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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts creativity, and the arts, 2021-11, Vol.15 (4), p.645-663
Main Authors: Dumas, Denis, Organisciak, Peter, Doherty, Michael
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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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