Ideational fluency as a predictor of original problem solving.

Milgram, Roberta M.; Arad, Rivka

doi:10.1037/0022-0663.73.4.568

Cited by 24 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their use is based on the premise that the ability to produce a number of responses, problem solutions, or ideas increases the probability that one or more of them will be creative or original. However, results concerning these tests' validity have been equivocal, with relatively few studies showing limited evidence of discriminant and predictive validity (Milgram & Arad, 1981;Milgram & Milgram, 1976;Plucker, 1999a;Yamada & Tam, 1996). One theoretical issue that may relate to validity problems is the issue of domain specificity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Domain Specificity in Creativity Testing: A Comparison of Performance on a General Divergent‐Thinking Test and a Parallel, Content‐Specific Test

Diakidoy

Spanoudis

2002

Journal of Creative Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which domain‐specific components, such as content and type of task, influence divergent thinking and creativity by comparing the performance of 112 ninth‐grade students on two parallel divergent‐thinking tests. The Verbal Forms of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT) represented the domain‐independent measures, while two forms of a Creativity in History Test (CHT), whose items corresponded closely to those of the TTCT, served as the content‐specific measures. The results indicated that both content‐specific and task‐specific factors have significant effects on divergent‐thinking and creative performance. Implications concerning the definition of creativity as a construct and its measurement are discussed.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Domain Specificity in Creativity Testing: A Comparison of Performance on a General Divergent‐Thinking Test and a Parallel, Content‐Specific Test

Diakidoy

Spanoudis

2002

Journal of Creative Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These measures have been utilized in most empirical studies reporting the process of creative thinking (Barron & Harrington, 1981 ). Milgram (1983) and Milgram and Arad (1981) reported findings for children across a wide range of age, intelligence and socioeconomic status that provided strong support for the construct validity of the Guilford conceptualization of original thinking, and for the validity of using measures of ideational fluency as predictors of original problem-solving in practical life situations.…”

Section: Creative Thinking and Problem Solvingmentioning

confidence: 85%

Creativity in Gifted Adolescents: A Review

Milgram

1984

Journal for the Education of the Gifted

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article extensively reviews the interplay of cognitive growth and creative behavior within the context of adolescence. Through the work of earlier researchers as well as current studies being conducted by the author in Israel, three major issues are discussed: the evolution of creativity in adolescence; important personality traits of gifted and creative young people; and the actual creative behavior of gifted adolescents. Significant educational implications resulting from this survey of previous work are suggested for educators and researchers.Roberta M. Milgram Ph.D. is Senior Lecturer in Educational Psychology at the School of Education, Tel Aviv University. She may be contacted (use air mail) through the University in Ramat-Aviv 69978, Israel.

show abstract

“…Although experimental practices from the group and decision support system literature were reviewed rather extensively, design aspects from the psychology literature were only cursorily considered. Within the psychology literature, ideational fluency--the ability of an individual to generate ideas (Torrance 1990)--has long been considered a significant, relevant independent variable impacting creative performance (see, for example, Frederiksen and Evans 1974;Hargreaves 1982;Hocevar 1979;Houtz and Speedie 1978;Milgram 1983;Milgram and Arad 1981;Sawyers et al 1983). Traditionally, it has been accounted for within the psychology literature by recording the number of non-redundant ideas an individual generates before and after various treatment conditions.…”

Section: Research Design and Cssmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Ounce of Preventative Research Design Is Worth a Ton of Statistical Analysis Cure

Massetti¹

1998

MIS Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This response addresses the data analysis issues raised by Wierenga and van Bruggen (1998) concerning Massetti (1998). Their analysis suggestions were performed and resulted in no significant differences between the treatment conditions. However, these analyses are misleading because of normality and variance problems present in Massetti's dataset. Specifically, not controlling for individual performance differences in ideational fluency ability during experimentation created the need for the complex, but appropriate, analysis approach used in Massetti. This response further suggests that ideational fluency be included as an independent factor in future research on individual creativity support systems.

show abstract

Ideational fluency as a predictor of original problem solving.

Cited by 24 publications

References 6 publications

Domain Specificity in Creativity Testing: A Comparison of Performance on a General Divergent‐Thinking Test and a Parallel, Content‐Specific Test

Domain Specificity in Creativity Testing: A Comparison of Performance on a General Divergent‐Thinking Test and a Parallel, Content‐Specific Test

Creativity in Gifted Adolescents: A Review

An Ounce of Preventative Research Design Is Worth a Ton of Statistical Analysis Cure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About