Norming the Muses: Establishing the Psychometric Properties of the Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale

The Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS; Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Counting the muses: Development of the Kaufman domains of creativity scale (K-DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 298-308. doi:10.1037/a0029751) is a self-report assessment of five creative domains: Everyday, Scholarly, Performance, Scientific, and Artistic. This investigation was designed to reassess the factor structure of the K-DOCS, examine its measurement invariance across men and women, and develop norms across the five domains. Data on 22,013 American participants who had completed the assessment as part of past or ongoing studies between 2012 and 2020 were collated across multiple samples. Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that both five- and nine-factor solutions had superior fit compared to a one-factor solution. The models were also gender invariant, indicating that creative domains were assessed similarly across male and female samples. Norms across gender and age-groups were provided to enable future comparisons in research settings; it is not recommended to use these norms in clinical or diagnostic contexts. The investigation concluded that the K-DOCS is a robust psychometric tool for the self-assessment of creativity across domains

Joining the Conversation: A Commentary on Glăveanu’s Critical Reading

In this commentary, I add my thoughts to Glăveanu’s excellent target article. I add two points to move the dialogue forward. One point is that although as a field we do have our portion of the blame, other disciplines must also share the burden. When new areas “discover” creativity they often begin anew, or claim there is no consensus, or else start and end with Guilford and Torrance. However, my second point is that the answer, to me, is via collaboration and dialogue. The people who are “scholarly bilingual” – who “speak” creativity jargon but also understand the ins and outs of another field – are the keys. Conversations and collaborations can help advance the [email protected] of Connecticut, USA1222022

Measuring Creativity for Innovation Management

Identifying the extent and nature of the creativity of new products is a key for innovation management. The revised Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale (CSDS) is a 27-item scale based on a theoretical model of functional creativity, consisting of five main criteria: Relevance & Effectiveness, Problematization, Propulsion, Elegance and Genesis. The CSDS offers potential for differentiated assessments of product creativity as part of the larger process of innovation. Non-expert judges rated a series of mousetrap designs using a 30-item version of the CSDS. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a simple structure that corresponded closely to the a priori theoretical model of functional creativity. The untrained judges were able to use the scale with a high degree of reliability and internal consistency. The scale offers a tool for managing innovation, especially for stimulating creativity and diagnosing the creativity of products

The Effect of Emotional Intelligence and Task Type on Malevolent Creativity

Malevolent creativity (MC), or intending to inflict harm in original ways, is an aspect of creativity that has received little empirical attention. It reasons that generating malevolently creative products in response to a problem is dependent upon individual differences and environmental factors, especially with regard to the social and emotional content of a particular problem. A personality variable strongly associated with how individuals acknowledge and respond to such social and emotional content is emotional intelligence (EI). Individuals with higher EI often solve problems in cooperative, beneficial, and positive ways, which seems contrary to solving a problem with MC. In addition to testing whether EI is negatively related to MC in general, we analyzed whether that negative relationship would persist even after controlling for cognitive ability and task effects. Those questions were examined across two studies. Results suggest that individuals with lower EI are more likely to respond to different types of problems with increased instances of MC even when the social or emotional content of those problems are factored out. The implications and limitations of these studies, as well as future directions for the study of MC, are discussed

The Interactive Effects of Self-Perceptions and Job Requirements on Creative Problem Solving

Over the years, researchers have focused on ways to facilitate creativity in the workplace by looking at individual factors and organizational factors that affect employee creativity (Woodman, Sawyer, & Griffin, 1993). In many cases, the factors that affect creativity are examined independently. In other words, it is uncommon for researchers to look at the interaction among individual and organizational factors. In this study, it is argued that to get a true understanding of how to maximize creativity in the workplace, organizational researchers must look at the interaction between organizational factors and individual factors that affect employee creativity. More specifically, the current study looked at an individual\u27s perceptions about his or her ability to be creative (i.e., individual factor) and perceptions of requirements for creativity in the workplace (i.e., an organizational factor). The results indicated that individuals who have a high belief about their ability to be creative (an individual factor) were most creative when they also perceived requirements for creativity in the workplace (an organizational factor). Furthermore, individuals who had low perceptions of creative ability were still able to perform creatively when they had high perceptions of requirements for creativity. This suggests that, to maximize creativity, organizations should focus on both individual and organizational factors that affect employee creativity

Cantankerous creativity: Honesty–Humility, Agreeableness, and the HEXACO structure of creative achievement

Creativity research has suggested that creative people are low in agreeableness. To explore this issue, we applied the HEXACO model of personality structure, which offers an expanded representation of interpersonal traits, particularly a distinction between Honesty–Humility and Agreeableness. A sample of 1304 adults completed the HEXACO-60 and several measures of creative achievement and activities. Latent variable models found that Agreeableness had no relationship with creativity, but Honesty–Humility did: people lower in Honesty–Humility had higher creativity scores, consistent with past work on arrogance and pretentiousness among creative people

Assessing Creativity With Self-Report Scales : A Review and Empirical Evaluation

This article reviews recent developments in the assessment of creativity using self-report scales. We focus on four new and promising scales: the Creative Achievement Questionnaire, the Biographical Inventory of Creative Behaviors, the revised Creative Behavior Inventory, and the Creative Domain Questionnaire. For each scale, we review evidence for reliability, validity, and structure, and we discuss important methodological features for users to consider. We then present new analyses of each scale based on a large, diverse sample. We evaluate each scale\u27s item-level and scale-level psychometric features, using both classical test theory and item response theory, and we examine how the scales converge. All four scales performed well and covaried highly with each other. Based on the latest generation of tools, self-report creativity assessment is probably much better than creativity researchers think it is

Evaluation of Self-Perceptions of Creativity: Is It a Useful Criterion?

Self-evaluations or self-perceptions of creativity have been used in the past both as predictors of creative performance and as a criterion. Four measures utilizing self-perceptions of creativity were assessed for their usefulness as criterion measures of creativity. Analyses provided evidence of domain specificity of self-perceptions. The scales correlated with self-report measures of creativity, but not with objective measures. Self-perceptions of creativity had strong to moderate relationships with personality and creative self-efficacy. These results suggest that while self-perceptions of creativity may provide some information about creativity, researchers should be cautious when using this measure as a criterion

Perfectionism: The Good, the Bad, and the Creative

The influence of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism on creativity was examined. Initially, six measures of creativity were administered, including creative self-perceptions, behavior, and performance measures. Adaptive perfectionism was weakly positively related to creativity, whereas maladaptive perfectionism was unrelated to creativity across five of the six measures. A follow-up study assessed whether initial findings could be generalized to an everyday problem-solving task. Results indicated that adaptive perfectionism was related to higher quality but not originality of solutions. Further, a curvilinear relationship in the shape of an inverted “U” occurred between adaptive perfectionism and four of eight creativity measures. Overall, adaptive perfectionism was consistently, albeit weakly, related to creativity across various types of measures, whereas maladaptive perfectionism was not related to creativity