1. bookVolume 4 (2017): Issue 2 (December 2017)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2354-0036
First Published
16 Apr 2015
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Methodological Issues in Measuring Creativity: A Systematic Literature Review

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Volume & Issue: Volume 4 (2017) - Issue 2 (December 2017)
Page range: 276 - 301
Received: 08 Sep 2017
Accepted: 07 Dec 2017
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2354-0036
First Published
16 Apr 2015
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

The growing body of creativity research has raised several challenging issues with regard to the measurement of this construct. This paper aims to provide a review of current challenging methodological issues related to measuring creativity. Five methodological issues are discussed: selecting measurement instruments, sampling, testing conditions, psychometric properties and domain-generality/specificity of creativity. This paper reveals that there remain a number of unresolved issues and serious questions surrounding the measurement of creativity. Research gaps and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Keywords

*Adams, J. C. (1968). The relative effects of various testing atmospheres on spontaneous flexibility: A factor of divergent thinking. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 2, 187-194.10.1002/j.2162-6057.1968.tb00101.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997-1013.10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997Search in Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357-376.10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357Search in Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In B. M.Search in Google Scholar

Staw, & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 123-167). Greenwish, CT: JAI Press.Search in Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1996). Evidence to support the componential model of creativity: Secondary analyses of three studies. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 385-389.10.1207/s15326934crj0904_9Search in Google Scholar

*Ambrose, L., & Machek, G. R. (2015). Identifying creatively gifted students: Necessity of a multi-method approach. Contemporary School Psychology, 19, 121-127. doi: 10.1007/s40688-014-0020-zSearch in Google Scholar

*Ayas, M. B., & Sak, U. (2014). Objective measure of scientific creativity: Psychometric validity of the creative scientific ability test. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 13, 195-205. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2014.06.001Search in Google Scholar

*Bachelor, P. (1989). Maximum likelihood confirmatory factor-analytic investigation of factors within Guilford's Structure of Intellect model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 797-804.10.1037/0021-9010.74.5.797Search in Google Scholar

*Baer, J. (1991). Generality of creativity across performance domains. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 23-39.10.1080/10400419109534371Search in Google Scholar

*Baer, J. (1994a). Divergent thinking is not a general trait: A multi-domain training experiment. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 35-46.10.1080/10400419409534507Search in Google Scholar

*Baer, J. (1994b). Generality of creativity across performance domains: A replication. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 1217-1218.10.2466/pms.1994.79.3.1217Search in Google Scholar

*Baer, J. (1994c). Performance assessments of creativity: Do they have long-term stability? Roeper Review, 7, 7-11.10.1080/02783199409553609Search in Google Scholar

*Baer, J. (1994d). Why you shouldn't trust creativity tests. Educational Leadership, 51, 80-83.Search in Google Scholar

*Baer, J. (1996). The effects of task-specific divergent-thinking training. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 30, 183-187.10.1002/j.2162-6057.1996.tb00767.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Baer, J. (1998). The case for domain specificity in creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 173-177.10.1207/s15326934crj1102_7Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Baer, J. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 16-29. doi: 10.1002/jocb.002Search in Google Scholar

*Baer, J. (2015). The importance of domain-specific expertise in creativity. Roeper Review, 37, 165-178. doi: 10.1080/02783193.2015.1047480Search in Google Scholar

*Baer, J. (2016). Domain specificity of creativity. San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

*Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The Amusement Park Theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27, 158-163.10.1080/02783190509554310Search in Google Scholar

*Baer, J., & McKool, S. S. (2009). Assessing creativity using the consensual assessment technique. In C. S. Schreiner (Ed.), Handbook of research on assessment technologies, methods, and applications in higher education (pp. 65-77). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Search in Google Scholar

*Barbot, B., Besançon, M., & Lubart, T. I. (2011). Assessing creativity in the classroom. The Open Education Journal, 4, 124-132. doi: 10.2174/1874920801104010058Search in Google Scholar

*Barbot, B., Besançon, M., & Lubart, T. I. (2016). The generality-specificity of creativity: Exploring the structure of creative potential with EPoC. Learning and Individual Differences, 52, 178-187. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.06.005Search in Google Scholar

