Which Test of Divergent Thinking Is Best?

• Authors: Mark A. Runco , Sue Hyeon Paek , Hanadi N. Alsuwaidi , Ahmed M. Abdulla , Fatima A. Al-Jasim
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Divergent thinking (DT) tests are probably the most commonly used measures of creative potential. Several extensive batteries are available but most research relies on one or two specific tests rather than a complete battery. This may limit generalizations because tests of DT are not equivalent. They are not always highly inter-correlated. Additionally, some DT tests appear to be better than others at eliciting originality. This is critical because originality is vital for creativity. The primary purpose of the present study was to determine which test of DT elicits the most originality. Seven measures of DTwere administered on a sample of 611 participants in eight Arabic countries. The tests were Figural, Titles, Realistic Presented Problems, Realistic Problem Generation, Instances, Uses, and Similarities. The Quick Test of Convergent Thinking, Runco’s Ideational Behavior Scale, and a demographic questionnaire were also administered. A linear mixed model analysis confirmed that the originality scores in the DT tests differed by test. Post-hoc tests indicated that the Titles and Realistic Problem Generation tests produced the highest mean originality scores, whereas the Realistic Presented Problems test produced the lowest mean originality scores. These differences confirm that research using only one DT test will not provide generalizable results.

Keywords

EN

Creativity; Divergent Thinking; Originality; Creativity Testing; Uses test; Problem Finding; Creative Potential; Runco Ideational Behavior Scale; Quick Estimate of Convergent Thinking; Standard Definition of Creativity

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Creativity. Theories – Research - Applications
• Year: 2016
• Volume: 3
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 4-18

Dates

published

2016-06-01

received

2015-11-22

revised

2016-02-16

accepted

2016-02-18

online

2016-06-08

Contributors

author

Mark A. Runco

• University of Georgia, Athens, GA USA

author

Sue Hyeon Paek

• University of Georgia, Athens, GA USA

author

Hanadi N. Alsuwaidi

• Ministry of Education, UAE

author

Ahmed M. Abdulla

• Arabian Gulf University, Kingdom of Bahrain

author

Fatima A. Al-Jasim

• Arabian Gulf University, Kingdom of Bahrain

References

• Acar, S., & Runco, M. A. (2014). Assessing associative distance among ideas elicited by tests of divergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 26, 229-238.[Crossref][WoS]
• Acar, S., & Runco, M. A. (2015). Thinking in multiple directions: Hyperspace categories in divergent thinking. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, And The Arts, 9, 41-53.[WoS]
• Alotaiby, F., Foda, S., & Alkharashi, I. (2014). Arabic vs. English: Comparative statistical study. Arabian Journal for Science & Engineering (Springer Science & Business Media B.V.), 39, 809-820.[WoS]
• Ames, M., & Runco, M. A. (2005). Predicting entrepreneurship from ideation and divergent thinking. Creativity and Innovation Management, 14, 311-315.
• Anastasi, A. (1988). Explorations in human intelligence: Some uncharted routes. Applied Measurement In Education, 1, 207-213.
• Beketayev, K., & Runco, M. A. (in press). Semantics-based algorithmic method for assessing divergent thinking. Europe's Journal of Psychology.
• Chand O’Neal, I., Paek, S. H., & Runco, M. A. (2015). Comparison of competing theories about ideation and creativity. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications. 2(2), 145-165.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
• Cronbach, L. J. (1989). Construct validation after thirty years. In R. L. Linn, R. L. Linn (Eds.), Intelligence: Measurement, theory, and public policy: Proceedings of a symposium in honor of Lloyd G. Humphreys (pp. 147-171). Champaign, IL, US: University of Illinois Press.
• Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Getzels, J. W. (1988). Creativity and problem finding. In F. G. Farley & R. W. Neperole (Eds.), The foundations of aesthetics, art, and art education (pp. 91–106). New York: Praeger.
• Guilford, J. P. (1968). Creativity, intelligence, and their educational implications. San Diego, CA: EDITS/Knapp.
• Harrington, D. M. (1975). Effects of explicit instructions to 'be creative' on the psychological meaning of divergent thinking test scores. Journal of Personality, 43, 434-454.
• Hocevar, D. (1979). Ideational fluency as a confounding factor in the measurement of originality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 191-196.
• Khaleefa, O. H., Erdos, G., & Ashria, I. H. (1996). Gender and creativity in an Afro-Arab Islamic culture: The case of Sudan. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 30, 52-60.
• Kharkhurin, A. V., & Samadpour Motalleebi, S. N. (2008). The Impact of culture on the creative potential of American, Russian, and Iranian college students. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 404-411.[Crossref]
• Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 746–759.
• Milgram, R. M. (1990). Creativity: An idea whose time has come and gone? In M. A. Runco & R. S. Albert (Eds.), Theories of creativity (pp. 215–233). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Mumford M. D, Reiter-Palmon R, & Redmond M. R. (1994). Problem construction and cognition: Applying problem representations in ill-defined domains. In: Runco M (ed.) Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity, pp. 3–39. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
• Okuda, S. M., Runco, M. A., & Berger, D. E. (1991). Creativity and the finding and solving of real-world problems. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 9, 45-53.
• Plucker, J., Runco, M., & Lim, W. (2006). Predicting ideational behavior from divergent thinking and discretionary time on task. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 55-63.
• Runco, M. A. (Ed.). (1991). Divergent thinking. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
• Runco, M. A. (2008). Creativity and education. New Horizons in Education, 56, 107-115.
• Runco, M. A. (Ed.). (2013). Divergent thinking and creative potential. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
• Runco, M. A., &Acar, S. (2010). Do tests of divergent thinking have an experiential bias? Psychology of Art, Creativity, and Aesthetics, 4, 144-148.
• 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.
• Runco, M. A., Dow, G., & Smith, W. R. (2006). Information, experience, divergent thinking: An empirical test. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 269-277.[Crossref]
• Runco, M. A., Illies, J. J., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2005). Explicit instructions to be creative and original: A comparison of strategies and criteria as targets with three types of divergent thinking tests. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving, 15, 5-15.
• Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 92-96.[Crossref]
• Runco, M. A., & Okuda, S. M. (1988). Problem discovery, divergent thinking, and the creative process. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 17, 211-20.
• Runco, M. A., Plucker, J. A., & Lim, W. (2000-2001). Development and psychometric integrity of a measure of ideational behavior. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 393-400.
• Runco, M. A., Okuda, S. M., & Thurston, B. J. (1991). Environmental cues and divergent thinking. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Divergent thinking (pp. 79-85). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
• Torrance E. P. (1972) Can we teach children to think creatively? Journal of Creative Behavior, 6, 114–143.[Crossref]
• Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Torrance, E. P. (1995). Why fly? Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
• Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
• Xu, R. (2003). Measuring explained variation in linear mixed effects models. Statistics in medicine, 22, 3527-3541.[Crossref]

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/ctra-2016-0001