This article was downloaded by: [Central University of Rajasthan]

On: 18 August 2015, At: 07:23

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG

International Journal of Mathematical

Education in Science and Technology
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tmes20

Is there a causal relation between

mathematical creativity and
mathematical problem-solving
performance?
a
Tarun Kumar Tyagi
a
Department of Education, Faculty of Education, Banaras Hindu
University, Varanasi, India
Published online: 18 Aug 2015.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Tarun Kumar Tyagi (2015): Is there a causal relation between mathematical
creativity and mathematical problem-solving performance?, International Journal of Mathematical
Education in Science and Technology, DOI: 10.1080/0020739X.2015.1075612

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1075612

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [Central University of Rajasthan] at 07:23 18 August 2015
 International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1075612

Is there a causal relation between mathematical creativity and

mathematical problem-solving performance?
Tarun Kumar Tyagi∗

Department of Education, Faculty of Education, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India

(Received 18 March 2015)
Downloaded by [Central University of Rajasthan] at 07:23 18 August 2015

The relationship between mathematical creativity (MC) and mathematical problem-

solving performance (MP) has often been studied but the causal relation between these
two constructs has yet to be clearly reported. The main purpose of this study was to
define the causal relationship between MC and MP. Data from a representative sample of
480 eighth-grade students were analysed using a cross-lagged panel correlation (CLPC)
design. CLPC attempts to rule out plausible alternative explanation of a causal effect.
The result suggests that significant predominant causal relationship was found between
MC and MP. It indicates that MP was found to be a cause of MC than the converse.
Keywords: mathematical creativity; mathematical problem-solving performance;
cross-lagged panel correlation

1. Introduction
Creativity in the creation of proofs is a fundamental part of mathematics. Mathematical
creativity (MC) is based upon individual’s experiences of the mathematics context. Ervynck
[1] writes ‘. . .It also plays a part in the formulation of the final edifice of mathematics as a
deductive system with clearly defined axioms and formally constructed proofs. It is an es-
sential factor in research mathematics when new ideas are formulated in manner previously
known to the mathematics community’. Mathematicians like Euclid, Archimedes, Gauss,
Arya Bhatt, Srinivas Ramanujan and others contributed high creative work in the field of
mathematics and they have used problem-solving approach to solve difficult problems of
mathematics. Norman Cousins writes ‘The message from the moon. . . is that no problem
need any longer be considered insoluble’. Halmos [2] states that problem solving is the
heart of mathematics. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) stan-
dards state that reasoning and problem solving are key components of mathematics, which
in many ways are supported by Freudenthal,[3] who claims that mathematics is an activity
of discovering and organizing of content and forms. In the development of MC, algorithms
need to be supplemented with the problem-solving activities and deductive proofs. A lim-
ited focus on algorithms and use of routine types of teaching–learning strategies can limit
the student’s MC.
The recent upsurge in the research conducted on problem-solving performance in
mathematics stems from the apparent belief that children’s feelings about themselves are
the key factors in problem-solving performance which helps in the development of MC.
Mathematical problem-solving performance (MP) appears, to a certain extent, to be as

∗
Email: taruntyagiugc@gmail.com


C 2015 Taylor & Francis
 2 T.K. Tyagi

complex and subtle as to defy description and analysis. It needs creativity. Creativity
workers [4,5] argued that good problem solvers are creative workers and found significant
relationship between problem-solving performance and creativity. Creative problem solvers
are the history-making talents in any area of human endeavour. Every nation needs creative
leaders, scientists, doctors, engineers, etc., who can solve problems creatively and help
to push forward the frontier of knowledge. Many important questions about facilitating
conditions cannot be answered without proper knowledge of the causal relationship between
MC and problem-solving performance in mathematics. The causal relationship between
these two constructs has yet to be clearly defined.
There have been several recent research works conducted on MC with mathematical
ability,[6] with mathematical achievement [7] and with problem-solving performance in
mathematics.[8,9] Kattou et al. [6] found the significant relationship between MC and math-
Downloaded by [Central University of Rajasthan] at 07:23 18 August 2015