*Barbot, B., Tan, M., Randi, J., Santa-Donato, G., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2012). Essential skills for creative writing: Integrating multiple domain-specific perspectives. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7, 209-223. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2012.04.006Search in Google Scholar

*Batey, M. (2012). The measurement of creativity: From definitional consensus to the introduction of a new heuristic framework. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 55-65. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2012.649181Search in Google Scholar

Batey, M., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2010). Individual differences in ideational behavior: Can the big five and psychometric intelligence predict creativity scores? Creativity Research Journal, 22, 90-97. doi: 10.1080/10400410903579627Search in Google Scholar

*Batey, M., & Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, intelligence, and personality: A critical review of the scattered literature. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 132, 355-429.Search in Google Scholar

*Beghetto, R. A. (2005). Does assessment kill student creativity? The Educational Forum, 69, 263.10.1080/00131720508984694Search in Google Scholar

*Brougher, S. J., & Rantanen, E. M. (2009). Creativity and design: Creativity’s new definition and its relationship to design. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1, 605-609. doi: 10.1177/154193120905301005Search in Google Scholar

*Busse, T. V., Blum, P. & Gutride, M. (1972). Testing conditions and the measurement preschool children of creative abilities in lower-class. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 7, 287-298.10.1207/s15327906mbr0703_2Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Chand, I., & Runco, M. A. (1993). Problem finding skills as components in the creative process. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 155-162.10.1016/0191-8869(93)90185-6Search in Google Scholar

*Channon, C. E. (1974). The effect of regime on divergent thinking scores. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 44, 89-91.10.1111/j.2044-8279.1974.tb00771.xSearch in Google Scholar

*Chen, C., Himsel, A., Kasof, J., Greenberger, E., & Dmitrieva, J. (2006). Boundless creativity: Evidence for the domain generality of individual differences in creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 40, 179-199.10.1002/j.2162-6057.2006.tb01272.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Chen, C., Kasof, J., Himsel, A., Dmitrieva, J., Dong, Q., & Xue, G. (2005). Effects of explicit instruction to “be creative” across domains and cultures. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 889-1009.Search in Google Scholar

*Chermahini, S. A., Hickendorff, M., & Hommel, B. (2012). Development and validity of a Dutch version of the Remote Associates Task: An item-response theory approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7, 177-186. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2012.02.003Search in Google Scholar

Cheung, P. C., & Lau, S. (2010). Gender differences in the creativity of Hong Kong school children: Comparison by using the new electronic Wallach-Kogan Creativity Tests. Creativity Research Journal, 22, 194- 199. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2010. 481522Search in Google Scholar

*Chua, R. Y., & Iyengar, S. S. (2008). Creativity as a matter of choice: Prior experience and task instruction as boundary conditions for the positive effect of choice on creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 42, 164-180. doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01293.xSearch in Google Scholar

*Clapham, M. M. (1998). Structure of the figural forms A and B of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 275-283.10.1177/0013164498058002010Search in Google Scholar

*Clapham, M. M. (2004). The convergent validity of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking and creativity interest inventories. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 828-841.10.1177/0013164404263883Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Cramond, B., Matthews-Morgan, J., Bandalos, D., & Zuo, L. (2005). A report on the 40- year follow-up of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Alive and well in the new millennium. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 283-291.10.1177/001698620504900402Search in Google Scholar

*Cropley, A. J. (1972). Originality scores under timed and untimed conditions. Australian Journal of Psychology, 24, 31-36.10.1080/00049537208255782Search in Google Scholar

*Cropley, A. J. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth using? Roeper Review, 23, 72-79.10.1080/02783190009554069Search in Google Scholar

*Dansky, J. L., & Silverman, I. W. (1973). Effects of play on associative fluency in preschool- aged children. Developmental Psychology, 9, 38-43. 10.1037/h0035076Search in Google Scholar

Darvishi, Z., & Pakdaman, S. (2012). Fourth grade slump in creativity: Development of creativity in primary school children. GSTF International Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 1, 40-48.Search in Google Scholar

