CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15Creativity in Education and NeurosciencePsychometric Methodologies and TestingPsychological Testing and Assessment

Psychometric properties of Torrance test (Persian version) of creative thinking (A form)

Open access
rad, Iraj safaei, Karimi, Lotfollah, Ramezani, Valiollah, Ahmadi, Mohsen, Heshmati, Rasoul, Jafar, Esa·2010·Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences
DOI 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.301
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the normalization and the reliability and validity of the Torrance Test (A form) of Creative Thinking (TTCT). 1015 students (614 boys and 401 Girls) were selected through Multistage sampling and they were asked to respond to Torrance Test of Creative Thinking and Abedi Creativity Test (CT). results show that Test – retest reliability of TTCT was acceptable and Alfa Coefficient for fluency, Flexibility, Originality and elaboration subscales and total score of TTCT was 0.751, 0.812, 0.766, 0.832 and 0.784 respectively. Data analysis showed a significant relation between Fluency (0.236) and Flexibility (0.376) subscales of TTCT and TC (P<0.001).

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This study examined the Persian version of the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (A form) in Iranian high school students, reporting acceptable reliability and evidence of validity. It also developed separate normalization tables for male and female students.

Key findings

  • Cronbach’s alphas for fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration, and total TTCT were reported as 0.751, 0.812, 0.766, 0.832, and 0.784, respectively.
  • Four-week test-retest correlations for fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration were 0.651, 0.782, 0.546, and 0.612, respectively.
  • Concurrent validity with Abedi’s Creativity Test showed significant relations for TTCT fluency (0.236) and flexibility (0.376) subscales (P<0.001); the highest correlation was between TTCT originality and CT flexibility (r=0.392), and the lowest between TTCT flexibility and CT elaboration (r=0.116).
  • Subscale–total correlations were 0.813, 0.766, 0.845, and 0.939 for fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration (p<0.001); content validity was confirmed by expert ratings on a 7-point scale.

Methods

  • The population was male and female secondary-school students aged 14–18 in Tehran during the 2006–2007 academic year; the sample comprised 1015 students (614 male, 401 female) selected by multistage sampling from 22 Tehran educational regions.
  • Participants responded to the TTCT and Abedi’s Creativity Test; TTCT administration took 40–45 minutes, with tests administered to 15 students per administration.
  • Analyses included concurrent validity correlations, content validity ratings, subscale–total correlations, test-retest reliability over 4 weeks with 95 students, Cronbach’s alpha, and normalization tables by gender and study level.

Limitations

  • The paper states that its reliability coefficients were lower than Torrance’s and suggests low test-retest coefficients may be due to students’ awareness of the aims/items or reluctance to retake the test; it also recommends using practical criteria instead of Abedi’s test for concurrent validity and cautions against using normal tables to label students as creative/non-creative or relying on a single creativity test.
  • Evident from the text: the reported sample totals are inconsistent—the abstract says 1015 students (614 male, 401 female), while the normalization tables each report a total of 401 for females and 401 for males.
  • Evident from the text: the Results section’s internal-consistency sentence is incomplete, stating only “0.784 respectively” for the alpha values, whereas the abstract reports separate alpha coefficients.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.301

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 11 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Test-retest reliability of the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT) was acceptable.

    “results show that Test -retest reliability of TTCT was acceptable”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The raw score range for elaboration was 11 to 181 for females and 8 to 154 for males.

    “regarding the elaboration category it was from (11 to 181) for females and from (8 to 154) for males”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Separate normal tables were developed for male and female students at different study levels because mean and standard deviation differed.

    “Since the mean and the standard deviation different levels, the author has developed separate normal table for both male and female students at different study level.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    There was a significant relation between TTCT Fluency (0.236) and Flexibility (0.376) subscales and CT (P<0.001).

    “Data analysis showed a significant relation between Fluency (0.236) and Flexibility (0.376) subscales of TTCT and TC (P<0.001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The mean score of female students in fluency, originality and total scores of TTCT was higher than that of male students.

    “The mean comparison between male and female group showed that the mean score of the female's students in fluency, originality and total scores of TTCT was higher than of male's.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 7
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Test-retest correlation coefficients for TTCT fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration were 0.651, 0.782, 0.546 and 0.612 respectively.

    “Coefficient correlation of fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration in the first and second administration have been calculated to be 0.651, 0.782, 0.546 and 0.612 respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Cronbach's alpha coefficients for TTCT fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration and total score were 0.751, 0.812, 0.766, 0.832 and 0.784 respectively.

    “Alfa Coefficient for fluency, Flexibility, Originality and elaboration subscales and total score of TTCT was 0.751, 0.812, 0.766, 0.832 and 0.784 respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Correlations between TTCT subscale scores and total test score were 0.813, 0.766, 0.845 and 0.939 for fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration respectively (p<0.001).

