How do examples impact divergent thinking? The interplay between associative and executive processes.

de Chantal, Pier-Luc; Zielińska, Aleksandra; Lebuda, Izabela; Karwowski, Maciej

doi:10.1037/aca0000613

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 84 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Future research should also investigate whether the presence of example responses causes fixation or a carryover effect, leading students to use them as responses to subsequent test items (cf. de Chantal et al, 2023).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

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

Section: Discussionmentioning

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

show abstract

“Who” Is the Best Creative Thinking Partner? An Experimental Investigation of Human–Human, Human–Internet, and Human–AI Co‐Creation

Tang,

Hofreiter,

Werner

et al. 2024

Journal of Creative Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research suggests that working with generative artificial intelligence (AI), such as ChatGPT, can produce more creative outcomes than humans alone. However, does AI retain its creative edge when humans have access to alternative information sources, such as another human or the internet. We explored this question in a between‐group experiment with 202 German participants across four conditions (human–human dyads, human–Internet, and two human–AI groups with basic or specific instructions) and four creativity tasks (two alternate uses tasks, a consequences task, and a problem‐solving task). Results showed that the human–human condition obtained higher creativity scores in the divergent thinking tasks than the remaining groups. No significant between‐group differences were observed in the problem‐solving task. Moreover, interacting in human dyads made people more creatively confident, an effect not observed in the other groups. In addition, we compared human‐rated outcomes with AI‐based automated scoring (Ocsai). Interestingly, notable discrepancies emerged between the AI assessment and the human‐judged results, raising concerns about AI's susceptibility to “elaboration bias.” These findings highlight the benefits of human collaboration for creativity and call for further studies about the reliability and potential biases of AI in evaluating creative performance.

show abstract

Self‐Regulation Prompts Improve Creative Performance

Zielińska,

Lebuda,

Czerwonka

et al. 2024

Journal of Creative Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While people approach creative actions in diverse ways, navigating them effectively requires self‐regulatory effort. In this preregistered experiment, we examined whether simple self‐regulation prompts, provided across the stages of the creative process, make the outcomes more creative. Participants (N = 332) engaged in one of three creativity tasks—designing a logo, writing a short story, or preparing a greeting card—and documented their ongoing progress with photos. During the task, half of the participants received prompts tailored to their task progress, encouraging the employment of various self‐regulatory mechanisms (e.g., uncertainty acceptance, adjusting approach). Consistent with our predictions, promoting a strategic approach throughout the task led participants to develop more creative products than those in the no‐prompt condition. Moreover, we demonstrated two indirect paths behind the prompts' effectiveness: first, via enhancing positive active emotions, and second, through fostering a greater time commitment to the task. On a theoretical level, the proposed prompting approach highlights the advantages of self‐regulatory engagement during creative actions beyond solely idea generation strategies. Methodologically, our study underscores the simplicity of such interventions and their potential broad applicability.

show abstract

How do examples impact divergent thinking? The interplay between associative and executive processes.

Cited by 3 publications

References 84 publications

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

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

“Who” Is the Best Creative Thinking Partner? An Experimental Investigation of Human–Human, Human–Internet, and Human–AI Co‐Creation

Self‐Regulation Prompts Improve Creative Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About