R. (1968b). Personality and demography in complexity-simplicity. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 32, 140–143.
Eisenman, R. (1990). Creativity, preference for complexity, and physical and mental illness. Creativity Research Journal, 3, 233–238.
Eisenman, R. (1991). From crime to creativity: Psychological and social factors in deviance. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Eisenman, R., Borod, J., & Grossman, J. C. (1972). Sex differences in the interrelationships of authoritarianism, anxiety, creative attitudes, preference for complex polygons, and the Barron-Welsh Art Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 549–550.
Eisenman, R., & Schussel, N. R. (1970). Creativity, birth order, and preference for symmetry. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 34, 275–280.
Freemantle, T. (1990, October 8). Strong finish indicates Duke is future force. Houston Chronicle, pp. 1A, 6A.
Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Jones, E. E., Farina, A., Hastorf, A. H., Markus, H., Miller, D. T., & Scott, R. A. (1984). Social stigma: The psychology of marked relationships. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Many turning to Duke out of frustration, pollster says. (1991, March 27). Lake Charles American Press, p. 10.
Newspaper ad labels Duke “an antichrist.” (1991, March 30). Lake Charles American Press, p. 3.
Roemer, Edwards leading, but Duke looks like wild card. (1991, March 27). Lake Charles American Press, p. 10.
Runco, M. A. (Ed.) (in press-a). Divergent thinking. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Runco, M. A. (Ed.) (in press-b). Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Sirgo, H. B., & Eisenman, R. (1990). Perceptions of governmental fairness by liberals and conservatives. Psychological Reports, 67, 1331–1334.
Vanderplas, J. M., & Garvin, E. A. (1959). The association value of random shapes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 147–154.
Victor, H. R., Grossman, J. C., & Eisenman, R. (1973). Openness to experience and marijuana use in high school students. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 41, 78–85.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Grateful appreciation is expressed to Keith Whitfield for his excellent statistical assistance and advice
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Eisenman, R. Creativity, social and political attitudes, and liking or disliking David Duke. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 30, 19–22 (1992). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330385
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330385