*Davis, G. A., & Belcher, T. L. (1971). How shall creativity be measured? Torrance Tests, RAT, Alpha Biographical, and IQ. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 5, 153-161.10.1002/j.2162-6057.1971.tb00885.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Dentler, R. A., & Mackler, B. (1964). Originality: Some social and personal determinants. Behavioral Science, 9, 1-7.10.1002/bs.3830090102Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Dewing, K. (1970). The reliability and validity of selected tests of creative thinking in a sample of seventh-grade West Australian children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 40, 35-42.10.1111/j.2044-8279.1970.tb02096.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Diakidoy, I. N., & Spanoudis, G. (2002). Domain specificity in creativity testing: A comparison of performance on a general divergent-thinking test and a parallel, content- specific test. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 36, 41-61.10.1002/j.2162-6057.2002.tb01055.xSearch in Google Scholar

*Dollinger, S. J., Burke, P. A., & Gump, N. W. (2007). Creativity and values. Creativity Research Journal, 19, 91-103.10.1080/10400410701395028Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Domino, G. (1994). Assessment of creativity with the ACL: An empirical comparison of four scales. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 21-33.10.1080/10400419409534506Search in Google Scholar

*Dow, G. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2004). Teaching students to solve insight problems: Evidence for domain specificity in creativity training. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 389-398.10.1080/10400410409534550Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Drwal, R. L. (1973). The influence of psychological stress upon creative thinking. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 4, 125-129.Search in Google Scholar

Dziedziewicz, D., Gajda, A., & Karwowski, M. (2014). Developing children’s intercultural competence and creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 13, 32-42. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.006Search in Google Scholar

*Feldhusen, J. F., & Goh, B. E. (1995). Assessing and accessing creativity: An integrative review of theory, research, and development. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 231-247.10.1207/s15326934crj0803_3Search in Google Scholar

*Fishkin, A. S., & Johnson, A. S. (1998). Who is creative? Identifying children’s creative abilities. Roeper Review, 21(1), 40-46. doi: 10.1080/02783199809553925Search in Google Scholar

*Gajda, A., Karwowski, M., & Beghetto, R. A. (2016). Creativity and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology. Advance online publication. doi. 10.1037/edu000013310.1037/edu0000133Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*González, M. A., Campos, A., & Pérez, M. J. (1997). Mental imagery and creative thinking. The Journal of Psychology, 131, 357-364.10.1080/00223989709603521Search in Google Scholar

*Han, K. (2003). Domain-specificity of creativity in young children: How quantitative and qualitative data support it. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 37, 117-142.10.1002/j.2162-6057.2003.tb00829.xSearch in Google Scholar

*Han, K., & Marvin, C. (2002). Multiple creativities? Investigating domain-specificity of creativity in young children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 98-109.10.1177/001698620204600203Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Harrington, D. (1975). Effects of explicit instructions to "be creative" on the psychological meaning of divergent thinking test scores. Journal of Personality, 43, 434-454.10.1111/j.1467-6494.1975.tb00715.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Harrington, D. M., Block, J., & Block, J. H. (1983). Predicting creativity in preadolescence from divergent thinking in early childhood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 609-623.10.1037/0022-3514.45.3.609Search in Google Scholar

*Hattie, J. A. (1977). Conditions for administering creativity tests. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 1249-1260.10.1037/0033-2909.84.6.1249Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Hattie, J. A. (1980). Should creativity tests be administered under test-like conditions? An empirical study of three alternative conditions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 87-98.10.1037/0022-0663.72.1.87Search in Google Scholar

*Heausler, N. L., & Thompson, B. (1988). Structure of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48, 463-468.10.1177/0013164488482021Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569-598. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100416Search in Google Scholar

*Hocevar, D. (1976). Dimensionality of creativity. Psychological Reports, 39 (3), 869-870.10.2466/pr0.1976.39.3.869Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Hocevar, D. (1979). The unidimensional nature of creative thinking in fifth grade children. Child Study Journal, 9, 273-278.Search in Google Scholar

*Hocevar, D. (1981). Measurement of creativity: Review and critique. Journal of Personality Assessment, 45, 450-464.10.1207/s15327752jpa4505_1Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Hocevar, D., & Bachelor, P. (1989). A taxonomy and critique of measurements used in the study of creativity. In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 53-75). New York: Plenum Press.Search in Google Scholar

*Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2010). Creative thinking ability: Domain generality and specificity. Creativity Research Journal, 22, 272-287. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2010. 503535Search in Google Scholar

