The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Measuring divergent thinking originality with human raters and text-mining models: A psychometric comparison of methods.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“we investigate originality primarily by means of semantic similarity, using a well-performing sentence embedding model [72] whose direct predecessors [70] have been found to agree well with human judgments of originality in creativity research [6, 26].”
From Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideation (2024) · cites this paper as [26]
In the citing paper
“a metric which has been found to agree well with human judgments of semantic similarity [6, 26].”
From Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideation (2024) · cites this paper as [26]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–162 of 162
Malthouse, E., Liang, Y., Russell, S., & Hills, T. T. (2021) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104937 · Cited by 4
Agnoli, S., & Mastria, S. (2022) · Creativity Research Journal · doi:10.1080/10400419.2022.2152555 · Cited by 4
Orwig, W., Luchini, S. A., Beaty, R. E., & Schacter, D. L. (2025) · The Journal of Creative Behavior · doi:10.1002/jocb.70041 · Cited by 5
Symbiosis or stagnation? Investigating the impact of AI on creativity in L1 Chinese writing
Yao, G. (2025) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2025.102096 · Cited by 3
AI‐Powered Scoring for Creative Thinking: Methods and Challenges in PISA Assessment
Primi, R., Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Dumas, D., Organisciak, P., Patterson, J. D., Caliço, T., & Piacentíni, M. (2025) · The Journal of Creative Behavior · doi:10.1002/jocb.70082 · Cited by 6
Self-citationCreativity and Attention Control: An Individual Difference Approach
Ruiz, B. N., Esparza, L. V., Mock, J. R., Coyle, T. R., & Golob, E. J. (2023) · Creativity Research Journal · doi:10.1080/10400419.2023.2291631 · Cited by 3
“As expected, inter-rater reliability for rater-based originality was less than for the more objective or constrained metrics above (Experiment 1: 95.6%, κ = .23; Experiment 2: 96.9%, κ = .24), and was comparable to prior work using rater-based originality Dumas, Organisciak, and Doherty (2021).”
InfluentialA Random Walk Modeling Framework for Boosting the Creativity of Humans and AI
Vardi, S., & Choudhary, V. (2026) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2024.0982 · Cited by 2
Understanding ideational fluency as a survival process
Dumas, D., Dong, Y., Grajzel, K., Forthmann, B., & Doherty, M. (2021) · British Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjep.12469 · Cited by 4
Self-citationPredication of Writing Originality Based on Computational Linguistics
Yang, L., Xin, T., Zhang, S., & Yu, Y. (2022) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence10040124 · Cited by 3
Chen, P.-Z., Wu, C., & Chen, H. (2024) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101716 · Cited by 3
Gao, Q., Qian, M., Wang, A. X., & Dai, S. (2024) · Creativity Research Journal · doi:10.1080/10400419.2024.2433359 · Cited by 3
“For instance, some researchers have been exploring the possibility of automatizing the scoring of participants’ responses to divergent thinking tests and minimizing the potential for human rater biases (e.g., Beaty et al., 2022; Dumas et al., 2021; Forthmann et al., 2019).”
Generating Creative Scientific Ideas in Collaborative Learning Using Computer-Based Mind Mapping
Sari, E. A. D. P. (2023) · International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication · doi:10.17762/ijritcc.v11i9.9976 · Cited by 2
Liu, L., Zheng, X., Zhang, Q., & Yang, T. (2025) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101818 · Cited by 2
Ganor, O., Samuel, G., Stella, M., & Kenett, Y. N. (2025) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-025-02748-6 · Cited by 2
“Such quantitative direction has significantly advanced creativity research over the past decade (Beaty & Johnson, 2021; Dumas et al., 2021; Organisciak et al., 2023).”
de Chantal, P., Leblanc, M., Houde-Labrecque, C., & Labrie, C. (2026) · The Journal of Creative Behavior · doi:10.1002/jocb.70095 · Cited by 4
Haq, I. U., Pifarré, M., & Fraca, E. (2024) · International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET) · doi:10.3991/ijet.v19i05.47465 · Cited by 5
Huang, Y., Zhang, Z., Cao, G., Kenett, Y. N., & Xu, Z. (2025) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101821 · Cited by 2
Reversing the alternate uses task
Scherbakova, A., Dumas, D., Kagan, S., Vlaamster, T., Acar, S., & Organisciak, P. (2025) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101915 · Cited by 2
Self-citationCross-domain analogical reasoning ability links functional connectome to creativity
Yang, L., Zeng, R., Wang, X., Chen, J., Gu, J., Fan, J., Qiu, J., & Cao, G. (2025) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101808 · Cited by 1
Sankar, B., & Sen, D. (2025) · Journal of Engineering Design · doi:10.1080/09544828.2025.2537465 · Cited by 1
“In literature, elaboration generally refers to the degree of detail, precision, and completeness in idea descriptions (Acar et al. 2023; Dumas et al. 2021).”
InfluentialNon-Linear Relationships Between Creativity Ratings of Musical Improvisations and Melodic Complexity
van Welzen, K., Clemente, A., Ullén, F., & de Manzano, Ö. (2026) · Creativity Research Journal · doi:10.1080/10400419.2025.2599793 · Cited by 1
Tadson, B., Krisam, C., & Mädche, A. (2025) · Lecture notes in information systems and organisation · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-00815-2_14 · Cited by 1
Scherbakova, A., Rubenstein, L. D., Maki, K. E., Ridgley, L. M., Quigley, B., Thompson, S., Kim, B., & Vasconcelos, C. P. (2026) · Creativity Research Journal · doi:10.1080/10400419.2026.2632305 · Cited by 1
The Scientific Creative Thinking Test (SCTT): Reliability, Validity, and Automated Scoring
Beaty, R. E., Cortes, R. A., Luchini, S. A., Patterson, J. D., Forthmann, B., Baker, B. S., Barbot, B., Hardiman, M. M., & Green, A. E. (2026) · Creativity Research Journal · doi:10.1080/10400419.2026.2639038 · Cited by 12
Czerwonka, M., Benedek, M., Zielińska, A., & Lebuda, I. (2026) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2026.102872 · Cited by 1
Know when to trust: Making AI scoring more reliable for educational assessment
Organisciak, P., & Acar, S. (2026) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-026-03058-1 · Cited by 3
“Dumas et al. (2021) introduced the Open Creativity Scoring (OCS) system, which used term weighting to better represent text in geometric space, further improving the quality of semantic scoring.”
Self-citationSEMANTIC IMITABILITY IN THE PROCESS OF THINKING
Мазяр, О. (2023) · doi:10.32782/2312-8437.51.2023-1.10 · Cited by 1
Valueva, E. А., Panfilova, A. S., & Семеновна, Р. А. (2024) · Психология Журнал Высшей школы экономики · doi:10.17323/1813-8918-2024-1-202-225 · Cited by 1
Creativity Enhancement: A Primer
Ding, K., & Kenett, Y. N. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197677131.013.21 · Cited by 1
Seeing the Creativity in Talent Development Processes
Puryear, J. S. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197698181.013.0002 · Cited by 1
Bower, J., Acar, S., & Kursuncu, U. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4631741 · Cited by 1
Wahbeh, H., Cannard, C., Yount, G. L., Arnaud Delorme, A., & Radin, D. I. (2024) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/vjqnu · Cited by 1
Forthmann, B., Jankowska, D. M., & Karwowski, M. (2020) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/h2g4m
Apparatus for Teaching Physics: Circular Motion and an Inverse Square Machine.
Scott, A. (1989) · The Physics Teacher
Perspective Chapter: New Approaches to the Assessment of Domain-Specific Creativity
Altındıs, Z. T. (2022) · IntechOpen eBooks · doi:10.5772/intechopen.102311
Creativity and Critical Thinking Contribute to Scholarly Achievement
Runco, M. A., & Lee, L. E. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-1284-1_3
СМИСЛОВА АЛОГІЧНІСТЬ У ПРОЦЕСІ МИСЛЕННЯ
Мазяр, О. (2023) · Науковий часопис НПУ імені М П Драгоманова Серія 12 Психологічні науки · doi:10.31392/udu-nc.series12.2023.22(67).06
Loose and tight: Creative formation but rigid use of nominal compounds in conspiracist textsPreprint
Miani, A., van der Plas, L., & Bangerter, A. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/3m7tk
How the use of concept maps changes students’ minds and brains
Shealy, T., Gero, J. S., & Ignacio, P. (2024) · ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition · doi:10.18260/1-2--40731
Bridging the gap through common features: The semantic structure of creative metaphorsPreprint
Yang, T., Zheng, X., Dong, Z., et al. (2024) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/4fzgs
Spontaneous associative thought may facilitate scene-gist memory via implicit scene-labeling
Baror, S., Aminoff, E., & Kenett, Y. N. (2024) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-024-01672-y
“This automated analysis uses a pre-trained large language model (Organisciak et al., 2023), and is found to capture participants originality in the AUT (see also Beaty & Johnson, 2021; Dumas et al., 2021).”
