The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Defining and measuring creativity:Are creativity tests worth using?
Abstract
Creativity tests measure specific cognitive processes such as thinking divergently, making associations, constructing and combining broad categories, or working on many ideas simultaneously. They also measure noncognitive aspects of creativity such as motivation (e.g., impulse expression, desire for novelty, risk‐taking), and facilitatory personal properties like flexibility, tolerance for independence, or positive attitudes to differentness. Raters can score the various kinds of test with substantial levels of agreement, while scores are internally stable to an acceptable degree. The tests also correlate to a reasonable degree with various criteria of creativity such as teacher ratings, and are useful predictors of adult behavior. Thus, they are useful in both research and education. However, they are best thought of as measures of creative potential because creative achievement depends on additional factors not measured by creativity tests, such as technical skill, knowledge of a field, mental health, or even opportunity. However, the multidimensional creativity concept they define indicates that assessments should be based on several tests, rather than relying on a single score.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The associative basis of the creative process.
Mednick, S. (1962) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0048850 · Cited by 4,140
Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-Analytic Studies
Carroll, J. B. (1993) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511571312 · Cited by 4,121
Guilford, J. P. (1950) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0063487 · Cited by 3,588
A Handbook of Child Psychology
(1934) · Nature · doi:10.1038/133515b0 · Cited by 2,273
Sattler, J. M. (1992) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,677
Education of the Gifted and Talented
DAVIS, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (1985) · Cited by 1,018
Modes of Thinking in Young Children
Shulman, L. S., Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. (1966) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.2307/1162039 · Cited by 680
Education for the Gifted and Talented
Chan, D. W. (2015) · International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.92137-8 · Cited by 503
Adaptors and Innovators: Styles of Creativity and Problem-solving
Evans, K. J. (1990) · Journal of the Operational Research Society · doi:10.1057/jors.1990.114 · Cited by 409
Is the proof in the pudding? Reanalyses of Torrance׳s (1958 to present) longitudinal data
Plucker, J. A. (1999) · Creativity Research Journal · doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1202_3 · Cited by 390
Cited by
Can We Trust Creativity Tests? A Review of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT)
Kim, K. H. (2006) · Creativity Research Journal · doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1801_2 · Cited by 830
Byron, K., Khazanchi, S., & Nazarian, D. (2010) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0017868 · Cited by 491
Creativity in entrepreneurship education
Yar Hamidi, D., Wennberg, K., & Berglund, H. (2008) · Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development · doi:10.1108/14626000810871691 · Cited by 438
Frontotemporal and dopaminergic control of idea generation and creative drive
Flaherty, A. W. (2005) · Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.20768 · Cited by 401
Kim, K. H., Cramond, B., & Bandalos, D. L. (2006) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164405282456 · Cited by 160
Metadata
- Authors
- Cropley, A. J.
- Venue
- Roeper Review
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2000-12
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 72-79
- ISSN
- 0278-3193 (ISSN-L)
- 1940-865X
- OpenAlex
- W1996779371
- Cited by
- 383
- References
- 38
- FWCI
- 1.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Defining and measuring creativity:Are creativity tests worth using? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02783190009554069
- The paper
- Cropley, A. J. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity:Are creativity tests worth using? Roeper Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190009554069
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.