Mark A. Runco

The Standard Definition of Creativity

This Correction focuses on issues surrounding definitions of creativity. No topic is more central to research on creativity. There is a clear need to “correct” at least one all-too-common oversight...

Divergent Thinking as an Indicator of Creative Potential.

Divergent thinking (DT) tests are very often used in creativity studies. Certainly DT does not guarantee actual creative achievement, but tests of DT are reliable and reasonably valid predictors of certain performance criteria. The validity of DT is described as reasonable because validity is not an all-or-nothing attribute, but is, instead, a matter of degree. Also, validity only makes sense relative to particular criteria. The criteria strongly associated with DT are detailed in this article. It also summarizes the uses and limitations of DT, conceptually and psychometrically. After the psychometric evidence is reviewed, alternative tests and scoring procedures are described, including several that have only recently been published. Throughout this article related processes, such as problem finding and evaluative thinking, are linked to DT.

Judgments of originality and appropriateness as predictors of creativity

Abstract Most contemporary theories of creativity recognize originality and some kind of appropriateness (e.g. fit or practicality). The present investigation was conducted to assess the contributions of originality and appropriateness to judgments of creativity. Three different collections of ideas, or “ideational pools” were organized on stimulus cards, with the number of original and appropriate ideas systematically manipulated in each. The ideas were responses from two different Instances divergent thinking tasks. Judges (71 college students) were asked to sort the pools according to three different criteria: originality, appropriateness, and creativity. Trend analyses were used to assess the degree to which the subjective ratings were associated with the objective levels of originality and appropriateness. Regression analyses were also conducted with the subjective ratings of originality and appropriateness (and their interaction) as predictors of subjective creativity ratings. In general, the subjective ratings of originality and appropriateness followed the objective levels, but an inverse relation between originality and appropriateness was apparent, with the lowest originality ratings occuring for the ideational pools with the highest number of appropriate ideas and vice versa. Furthermore, only subjective originality ratings were associated with creativity ratings. When all ideas were unoriginal, creativity ratings decreased (though not significantly) with increasing numbers of appropriate ideas within the pools. However, when objective levels of both originality and appropriateness increased, creativity ratings increased significantly. These results suggest that although it is not necessary for an original idea to be appropriate to be viewed as creative, original ideas are not valued less by being appropriate. However, with unoriginal ideas, appropriateness may inhibit judgments of creativity.

Creativity and the Finding and Solving of Real-World Problems:

Divergent thinking tests have been criticized for their low correlations with real-world performance. The primary objective of this study was to ascertain whether real-world problems are more predictive of creative accomplishments than problems contained in standard divergent thinking tasks. A second objective was to examine the relationship between performance on problem-finding tasks and traditional problem-solving tasks. Four tasks were administered to 77 elementary school students, with a check list of creative activities that was used as a criterion measure. Correlational results indicated that the real-world problem-finding measure was more predictive of creative accomplishments than standard divergent thinking tasks and the real-world problem-solving task. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that the real-world problem-finding task added significantly to the prediction of creative activities, beyond the prediction from the other tasks.

The psychoeconomic approach to creativity

Abstract The psychoeconomic model of the creative process is introduced in this article. This theoretical model utilizes the concept of human capital and postulates the existence of creative potential for each individual as the product of initial endowments and active investments in creative ability . The model predicts how much of an investment individuals are likely to make, and shows how this depends upon intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Like investments in education, the pursuit of creativity is based on consideration of costs (including psychic and temporal) and the expected benefits. Education and creative potential differ in several ways, leading the psychoeconomic model to predict that individuals will invest in these two forms of human capital in different ways. The model also uses the supply and demand framework to explain the rate of creative activity in several areas (e.g., art, business, research). The costs of producing creative ideas and the benefits to the individual and others are shown to be influential. Finally, the model is applied to the question of allocative efficiency, and suggests that society may be misallocating its resources. In this view, society as a whole would be better off shifting resources from other activities into the creative sphere.