*Hong, E., Milgram, R. M., & Gorsky, H. (1995). Original thinking as a predictor of creative performance in young children. Roeper Review, 18, 147-149.10.1080/02783199509553720Search in Google Scholar

*Horn, D., & Salvendy, G. (2006). Consumer-based assessment of product creativity: A review and reappraisal. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 16, 155-175.Search in Google Scholar

*Howieson, N. (1981). A longitudinal study of creativity: 1965-1975. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 15, 117-134.10.1002/j.2162-6057.1981.tb00284.xSearch in Google Scholar

*Hung, S.-P., Chen, P.-H., & Chen, H.-C. (2012). Improving creativity performance assessment: A rater effect examination with many facet Rasch model. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 345-357. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2012.730331Search in Google Scholar

Ivcevic, Z. (2007). Artistic and everyday creativity: An act-frequency approach. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 41, 271-290.10.1002/j.2162-6057.2007.tb01074.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 602-611. doi: 10.2307/2392366Search in Google Scholar

*Johns, G. A., & Morse, L. W. (1997). Research note: Divergent thinking as a function of time and prompting to “be creative” in undergraduates. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 31, 156-165.10.1002/j.2162-6057.1997.tb00788.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Johns, G. A., Morse, L. W., & Morse, D. T. (2000). Divergent production in gifted adolescents using timed vs. untimed stimuli with creative prompting. Roeper Review, 22, 165-166.10.1080/02783190009554026Search in Google Scholar

*Karwowski, M. (2014). Creative mindsets: Measurement, correlates, consequences. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 62-70. doi: 10.1037/a0034898Search in Google Scholar

*Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2002). Could Steven Spielberg manage the Yankees? Creative thinking in different domains. The Korean Journal of Thinking & Problem Solving, 12, 5-14.Search in Google Scholar

*Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2004). Sure, I'm creative-but not in mathematics! Selfreported creativity in diverse domains. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22, 143-155.10.2190/26HQ-VHE8-GTLN-BJJMSearch in Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Cole, J. C., & Sexton, J. D. (2008). A comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the consensual assessment technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 171-178. doi: 10.1080/10400410802059929Search in Google Scholar

*Kaufman, J. C., Cole, J. C., & Baer, J. (2009). The construct of creativity: A structural model for self-reported creativity ratings. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 43, 119-134. doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01310.xSearch in Google Scholar

*Kelly, J. R., & McGrath, J. E. (1985). Effects of time limits and task types on task performance and interaction of four-person groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 395-407.Search in Google Scholar

Kilgour, M. (2006). Improving the creative process: Analysis of the effects of divergent thinking techniques and domain specific knowledge on creativity. International Journal of Business and Society, 7, 79-107.Search in Google Scholar

*Kim, K. H. (2006). Is creativity unidimensional or multidimensional? Analyses of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 251-259.10.1207/s15326934crj1803_2Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Kim, K. H., Cramond, B., & Bandalos, D. L. (2006). The latent structure and measurement invariance of scores on the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-figural. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 459-477.Search in Google Scholar

*Kogan, N., & Morgan, F. T. (1969). Task and motivational influences on the assessment of creative and intellectual ability in children. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 80, 91-127.Search in Google Scholar

*Kogan, N., & Pankove, E. (1974). Long-term predictive validity of divergent-thinking tests: Some negative evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 802-810.10.1037/h0021521Search in Google Scholar

*Krumm, G., Aranguren, M., Filippetti, V. A., & Lemos, V. (2014). Factor structure of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking verbal form B in a Spanish-speaking population. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 50, 150-164. doi: 10.1002/jocb.76Search in Google Scholar

*Krumm, G., Lemos, V., & Filippetti, V. A. (2014). Factor structure of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking figural form B in Spanish-speaking children: Measurement invariance across gender. Creativity Research Journal, 26, 72-81. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2013.843908Search in Google Scholar

*Lee, S., Lee, J., & Youn, C.-Y. (2005). A variation of CAT for measuring creativity in business products. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving, 15, 143-153.Search in Google Scholar

*Leith, G. (1972). The relationship between intelligence, personality, and creativity under two conditions of stress. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 42, 240-247.10.1111/j.2044-8279.1972.tb00717.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Lemons, G. (2011). Diverse perspectives of creativity testing: Controversial issues when used for inclusion into gifted programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34, 742-772. doi: 10.1177/0162353211417221Search in Google Scholar

