Trait creativity among midwifery students: a cross-sectional study

SUMMARY

OBJECTIVE:

Midwifery services are a cornerstone of maternal care but the trait creativity of midwifery students is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess trait creativity among midwives in Taizhou, China.

METHODS:

A cross-sectional online survey among midwives was conducted from July 20 to August 10, 2022. Trait creativity was assessed using the Williams Creativity Assessment Packet.

RESULTS:

A total of 300 survey respondents were studied. The mean scores for the imagination dimension (p=0.032) and the risk-taking dimension (p=0.049) differed across major groups. We further compared the scores of trait creativity dimensions after excluding male participants. Midwifery students only scored lower on the specific imagination dimension (p=0.024).

CONCLUSION:

The imagination level of midwifery students certainly deserves further attention. Education workers should pay more attention to the imagination of midwifery students.

KEYWORDS:
Creativity; China; Imagination; Midwifery

INTRODUCTION

Globally, maternal mortality has declined by 47% (from 400 to 210 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births) over the last two decades (1990–2010), but considerably greater progress will be needed to reach Millennium Development Goal 5¹. The availability of midwifery services has been identified as a cornerstone of quality maternal care. The provision of midwifery services was shown to have a positive effect on several outcomes of maternal care, including reductions in maternal and neonatal mortality, improved psychosocial outcomes, reductions in infections, and a shorter hospital stay for newborns². Standardized and high-quality midwifery education is the guarantee to improve the level of midwifery services³.

A widely accepted definition for creativity is a person's ability to generate an idea or a product that is deemed as both novel and appropriate by experts in a field of human activities⁴. Trait creativity has a positive impact on creative thinking and creative problem-solving⁵. As we know, numerous outstanding creators like Albert Einstein always possess a great creative potential that makes them unique and acquires more creative achievements. One study demonstrated that having some college research experience (such as taking research method courses) could positively influence the creativity and critical thinking skills of both the United States and Chinese students⁶. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to report trait creativity for midwifery students in China.

The aims of this study were (1) to assess the score of trait creativity (i.e., imagination, challenging, risk-taking, and curiosity) among midwives based on an online survey at Taizhou University, China and (2) to compare the scores of trait creativity (i.e., imagination, challenging, risk-taking, and curiosity) among different majors.

METHODS

Study design and data collection

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among midwifery students from July 20 to August 10, 2022. The survey collected data on the subjects’ major, age, gender, grade, and parents’ education level. To assess creativity, the Williams Creativity Assessment Packet scale was included in the online survey. Participation was voluntary, anonymous, and possible from July 20 to August 10, 2022⁷.

Trait creativity

The Williams Creativity Assessment Packet (Chinese version⁸) consists of four dimensions: curiosity consists of items 2, 8, 11, 12R, 19, 27, 33, 34, 37, 38, 39, 47, 48R, and 49 (inclination to explore or play with an idea); challenging consists of items 3, 4R, 7, 9R, 10, 15, 17R, 18, 26, 41, 42, and 50 (tend to look for new alternatives and ways to solve problems, restoring order from chaos); risk-taking consists of items 1, 5, 21, 24, 25, 28, 29R, 35R, 36, 43, and 44 (the tendency to act and defend one's ideas in disorganized conditions); and imagination consists of items 6, 13, 14, 16, 20, 22, 23, 30, 31, 32, 40, 45R, and 46 (tend to imagine and construct mental images or feel intuitively)⁹,¹⁰ “R” denotes reverse-scored items, and reverse questions were used for reverse scoring. Questions are answered on a three-point Likert scale. Participants indicated their choices on this scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 3 (strongly agree). In this study, Cronbach's α value was 0.88, KMO value was 0.85, and Bartlett's test p=0.000 value was evident.

Data analysis

The analyzed study sample was generated by excluding surveys with missing values for the study variables. For each creativity dimension, a creativity score was derived from the individual creativity questions. The internal reliability of the creativity scores was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. The characteristics of midwives were analyzed by descriptive statistical analysis. Pearson's chi-square tests were used to assess the differences in categorical variables. One-way analysis of variance was used to assess the differences in imagination, challenging, risk-taking, and curiosity between males and females and among different majors. LSD (least significant difference) post-hoc tests were performed to evaluate post-hoc pairwise comparisons. The statistical significance level was p<0.05. All analyses were conducted using SPSSAU (Version 22.0) [Online Application Software] (https://www.spssau.com).

RESULTS

Of the 300 surveys submitted, 108 were conducted on midwives who practiced midwifery in the year before the study. The age ranged from 18 to 22 years. More than half of the subjects in the study sample were female (82.67%) and in sophomore year (43.33). Most of the subjects (36%) majored in midwifery. Over half (70.33%) of the mother's education of the subjects was junior high school and below. Over half (61%) of the father's education of the subjects was junior high school and below. The family's year income per capita (CNY) varied from >1,000,001 RMB (1%) to 80,001–150,000 CNY (32%) (see Table 1).

Table 1
Characteristics of subjects participating in a survey of trait creativity in Taizhou, China, 2022 (n=300).

Items	Categories	n	Percent (%)
Gender	Male	52	17.33
	Female	248	82.67
Grade	Freshman year	82	27.33
	Sophomore year	130	43.33
	Sophomore year	65	21.67
	Senior year	23	7.67
Major	Clinical medicine	87	29
	Nursing	105	35
	Midwifery	108	36
Family's year income per capita (CNY)	0–30,000	46	15.33
	30,001–80,000	75	25
	80,001–150,000	96	32
	150,001–300,000	63	21
	300,001–1,000,000	17	5.67
	1,000,001	3	1
Mother's education level	Junior high school and below	211	70.33
	High school or secondary school	66	22
	College degree or above	23	7.67
Father's education level	Junior high school and below	183	61
	High school or secondary school	87	29
	College degree or above	30	10

The scores of trait creativity dimensions

The mean scores for imagination dimension (p=0.032) and risk-taking dimension (p=0.049) differed across major groups (Figure 1A). However, the mean score for challenging dimension (p=0.58) and curiosity dimension (p=0.17) was not statistically significant among the three major groups (Figure 1B).

Figure 1
Comparison of the scores of imagination, challenging, risk-taking, and curiosity. (A) Including the male students. (B) Excluding the male students.

To rule out a direct effect of gender on creativity, we compared gender differences in trait creativity (i.e., imagination, risk-taking, challenging, and curiosity) among major groups. The results revealed that there are statistically significant differences between groups in risk-taking dimension (Table 2), except for the following three dimensions: imagination, challenging, and curiosity. We further compared the scores of trait creativity dimensions after excluding male participants. Midwifery students only scored lower on the specific imagination dimension (p=0.024).

Table 2
Comparison of the scores of imagination, challenging, risk-taking, and curiosity between males and females.

	Gender (mean±std. deviation)		F	p
	Male (n=52)	Female (n=248)
Imagination	26.68±3.73	25.57±3.91	3.562	0.06
Challenging	28.16±3.56	27.51±3.07	1.867	0.173
Risk-taking	24.86±3.00	23.59±2.62	9.477	0.002**
Curiosity	33.27±5.40	32.21±4.48	2.249	0.135

• ^**
  p<0.01.

DISCUSSION

Based on the data from a cross-sectional online survey, we studied the level of trait creativity among midwifery students in China. Our study found that the mean scores for imagination and risk-taking dimensions differed across major groups.

The imagination and risk-taking dimensions of trait creativity were lower in the major of midwifery than in the major of clinical medicine and nursing. At present, there is little literature on the creativity of midwifery students. Future studies should further expand the sample size to confirm our findings and explore the influencing factors of the low creative ability of midwifery students. This is helpful to education-related workers to further improve the cultivation of students’ creative abilities.

