1968
DOI: 10.1037/h0026005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Factor analytic approach to the structural differentiation of description.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1970
1970
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
(4 reference statements)
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the time intervals between testing periods were not reported. Other test-retest reliabilities were reported by Stimson (1968), whose sample of 35 male college students showed test-retest reliabilities of .64 with a 6-month time interval between testing periods. The Friedman Well-Being Scale (Friedman, 1994) was chosen from among a variety of psychological instruments, many of which suggested a pathological orientation that potentially could have been offensive to the participant sample used in this research.…”
Section: Creativity and Well-being Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…However, the time intervals between testing periods were not reported. Other test-retest reliabilities were reported by Stimson (1968), whose sample of 35 male college students showed test-retest reliabilities of .64 with a 6-month time interval between testing periods. The Friedman Well-Being Scale (Friedman, 1994) was chosen from among a variety of psychological instruments, many of which suggested a pathological orientation that potentially could have been offensive to the participant sample used in this research.…”
Section: Creativity and Well-being Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…GAU depends on cognitive flexibility (Benedek, Konen, & Neubauer, 2012), so that people can avoid locking into a single category of uses. For example, in the following study, one person heard “button” and generated “as a doorknob for a dollhouse, an eye for a doll, a tiny strainer, to drop behind you to keep your path.” The GAU has exhibited various forms of validity (Gibson, Folley & Park, 2009; Harrington, Block, & Block, 1983; Stimson, 1968), and it has been used to assess the success of creativity training (Renner & Renner, 1971).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In response, some of them generated ideas like 'to write on paper,' 'used as whistle by blowing air in the cap,' and 'to use the pen cap as a bookmark.' The task has exhibited various forms of validity (Gibson, Folley, & Park, 2009;Harrington, Block, & Block, 1983;Stimson, 1968) and interrater reliability (Cronbach's alpha ¼ 1.00 [Fluency];.85 [Flexibility]; .71 [originality]; Colzato et al, 2013). GAU has also been used to test the success of creativity training (Renner & Renner, 1971).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%