*Long, H. (2014). An empirical review of research methodologies and methods in creativity studies (2003-2012). Creativity Research Journal, 26, 427-438. doi: 10.1080/10400 419.2014.961781Search in Google Scholar

Lubart, T. I. (2001). Models of the creative process: Past, present and future. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 295-308.10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_07Search in Google Scholar

*Lubart, T. I., & Guignard, J. (2004). The generality-specificity of creativity: A multivariate approach. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko, & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 43-56). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Search in Google Scholar

*Milgram, R. M., & Milgram, N. A. (1976a). Creative thinking and creative performance in Israeli students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 255-259.10.1037/0022-0663.68.3.255Search in Google Scholar

*Milgram, R. M., & Milgram, N. A. (1976b). Group versus individual administration in the measurement of creative thinking in gifted and nongifted children. Child Development, 47, 563-565.10.2307/1128823Search in Google Scholar

*Mohamed, A., Maker, J., & Lubart, T. (2012). Exploring the domain specificity of creativity in children: The relationship between a non-verbal creative production test and creative problem-solving activities. Turkish Journal of Giftedness and Education, 2, 84-101.Search in Google Scholar

*Mouchiroud, C., & Lubart, T. (2001). Children's original thinking: An empirical examination of alternative measures derived from divergent thinking tasks. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 162, 382-401.10.1080/00221320109597491Search in Google Scholar

Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration, application and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 27-43.10.1037/0033-2909.103.1.27Search in Google Scholar

*Nakano, T. C., Primi, R., Ribeiro, W. J., & Almeida, L. S. (2016). Multidimensional assessment of giftedness: Criterion validity of battery of intelligence and creativity measures in predicting arts and academic talents. Anales de Psicología, 32, 628-637. doi: 10.6018/analesps.32.3.259391Search in Google Scholar

Niu, W., & Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Societal and school influences on student creativity: The case of China. Psychology in the Schools, 40, 103-114.10.1002/pits.10072Search in Google Scholar

Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2011). Are intelligence and creativity really so different? Fluid intelligence, executive processes, and strategy use in divergent thinking. Intelligence, 39, 36-45. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2010.11.002Search in Google Scholar

*Nusbaum, E. C., Silvia, P. J., & Beaty, R. E. (2014). Ready, set, create: What instructing people to “be creative” reveals about the meaning and mechanisms of divergent thinking. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 423-432. doi: 10.1037/a0036549Search in Google Scholar

*O’Hara, L. A., & Sternberg, R. J. (2000-2001). It doesn’t hurt to ask: Effects of instructions to be creative, practical, or analytical on essay-writing performance and their interaction with students’ thinking styles. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 197-210.10.1207/S15326934CRJ1302_7Search in Google Scholar

*Palmiero, M., Nori, R., Aloisi, V., Ferrara, M., & Piccardi, L. (2015). Domain-specificity of creativity: A study on the relationship between visual creativity and visual mental imagery. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-8. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01870Search in Google Scholar

*Park, N. K., Chun, M. Y., & Lee, J. (2016). Revisiting individual creativity assessment: Triangulation in subjective and objective assessment methods. Creativity Research Journal, 28, 1-10. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2016.1125259Search in Google Scholar

Paulus, P. B., Kohn, N. W., & Arditti, L. E. (2011). Effects of quantity and quality instructions on brainstorming. First Quarter, 54, 38-46. doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057. 2011.tb01083.xSearch in Google Scholar

*Piffer, D. (2012). Can creativity be measured? An attempt to clarify the notion of creativity and general directions for future research. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7, 258-264. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2012.04.009Search in Google Scholar

*Plucker, J. A. (1998). Beware of simple conclusions: The case for content generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 179-182.10.1207/s15326934crj1102_8Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Plucker, J. A. (1999a). Is the proof in the pudding? Reanalyses of Torrance's (1958 to present) longitudinal data. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 103-114.10.1207/s15326934crj1202_3Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Plucker, J. A. (1999b). Reanalyses of student responses to creativity checklists: Evidence of content generality. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 33, 126-137.10.1002/j.2162-6057.1999.tb01042.xSearch in Google Scholar

