Rejoinder: The Madness to Our Method: Some Thoughts on Divergent Thinking

In this reply, the authors examine the madness to their method in light of the comments. Overall, the authors agree broadly with the comments; many of the issues will be settled only by future research. The authors disagree, though, that past research has proven past scoring methods-including the To...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts creativity, and the arts, 2008-05, Vol.2 (2), p.109-114
Main Authors: Silvia, Paul J, Winterstein, Beate P, Willse, John T
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Creativity
Divergent Thinking
Human
Scoring (Testing)
Statistical Reliability
Statistical Validity
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In this reply, the authors examine the madness to their method in light of the comments. Overall, the authors agree broadly with the comments; many of the issues will be settled only by future research. The authors disagree, though, that past research has proven past scoring methods-including the Torrance methods-to be satisfactory or satisfying. The authors conclude by offering their own criticisms of their method, of divergent thinking, and of the concept of domain-general creative abilities.
ISSN:1931-3896
1931-390X
DOI:10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.109