Loading…
A comprehensive method for the measurement of everyday creativity
•A method allowing for a comprehensive assessment of everyday creativity is proposed.•This method relies on questionnaires, creativity tasks, and peer-rating of creativity.•It builds on and synthetizes most of the theoretical inputs of past research in the field.•It is psychometrically sound and all...
Saved in:
Published in: | Thinking skills and creativity 2018-06, Vol.28, p.84-97 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | •A method allowing for a comprehensive assessment of everyday creativity is proposed.•This method relies on questionnaires, creativity tasks, and peer-rating of creativity.•It builds on and synthetizes most of the theoretical inputs of past research in the field.•It is psychometrically sound and allows for unprecedented levels of efficiency.
This paper introduces a multivariate and theoretically driven measurement scheme for everyday creativity. We start by briefly reviewing classical distinctions (e.g., creative person, process and product; potential and manifest creativity) and examining several instruments for the assessment of creativity. We then propose a measurement method that integrates these theoretical elements and psychometric traditions. This method includes several questionnaires (assessing aspects of personality, cognitive styles, creative interests, activities, and achievements) and creativity tasks (divergent thinking, insight, and “real-life” creativity tasks). The scoring method of these tasks rests both on classical indices (e.g., fluency) and on an innovative subjective scoring procedure. This procedure relies on a randomized, double-blind peer evaluation, where some participants rate the creativity of other participants, and allows for unprecedented levels of efficiency and practicality. Overall, results shows that our measurement scheme is psychometrically and theoretically sound. These results are discussed at a theoretical and methodological level, and avenues for future research are explored. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1871-1871 1878-0423 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.tsc.2018.03.007 |