Divergent thinking tests are often used in creativity research as measures of creative potential. However, measurement approaches across studies vary to a great extent. One facet of divergent thinking measurement that contributes strongly to differences across studies is the scoring of participants' responses. Most commonly, responses are scored for fluency, flexibility, and originality. However, even with respect to only one dimension (e.g., originality), scoring decisions vary extensively. In the current work, a systematic framework for practical scoring decisions was developed. Scoring dimensions, instructionscoring fit, adequacy of responses, objectivity (vs. subjectivity), level of scoring (response vs. ideational pool level), and the method of aggregation were identified as determining factors of divergent thinking test scoring. In addition, recommendations and guidelines for making these decisions and reporting the information in papers have been provided.

- Avances en la teoría e investigación de la creatividad:Un manifiesto sociocultural 1 Avances en la teoría e investigación de la creatividad: Un manifiesto sociocultural -99 - ResumenEste manifiesto, discutido por 20 académicos y académicas que representan diversas líneas de investigación sobre la creatividad, marca un cambio conceptual dentro de los estudios de este campo. Los enfoques socioculturales han hecho contribuciones sustanciales al concepto de creatividad en las últimas décadas y hoy pueden proporcionar un conjunto de propuestas para guiar nuestra comprensión de la investigación anterior y generar nuevas direcciones en investigación y práctica. Estas proposiciones son urgentemente necesarias en respuesta a la transición de una Sociedad de la Información a una Sociedad Post-Información. A través de las proposiciones descritas aquí, nuestro objetivo es construir un terreno común e invitar a la comunidad de investigadores y profesionales de la creatividad a reflexionar, estudiar y cultivar la creatividad como un fenómeno sociocultural. AbstractThis manifesto, discussed by 20 scholars, representing diverse lines of creativity research, marks a conceptual shift within the field. Socio-cultural approaches have made substantial contributions to the concept of creativity over recent decades and today can provide a set of propositions to guide our understanding of past research and to generate new directions of inquiry and practice. These propositions are urgently needed in response to the transition from the Information Society to the Post-Information Society. Through the propositions outlined here, we aim to build common ground and invite the community of creativity researchers and practitioners to reflect up, study, and cultivate creativity as a sociocultural phenomenon.

Despite six decades of creative cognition research, measures of creative ideation have heavily relied on divergent thinking tasks, which still suffer from conceptual, design, and psychometric shortcomings. These shortcomings have greatly impeded the accurate study of creative ideation, its dynamics, development, and integration as part of a comprehensive psychological assessment. After a brief overview of the historical and current anchoring of creative ideation measurement, overlooked challenges in its most common operationalization (i.e., divergent thinking tasks framework) are discussed. They include (1) the reliance on a single stimulus as a starting point of the creative ideation process (stimulus-dependency), (2) the analysis of response quality based on a varying number of observations across test-takers (fluency-dependency), and (3) the production of “static” cumulative performance indicators. Inspired from an emerging line of work from the field of cognitive neuroscience of creativity, this paper introduces a new assessment framework referred to as “Multi-Trial Creative Ideation” (MTCI). This framework shifts the current measurement paradigm by (1) offering a variety of stimuli presented in a well-defined set of ideation “trials,” (2) reinterprets the concept of ideational fluency using a time-analysis of idea generation, and (3) captures individual dynamics in the ideation process (e.g., modeling the effort-time required to reach a response of maximal uncommonness) while controlling for stimulus-specific sources of variation. Advantages of the MTCI framework over the classic divergent thinking paradigm are discussed in light of current directions in the field of creativity research.

This article reviews developmental studies of creativity in children and adolescents with a focus on "peaks" and "slumps" that have often been described in the literature. The irregularity of the development of creativity is interpreted in light of conceptual and measurement issues and with regard to the interaction between individual-level resources, task-specific demands, and environmental influences, resulting in apparent individual differences in the development of creativity. The need for longitudinal designs, multidimensional and multi-domain assessment of creative potential limiting the contribution of task-specific factors is outlined and discussed as an important direction for developmental research on creativity.

In recent years, translational research involving humans and animals has uncovered biological and physiological pathways that explain associations between early adverse circumstances and long-term mental and physical health outcomes. In this article, we summarize the human and animal literature demonstrating that epigenetic alterations in key biological systems, the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis and immune system, may underlie such disparities. We review evidence suggesting that changes in DNA methylation profiles of the genome may be responsible for the alterations in hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis and immune system trajectories. Using some preliminary data, we demonstrate how explorations of genome-wide and candidate-gene DNA methylation profiles may inform hypotheses and guide future research efforts in these areas. We conclude our article by discussing the many important future directions, merging perspectives from developmental psychology, molecular genetics, neuroendocrinology, and immunology, that are essential for furthering our understanding of how early adverse circumstances may shape developmental trajectories, particularly in the areas of stress reactivity and physical or mental health.

International audienceIt is increasingly acknowledged that creative potential involves partly a generalized ability, partly a set of domain-specific abilities, and partly a set of task-specific abilities. We extend and illustrate this view in a study of 482 children and adolescents, exploring the extent to which the scores variance of the Evaluation of Potential Creativity (EPoC)'s eight subtests can be decomposed by five variance components: thinking-process general, thinking-process specific, domain-specific, task-specific, and measurement error. A structural equation model derived from an extension of the multi-trait multi-method matrix analysis revealed that (1) the contribution of each variance component depends greatly on the task under consideration, and that (2) the contribution of a general creative thinking-process factor is overall limited. This study outlines the multidimensional and hierarchical structure of creative potential and the need to measure it with comprehensive test batteries sampling a range of creative tasks, domains and creative thinking-modes

This commentary discusses common relevant themes that have been highlighted across contributions in this special issue on "Creativity Assessment: Pitfalls, Solutions, and Standards." We first highlight the challenges of operationalizing creativity through the use of a range of measurement approaches that are simply not tapping into the same aspect of creativity. We then discuss pitfalls and challenges of the three most popular measurement methods employed in the field, namely divergent thinking tasks, productbased assessment using the consensual assessment techniques, and self-report methodology. Finally, we point to two imperative standards that emerged across contributions in this collection of articles, namely transparency (need to accurately define, operationalize, and report on the specific aspect[s] of creativity studied) and homogenization of creativity assessment (identification and consistent use of an optimal "standard" measure for each major aspect of creativity). We conclude by providing directions on how the creativity research community and the field can meet these standards.

International audienceThis article provides a historical presentation of creativity assessment from a psychological perspective (since Guilford), from traditional divergent thinking tasks, to current theoretical models of creativity assessment which allow creativity to be assessed in different domains, capturing the multidimensionality of creative potential (e.g. EPoC). These techniques and alternative assessment tools are contextualized by addressing their interest for educational programs which take into account children's needs (as suggested by their creative profile). Finally, we discuss the importance of assessing creativity reliably in the classroom, to study the efficiency of these educational intervention programs aiming to promote student creativity