ematical ability and concluded that MC is the subcomponent of mathematical ability. Bahar
and Maker [7] found significant relationship between MC and mathematical achievement.
Somashekhar [9] and Singh [8] found significant relationship between MC and MP. Singh
[10] found no significant relationship between MC and mathematical achievement and also
indicates that mathematical achievement which is usually based on the convergent type of
thinking is not predicted better by MC. Akpan [11] reported that the student’s attributional
factors, i.e. motivation, creativity and attitude towards mathematics have no direct impact
on their ability to solve problems in mathematics, and students’ cognitive abilities have
direct causal impact on their ability to solve problems in mathematics rather than affective
factors. Singh [8] reported that MC does not contribute significantly in the development
of MP. Similar result was also found by Somashekhar.[9] In contrast, Kichi [12] reported
that problem solving in mathematics is the only way to develop MC among children and
adults. Lowrie [13] concluded that the students who effectively used high proportion of
visual methods to solve problems were more likely to perform better on the mathematical
problem solving and numeracy tests than students who choose to employ a high proportion
of non-visual approaches. Aslan [14] found significant relationship between type of creative
thinking skills and the approaches for problem solving.
Some investigators used simple correlation design to show relationship between MC
and problem-solving performance in mathematics.[8,9] Assuming that correlation implies
causation is a well-known error in such methodological design, and the employ of ‘t’
test or simple analysis of variance (ANOVA) is not better statistics tests to show causal
relationship between these two constructs. Since neither the MC nor MP was manipulated
and any significant effect in such condition is not a guarantee to show cause and effect
relationship. Simple product moment correlation or ANOVA, do not offers any information
about the direction of possible causation between MC and problem-solving performance in
mathematics.
However, several research studies specifically designed to capture causality [15–21]
between two constructs have been conducted. Kenny [22] suggested the use of cross-lagged
panel analysis (CLPA) to classify the cause and effect relationship between two variables.
Cross-lagged panel correlation (CLPC) is a quasi-experimental design that indicates
casual relation between variables measure at two or more point in time simultaneously. This
technique holds promise especially in situations, where manipulation of variables is either
not possible or likely to result in low external validity of findings.[22] The purpose of this
study is to determine if MC and MP are causally related, and if so, what the direction of
causation is. Methodology specifically designed for this purpose i.e., CLPA was used to
analyse the data.
 International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 3

2. Method
2.1. Participants
Four hundred and eighty participants (83 urban male + 107 urban female + 118 rural male
and 172 rural female) of eighth standard were selected through random cluster technique
from nine intermediate and high schools located in Varanasi region, India.

2.2. Instruments
MC was measured by using an instrument developed by Singh.[23] The items on the test
encourage the students to freely play with the numbers and figures. Pattern in mathematics,
new relationship test activity, nine dot areas, subsets and similarities – these five types
Downloaded by [Central University of Rajasthan] at 07:23 18 August 2015

of activities have been included in the test. The task pertaining to fluency, flexibility and
originality (verbal and non-verbal) have been used in the construction of MC test. There
were eight items related to creativity in mathematics in the instrument with the open range
of possible test scores. Test–retest reliability of the test was found to be 0.81. The item
correlations range from 0.25 to 0.68. The correlations of the total activity scores with grand
total for the urban sample range from 0.63 to 0.84 and for the rural sample correlations
range from 0.49 to 0.78. It indicates that MC test possesses internal validity. The raw scores
of each dimension i.e., fluency, flexibility and originality were converted into ‘T’ scores
with a Mean = 50 and SD = 10. The ‘T’ scores of each dimension were added then to get
the composite scores of MC score of each student.
To measure problem-solving performance in mathematics, the investigator used math-
ematical problem-solving test developed by Singh.[8] Part I consists of eight mathematical
problems which are not based on contents but related with the use of mathematical con-
cepts in solving real life situations. These problems emphasize more on precise, analysis
and application of mathematical learning competencies for obtaining solutions. The time
required to complete part I is 30 minutes. Part II consists of seven problems. Out of these
four problems, one is of puzzle type and the remaining three are of situational problems. It
covers all the three branches of mathematics namely - Arithmetic, Algebra and Geometry.
The test–retest reliability of the test was reported 0.70. It indicates moderate consistency
of the test. Item validity of mathematical problem-solving test is also significant.

