Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Creative Thinking Abilities: Measures for Various Domains

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Teaching and Measuring Cognitive Readiness

Abstract

Although creativity and creative thinking have been mentioned in schools as part of an identification process of gifted and talented students, they have been largely neglected in the mainstream education scene. The measurement issue is one of the reasons for neglect in the development of creative talent, along with the high-stakes testing environment of recent years which has narrowed the curriculum to exclude the teaching and assessment of creativity. In this chapter, the need for measures of creative potential will be discussed by describing macro components that are foundations for realizing creative potential along with the need for developing quality measures of creative potential. Clarifying definitions of creativity and creative thinking are offered, as an informative definition for any psychological construct is a condition for developing quality measures. The chapter, then, focuses on the measures of creative-thinking ability, distinguishing domain generality and domain specificity of creative-thinking ability. As most of the creative-thinking measures have been domain-general, the chapter briefly describes the domain-general measures, followed by an in-depth description of domain-specific measures, especially Creative Real Life Problem Solving measures (e.g., Creative Real Life Problem Solving: Thinking and Imagination, Las Vegas, NV), with a hope that the measures of creative potential discussed will enable researchers and practitioners helping individuals learn to be more creative.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Almeida, L. S., Prieto, L. R., Ferrando, M., & Ferrandiz, C. (2008). Torrance Test of Creative Thinking: The question of its construct validity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3, 53–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997–1013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 19, 1154–1184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M., & Gryskiewicz, N. (1989). The creativity environment scales: The work environment inventory. Creativity Research Journal, 2, 231–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. (1994). The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 950–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anastasi, A., & Schaefer, C. E. (1969). Biographical correlates of artistic and literary creativity in adolescent girls. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 267–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arden, R., Chavez, R. S., Grazioplene, R., & Jung, R. E. (2010). Neuroimaging creativity: A psychometric view. Behavioural Brain Research, 214, 143–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (1991). Generality of creativity across performance domains. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 23–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (1993). Creativity and divergent thinking: A task specific approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (1994). Divergent thinking is not a general trait: A multi-domain training experiment. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 35–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (1996). The effects of task-specific divergent-thinking training. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30, 183–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (1998). The case for domain specificity of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 173–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (2003). Evaluative thinking, creativity, and task specificity: Separating wheat from chaff is not the same as finding needles in haystacks. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Critical creative processes (pp. 129–151). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The Amusement Park Theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27, 158–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basadur, M., & Hausdorf, P. A. (1996). Measuring divergent thinking attitudes related to creative problem solving and innovation management. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 21–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batey, M., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2010). Individual differences in ideational behavior: Can the big five and psychometric intelligence predict creativity scores? Creativity Research Journal, 22, 90–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Creative self-efficacy: Correlates in middle and secondary students. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 447–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2007). Toward a broader conception of creativity: A case for mini-c creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1, 73–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (Eds.). (2010). Nurturing creativity in the classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besemer, S. P. (1998). Creative produce analysis matrix: Testing the model structure and a comparison among products—three novel chairs. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 333–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilalić, M., McLeod, P., & Gobet, F. (2008). Inflexibility of experts—reality or myth? Quantifying the Einstellung effect in chess master. Cognitive Psychology, 56, 73–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronson, P. O., & Merryman, A. (2010, July 19). The creativity crisis. Newsweek, 44–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buijs, J., Smulders, F., & Van Der Meer, H. (2009). Toward a more realistic creative problem solving approach. Creativity and Innovation Management, 18, 286–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, S., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Reliability, validity, and factor structure of the creative achievement questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 37–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casakin, H., Davidovitch, N., & Milgram, R. M. (2010). Creative thinking as a predictor of creative problem solving in architectural design students. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4, 31–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, R. B., Eber, H. W., & Tatsuoka, M. M. (1970). Handbook for the sixteen personality factor questionnaire (16 PF). Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charyton, C., Jagacinski, R. J., & Merrill, J. A. (2008). CEDA: A research instrument for creative engineering design assessment. Psychology of Aesthetics and Creativity in the Arts, 2, 147–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clapham, M. M. (1998). Structure of figural forms A and B of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 275–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarizio, H. F., & Mehens, W. A. (1985). Psychometric limitations of Guilford’s structure of the intellect model for identification and programming for the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29, 113–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conti, R., Coon, H., & Amabile, T. M. (1996). Evidence to support the componential model of creativity: Secondary analyses of three studies. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 385–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1991). NEO five-factor inventory. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramond, B. (1994). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: From design through establishment of predictive validity. In R. F. Subotnik & K. D. Arnold (Eds.), Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent (pp. 229–254). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramond, B., Matthews-Morgan, J., Bandalos, D., & Zuo, L. (2005). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Alive and well in the new millennium. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 283–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creativity. (2011). In Dictionary com. Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/creativity