*Plucker, J. A. (2004). Generalization of creativity across domains: Examination of the method effect hypothesis. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 38, 1-12.10.1002/j.2162-6057.2004.tb01228.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Plucker, J. A., & Beghetto, R. A. (2004). Why creativity is domain general, why it looks domain specific, and why the distinction does not matter. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko, & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 153-167). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Search in Google Scholar

*Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83-96.10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1Search in Google Scholar

*Plucker, J. A., & Makel, M. C. (2010). Assessment of creativity. In J. Kaufman, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

*Plucker, J. A., & Renzulli, J. S. (1999). Psychometric approaches to the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.). Handbook of human creativity (pp. 35-60). New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

*Primi, R. (2014). Divergent productions of metaphors: Combining many-facet Rasch measurement and cognitive psychology in the assessment of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 461-474. doi: 10.1037/a0038055Search in Google Scholar

*Plucker, J. A., & Runco, M. A. (1998). The death of creativity measurement directions in creativity assessment has been greatly exaggerated: Current issues, recent advances, and future. Roeper Review, 21, 36-39. doi: 10.1080/02783199809553924Search in Google Scholar

*Reiter-Palmon, R., Robinson-Morral, E. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Santo, J. B. (2012). Evaluation of self-perceptions of creativity: Is it a useful criterion? Creativity Research Journal, 24, 107-114. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2012.676980Search in Google Scholar

*Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 109-135. Search in Google Scholar

*Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2014). Effects of problem scope and creativity instructions on idea generation and selection. Creativity Research Journal, 26, 185-191. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2014.901084Search in Google Scholar

*Runco, M. A. (1984). Teachers' judgments of creativity and social validation of divergent thinking tests. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 59, 711-717.10.2466/pms.1984.59.3.711Search in Google Scholar

*Runco, M. A. (1985). Reliability and convergent validity of ideational flexibility as a function of academic achievement. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61, 1075-1081.10.2466/pms.1985.61.3f.1075Search in Google Scholar

*Runco, M. A. (1986a). Divergent thinking and creative performance in gifted and nongifted children. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 375-384.10.1177/001316448604600211Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Runco, M. A. (1986b). Maximal performance on divergent thinking tests by gifted, talented, and nongifted children. Psychology in the Schools, 23, 308-315. 10.1002/1520-6807(198607)23:3<308::AID-PITS2310230313>3.0.CO;2-VSearch in Google Scholar

*Runco, M. A. (1987). The generality of creative performance in gifted and nongifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31, 121-125.10.1177/001698628703100306Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Runco, M. A., & Albert, R. S. (1985). The reliability and validity of ideational originality in the divergent thinking of academically gifted and nongifted children. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45, 483-501.Search in Google Scholar

*Runco, M. A., Millar, G., Acar, S., & Cramond, B. (2010). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking as predictors of personal and public achievement: A fifty year follow up. Creativity Research Journal, 22, 361-368. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2010.523393Search in Google Scholar

*Runco, M. A., & Okuda, S. M. (1991). The instructional enhancement of the flexibility and originality scores of divergent thinking tests. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 435-441. 10.1002/acp.2350050505Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Said-Metwaly, S., Kyndt, E., & Van den Noortgate, W. (2017). Approaches of measuring creativity: A systematic literature review. Creativity. Theories - Research - Applications, 4(2), 238-275. doi: 10.1515/ctra-2017-0013Search in Google Scholar

*Sandlund, E. S., Linnarud, M., & Norlander, T. (2001). Effects of stress versus flotation- REST relaxation on creativity and literacy skills in advanced English as a Second Language (ESL) composition. International Journal of Language & Communication, 15, 95-113.Search in Google Scholar

Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Sayed, E. M., & Mohamed, A. H. H. (2013). Gender differences in divergent thinking: Use of the Test of Creative Thinking-Drawing Production on an Egyptian sample. Creativity Research Journal, 25, 222-227. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2013.783760Search in Google Scholar

Silvia, P. J. (2008). Another look at creativity and intelligence: Exploring higher-order models and probable confounds. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1012-1021. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.027Search in Google Scholar

