Objective measure of scientific creativity: Psychometric validity of the Creative Scientific Ability Test

By M. Ayas, Uğur Sak. 2014

108 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.

The relative influences of domain knowledge and domain-general divergent thinking on scientific creativity and mathematical creativity (2017, background): “Divergent thinking ability has also been considered to measure the abilities of fluency, flexibility and originality in the creativity of these two domains (Ayas & Sak, 2014; Haylock, 1987a, 1997; Hu & Adey, 2002; Lee et al., 2003; Leikin, 2009; Leikin & Lev, 2013; Sak & Ayas, 2013).”
The Practicality and Effectiveness of Collaborative Creativity Learning (CCL) Model by Using PhET Simulation to Increase Students’ Scientific Creativity (2018, background): “…skill is reflected through unusual use, technical production, hypothesizing, science problem solving, creative experimental, and science production (Ayas & Sak 2014; Hu & Adey 2010; Hu, et al., 2013; Kang et al., 2015; Raj & Saxena, 2016; Siew et al., 2014; Suyidno et al., 2017; Suyidno et al.,…”
Convergent Thinking Moderates the Relationship between Divergent Thinking and Scientific Creativity (2019, background): “The process of scientific problems solution usually involved three stages (Ayas & Sak, 2014; Hu & Adey, 2002; Lee et al., 2015; Sak & Ayas, 2013): problem generation, method searching, and choice.”