  • Cropley, J. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth using? Roeper Review, 23, 72–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Perennial.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich, A., & Kanso, R. (2010). A review of EEG, ERP and neuroimaging studies of creativity and insight. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 822–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 683–703). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fink, A., Grabner, R. H., Benedek, M., Reishofer, G., Hauswirth, V., Fally, M., et al. (2009). The creative brain: Investigation of brain activity during creative problem solving by means of EEG and fMRI. Human Brain Mapping, 30, 734–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleenor, J. W., & Taylor, S. (2004). The assessment of creativity. In J. C. Thomas (Ed.), Comprehensive handbook of psychological assessment: Industrial and organizational assessment (pp. 75–86). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Florida, R. L. (2007). The flight of the creative class: The new global competition for talent. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (1994). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity as seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gandhi. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gough, H. G. (1979). A creative personality scale for the Adjective Check List. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1398–1405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grigorenko, E. L., Jarvin, L., Tan, M., & Sternberg, R. J. (2008). Something new in the garden: Assessing creativity in academic domains. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50, 295–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grigorenko, E. L., & Tan, M. (2008). Teaching creativity as a demand-led competency. In O. S. Tan, D. M. McInerney, A. D. Liem, A. G. Ta, & A. G. Tan (Eds.), What the West can learn from the East: Asian perspectives on the psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 11–29). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Press (IAP).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, H. E., & Wallace, D. B. (1999). The case study method and evolving systems approach for understanding unique creative people at work. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 93–115). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P. (1968). Creativity, intelligence, and their educational implications. San Diego, CA: EDITS/Knapp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P., & Guilford, J. S. (1980a). Manual for the Christiansen–Guilford Fluency tests. Orange, CA: Sheridan Psychological Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P., & Guilford, J. S. (1980b). Manual for the consequences test. Orange, CA: Sheridan Psychological Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, K. (2003). Domain-specificity of creativity in young children: How quantitative and qualitative data support it. Journal of Creative Behavior, 37, 117–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harré, R., & Lamb, R. (1986). The dictionary of developmental and educational psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heausler, N. L., & Thompson, B. (1988). Structure of the Torrance Tests of creative thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48, 463–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, K. A. (2007). Scientific ability and creativity. High Ability Studies, 18, 209–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hickey, M. (2001). An application of Amabile’s consensual assessment technique for rating the creativity of children’s musical compositions. Journal of Research in Music Education, 49, 234–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsh, M. (2010, August 23 and 30). We’re No. 11! America may be declining, but don’t despair. Newsweek, 40–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hocevar, D. (1979, April). The development of the creative behavior inventory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED170350).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hocevar, D. (1981). Measurement of creativity: Review and critique. Journal of Personality Assessment, 5, 450–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2008a). Preventing talent loss. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2008b, 2009). The activities and accomplishments inventory. University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, and Tel Aviv University, School of Education, Ramat Aviv, Israel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2010). Creative thinking ability: Domain generality and specificity. Creativity Research Journal, 22, 272–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, E., O’Neil, H. F., & Feldon, D. (2005). Gender effects on mathematics achievement: Mediating role of state and trait self-regulation. In A. M. Gallagher & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Gender differences in mathematics (pp. 264–293). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, E., & Peng, Y. (2009). Creative real life problem solving: Thinking and imagination. Las Vegas, NV: University of Nevada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaksen, S. G., & Treffinger, D. J. (2004). Celebrating 50 years of reflective practice: Versions of creative problem solving. Journal of Creative Behavior, 38, 75–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaksen, S. G., Treffinger, D. J., & Dorval, K. B. (2011). Creative approaches to problem solving: A framework for innovation and change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iseman, J. S., & Naglieri, J. A. (2011). A cognitive strategy instruction to improve math calculation for children with ADHD and LD: A randomized controlled study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 184–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jellen, H. G., & Urban, K. K. (1986). The TCT-DP (Test for Creative Thinking-Drawing Production): An instrument that can be applied to most age and ability groups. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 11, 131–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kashdan, T. B., Rose, P., & Fincham, F. D. (2004). Curiosity and exploration: Facilitating positive subjective experiences and personal growth opportunities. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82, 291–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasof, J. (1997). Creativity and breadth of attention. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 303–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (Eds.). (2005). Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2006). Intelligent testing with Torrance. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 99–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond Big and Little: The four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, J. C., Beghetto, R. A., Baer, J., & Ivcevic, Z. (2010). Creativity polymathy: What Benjamin Franklin can teach your kindergartener. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 358–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (2010). The Cambridge handbook of creativity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. H. (2006). Can we trust creativity tests? A review of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT). Creativity Research Journal, 18, 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. H. (2008). Meta-analyses of the relationship of creative achievement to both IQ and divergent thinking test scores. Journal of Creative Behavior, 42, 106–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. H., Cramond, B., & Bandalos, D. L. (2006). The latent structure and measurement invariance of scores on the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking–Figural. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 459–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, A. P. (1970). Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity. Psychological Reports, 26, 791–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maker, C. J., Jo, S., & Muammar, O. M. (2008). Development of creativity: The influence of varying levels of implementation of the DISCOVER curriculum model, a non-traditional pedagogical approach. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 402–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meeker, M. N., Meeker, R. J., & Roid, G. H. (1985). Structure of Intellect Learning Abilities Test (SOI-LA) manual. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, R. M., & Hong, E. (2000–2009). Ariel real-life problem-solving. Ariel University Center of Samaria, Ariel, Israel and University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, R. M., & Hong, E. (2002). The activities and accomplishments inventory. Tel Aviv University, School of Education, Ramat Aviv, Israel, and University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, R. M., & Milgram, N. A. (1976). Tel Aviv Creativity Test (TACT). Ramat Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nemiro, J. E. (2001). Assessing the climate for creativity in virtual teams. In M. M. Beyerlein, D. A. Johnson, & S. T. Beyerlein (Eds.), Eighth annual University of North Texas symposium on individual, team, and organizational effectiveness (pp. 59–84). Oxford: Elsevier Science/JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, R. W. (1975). Measurement of ambiguity tolerance. Journal of Personality Assessment, 39, 607–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owens, W. A. (1960). The Owens creativity test. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owens, W. A. (1969). Cognitive, non-cognitive, and environmental correlates of mechanical ingenuity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parnes, S. J. (1966). Manual for institutes and programs. Buffalo, NY: Creative Education Foundation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parnes, S. J. (1988). Visioning. Buffalo, NY: Creative Education Foundation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearlman, C. (1983). Teachers as an informational resource in identifying and rating student creativity. Education, 103, 215–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piirto, J. (2007). Talented children and adults: Their development and education (3rd ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J. A. (1998). Point counterpoint, beware of simple conclusions: The case for content generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 179–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J. A. (1999). Reanalysis of student responses to creativity checklists: Evidence of content generality. Journal of Creative Behavior, 33, 136–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J., Runco, M. A., & Lim, W. (2006). Predicting ideational behavior from divergent thinking and discretionary time on task. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 55–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J. A., & Zabelina, D. (2009). And interdisciplinarity: One creativity or many creativities? ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41, 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rastogi, D., & Sharma, N. K. (2010). Creativity under concurrent and sequential task conditions. Creativity Research Journal, 22, 139–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (1991). The assessment of creative products in programs for gifted and talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 128–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiter-Palmon, R., Illies, M. Y., Cross, L. K., Buboltz, C., & Nimps, T. (2009). Creativity and domain specificity: The effect of task type on multiple indexes of creative problem-solving. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 73–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renzulli, J. S., Hartman, R. K., & Callahan, C. M. (1981). Teacher identification of superior students. In W. B. Barbe & J. S. Renzulli (Eds.), Psychology and education of the gifted (3rd ed., pp. 151–156). New York: Irvinton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A. (1989). The creativity of children’s art. Child Study Journal, 19, 177–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A. (2007). Creativity: Theories and themes: Research, development, and practice. New York: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A., Okuda, S. M., & Thurston, B. J. (1991). Environmental cues and divergent thinking. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Divergent thinking (pp. 79–85). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. K., John-Steiner, V., Moran, S., Sternberg, R. J., Feldman, D. H., Nakamura, J., et al. (2003). Creativity and development. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schooler, J. W., & Melcher, J. (1995). The ineffability of insight. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 97–133). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaheen, R. (2010). Creativity and education. Creative Education, 1(3), 166–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silvia, P. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2009). Is creativity domain specific? Latent class models of creative accomplishments and creative self-descriptions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 139–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (1984). Genius, creativity and leadership: Historiometric inquiries. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (1997). Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks. Psychological Review, 104, 66–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (1999). Creativity and genius. In L. A. Pervin & O. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 629–652). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55, 151–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, A., Mitchell, J., Bossomaier, T., & Pallier, G. (2004). The creativity quotient: An objective scoring of ideational fluency. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 415–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (2010). Assessment of gifted students for identification purposes: New techniques for a new millennium. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 327–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2004). Successful intelligence in the classroom. Theory Into Practice, 43, 274–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., & Jarvin, L. (2009). Teaching for wisdom, intelligence, creativity, and success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J., Lubart, T. I., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2005). Creativity. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 351–370). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, B., & Andersson, B. V. (1983). Construct validity of the divergent production subtests from the Structure-of-Intellect Learning Abilities Test. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43, 651–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2011). Creative self-efficacy development and creative performance over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 277–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, C. A., Kaplan, S. N., Renzulli, J. S., Purcell, J. H., Leppien, J. H., & Burns, D. E. (2002). The parallel curriculum: A design to develop high potential and challenge high-ability learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1972). Predictive validity of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Journal of Creative Behavior, 6, 236–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1974). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Test Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1981). Predicting the creativity of elementary school children (1958–80) and the teacher who “made a difference”. Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 55–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1993). The Beyonder in a thirty-year longitudinal study. Roeper Review, 15, 131–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1995). Insights about creativity: Questioned, rejected, ridiculed, ignored. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 313–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1999). Torrance test of creative thinking: Norms and technical manual. Beaconville, IL: Scholastic Testing Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (2000). Research review for the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking Figural and Verbal Forms A and B. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (2002). The manifesto: A guide to developing a creative career. Westport, CT: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P., & Khatena, J. (1970). What kind of person are you? Gifted Child Quarterly, 14, 71–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treffinger, D. J. (1985). Review of the Torrance tests for creative thinking. In J. Mitchell (Ed.), Ninth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 1633–1634). Lincoln, NV: Buros Institute of Mental Measurement.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treffinger, D. J. (2000). Practice problems for creative problem solving (3rd ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treffinger D. J., Isaksen, S. G., & Dorval, B. (2003). Creative problem solving (CPS version 6.1 TM): A contemporary framework for managing change. Sarasota, FL: Center for Creative Learning and Creative Problem Solving Groups.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanderbos, G. R. (2006). APA dictionary of psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children: A study of the creativity-intelligence distinction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, T. B., Patterson, M. J., & Sifonis, C. M. (2004). The role of specificity and abstraction in creative idea generation. Memory and Cognition, 16, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, T. B., & Sifonis, C. M. (1997). Task demands and generative thinking: What changes and what remains the same? Journal of Creative Behavior, 31, 245–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Creativity: Understanding innovation in problem solving, science, invention, and the arts. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Nevada, 453003, Las Vegas, NV, 89154-3003, USA

    Eunsook Hong

Authors
  1. Eunsook Hong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eunsook Hong .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , National Center for Research on Evaluati, University of Southern California, Longbow Drive 15366, Los Angeles, 91403, California, USA

    Harold F. O'Neil

  2. Office of Naval Research, Inglewood Ct. 2431, Arlington, 22043, Virgin Islands, USA

    Ray S. Perez

  3. National Center for Research on Evaluati, Standards, and Student Testing, CRESST/UCLA, Charles E. Young Drive North 301, Los Angeles, 90095-1521, California, USA

    Eva L. Baker

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hong, E. (2014). Creative Thinking Abilities: Measures for Various Domains. In: O'Neil, H., Perez, R., Baker, E. (eds) Teaching and Measuring Cognitive Readiness. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7579-8_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation