Unusual Uses Test

Wilson, R. C.; Guilford, J. P.; Christensen, P.R.

doi:10.1037/t50605-000

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To test the robustness of our results against different scoring procedures, we further analyzed AUT responses through a second automated scoring package (Mildner, 2020). The software calculates four conceptually unique facets of creativity: (1) fluency, (2) elaboration, (3) flexibility, and (4) originality.…”

Section: Exploratory Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What are the benefits of mind wandering to creativity?

Murray

Liang

Brosowsky

et al. 2024

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A primary aim of mind-wandering research has been to understand its influence on task performance. While this research has typically highlighted the costs of mind wandering, a handful of studies have suggested that mind wandering may be beneficial in certain situations.Perhaps the most-touted benefit is that mind wandering during a creative-incubation interval facilitates creative thinking. This finding has played a critical role in the development of accounts of the adaptive value of mind wandering and its functional role, as well as potential mechanisms of mind wandering. Thus, a demonstration of the replicability of this important finding is warranted. Here, we attempted to conceptually replicate results of a highly cited laboratory-based experiment supporting this finding. However, across two studies (N = 443), we found no evidence for the claim that mind wandering during a creative-incubation interval facilitates a form of creativity associated with divergent thinking. We suggest that our failed conceptual replication stems from an inadequate characterization of mind wandering (taskunrelated thought), and that there are good reasons to think that task-unrelated thought is unlikely to be causally related to creativity. Our results cast doubt on the claim that taskunrelated thought during an incubation interval enhances divergent creativity while also offering some prescriptions for how future research might further elucidate the cognitive benefits of mind wandering.

show abstract

Section: Exploratory Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What are the benefits of mind wandering to creativity?

Murray

Liang

Brosowsky

et al. 2024

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…I 2 was calculated from the Q value, (QÀdf/Q) 9 100 (Higgins & Thompson, 2002) and is interpreted as a percentage value. A larger I 2 indicates a larger amount of (Guilford, 1968;Rawat & Agarwal, 1977;Wallach & Kogan, 1965), including Utility Test (Guilford, 1967); Unusual Uses; Alternate Uses, (Guilford, 1959, Guilford, Merrifield, & Wilson, 1958, May, 1961; Adapted version of the Object Uses, Word Uses, Associational fluency (Guilford, 1957); Ideational fluency (Guilford, 1957); Word Fluency, Expressive Fluency; Associational Fluency; Ideational Fluency; Word fluency (Guilford, 1957); Plot Titles and Plot Questions (May, 1961); Redefinition A and B; Line Meanings, Drawing completion (Schulman, 1966); Drawing completion (Schulman, 1966); Incomplete Line Drawing Test (Greenberg, Shore, & Davidson, 1972); Circles and Square (Torrance, 1962); Sketch Task (Savoca, 1965); Block Task (Savoca, 1965); Concealed Figures (Anderson & Cropley, 1966); Hidden Figures Task (Savoca, 1965); Consequences Test , Guilford, Merrifield, & Wilson, 1958, Just Suppose Test (Torrance, 1974); What will happen if ; Symbol production (Christensen & Guilford, 1959;Wilson, Christensen, Merrifield, & Guilford, 1960); Real World Problems, Seeing problems (Merrifield, Guilford, & Guilford, 1980); Problem Finding Tests; Picture story completion ; Toy improvement (Torrance, 1965); Object Improvement, Sentence Improvement (May, 1961); New version of the Chinese Creative Thinking Test (Wu et al, 1999); The Minnesota Tests of Creative Thinking (Torrance, 1962); Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Figural (Torrance, 1966); Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Verbal (Torranc...…”

Section: Effect Size Calculationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socio‐Economic Status and Creativity: A Meta‐Analysis

Acar

Tadik²,

Uysal

et al. 2022

Journal of Creative Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, we examined the relationship between socio-economic status (SES) and creativity through a meta-analysis of 885 effect sizes from 151 samples in 117 studies. Analyses of a multivariate model with a robust variance estimator showed a small positive correlation between creativity and SES (r = .120, 95% CI [0.086, 0.154]). Further analyses with four groups of moderators (i.e., creativity measure, SES indicator, sample characteristics, and study characteristics) indicated that the mean effect size is significantly higher when the creativity index is flexibility rather than fluency or when SES is measured by parental or one's own level of education and parental occupation rather than the location of residency. In addition, the relationship between creativity and SES dissipated as the students progressed from elementary school through college. The potential role of schooling in the creativity-SES link is discussed.

show abstract

“…The field of creativity assessment has been heavily relying on the alternate uses test (Guilford, Merrifield, & Wilson, 1958) at the expense of other available tasks .…”

Section: Selection Of the Tasks And Task Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring original thinking in elementary school: Development and validation of a computational psychometric approach.

Acar,

Dumas,

Organisciak

et al. 2024

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Creativity is highly valued in both education and the workforce, but assessing and developing creativity can be difficult without psychometrically robust and affordable tools. The open-ended nature of creativity assessments has made them difficult to score, expensive, often imprecise, and therefore impractical for school-or district-wide use. To address this challenge, we developed and validated the Measure of Original Thinking for Elementary School (MOTES) in five phases, including the development of the item pool and test instructions, expert validation, cognitive pilots, and validation of the automated scoring and latent test structure. MOTES consists of three game-like computerized activities (uses, examples, and sentences subscales), with eight items in each for a total of 24 items. Using large language modeling techniques, MOTES is scored for originality by our open-access artificial intelligence platform with a high level of agreement with independent subjective human ratings across all three subscales at the response level (rs = .79, .91, and .85 for uses, examples, and sentences, respectively). Confirmatory factor analyses showed a good fit with three factors corresponding to each game, subsumed under a higher-order originality factor. Internal consistency reliability was strong for both the subscales (H = 0.82, 0.85, and 0.88 for uses, examples, and sentences, respectively) and the higher-order originality factor (H = 0.89). MOTES scores showed moderate positive correlations with external creative performance indicators as well as academic achievement. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to the challenges of assessing creativity in schools and research. Educational Impact and Implications StatementThis study introduces Measure of Original Thinking for Elementary School (MOTES), a validated assessment tool consisting of three game-like computerized activities, to address the challenge of assessing and nurturing creativity in education. By employing large language modeling methods, MOTES demonstrates remarkable correlations with human ratings, representing a significant leap forward in computational psychometrics for creativity assessment. The automated scoring methods employed by MOTES overcome cost-ineffectiveness and lack of affordability issues associated with traditional creativity tests, offering a reliable and affordable means of measuring original thinking in the verbal domain. These scores can be utilized alongside other indicators of school learning and academic achievement, highlighting the potential for creativity assessment to play a pivotal role in schoolbased programming and development efforts.

show abstract

Unusual Uses Test

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

What are the benefits of mind wandering to creativity?

What are the benefits of mind wandering to creativity?

Socio‐Economic Status and Creativity: A Meta‐Analysis

Measuring original thinking in elementary school: Development and validation of a computational psychometric approach.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About