2.3. Procedure
The data were collected in two phases which were termed as time-1 and time-2. There
was lag of four months between two successive phases. In the first phase, there were 850
students. In the second, some students left and new joined. In this way, only 480 students
were found common in both the phases. Therefore, the data on the sample of 480 students
were analysed to calculate the results.

2.4. Design and analysis

A CLPC was used to analyse the data on 480 subjects. Although not without its critics,(e.g.,
[24]) it has been used effectively in education research (e.g., [16,20,22]). As indication
from CLPC, the rudiments of this analysis necessitates at least two variables (here MC and
MP) were measured simultaneously at two phases in time T1 and T2 with a difference of
four months between two successive phases.
 4 T.K. Tyagi
Downloaded by [Central University of Rajasthan] at 07:23 18 August 2015

Figure 1. Cross-lagged panel correlation paradigm (X and Y are variables and 1 and 2 are time).

In Figure 1, two variables X (MP) and Y (MC) and two lags (time-1 and time-2) generate
four variables (X1 , X2 , Y1 and Y2 ), and the four variables generate six correlations: two
autocorrelations (rX1 X2 , rY1 Y2 ), two synchronous correlations (rX1 Y1 , rX2 Y2 ), and two cross-
lagged correlations (rX1 Y2 , rY1 X2 ). The CLPC is a method for testing spurious relationships
by comparing the cross-lagged differential: rX1 Y2 minus rY1 X2 (rX1 Y2 − rY1 X2 ). It is clear
that the attribution of causal predominance in CLPC is based on the difference between
cross-lagged correlations (rX1 Y2 ∼ rY1 X2 ). Campbell [25] suggested if the data indicate a
2w2v (two wave two variable) panel, the cross-lagged differential is positive, concluding
the causal predominance to be that of X causing Y, and if the cross-lagged differential
is negative, concluding causal predominance to be that of Y causing X. No difference in
the cross-lags (the null hypothesis) suggests that the correlation between the variables is
spurious.
The null hypothesis of CLPC is that the two variables are not causally related but seem to
be affected by some other set of common causes of ‘third variables’.[26] In order to interpret
the results of cross-lagged analysis, two assumptions need to be satisfied: synchronicity
and stationarity.[22,27] Synchronicity means that the variables involved are measured at the
same point in time, a condition which is satisfied in this study. It means that the measures
involved attributes to manifestation at that point in time and not aggregated over some time
prior to measurement. Stationarity, tested by comparing the synchronous correlations means
that there is no change over time in the strength, direction or composition of the causes
of a variable or causal structure of the variables does not change over time. No significant
difference between the synchronous correlations indicates that variables are stationary. If
quasi-stationarity exists, the test for cross-lagged correlations could be conducted by using
the Pearson–Filon (PF) test for dependent correlations.

3. Results
Figure 2 presents the coefficients of correlation among the four variables in standard CLPC
model. Significant and high autocorrelations were found between MP at time-1 and MP at
time-2 (rMP1 MP2 = 0.70), and between MC at time-1 and MC at time-2 (rMC1 MC2 = 0.76).
It indicates that both the variables appear to be more stable over time. In order to test the
hypotheses in a cross-lagged panel correlational study, tests for stationarity and spuriousness
must be examined. The equality of the synchronous correlation is tested to satisfy the
 International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 5
Downloaded by [Central University of Rajasthan] at 07:23 18 August 2015

Figure 2. Correction in synchronous and cross-lagged correlation at time-1 and time-2, z = 2.99
(p< 0.01) significant at 0.01 level of significance, all the correlations are significant at .01 level with
df = 478.