Development and Psychometric Integrity of a Measure of Ideational Behavior

Although creativity is an important part of cognitive, social, and emotional activity, high-quality creativity assessments are lacking. This article describes the rationale for and development of a measure of creative ideation. The scale is based on the belief that ideas can be treated as the products of original, divergent, and creative thinking-a claim J. P. Guilford (1967) made years ago. Guilford himself assessed ideation with tests of divergent thinking, although through the years scores from these tests have only moderate predictive validity. This may be because previous research has relied on inappropriate criteria. For this reason, the Runco Ideational Behavior Scale (RIBS) was developed. It can be used as a criterion of creative ideation. Most items describe actual behaviors (i.e., overt actions and activities) that clearly reflect an individuals use of, appreciation of, and skill with ideas. Results obtained using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis are reported in this article. These suggest the presence of 1 or 2 latent factors within the scale. Based on the theoretical underpinnings of the scale, a 1-factor solution was judged to be more interpretable than a 2-factor solution. Analyses also supported the discriminant validity of the RIBS.

Problem discovery, divergent thinking, and the creative process.

Previous empirical research suggests that problem discovery is an important step in the creative process. The present investigation was conducted to examine the role of problem discovery in the divergent thinking and creative performance of adolescents. Three divergent thinking tests were administered to a group of adolescents. Each test contained three presentedproblems and one discoveredproblem. The discovered problem allowed the adolescents to think of a problem and then to provide solutions. Comparisons indicated that the adolescents generated significantly more responses to the discovered problems than the presented problems. Most important was that the unique variance of the discovered problems (controlling the variance shared with scores from the presented problems) was reliable and significantly related to five indices of creative performance. These results support the componential theory of divergent thinking and creativity, and are consistent with the developmental view of problem finding.

The Reliability and Validity of Ideational Originality in the Divergent Thinking of Academically Gifted and Nongifted Children

Divergent thinking tests are probably the most commonly employed measures of creative potential and have demonstrated adequate psychometric properties with many populations. Recently, however, a partial correlation evaluation revealed that the indices drawn from divergent thinking tests are highly redundant. That is, in the nongifted population, ideational “originality” and “flexibility” were seriously confounded by ideational “fluency,” and hence were not reliable indices of divergent thinking. Because the ideation of gifted individuals is qualitatively and quantitatively different from that of nongifted individuals, the present investigation utilized partial correlation procedures in order to compare the reliability of ideational originality in academically gifted and nongifted intermediate school children (N = 225). The results indicated that the divergent thinking interitem and intertest correlations of the gifted children were significantly larger than those of the nongifted children. Still, ideational originality was adequately reliable after fluency was controlled only in the figural (nonverbal) divergent thinking tests.

Handbook of Creativity: A History of Research on Creativity

The title we have given this chapter is meant to signal to readers that we recognize that the history we describe is one among other possible histories of the same subject. This chapter truly presents a and not the history of research on creativity. Our attempt to describe the broad and extended historical changes in the concept of creativity can be easily contrasted with efforts to describe the narrower historical changes in actual creativity. Bullough, Bullough, and Mauro (1981), Gray (1966), Kroeber (1944, 1956), Martindale (1992), Naroll et al. (1971), and Sorokin (1947) compared specific historical eras in terms of various indices of creativity. Bullough et al., for instance, compared eighteenth-century Scotland with fifteenth-century Italy. Historical differences in content and abstractness are also implied in studies of Zeitgeist; these assume that there is a “spirit” that is unique to creative eras (Boring, 1929; Simonton, in press). Additional historical perspectives are involved in studies of eminent creatorss developmental background and careers. Although they may not have influenced the meeting of research and creativity , investigations of eminent persons have contributed chiefly to the way we think about creativity (see, e.g., Albert, 1975; Gardner, 1994; Ochse, 1990; Roe, 1952). Our own perspective directed us to the work of eminent individuals (e.g., Francis Bacon, Darwin, Galton, Malthus, and Adam Smith) who had particular impact on the clarification and eventual meeting of the concepts of research and creativity.

Parents' and Teachers' Implicit Theories of Children's Creativity: A Cross-Cultural Perspective

ABSTRACT: A social validation methodology was applied across two cultures to examine the implicit theories of parents and teachers. Adults (N = 150) from the United States and India were rated on 68 adjectives for creativity and desirability. The results indicated that all groups distinguished between indicative and contraindicative aspects of creativity and, for the most part, viewed creative traits desirably. These results were qualified by the adjectives that received high ratings for creativity but significantly lower ratings for desirability. These provided evidence that creativity and desirability are related yet separate constructs and that parents and teachers recognize that some traits associated with creativity may be undesirable. Multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) revealed significant differences between the United States and India for intellectual and attitudinal clusters of adjectives, p < .001; however, parent and teacher differences were not found, p > .05. These findings support the notion that implicit theories are influenced by cultural traditions and expectations.