The measure of originality in CREA test responses
The aim was to study a new scoring procedure for the CREA Test, complementary to the traditional, that considers the originality of the productions. The new procedure and corresponding analyzes were defined for three groups (children, adolescents and adults) and for the three stimuli of the CREA. The sample included 505 participants (188 children, 108 adolescents and 209 adults) living in Cordoba, Argentina. The new procedure included three categories of questions: very frequent, frequent and unique, each categories had different scoring. A descriptive analysis of typologies and a correlational analysis of the scores were performed according to the two procedures. Also, the paper presented a case study of people asking unique questions. The results showed very high consistency of measurements and correlations between two procedures for the three groups and the three stimuli. There were significant associations between the levels of creativity defined by both procedures. The unique questions represented between 1 and 4% of the total, stimulus A is the one that most promotes the formulation of unique questions. The authors proposed to use of the alternative system in groups that obtain low scores with the traditional system and when a differential analysis of the originality is required. Authors discussed theoretically relations between quantity and originality and proposed future lines of research.
Baer, J. (2011). How divergent thinking tests mislead us: Are the Torrance tests still relevant in the 21st century? The Division 10 debate. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(4), 309-313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025210
Baer, J. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 16-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jocb.002
Batey, M. (2012). The measurement of creativity, from definitional consensus to the introduction of a new heuristic framework. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 55– 65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.649181
Bermejo, M., Ruiz-Melero, M., Esparza, J., Ferrando, M. & Pons, M. (2016). A new measurement of scientific creativity: The study of its psychometric properties. Annals of Psychology, 32(3) 652-661. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.32.3.259411
Clapham, M. & King, W. (2010). Psychometric characteristics of the CREA in an english speaking population. Annals of Psychology, 26(2), 206-211. Retrieve from http://revistas.um.es/analesps/article/view/108991
Corbalán, J., Martín-Brufau, R., Donolo, D., Clapham, M., Limiñana, R., García Peñas, V.
& King, R. (2014). CREA.A cross-cultural study. Personality and Individual Differences, 60, 54-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.07.223
Corbalán, J. & Limiñana, M. (2010). The genie in a bottle. The CREA test, questions and creativity. Annals of Psychology, 26 (2), 197-205.
Corbalán, J., Martínez, F., Donolo, D., Alonso, C., Tejerina, M. & Limiñana, M. (2003).
CREA. Creative Intelligence. A cognitive measure of creativity. Una medida cognitiva de la creatividad. Madrid: TEA Ediciones.
Corbalán, J. (2008). What do we mean when we talk about creativity? Cuadernos FHyCSUNJu, 35, 11-21. Retrieve from http://www.scielo.org.ar/pdf/cfhycs/n35/n35a01.pdf
Donolo, D. & Elisondo, R. (2007). Creativity for all. Consideration about a particular group. Annals of Psychology, 23(1), 147-151. Retrieve from http://revistas.um.es/analesps/article/view/23281/22561
Dumas, D. & Dunbar, K. N. (2014). Understanding fluency and originality: A latent variable perspective. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 14, 56-67.
Elisondo, R. (2015). Evaluation of creativity: analysis of alternative variables related to the form and content of the answers in the CREA test. Doctoral thesis. Faculty of Psychology. University of Murcia. Retrieve from http://www.tdx.cat/bitstream/handle/10803/334985/TRCE.pdf?sequence=1
Elisondo, R. & Donolo, D. (2010). Creativity or Intelligence? That is not the question.
Annals of Psychology, 26(2), 220-225.
Elisondo, R. & Donolo, D. (2011). The stimuli in a test of Creativity. Incidents by gender, age and schooling. Psychology Bulletin, 101, 51-65.
Gutierrez-Braojos, M., Salmeron-Vilchez, J. Martin-Romera, S. & Salmerón, A. (2013). Direct and indirect effects between thinking styles, metacognitive strategies and creativity in college students. Annals of Psychology, 29(1), 159-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.1.124651
Hernández, N., Schmidt, L. & Okudan, G. E. (2013). Systematic ideation effectiveness study of TRIZ. Journal of Mechanical Design, 135(10), 101-109.
Hong, E., O’Neil, H. & Peng, Y. (2016). Effects of explicit instructions, metacognition, and motivation on creative performance. Creativity Research Journal, 28(1), 33-45.
Ivcevic, Z. (2009). Creativity map: Toward the next generation of theories of creativity.
Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 17-21. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014918
Kaufman, J. & Beghetto, R. (2009). Beyond big and little, the four C model of creativity.
Review of General Psychology, 13, 1-12. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013688
Kim, K. (2011). The APA 2009 Division 10 debate. Are the Torrance Tests of creative thinking still relevant in the 21st century? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 5(4), 302-308. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021917
Leutner, F., Yearsley, A., Codreanu, S., Borenstein, Y. & Ahmetoglu, G. (2017). From Likert scales to images: Validating a novel creativity measure with image based response scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 36-40. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.007
Limiñana, M., Bordoy, M., Juste, G. & Corbalán, J. (2010). Creativity, intelectual abilities and response styles, implications for academic performance in the secondary school. Annals of Psychology, 26(2), 212-219.
Long, H. (2014). An empirical review of research methodologies and methods in creativity studies (2003–2012). Creativity Research Journal, 26(4), 427-438. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2014.961781
López Martínez, O. & Martín Brufau, R. (2010). Styles of thinking and creativity.Annals of Psychology, 26(2), 254-258. Retrieve from http://www.um.es/analesps/v26/v26_2/08-26_2.pdf
Martínez, F. (2003). Psychometric characteristics of CREA. A study with Spanish and Argentine population. RIDEP, 16 (2). Retrieve from www.aidep.org/03_ridep/R16/R164.pdf
Mourgues, C., Tan, M., Heina, S., Elliott, J. & Grigorenkoa, E. (2016). Using creativity to predict future academic performance: An application of Aurora's five subtests for creativity, Learning and Individual Differences. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.02.001
Nakano, T., Primi, R., Ribeiro, W. & Almeida, L. (2016). Multidimensional assessment of giftedness: criterion validity of battery of intelligence and creativity measures in predicting arts and academic talents. Annals of Psychology, 32(3), 628-637.
Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.32.3.259391
Park, M., Youngshin, M. & Chun L. (2016). Revisiting individual creativity assessment: Triangulation in subjective and objective assessment methods. Creativity Reseach Journal, 28(1), 1-10. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2016.1125259
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–
Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.04.009
Richards, R. (2007). Everyday creativity and new views of human nature. Washington: American Psychological Association.
Runco, M. (1999) Divergent thinking. En Runco, M.y Pritzker, S. (Eds.) Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 2). Pp. 577-572. Washington: Elsevier.
Runco, M. & Jaeger, G. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92-96. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Runco, M., Abdulla, A., Paek, S., Al-Jasim, F. & Alsuwaidi, H. (2016). Which test of divergent thinking is best? Creativity. Theories–Research-Applications, 3(1), 4-18. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ctra-2016-0001
Sanz de Acedo Lizarraga, M. & Sanz de Acedo Baquedano, M. (2008). Explicit instructions for creative performance according to two creativity tests, taking intelligence in account. Annals of Psychology, 24 (1), 129-137.
Silvia, P. (2008). Creativity and intelligence revisited: A latent variable analysis of Wallach and Kogan (1965). Creativity Research Journal, 20(1), 34-39.
Silvia, P., Wigert, B. Reiter, R. & Kaufman, J. (2012). Assessing creativity with self-report scales: A review and empirical evaluation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 19-34. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0024071
Sternberg, R. (2012). The assessment of creativity an investment-based approach.Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 3–12. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.652925
Yagolkovskiya, S. & Kharkhurinba, A. (2016). The roles of rarity and organization of
stimulus material in divergent thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 14–21.
Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.08.001
Zhu, W., Chen, Q., Tang, C., Cao, G., Hou, Y. & Qiu, J. (2016). Brain structure links everyday creativity to creative achievement. Brain and Cognition, 103, 70–76. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2015.09.008
The works published in this journal are subject to the following terms:
1. The Publications Service of the University of Murcia (the publisher) retains the property rights (copyright) of published works, and encourages and enables the reuse of the same under the license specified in paragraph 2.
2. The works are published in the online edition of the journal under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 (legal text). You can copy, use, distribute, transmit and publicly display, provided that: i) you cite the author and the original source of publication (journal, editorial and URL of the work), ii) are not used for commercial purposes, iii ) mentions the existence and specifications of this license.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
3. Conditions of self-archiving. Is allowed and encouraged the authors to disseminate electronically pre-print versions (version before being evaluated and sent to the journal) and / or post-print (version reviewed and accepted for publication) of their works before publication, as it encourages its earliest circulation and diffusion and thus a possible increase in its citation and scope between the academic community. RoMEO Color: Green.