國立虎尾科技大學 |

Divergent Thinking Responses : = An Evaluation of Substantive Validity Under Multiple Scoring Approaches.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Divergent Thinking Responses :/
Reminder of title:	An Evaluation of Substantive Validity Under Multiple Scoring Approaches.
Author:	Smith, Kendal.
Description:	1 online resource (161 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-01, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International86-01B.
Subject:	Personality psychology. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798383207369

Divergent Thinking Responses : = An Evaluation of Substantive Validity Under Multiple Scoring Approaches.
Smith, Kendal.

Divergent Thinking Responses :An Evaluation of Substantive Validity Under Multiple Scoring Approaches. - 1 online resource (161 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-01, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of North Texas, 2024.

Includes bibliographical references

Divergent thinking (DT) tasks that solicit responses to open-ended stimuli are the most common form of assessment used in creativity research. Intended to measure creative potential, these tasks present researchers with multiple choices throughout administration and scoring that often result in widely varying scores. This study used a combined dataset from 9 independent samples (N = 1,066) containing DT responses (n = 15,935) to the alternate uses task to evaluate substantive validity under different scoring approaches. Human ratings of creative quality were compared to 11 additional quality scores based on statistical infrequency and semantic distance. Psychometric analyses were supplemented by review of response content to assess conceptual and operational correspondence. Results revealed several inconsistencies between and within scoring approaches, including considerable subjectivity required to group semantically equivalent responses before applying objective frequency rules; low reliability estimates for statistically unique responses; dictionary uses for some prompts scored as unique under 5% and 10% infrequency thresholds; variation in semantic distance scores of responses with similar meanings; and large within-subject differences across scoring types. Substantive review also indicated that how the creative dimension of appropriateness is operationalized can play a sizable role in score differences, such as treatment of responses featuring randomness, humor, fantasy, or cultural references. Recommendations for expanded reporting practices to support substantive validity in future DT research are discussed.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798383207369Subjects--Topical Terms:

1180475
Personality psychology.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Divergent thinkingIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Divergent Thinking Responses : = An Evaluation of Substantive Validity Under Multiple Scoring Approaches.
LDR:03117ntm a22004097 4500 001 1152227
005 20241122094202.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2024 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798383207369
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI31520243
035 $a (MiAaPQ)0158vireo3704Smith
035 $a AAI31520243
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Smith, Kendal. $3 1479136
245 1 0 $a Divergent Thinking Responses : $b An Evaluation of Substantive Validity Under Multiple Scoring Approaches.
264 0 $c 2024
300 $a 1 online resource (161 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-01, Section: B.
500 $a Includes supplementary digital materials.
500 $a Advisor: Rinn, Anne N.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of North Texas, 2024.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Divergent thinking (DT) tasks that solicit responses to open-ended stimuli are the most common form of assessment used in creativity research. Intended to measure creative potential, these tasks present researchers with multiple choices throughout administration and scoring that often result in widely varying scores. This study used a combined dataset from 9 independent samples (N = 1,066) containing DT responses (n = 15,935) to the alternate uses task to evaluate substantive validity under different scoring approaches. Human ratings of creative quality were compared to 11 additional quality scores based on statistical infrequency and semantic distance. Psychometric analyses were supplemented by review of response content to assess conceptual and operational correspondence. Results revealed several inconsistencies between and within scoring approaches, including considerable subjectivity required to group semantically equivalent responses before applying objective frequency rules; low reliability estimates for statistically unique responses; dictionary uses for some prompts scored as unique under 5% and 10% infrequency thresholds; variation in semantic distance scores of responses with similar meanings; and large within-subject differences across scoring types. Substantive review also indicated that how the creative dimension of appropriateness is operationalized can play a sizable role in score differences, such as treatment of responses featuring randomness, humor, fantasy, or cultural references. Recommendations for expanded reporting practices to support substantive validity in future DT research are discussed.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Personality psychology. $3 1180475
650 4 $a Educational psychology. $3 555103
650 4 $a Quantitative psychology. $3 1182802
653 $a Divergent thinking
653 $a Creativity
653 $a Alternate uses task
653 $a Malevolent creativity
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0525
690 $a 0632
690 $a 0625
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a University of North Texas. $b Department of Educational Psychology. $3 1469105
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 86-01B.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=31520243 $z click for full text (PQDT)