Abstract

In the presented work, a shift of perspective with respect to the dimensionality of divergent thinking (DT) tasks is introduced moving from the question of multidimensionality across DT scores (i.e., fluency, flexibility, or originality) to the question of multidimensionality within one holistic score of DT performance (i.e., snapshot ratings of creative quality). We apply IRTree models to test whether unidimensionality assumptions hold in different task instructions for snapshot scoring of DT tests across Likert-scale points and varying levels of fluency. It was found that evidence for unidimensionality across scale points was stronger with be-creative instructions as compared to be-fluent instructions which suggests better psychometric quality of ratings when be-creative instructions are used. In addition, creative quality latent variables pertaining to low-fluency and high-fluency ideational pools shared around 50% of variance which suggests both strong overlap, and evidence for differentiation. The presented approach allows to further examine the psychometric quality of subjective ratings and to examine new questions with respect to within-item multidimensionality in DT.

Highlights

  • Divergent thinking (DT) tasks are one of the most important proxies of creative thinking (Runco and Acar, 2012)

  • We focus on the dimensionality of creative quality

  • The ability to depart from the most common ideas appeared to be loosely related to the other abilities underlying the response tree. This pattern of results might be a reflection of different underlying strategies that either opt for quantity with the be-fluent instruction – participants are likely to accept low-quality ideas to increase fluency more readily here – or for quality with the be-creative instruction

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Divergent thinking (DT) tasks are one of the most important proxies of creative thinking (Runco and Acar, 2012). They are frequently used in research on the link of intelligence and creativity (e.g., Karwowski et al, 2016) and have been shown to predict creative achievement above intelligence (Kim, 2008). These tasks typically ask participants to come up with either many or creative ideas in order to solve a given problem.

Objectives
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call