Measuring Creativity in Academic Writing
Nagel, J. H. B. (2022) · doi:10.12794/metadc2048679
Creativity in Gifted Education Policy and Assessment
Grantham, T. C., Acar, S., Dumas, D., & Fox, S. S. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197698181.013.0023
Self-citationMeasuring Creative Potential and Growth in PreK–12 Education Contexts
Meyer, M. S., & Plucker, J. A. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197698181.013.0038
Cebeci, S. M., & Acar, S. (2025) · The Journal of Creative Behavior · doi:10.1002/jocb.70030
Semantic Measures of Creativity
Johnson, D. R., & Beaty, R. E. (2025) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-95504-1.00716-x
Educational background’s impact on designers’ ideation: brain, behavior, and stress
Colombo, S., Mazza, A., Cantamessa, M., Montagna, F., Monte, O. D., Ricci, R., Michielli, N., & Törlind, P. (2025) · Artificial intelligence for engineering design analysis and manufacturing · doi:10.1017/s0890060425100188
Alves, N. D. C., & von Wangenheim, C. G. (2025) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-34073-4.00021-6
Testing LLMs in the Wild. The case of reasoning about strategic managementPreprint
Bonaccorsi, A. J., Chiarello, F., Acampora, C., Bello, G., Niccolai, J., & Ruggeri, A. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5812559
Assessing the interaction of empathy and diversity in creative teams
Rodet, C. S. (2026) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics · doi:10.1016/j.socec.2026.102533
Ovando‐Tellez, M. (2021) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/c78e9d5ez77d2z4afczb6b7za8334d6f765c
Five Key Cognitive Attributes of Highly Creative Individuals
Dumas, D., & Kagan, S. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-09225-0_6
Self-citationAutomating Creativity Assessment with SemDis: An Open Platform for Computing Semantic DistancePreprint
Pronchick, J., Beaty, R. E., & Johnson, D. R. (2025) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints)
Vlaamster, T., Acar, S., Organisciak, P., Dumas, D., & Berthiaume, K. (2026) · Applied Psycholinguistics · doi:10.1017/s0142716426100587
“Because DT items are open-ended and involve memory processes, word frequency metrics (e.g., British National Corpus Consortium, 2007; Brysbaert & New, 2009; Davies, 2008) may influence the quantity and quality of the responses (Dumas et al., 2021; Forthmann et al., 2016; Ogurlu et al., 2023).”
Self-citationZhao, Y., Gui, H., & Zhang, S. J. (2026) · Systems · doi:10.3390/systems14050553
Koolman, E., Moore, G., Young, L., Brubaker, E. R., & Schauer, A. M. K. (2026) · Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering · doi:10.1115/1.4072161
Using Poly-Encoders for Computationally Efficient Automated Creativity Assessment
Grouchnikov, S., Gregory, P., & Noh, J. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-29755-6_32
“Traditional approaches rely on human judges, proving the process to be both time and resource-intensive [1, 10, 12].”
Rebuilding the Bridge: Overlooked Creativity Insights and Their Implications for Gifted Education
Puryear, J. S., Lamb, K. N., Acar, S., Dumas, D., Mammadov, S., & Rubenstein, L. D. (2026) · Gifted Child Quarterly · doi:10.1177/00169862261460090
“Validation studies for each of these functions are available in the peer-reviewed literature (Acar et al., 2025; Dumas et al., 2021; Organisciak et al., 2023), and such functions are being built into the workflow of psychometric assessments of creativity designed for use in school-based gifted…”
Self-citationHayee, S., Friedman, J., Bernstein, G. A., Klimes‐Dougan, B., Reigstad, K. M., Abebaw, E. F., Olson, M. E., Wu, P., Williams, R., Peña-Gutiérrez, A., et al. (2026) · Arts & Health · doi:10.1080/17533015.2026.2706807
A influência da idade na cotação de originalidade em um teste de criatividade figural
Nakano, T. D. C., Fusaro, G. J., Cano, I. W., et al. (2023) · Revista Ibero-americana de Criatividade e Inovação · doi:10.68087/recriai.v4.92
Metadata
- Authors
- Dumas, D., Organisciak, P., & Doherty, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Denver (US)
- Actors' Equity Association (US)
- Venue
- Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts
- Published
- 2021-11
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 645-663
- ISSN
- 1931-3896 (ISSN-L)
- 1931-390X
- OpenAlex
- W3044750169
- Cited by
- 158
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 12
- FWCI
- 14.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Denver
- 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
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
- Keywords
- divergent thinking, originality, human raters, psychometric comparison, creativity assessment
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
