Testing conditions and creative performance: Meta-analyses of the impact of time limits and instructions.

Abstract

This study attempts to clarify the effects of varying testing conditions on creative performance in divergent thinking and product-based tasks. Two meta-analyses, one for time limits (short vs. long) and one for instructions (standard vs. explicit), were conducted.Moderator analyses were performed to examine whether the effects of time limits and instructions differ by measurement method, domain of creative performance, gender, study's country of origin, educational level, study quality, and scoring method of originality. It was also investigated whether the effects of time limits vary depending on whether long time condition is timed or untimed, and whether the effects of instructions vary under timed versus untimed conditions. A total of 57 effect sizes (12 studies) for time limits and 165 effect sizes (38 studies) for instructions were analyzed using a meta-analytic three-level model. The time limits meta-analysis showed that long time limits (vs. short time limits) significantly enhanced creative performance, with smaller effects in studies from the USA (vs. non-USA). Analyses on divergent thinking indicators showed that long time limits (vs. short time limits) yielded higher originality scores, with no significant differences for fluency or flexibility. Long time limits showed greater effects on fluency and flexibility in timed (vs. untimed) long conditions.The instructions meta-analysis revealed that explicit (vs. standard) instructions significantly enhanced creative performance. An examination of divergent thinking indicators showed that explicit (vs. standard) instructions resulted in higher originality scores, with no significant differences for fluency or flexibility. Explicit instructions demonstrated larger effects on originality in non-college (vs. college) subjects, as well as in untimed (vs. timed) conditions.

Percolating ideas: The effects of caffeine on creative thinking and problem solving

“…Although the ATTA is widely used and is based on the venerable Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (Torrance, 2008), its markers of originality are strongly affected by fluency (Silvia et al, 2008), often correlating close to .90 in large samples. Studying ways of separating quantity (fluency) and quality (creativity) has been a major part of the past decade in creativity assessment, such as changing the task instructions to emphasize quality (Said-Metwaly et al, 2019), having judges provide subjective ratings of the responses (Benedek, Mühlmann, Jauk, & Neubauer, 2013;Silvia et al, 2008), and using automated methods to evaluate the semantic distance of the responses (Green, 2016;Hass, 2017;Kenett, 2019).…”

“…Figural activities present incomplete figures, and participants are asked to generate drawings incorporating the figures. In all three activities participants are instructed to "be creative"(Nusbaum, Silvia, & Beaty, 2014;Said-Metwaly, Fernández-Castilla, Kyndt, & Van den Noortgate, 2019). Responses are scored for fluency (i.e.,…”

Percolating Ideas: The Effects of Caffeine on Creative Thinking and Problem Solving

“…Figural activities present incomplete figures, and participants are asked to generate drawings incorporating the figures. In all three activities participants are instructed to "be creative" (Nusbaum, Silvia, & Beaty, 2014;Said-Metwaly, Fernández-Castilla, Kyndt, & Van den Noortgate, 2019). Responses are scored for fluency (i.e., the number of generated responses and drawings), and originality (i.e., how novel or original responses are compared to a large pool of normative responses).…”

“…It is also possible that 200 mg is not a sufficient dose to impact idea generation during divergent thinking, but higher amounts (e.g., 400 mg) would result in reduced idea generation abilities.Although the ATTA is widely used and is based on the venerable Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking(Torrance, 2008), its markers of originality are strongly affected by fluency(Silvia et al, 2008), often correlating close to .90 in large samples. Studying ways of separating quantity (fluency) and quality (creativity) has been a major part of the past decade in creativity assessment, such as changing the task instructions to emphasize quality(Said-Metwaly et al, 2019), having judges provide subjective ratings of the responses…”

Executive and default network connectivity reflects conceptual interference during creative imagery generation

“…For the "Shapes" trials, participants were told to identify common shapes in the incomplete figure (e.g., rectangles). For the "Imagine" trials, participants were told to "be creative" and imagine a novel creative label for the incomplete figure (Nusbaum, Silvia, & Beaty, 2014;Said-Metwaly, Fernández-Castilla, Kyndt, & Van den Noortgate, 2019). Participants were told that they could "mentally manipulate" (e.g., rotate, elaborate, expand on) the incomplete figure when generating labels.…”