*Silvia, P. J. (2011). Subjective scoring of divergent thinking: Examining the reliability of unusual uses, instances and consequences tasks. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6, 24-30. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2010.06.001Search in Google Scholar

*Silvia, P. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2009). Is creativity domain-specific? Latent class models of creative accomplishments and creative self-descriptions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 139-148. doi: 10.1037/a0014940Search in Google Scholar

*Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., Willse, J. T., Barona, C. M., Cram, J. T., Hess, K. I., Martinez, J. L., & Richard, C. A. (2008). Assessing creativity with divergent thinking tasks: Exploring the reliability and validity of new subjective scoring methods. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2, 68-85. doi: 10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.68Search in Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2003). Expertise, competence, and creative ability: The perplexing complexities. In R. J. Sternberg, & E. L. Grigorenko (Eds.), The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise (pp. 213-239). New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

*Smith, K. L. R., Michael, W. B., & Hocevar, D. (1990). Performance on creativity measures with examination-taking instructions intended to induce high or low levels of test anxiety. Creativity Research Journal, 3, 265-280.10.1080/10400419009534360Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Soroa, G., Balluerka, N., Hommel, B., & Aritzeta, A. (2015). Assessing interactions between cognition, emotion, and motivation in creativity: The construction and validation of EDICOS. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 17, 45-58. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2015.05.002Search in Google Scholar

*Sternberg, R. J. (1989). Domain-generality versus domain-specificity: The life and impending death of a false dichotomy. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 35, 115-130.Search in Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press.Search in Google Scholar

*Torrance, E. P. (1969). Curiosity of gifted children and performances on timed and untimed tests of creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 13, 155-158.10.1177/001698626901300301Search in Google Scholar

*Torrance, E. P., & Haensly, P. A. (2003). Assessment of creativity in children and adolescents. In C. R. Reynoolds, & R. W. Kamphaus (Eds.) Handbook of psychological and educational assessment of children: Intelligence, aptitude and achievement (2nd ed.) (pp. 584-607). New York: The Guildford Press.Search in Google Scholar

*Treffinger, D. J., Renzulli, J., & Feldhusen, J. (1971). Problems in the assessment of creative thinking. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 5, 104-112.10.1002/j.2162-6057.1971.tb00880.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Treffinger, D. J., Young, G. C., Selby, E. C., & Shepardson, C. (2002). Assessing creativity: A guide for educators. Sarasota: Center for Creative Learning.Search in Google Scholar

*Van Mondfrans, A. P., Feldhusen, J. F., Treffinger, D. J., & Ferris, D. R. (1971). The effects of instructions and response time on divergent thinking test scores. Psychology in the Schools, 8, 65-71.10.1002/1520-6807(197101)8:1<65::AID-PITS2310080116>3.0.CO;2-JSearch in Google Scholar

*Vernon, P. E. (1971). Effects of administration and scoring on divergent thinking tests. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 41, 245-257.10.1111/j.2044-8279.1971.tb00669.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

*Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children: A study of the creativity intelligence distinction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Search in Google Scholar

*Wang, C., Ho, H., Cheng, C., & Cheng, Y. (2014). Application of the Rasch model to the measurement of creativity: The Creative Achievement Questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 26, 62-71. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2013.843347Search in Google Scholar

*Ward, T. B., Saunders, K. N., & Dodds, R. A. (1999). Creative cognition in gifted adolescents. Roeper Review, 21, 260-266.10.1080/02783199909553973Search in Google Scholar

*Ward, W. C., Kogan, N., & Pankove, E. (1972). Incentive effects in children's creativity. Child Development, 43, 669-676.10.2307/1127565Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Creativity: understanding innovation in problem solving, science, invention, and the arts. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.Search in Google Scholar

Williams, T. M., & Fleming, J. W. (1969). A methodological study of the relationship between associative fluency and intelligence. Developmental Psychology, 1, 155-162.10.1037/h0027006Search in Google Scholar

*Zampetakis, L. A. (2010). Unfolding the measurement of the creative personality. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 44, 105-123. doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.2010.tb01328.xSearch in Google Scholar

*Zeng, L., Proctor, R. W., & Salvendy, G. (2011). Can traditional divergent thinking tests be trusted in measuring and predicting real-world creativity? Creativity Research Journal, 23, 24-37. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2011.545713Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo