Several researchers have investigated the effect of extrinsic motivators (e.g. rewards) on creative performance. The learned industriousness theory (e.g. Eisenbeger & Selbst, 1994) state that individuals learn to distinguish which dimensions of behavior are rewarded, and extend more effort to these dimensions when offered a reward. Accordingly, a reward offered for explicitly stated creative behavior should elicit more creative behavior. On the other hand, the intrinsic motivation principle of creativity (Amabile, 1996) state that intrinsic motivation is conducive to creative idea-generation. Being offered an extrinsic motivator for creative performance decreases this intrinsic motivation, and thus should have a detrimental effect on creativity. Amabile (1996) ground her theory on several studies suggesting that a mental state where thought is associative and attention is defocused, is conducive to creative idea-generation (e.g. Martindale, 1999). Amabile (1996) argue that such a mental state (creative potential) is more likely to be found in an intrinsically motivated state, compared to an extrinsically motivated state. The present study assessed whether or not creative potential is a variable mediating the effect of reward on creative performance: For individuals with high creative potential, reward may have a detrimental effect on subsequent creative performance, while for individuals with low creative potential reward may have a facilitative effect on creative performance. A regression analysis found support for this hypothesis. It is argued that the intrinsic motivation principle of creativity can account for the findings regarding the high-participants, while the learned industriousness theory can account for the findings regarding the low-participants.