Loading…
Measuring Divergent Thinking Originality With Human Raters and Text-Mining Models: A Psychometric Comparison of Methods
Within creativity research, interest and capability in utilizing text-mining models to quantify the Originality of participant responses to Divergent Thinking tasks has risen sharply over the last decade, with many extant studies fruitfully using such methods to uncover substantive patterns among cr...
Saved in:
Published in: | Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts creativity, and the arts, 2021-11, Vol.15 (4), p.645-663 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a323t-c3e7f38bc164e9ad828089c955cb0af758f350def582714a6f6d8414cf7beb283 |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 663 |
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 645 |
container_title | Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | Dumas, Denis Organisciak, Peter Doherty, Michael |
description | Within creativity research, interest and capability in utilizing text-mining models to quantify the Originality of participant responses to Divergent Thinking tasks has risen sharply over the last decade, with many extant studies fruitfully using such methods to uncover substantive patterns among creativity-relevant constructs. However, no systematic psychometric investigation of the reliability and validity of human-rated Originality scores, and scores from various freely available text-mining systems, exists in the literature. Here we conduct such an investigation with the Alternate Uses Task. We demonstrate that, despite their inherent subjectivity, human-rated Originality scores displayed the highest reliability at both the composite and latent factor levels. However, the text-mining system GloVe 840B was highly capable of approximating human-rated scores both in its measurement properties and its correlations to various creativity-related criteria including ideational Fluency, Elaboration, Openness, Intellect, and self-reported Creative Activities. We conclude that, in conjunction with other salient indicators of creative potential, text-mining models (and especially the GloVe 840B system) are capable of supporting reliable and valid inferences about Divergent Thinking. We offer an open-access module for researchers to apply these methods to their own data via our laboratory website (https://openscoring.du.edu/). |
doi_str_mv | 10.1037/aca0000319 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2617215332</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2426250262</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a323t-c3e7f38bc164e9ad828089c955cb0af758f350def582714a6f6d8414cf7beb283</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLAzEQgBdRsFYv_oKAN2U1j81u1pvUR4UWRSp6C9Ns0qa2mzXJqv33bqnizTnMDMPHDPMlyTHB5wSz4gIU4C4YKXeSHikZSVmJX3d_e1Hm-8lBCAuMs4LRvJd8jjWE1tt6hq7th_YzXUc0mdv6bTN68HZma1jauEYvNs7RsF1BjZ4gah8Q1BWa6K-Yjm29oceu0stwia7QY1iruVvp6K1CA7dqwNvgauQMGus4d1U4TPYMLIM--qn95Pn2ZjIYpqOHu_vB1SgFRllMFdOFYWKqSJ7pEipBBRalKjlXUwym4MIwjittuKAFySA3eSUykilTTPWUCtZPTrZ7G-_eWx2iXLjWdy8FSXNSUMJZd-g_KqM55bhLHXW6pZR3IXhtZOPtCvxaEiw3-uWf_g4-28LQgGw6H-CjVUsdVOt9J3nDSsJlJvOMs28KIIeC</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2426250262</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Measuring Divergent Thinking Originality With Human Raters and Text-Mining Models: A Psychometric Comparison of Methods</title><source>PsycARTICLES</source><source>ARTbibliographies Modern</source><source>International Bibliography of Art (IBA)</source><creator>Dumas, Denis ; Organisciak, Peter ; Doherty, Michael</creator><contributor>Goldstein, Thalia ; Vartanian, Oshin</contributor><creatorcontrib>Dumas, Denis ; Organisciak, Peter ; Doherty, Michael ; Goldstein, Thalia ; Vartanian, Oshin</creatorcontrib><description>Within creativity research, interest and capability in utilizing text-mining models to quantify the Originality of participant responses to Divergent Thinking tasks has risen sharply over the last decade, with many extant studies fruitfully using such methods to uncover substantive patterns among creativity-relevant constructs. However, no systematic psychometric investigation of the reliability and validity of human-rated Originality scores, and scores from various freely available text-mining systems, exists in the literature. Here we conduct such an investigation with the Alternate Uses Task. We demonstrate that, despite their inherent subjectivity, human-rated Originality scores displayed the highest reliability at both the composite and latent factor levels. However, the text-mining system GloVe 840B was highly capable of approximating human-rated scores both in its measurement properties and its correlations to various creativity-related criteria including ideational Fluency, Elaboration, Openness, Intellect, and self-reported Creative Activities. We conclude that, in conjunction with other salient indicators of creative potential, text-mining models (and especially the GloVe 840B system) are capable of supporting reliable and valid inferences about Divergent Thinking. We offer an open-access module for researchers to apply these methods to their own data via our laboratory website (https://openscoring.du.edu/).