    “obtained correlations between the subscales and total test of TTCT have been 0.813, 0.766, 0.845 and 0.939 for fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration respectively.(p<0.001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The total creativity raw score range was 37 to 281 for females and 20 to 255 for males.

    “totally the raw score of creativity varied for females from (37 to 281) and for males (20 to 255).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Cronbach's alphas for TTCT fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration and total test were 0.784 respectively.

    “Estimated Cronbach's alfas concerning fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration and total test have been0.784respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The raw score range for fluency was 6 to 28 for females and 0 to 28 for males.

    “The range of subject's raw scores concerning the category of fluency was from (6 to 28) for females and from (0 to 28) for males”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Torrance (1972, 1974) reported TTCT reliability coefficients of 0.82, 0.78, 0.51 and 0.78 for fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration respectively, and 0.86 for the total test.

    “Regarding the estimation of reliability of TTCT test (Torrance, 1972(Torrance, , 1974) ) the reliability coefficients have been 0.82, 0.78, 0.51, and 0.78 for fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration respectively.For the total test it has been 0.86.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Torrance, 1972 source
    • cites Torrance, 1974

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Torrance (1972) referred to content validity, concurrent validity, construct validity and predictive validity.

    “In a study Torrance (1972) has referred to content validity, concurrent validity, construct validity as well as predictive validity .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Torrance (1972) source
8 of 8

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is a lack of valid tests of creativity measurement in Iran.

    “Based on theoretical foundations and the lock of valid tests of creativity measurement in our country, the present study aims at the following purposes”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Abedi's creativity test is verbal and cannot measure different aspects of an individual's creativity.

    “Since Abedi's creativity test is verbal and can not measuring different aspects of an individual's creativity it may be replaced by Torrance's test”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Different factors are involved in the subject's creativity.

    “Since different factofs are involved in the subject's creativity, the normal tables should be used cautiously”
3 of 3

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Male fluency frequencies do not add to the reported total

    Major

    The frequencies in Table 3 sum to 513, not its reported total of 401.

    Reported 401 · recomputed 513

  • Female total-score mean differs from the sum of subscale means

    Major

    The four reported female subscale means sum to 139.73, rather than the reported total-score mean of 144.75.

    Reported 144.75 · recomputed 139.73

  • Female fluency frequencies do not add to the reported total

    Major

    The frequencies in Table 2 sum to 451, not the reported 401 female students.

    Reported 401 · recomputed 451

  • Gender conclusion reverses the reported originality means

    Major

    The discussion says females scored higher in originality, whereas Table 1 reports a female mean of 22.10 and a male mean of 32.64.

  • Female fluency percentage is inconsistent with its frequency

    Minor

    At a score of 19, Table 2 reports a frequency of 61 and a percentage of 1.6%. Among 401 females, 61 corresponds to approximately 15.2%.

    Reported 1.6 · recomputed 15.21197

  • Male fluency percentage is inconsistent with its frequency

    Minor

    At a score of 24, Table 3 reports 24 students as 8.3%. Of the stated 614 male students, 24 is approximately 3.9%.

    Reported 8.3 · recomputed 3.908795

6 of 6

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Baer, J. (1999). Gender different. In M. A. Runco and S. Pritzker(Eds). Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 1, pp.753-758). Sandiego: Academic Press.
  2. Biooki, Z. (1997). [Normalization of TTCT in the Student of Junior High of Tehran] (M.A. Thesis). Faculty of Psychology and Educational Science, Trbiat mo’alem University.(Persian).
  3. Haghighi, G., Behroozi, N., Shokrkon, H., & Mehrabi zade, M. (2004). [The comparition of nine-combinations of intelligence and creativity from personality perspective in Ahvaz first grade high school]. Journal of Psychology and Education,University of Shahid Chamran,3(10), 15-25.(Persian).
  4. Pila, M. M., Rodriguez,C., Grande. J. (2007). Gender different in creative thinking.journal of personality and individual difference, 43, 1137-1147.
  5. Torrance, E. P. (1969). Creativity. What research says to the teacher.Washington, DC: National Education Association and B. Princeton NJ: Personnel Press.
  6. Torrance, E. P. (1974). Norm-Technical Manual Torrance Test of Creative Thinking, Verbal test, form A and B. Figural test, form A and B, Personal Press Inc, Lexing ton, Massachusetts.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
rad, I. S., Karimi, L., Ramezani, V., Ahmadi, M., Heshmati, R., & Jafar, E.
Affiliations
  • Islamic Azad University of Hamedan (IR)
  • Kharazmi University (IR)
  • University of Tehran (IR)
  • Payame Noor University (IR)
Corresponding author
Heshmati, Rasoul
ORCID
Venue
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010
Volume
5
Pages
1429-1433
ISSN
1877-0428 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.301
OpenAlex
W1969586881
Semantic Scholar
515abbfacb7f4acddda3caa7b9e327914bb1396d
Cited by
15
References
9
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking, creative thinking, Persian version, psychometric properties, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration, students

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-23.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-23.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review