Divergent thinking tests are used to select students for gifted programs. Studies on these tests, mostly conducted on non-gifted students, suggest that performance is influenced by the type of instruction given (standard vs. hybrid “be fluent AND original”) and time-on-task. The current study aimed to examine the effect of instructions and time-on-task on divergent thinking performance in gifted and non-gifted students in a 2 [gifted vs non-gifted] × 2 [standard vs hybrid instructions] design. The results showed that gifted students outperformed non-gifted students in fluency, while no significant difference was found between the two groups in originality. Creativity instructions improved both originality and fluency scores in verbal but not figural tests. As for time-on-task, gifted students took more time when completing divergent thinking tests as well as when they were given explicit instructions to “be creative.” Implications for gifted identification are discussed.
Abstract Creative things are always original, but they must be more than just original. They must also have some utility, effectiveness, or value. The present research tested the psychoeconomic definition of “value” and examined how value ratings fluctuated when individuals worked in groups or alone. This psychoeconomic definition of value is very different from that found in previous studies. It was based on ratings obtained after the students participating had been told that their grades depended on their teamwork. Previous studies have used hypothetical ratings of value, but here the ratings were meaningful: there was a contingency placed on making a good decision, and that decision focused on creative teamwork. This investigation also tested the idea that originality and value are both required for creativity. Psychoeconomic theory not only offers an objective and behavioural index of value. It also offers predictions about the “social costs” of working in groups. To test these ideas individuals received two tests of divergent thinking, either while alone (no social cost), working in a small group (low cost), or working in a larger group (high cost). Social preferences were controlled, as was extraversion. Results indicate that fluency did not diminish when the social costs were present. Moreover, originality increased when participants worked in groups. Findings also demonstrated that value judgments can be reliably assessed and that the interaction of value and originality accounted for a significant amount of the variability in creativity ratings.
The COVID-19 pandemic forced students’ learning to shift rapidly to an exclusively online environment. This led to an increase in issues such as anxiety and stress that may have negatively impacted student wellbeing. The present study was designed to investigate college students’ creative self-efficacy, self-regulation, and online academic engagement in relation to their wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study utilized a survey method to analyze data from 461 respondents, examining the academic, psycho-social, and demographic factors associated with changes in students’ wellbeing during COVID-19. The results show that the changes in students’ wellbeing during the pandemic were significantly and positively related to their engagement in e-learning, self-regulation, and creative self-efficacy. Students’ engagement in e-learning and self-regulation was significantly changed by students’ gender and academic grade levels. Race was a significant predictor of creative self-efficacy. Engagement in e-learning and self-regulation scores were highest among English Language Learners (ELL) students. Freshman students scored the lowest in creative self-efficacy. Compared to athletic students, non-athletes reported significantly higher engagement in e-learning, self-regulation, and creative self-efficacy. Discussions and recommendations are presented based on the results.
Abstract Evaluative skill, the ability to accurately assess ideas in terms of originality or creativity, is a critical component of creativity. It involves discarding bad ideas and discerning ideas that are worthwhile to pursue. In light of the growing research on the association between individuals’ evaluative skill and divergent thinking (DT), a research synthesis is needed to clarify discrepant results. Therefore, we examined the relationship between DT and evaluative skill with a three‐level meta‐analytic approach. Based on 96 effect sizes in 20 studies with a total sample of 3,019 participants, results indicated that DT was positively associated with evaluative skill, r = .13 (95% CI [.07, .20], p < .001). Follow‐up moderator analyses revealed that the type of DT tests, the source of ideas, and the type of evaluation tasks were significant moderators. Compared with Instances, Line Meanings, and Consequences, the relationship was (a) weaker when the Uses task was used as the DT test, (b) stronger when the evaluation task was based on Uses, and (c) stronger when people rated their own ideas than when they rated others. The findings implied that DT and evaluative skill are conceptually distinct but interrelated and suggested ways to enhance evaluative skill.
'%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0v30h60V0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='6' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='4' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30' clip-path='url(%23b)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='10' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='6' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)