Cited by 45Creativity in Education and NeuroscienceDesign Education and PracticeCategorization, perception, and language

Improving Your Creative Potential without Awareness: Overinclusive Thinking Training

Chiu, Fa-Chung·2015·Thinking Skills and Creativity

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tsc.2014.11.001

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chiu, F.-C.
Affiliations
National Defense University (TW)
Corresponding author
Chiu, Fa-Chung
Venue
Thinking Skills and Creativity
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-03
Volume
15
Pages
1-12
ISSN
1871-1871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2072865066
Cited by
45
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2
FWCI
2.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Thinking Skills and Creativity (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
Keywords
creativity training, categorization, insight problem solving, fluency, originality, flexibility, semantic distance

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.

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