stationarity stipulation, and the equality of the cross-lags is tested to satisfy the spurious
stipulation.[17]
The data, therefore, appear not to satisfy the assumption of perfect stationarity. As
unequal synchronous correlations have been found between MP and MC (rMP1 MC1 = 0.61,
and rMP2 MC2 = 0.71). The synchronous and cross-lagged correlations must be corrected
for changes in the reliability of the measures. Reliability ratios have been used to correct
the synchronous and cross-lagged correlations. The values in parentheses are the corrected
correlations. Quasi-stationarity exists, a demonstrated by the equality of the synchronous
correlation after correction procedure (rMC1 MP1 , rMC2 MP2 = 0.65). The uncorrected cross-
lagged correlations appear to show causal direction between MC and MP rMP1 MC2 = 0.67
and rMC1 MP2 = 0.63.
As can be seen from the Table 1 that obtained cross-lagged correlations between MP
at time-1 and MC at time-2 (rMP1 MC2 = 0.69) were found to be significantly higher than
those of MC time-1 and MP at time-2 (rMC1 MP2 = 0.60). The obtained PF z value (2.99)
of the difference between rMP1 MC2 and rMC1 MP2 was found to be significant at .01 level of
confidence with df = 478.

Table 1. Corrected cross-lagged correlations between mathematical creativity (MC) and mathe-
matical problem-solving performance (MP) at time-1 to time-2 (N = 480).

Coefficient of correlations

Cross-lagged Stability Synchronous Pearson–Filon

Relationship rMP1 MC2 rMC1 MP2 rMC1 MC2 rMP1 MP2 rMC1 MP1 rMC2 MP2 z value p

Mathematical 0.69 0.60 0.76 0.70 0.65 0.65 2.99 < 0.01
creativity
(MC)
Mathematical
problem-
solving
performance
(MP)

Note: z is based on Pearson–Filon. If z ≥ 2.58, significant difference in cross-lagged correlations at 0.01 level.
 6 T.K. Tyagi

Thus, the null hypothesis that the correlation between MC and MP is spurious can be
rejected, and the structural equations remain constant over time. Hence the relationship
between MC and MP was not found to be spurious. The unequal corrected cross-lags
indicate the asymmetric relation between them. Hence, it is concluded that MP was found
to be a stronger cause of MC than the converse.

4. Discussion
This study involved a tentative attempt to ferret out and focus upon the presence of causal
relation between MC and MP. The study attempted to determine the direction of the relation
through use of a cross-lagged panel correlational technique. In the past, some research
studies had been conducted to examine the relationship between MC and MP, but few have
Downloaded by [Central University of Rajasthan] at 07:23 18 August 2015

come near the magnitude of this sample size, and some studies reported low relationship
between these two constructs.[8,9] The results suggest that there is a significant difference
between the cross-lagged correlations of MC and MP at time 1 and 2. It indicates that MP is
the cause of MC than the converse. The results of this study corroborate to some extent the
results obtained earlier by Pehkonen,[28] Silver,[29] and Khichhi.[12]Without appraisal of
MC and mathematical problem-solving ability in learner, parents and teachers should not
emphasize on them to opt out mathematics as a subject at senior secondary or higher level.
Good problem solvers are also creative persons who have moderate anxiety and high degree
of interest in solving the mathematical problems. Hence, problem solving in mathematics
secures a prominent position in mathematics learning. MC and MP, both are commonly
identified as important areas for the students’ growth in the school curriculum. Future
research on this topic might consider other variables such as mathematical intelligence,
self-concept in mathematics and mathematical aptitude that may have a role to play in
any such causal relationship. Past and present studies have not addressed these concerns
in details. In future, cross-lag relations may be tested with different time periods (three
or four lags) between measurements. It may be that shorter or longer time gaps between
two measurements may lead high or low cross-lagged relationships. Future longitudinal
and laboratory experiments should be conducted to explicitly investigate the relationship
between MC and MP. Experimental research of an extended longitudinal nature should be
conducted considering MP as an independent variable, and MC as the dependent variable.

