Is Originality in the Eye of the Beholder? Comparison of Scoring Techniques in the Assessment of Divergent Thinking

119 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Identifying and Assessing Creativity as a Component of Giftedness (2012, background): “Silvia et al. (2008) have had good success with subjective evaluation of DT test results, and Plucker, Qian, and Wang (2011) found evidence that the percentage scoring method (i.e., dividing originality scores by fluency scores) may be the most appropriate scoring strategy for determining…”
Multiculturalism and Creativity (2013, methodology): “The current study examined originality controlling for fluency (i.e., pure originality), in line with prior research (Hocevar & Michael, 1979; Plucker et al., 2011).”
Scoring divergent thinking tests: A review and systematic framework. (2019, methodology): “However, there are limited resources available to researchers interested in the various available scoring procedures of DT tests and lack of agreement on a uniform way in which these scoring procedures should proceed (e.g., Plucker et al., 2011).”
Approaches to Measuring Creativity: A Systematic Literature Review (2017, background): “These tests, which are also known as measures of ideational fluency, include open or ill-structured problems that require individuals to generate as many responses as possible, which are then scored to capture fluency (number of responses), originality (statistical rarity), flexibility (number of di”