Factor structure of intelligence and divergent thinking subtests: A registered report
Psychologists have investigated creativity for 70 years, and it is now seen as being an important construct, both scientifically and because of its practical value to society. However, several fundamental unresolved problems persist, including a suitable definition of creativity and the ability of p...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9484676/?tool=EBI |
| _version_ | 1811183729815584768 |
|---|---|
| author | Russell T. Warne Sam Golightly Makai Black |
| author_facet | Russell T. Warne Sam Golightly Makai Black |
| author_sort | Russell T. Warne |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Psychologists have investigated creativity for 70 years, and it is now seen as being an important construct, both scientifically and because of its practical value to society. However, several fundamental unresolved problems persist, including a suitable definition of creativity and the ability of psychometric tests to measure divergent thinking—an important component of creativity—in a way that aligns with theory. It is this latter point that this registered report is designed to address. We administered two divergent thinking tests (the verbal and figural versions of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking; TTCT) with an intelligence test (the International Cognitive Ability Resource test; ICAR). We then subjected the subscores from these tests to confirmatory factor analysis to examine which of nine theoretically plausible models best fits the data. Results show that none of the pre-registered models fit the data well, an ambiguous result that leaves unanswered the question of whether intelligence and divergent thinking tests measure the same construct. Exploratory (i.e., not pre-registered) measurement models of each test separately shows that the TTCT-F may not measure a coherent, unitary construct—leading to model misspecification when TTCT-F subtests were included in larger models. This study was conducted in accordance with all open science practices, including pre-registration, open data and syntax, and open materials (with the exception of copyrighted and confidential test stimuli). Materials are available at https://osf.io/8rpfz/. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T09:51:51Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-78eaea45efa84f97a2d8ee8f017bf0f5 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T09:51:51Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-78eaea45efa84f97a2d8ee8f017bf0f52022-12-22T04:30:47ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032022-01-01179Factor structure of intelligence and divergent thinking subtests: A registered reportRussell T. WarneSam GolightlyMakai BlackPsychologists have investigated creativity for 70 years, and it is now seen as being an important construct, both scientifically and because of its practical value to society. However, several fundamental unresolved problems persist, including a suitable definition of creativity and the ability of psychometric tests to measure divergent thinking—an important component of creativity—in a way that aligns with theory. It is this latter point that this registered report is designed to address. We administered two divergent thinking tests (the verbal and figural versions of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking; TTCT) with an intelligence test (the International Cognitive Ability Resource test; ICAR). We then subjected the subscores from these tests to confirmatory factor analysis to examine which of nine theoretically plausible models best fits the data. Results show that none of the pre-registered models fit the data well, an ambiguous result that leaves unanswered the question of whether intelligence and divergent thinking tests measure the same construct. Exploratory (i.e., not pre-registered) measurement models of each test separately shows that the TTCT-F may not measure a coherent, unitary construct—leading to model misspecification when TTCT-F subtests were included in larger models. This study was conducted in accordance with all open science practices, including pre-registration, open data and syntax, and open materials (with the exception of copyrighted and confidential test stimuli). Materials are available at https://osf.io/8rpfz/.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9484676/?tool=EBI |
| spellingShingle | Russell T. Warne Sam Golightly Makai Black Factor structure of intelligence and divergent thinking subtests: A registered report PLoS ONE |
| title | Factor structure of intelligence and divergent thinking subtests: A registered report |
| title_full | Factor structure of intelligence and divergent thinking subtests: A registered report |
| title_fullStr | Factor structure of intelligence and divergent thinking subtests: A registered report |
| title_full_unstemmed | Factor structure of intelligence and divergent thinking subtests: A registered report |
| title_short | Factor structure of intelligence and divergent thinking subtests: A registered report |
| title_sort | factor structure of intelligence and divergent thinking subtests a registered report |
| url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9484676/?tool=EBI |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT russelltwarne factorstructureofintelligenceanddivergentthinkingsubtestsaregisteredreport AT samgolightly factorstructureofintelligenceanddivergentthinkingsubtestsaregisteredreport AT makaiblack factorstructureofintelligenceanddivergentthinkingsubtestsaregisteredreport |