Acknowledgements
Special thanks to Dr Bhoodev Singh Professor, Faculty of Education, Banaras Hindu University,
Varanasi, India for valuable guidance and suggestions.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

References
[1] Ervynck G. Mathematical creativity. In: Tall D, editor. Advanced mathematical thinking.
Dordrecht: Kluwer; 1991. p. 42–53.
[2] Halmos P. The heart of mathematics. Am Math Mon. 1980;87(7):519–524.
[3] Freudenthal H. Revisiting mathematics education: China lectures. Boston, MA: Kluwer Aca-
demic Publishers; 2002.
[4] Parnes SJ. Creative behavior guidebook. New York, NY: Scribners; 1967.
 International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 7

[5] Torrance EP. Educational achievement of the highly intelligent and the highly creative: eight
partial replications of the Getzels-Jackson study. Minneapolis, MN: Bureau of Educational
Research, University of Minnesota; 1960.
[6] Kattou M, Kontoyianni K, Pitta-Pantazi D, et al. Connecting mathematical creativity to math-
ematical ability. SDM-Int J Math Educ. 2013;45(2):167–181.
[7] Bahar AK, Maker CJ. Exploring the relationship between mathematical creativity and mathe-
matical achievement. Asia-Pacific J Gifted Talented Educ. 2011;3(1):33–48.
[8] Singh VP. Predictive efficiency of intellectual and mathematical creative thinking abilities for
mathematical problem solving students [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. India: Banaras
Hindu University; 1993.
[9] Somashekhar TV. Predictive efficiency of mathematical creativity, test anxiety and interest
for problem solving performance in mathematics of secondary school students [Unpublished
doctoral dissertation]. India: Bangalore University; 1998.
[10] Singh B. A study to examine the relationship between mathematical creativity and achievement
Downloaded by [Central University of Rajasthan] at 07:23 18 August 2015

in mathematics. Lokmanya Shikshak. 1986;10:29–32.

[11] Akpan AA. Path-analysis model of mathematics problem solving for secondary school students.
Indian Educ Rev. 1991;26(2):30–45.
[12] Kichi KS. Problem solving in mathematics. J Indian Educ. 1994;20(1).
[13] Lowrie T. The influence of visual representations on mathematical problem solving and
numeracy performance. In: Bobis J, Perry B, Mitchelmore M, editors. 24th Annual MERGA
Conference. Sydney: MERGA; 2001. p. 354–361.
[14] Aslan AE. A comparison of thinking styles of social sciences and mathematics students through-
out the process of problem solving. Online J Couns Educ. 2012;1(3):1–22.
[15] Ahmed W, Minnaret A, Kuyper H, et al. Reciprocal relationships between math self-concept
and math anxiety. Learn Individual Differences. 2012;22:385–389.
[16] Calsyn RJ. The causal relationship between self-esteem, locus of control, and achievement:
a cross-lagged panel analysis [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Illinois: Northwestern
University; 1973.
[17] Kenny DA. Correlation and causality. New York, NY: Wiley; 1979.
[18] Ma X, Xu J. The causal ordering of mathematics anxiety and mathematics achievement: a
longitudinal panel analysis. J Adolescence. 2004;27:165–179.
[19] Quinn B, Jadav AD. Causal relationship between attitude and achievement for elementary
grade mathematics and reading. J Educ Res. 1987;80(6):366–372.
[20] Verma SR. A cross-lagged panel analysis of scientific creativity, scientific aptitude and career
interest [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. India: University of Awadh; 1994.
[21] Watkins MW, Lei P-W, Canivez GL Psychometric intelligence and achievement: a cross-lagged
panel analysis. Intelligence. 2007;35:59–68.
[22] Kenny DA Cross-lagged panel correlation: a test for spuriousness. Psychological Bull.
1975;82(6):887–903.
[23] Singh B. The development of test to measure mathematical creativity. Int J Math Educ Sci
Technol. 1985;18(2):181–186.
[24] Rogosa D. A critique of cross-lagged correlation. Psychological Bull. 1980;88(2):245–258.
[25] Campbell DT. From description to experimentation: interpreting trends as quasi-experiments.
In: CW Harris, editor. Problems in measuring change. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press;
1963.
[26] Simon HA. Spurious correlation: a causal interpretation. Am Stat Assoc J. 1954;49:467–479.
[27] Kenny D, Harackiewics J. Cross-lagged panel correlation: practice and promise. J Appl Psychol.
1979;64:372–379.
[28] Pehkonen E. The state of art in mathematical creativity. ZDM. 1977;29(3):63–67.
[29] Silver EA. Fostering creativity through instruction rich in mathematical problem-solving and
problem posing. Zentralblattfiir Didaktik der Mathematic. 1997;29(3):75–80.