</description><identifier>ISSN: 1931-3896</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1931-390X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/aca0000319</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Educational Publishing Foundation</publisher><subject>Cognition & reasoning ; Creativity ; Data mining ; Divergent Thinking ; Experimentation ; Female ; Human ; Male ; Psychometrics ; Quantitative psychology ; Subjectivity ; Test Reliability ; Verbal Fluency ; Websites</subject><ispartof>Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts, 2021-11, Vol.15 (4), p.645-663</ispartof><rights>2020 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2020, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Nov 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a323t-c3e7f38bc164e9ad828089c955cb0af758f350def582714a6f6d8414cf7beb283</citedby><orcidid>0000-0002-9058-2280</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,30995,33461</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Goldstein, Thalia</contributor><contributor>Vartanian, Oshin</contributor><creatorcontrib>Dumas, Denis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Organisciak, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doherty, Michael</creatorcontrib><title>Measuring Divergent Thinking Originality With Human Raters and Text-Mining Models: A Psychometric Comparison of Methods</title><title>Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts</title><description>Within creativity research, interest and capability in utilizing text-mining models to quantify the Originality of participant responses to Divergent Thinking tasks has risen sharply over the last decade, with many extant studies fruitfully using such methods to uncover substantive patterns among creativity-relevant constructs. However, no systematic psychometric investigation of the reliability and validity of human-rated Originality scores, and scores from various freely available text-mining systems, exists in the literature. Here we conduct such an investigation with the Alternate Uses Task. We demonstrate that, despite their inherent subjectivity, human-rated Originality scores displayed the highest reliability at both the composite and latent factor levels. However, the text-mining system GloVe 840B was highly capable of approximating human-rated scores both in its measurement properties and its correlations to various creativity-related criteria including ideational Fluency, Elaboration, Openness, Intellect, and self-reported Creative Activities. We conclude that, in conjunction with other salient indicators of creative potential, text-mining models (and especially the GloVe 840B system) are capable of supporting reliable and valid inferences about Divergent Thinking. We offer an open-access module for researchers to apply these methods to their own data via our laboratory website (https://openscoring.du.edu/).</description><subject>Cognition & reasoning</subject><subject>Creativity</subject><subject>Data mining</subject><subject>Divergent Thinking</subject><subject>Experimentation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Quantitative psychology</subject><subject>Subjectivity</subject><subject>Test Reliability</subject><subject>Verbal Fluency</subject><subject>Websites</subject><issn>1931-3896</issn><issn>1931-390X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QI</sourceid><sourceid>8XN</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtLAzEQgBdRsFYv_oKAN2U1j81u1pvUR4UWRSp6C9Ns0qa2mzXJqv33bqnizTnMDMPHDPMlyTHB5wSz4gIU4C4YKXeSHikZSVmJX3d_e1Hm-8lBCAuMs4LRvJd8jjWE1tt6hq7th_YzXUc0mdv6bTN68HZma1jauEYvNs7RsF1BjZ4gah8Q1BWa6K-Yjm29oceu0stwia7QY1iruVvp6K1CA7dqwNvgauQMGus4d1U4TPYMLIM--qn95Pn2ZjIYpqOHu_vB1SgFRllMFdOFYWKqSJ7pEipBBRalKjlXUwym4MIwjittuKAFySA3eSUykilTTPWUCtZPTrZ7G-_eWx2iXLjWdy8FSXNSUMJZd-g_KqM55bhLHXW6pZR3IXhtZOPtCvxaEiw3-uWf_g4-28LQgGw6H-CjVUsdVOt9J3nDSsJlJvOMs28KIIeC</recordid><startdate>20211101</startdate><enddate>20211101</enddate><creator>Dumas, Denis</creator><creator>Organisciak, Peter</creator><creator>Doherty, Michael</creator><general>Educational Publishing Foundation</general><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7QI</scope><scope>8XN</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9058-2280</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20211101</creationdate><title>Measuring Divergent Thinking Originality With Human Raters and