ISSN 1671-3710
CN 11-4766/R
主办：中国科学院心理研究所
出版：科学出版社

心理科学进展 ›› 2016, Vol. 24 ›› Issue (1): 31-45.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2016.00031

• 研究前沿 • 上一篇    下一篇

有关创造力测量的一些思考

贡喆1;刘昌1;沈汪兵2,1   

  1. (1南京师范大学心理学院暨认知神经科学实验室, 南京 210097)
    (2河海大学公共管理学院暨应用心理研究所, 南京 210098)
  • 收稿日期:2015-04-27 出版日期:2016-01-15 发布日期:2016-01-15
  • 通讯作者: 刘昌, E-mail: liuchang@njnu.edu.cn

Several thoughts on measuring creativity

GONG Zhe1; LIU Chang1; SHEN Wangbing2,1   

  1. (1 Lab of Cognitive Neuroscience and School of Psychology, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210097, China)
    (2 School of Public Administration and Institute of Applied Psychology, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)
  • Received:2015-04-27 Online:2016-01-15 Published:2016-01-15
  • Contact: LIU Chang, E-mail: liuchang@njnu.edu.cn
  • Supported by:

    江苏省第四期“333高层次人才培养工程”科研项目; 国家自然科学基金(31500870); 中央高校基本业务费项目(2014B15314); 博士学术新人培育(1812000002120)

PDF (PC)

4921

被引次数

33

摘要：

创造力测量是创造力研究的基础, 然而该领域研究成果却一直饱受质疑, 因此如何准确测量创造力是研究者亟需解决的问题。近几年, 创造力测量领域围绕一些研究热点, 在多方面取得显著进展。例如：发散思维测验独特性维度的计分问题, 或许可以通过主观计分法解决; 顿悟类测验可能表征个体创造力水平, 但效度仍有待于进一步确认; 创造力成就测验可能带来的共同方法变异问题, 需要通过合理应用测验规避; 同感评估技术或许会引起评定者效应; 研究者开始从语义网络角度测量创造力等等。未来该领域研究应当在：基本概念问题上达成共识; 从测验内容和施测过程优化测验质量; 采用混合测验的策略以及通过跨领域研究增进测量技术多样化等方面进行努力。

关键词: 创造力, 创造力测量, 创造力测验, 发散思维测验

Abstract:

 Creativity measurements are the foundation of creativity research. However, the accuracy of the results of creativity measurements have been long questioned by scholars in the field, making precise creativity measurements an urgent topic for exploration. For example, the divergent thinking test is central in the study of creativity, but its traditional scoring systems have faced well documented problems. Insight tests may represent individual creativity levels, but their validity still remains to be confirmed. Creative achievement tests are not always used legitimately, which may cause common method variance, and consensual assessment techniques may cause rater effects.

Fortunately, however, in recent years, remarkable progress has been achieved in some creativity measurement hotspots. For example, new subjective scoring methods for assessing the uniqueness dimension of divergent thinking tests may improve assessment reliability and validity. This paper hopes to contribute to progress in this area, and researchers explore the measurement of creativity from semantic network aspect. Future research should focus on the following points: unifying basic conceptions, optimizing tests from content and process aspects, using mixed tests, increasing the diversification of tests through intersection research, etc.

Key words: creativity, measurement of creativity, creativity test, divergent thinking test