Start Submission Become a Reviewer

Reading: Modes D’Éducation et Créativité Motrice


A- A+
Alt. Display

Research Article

Modes D’Éducation et Créativité Motrice


Renée Vanfraechem-Raway

Laboraloire de I'Effort Univcrsitc Libre dc Bruxelles avenue Paul Heger 28 1050 Bruxelles, BE
X close


[Way of Education and Motor Creativity]


Our purpose has been to study the characteristics of motor creativity. Therefore, we tried to evaluate the influence of the means of physical training upon the motor creativity of 223 girls aged 15 to 18. We selected three typical attitudes in the physical trainers a. non directivity (E57 + E56 groups); b. authority (C53 group); c. lack of coherence (C57 group). After a year of teaching we submitted the pupils to different tests: Motor creativity tests, M.A.S. Taylor, Cornell Index II, P.F. of Rosenzweig, D48 and a sociometric test. The pupils of the E57 + E56 groups reached motor creativity scores significantly higher than the members of the C53 group who were themselves more creative than those of the C57 groups. We also found a correlation between motor creativity and intelligence and between the sociometric status and creativity. Furthermore in the E57 + E56 groups we found a quite high relation between extrapunitivity, ego defense, and high creativity as well as between intropunilivity and low creativity. These variables were probably inhibited in the other groups submitted to a limitative form of authority. But no correlation was found between anxiety or nevrosism and creativity. In order to stimulate motor creativity, it appears to be very important to give the pupils a large choice of different techniques and to allow the group to explore motricity. This will provide the pupils with a greater feeling of security, for when the subject feels more secured, he is able to experiment the different possibilities of his motor vocabulary.

How to Cite: Vanfraechem-Raway, R., 1975. Modes D’Éducation et Créativité Motrice. Psychologica Belgica, 15(2), pp.137–146. DOI:
Published on 01 Jan 1975.
Peer Reviewed


  • PDF (EN)

    comments powered by Disqus