Since gender is one of the most important factors affecting the research conclusion, the proportion of male midwifery students was small in this study. To exclude the influence of gender on the experimental results, we further analyzed the data after excluding all male students. The results revealed that midwifery students only scored lower on the specific imagination dimension. In conclusion, the creativity of midwifery students, especially the imagination dimension, deserves attention in future research.

Limitations

This study is subject to limitations. First, the survey was promoted through an online questionnaire survey (https://www.wjx.cn). Participating students may have considered that this study can be used to underscore midwifery, which could have biased the given answers. Second, all students in our sample studied in Taizhou of Zhejiang Province (China). This might limit the validity of our findings to other provinces in China. Third, we collected data from a convenience sample of subjects, which may have introduced a selection bias to our study. Finally, we used a cross-sectional study design, which does not allow the inference of causal relationships.

CONCLUSION

This cross-sectional study assessed trait creativity among midwifery students in China. Using the Williams Creativity Assessment Packet, we found that the mean scores for imagination and risk-taking dimensions differed across major groups and the mean score for challenging and curiosity dimensions was not statistically significant among the three major groups. The imagination level of midwifery students certainly deserves further attention. Education workers should pay more attention on the imagination of midwifery students.

• Funding: The research was supported by 2022 Taizhou University Higher Education Teaching Reform Project (No.105 and No.114) and the Taizhou University Cultivation Project (Grant No. 2019py045).

REFERENCES

• ¹
  McConville F, Lavender DT. Quality of care and midwifery services to meet the needs of women and newborns. BJOG. 2014;121(Suppl. 4):8-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.12799
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.12799
• ²
  Situmorang HE, Sweet L, Graham K, Grant J. Health care provider's perceptions of factors that influence infant mortality in Papua Indonesia: a qualitative study. Women Birth. 2022;35(2):201-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2021.04.007
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2021.04.007
• ³
  Sogukpinar N, Saydam BK, Bozkurt OD, Ozturk H, Pelik A. Past and present midwifery education in Turkey. Midwifery. 2007;23(4):433-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2007.01.011
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2007.01.011
• ⁴
  Corazza GE, Lubart T. Intelligence and creativity: mapping constructs on the space-time continuum. J Intell. 2020;9(1):1. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence9010001
  » https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence9010001
• ⁵
  He L, Mao Y, Sun J, Zhuang K, Zhu X, Qiu J, et al. Examining brain structures associated with emotional intelligence and the mediated effect on trait creativity in young adults. Front Psychol. 2018;9:925. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00925
  » https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00925
• ⁶
  Park JH, Niu W, Cheng L, Allen H. Fostering creativity and critical thinking in college: a cross-cultural investigation. Front Psychol. 2021;12:760351. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.760351
  » https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.760351
• ⁷
  Li CP, Liu XH, Wang XJ, He LP. Trait creativity, personality, and physical activity: a structural equation model. Ann Palliat Med. 2023;12(1):141-9. https://doi.org/10.21037/apm-22-1310
  » https://doi.org/10.21037/apm-22-1310
• ⁸
  Lin X, Wang M. Williams creativity assessment packet (in Chinese). Taipei City: Psychology Press; 1997.
• ⁹
  Gostoli S, Cerini V, Piolanti A, Rafanelli C. Creativity, bipolar disorder vulnerability and psychological well-being: a preliminary study. Creat Res J. 2017;29(1):63-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2017.1263511
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2017.1263511
• ¹⁰
  Sica LS, Ragozini G, Palma T, Aleni Sestito L. Creativity as identity skill? Late adolescents’ management of identity, complexity and risk-taking. J Creat Behav. 2019;53(4):457-71. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.221
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.221

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  14 Apr 2023
• Date of issue
  2023

History

• Received
  10 Oct 2022
• Accepted
  21 Jan 2023