Text-Mining Models: A Psychometric Comparison of Methods</title><author>Dumas, Denis ; Organisciak, Peter ; Doherty, Michael</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a323t-c3e7f38bc164e9ad828089c955cb0af758f350def582714a6f6d8414cf7beb283</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Cognition & reasoning</topic><topic>Creativity</topic><topic>Data mining</topic><topic>Divergent Thinking</topic><topic>Experimentation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Quantitative psychology</topic><topic>Subjectivity</topic><topic>Test Reliability</topic><topic>Verbal Fluency</topic><topic>Websites</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dumas, Denis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Organisciak, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doherty, Michael</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PsycARTICLES- ProQuest</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ARTbibliographies Modern</collection><collection>International Bibliography of Art (IBA)</collection><jtitle>Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dumas, Denis</au><au>Organisciak, Peter</au><au>Doherty, Michael</au><au>Goldstein, Thalia</au><au>Vartanian, Oshin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Measuring Divergent Thinking Originality With Human Raters and Text-Mining Models: A Psychometric Comparison of Methods</atitle><jtitle>Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts</jtitle><date>2021-11-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>645</spage><epage>663</epage><pages>645-663</pages><issn>1931-3896</issn><eissn>1931-390X</eissn><abstract>Within creativity research, interest and capability in utilizing text-mining models to quantify the Originality of participant responses to Divergent Thinking tasks has risen sharply over the last decade, with many extant studies fruitfully using such methods to uncover substantive patterns among creativity-relevant constructs. However, no systematic psychometric investigation of the reliability and validity of human-rated Originality scores, and scores from various freely available text-mining systems, exists in the literature. Here we conduct such an investigation with the Alternate Uses Task. We demonstrate that, despite their inherent subjectivity, human-rated Originality scores displayed the highest reliability at both the composite and latent factor levels. However, the text-mining system GloVe 840B was highly capable of approximating human-rated scores both in its measurement properties and its correlations to various creativity-related criteria including ideational Fluency, Elaboration, Openness, Intellect, and self-reported Creative Activities. We conclude that, in conjunction with other salient indicators of creative potential, text-mining models (and especially the GloVe 840B system) are capable of supporting reliable and valid inferences about Divergent Thinking. We offer an open-access module for researchers to apply these methods to their own data via our laboratory website (https://openscoring.du.edu/).</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Educational Publishing Foundation</pub><doi>10.1037/aca0000319</doi><tpages>19</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9058-2280</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1931-3896 |
ispartof | Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts, 2021-11, Vol.15 (4), p.645-663 |
issn | 1931-3896 1931-390X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2617215332 |
source | PsycARTICLES; ARTbibliographies Modern; International Bibliography of Art (IBA) |
subjects | Cognition & reasoning Creativity Data mining Divergent Thinking Experimentation Female Human Male Psychometrics Quantitative psychology Subjectivity Test Reliability Verbal Fluency Websites |
title | Measuring Divergent Thinking Originality With Human Raters and Text-Mining Models: A Psychometric Comparison of Methods |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T11%3A50%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Measuring%20Divergent%20Thinking%20Originality%20With%20Human%20Raters%20and%20Text-Mining%20Models:%20A%20Psychometric%20Comparison%20of%20Methods&rft.jtitle=Psychology%20of%20aesthetics,%20creativity,%20and%20the%20arts&rft.au=Dumas,%20Denis&rft.date=2021-11-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=645&rft.epage=663&rft.pages=645-663&rft.issn=1931-3896&rft.eissn=1931-390X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/aca0000319&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2426250262%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a323t-c3e7f38bc164e9ad828089c955cb0af758f350def582714a6f6d8414cf7beb283%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2426250262&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |