Based on Glăveanu’s target article, issues raised about the psychometric approach to creativity research are examined. Criticisms of divergent thinking tests, such as the unusual uses of an object test, are examined. Arguments supporting the theoretical and practical utility of divergent thinking tests are presented. It is furthermore suggested that tests are best conceived and used in contextualized ways. The example of measures of divergent thinking which were designed for managers is presented. Finally, the psychometric approach encompasses many aspects of creativity beyond divergent thinking, as illustrated by recent work on the evaluation of creative potential (the EPoC battery). In the EPoC assessment, both divergent-exploratory thinking and convergent-integrative thinking are measured in a range of contextual domains, such as the visual-graphic, verballiterary, social problem solving ones. This work contrasts with the simplistic, and restrictive view of the unusual uses of an object test as the epitome of the psychometric approach to creativity.
The literature on creativity has often focused on the analysis of artists and scientists. The ability to generalize these findings to respective professional sub-disciplines is examined. In particular, the present study addresses the generalizability of the personality profile of creative scientists to creative social scientists. Autonomy was found to be the most important personality feature for creativity in social sciences. These results suggest the importance of fostering an autonomous working style.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.