| Creativity refers to creating,generating,producing and inventing,and its core is creative thinking.Guilford(1950)differentiated Divergent Thinking(DT)and Convergent Thinking(CT)in the Structure of Intellect model for the first time.The core of creative Thinking is divergent Thinking.According to the Structure of Intellect model theory put forwarded by Guilford(1950),divergent thinking has four factors: fluency,originality,flexibility and elaboration.There are many tools to measure divergent thinking ability.For a long time,researchers have also developed a variety of methods to evaluate divergent thinking tasks according to Guilford(1950)’s creative theory,among which the most controversial factor is the originality.On the basis of previous studies,the evaluation method of uniqueness can be divided into objective evaluation and subjective evaluation according to the reference objects or criteria in the evaluation of creativity.Objective evaluation method is to evaluate the uniqueness of the answers of all the subjects by using some mathematical and statistical methods such as statistical weighting.The whole evaluation process does not depend on the subjective ideas of the main subjects or the subjects.In subjective evaluation,raters are required to complete the evaluation of uniqueness based on their own understanding,subjective experience or professional ability,etc.,which are greatly affected by the main concern of raters.But no matter which kind of evaluation,it only gives a score for the creative result,without considering the performance of the subject in the creative task process.Therefore,this study creatively proposed a new index to evaluate creativity,and discussed the creativity level of the subjects from the perspective of the process of creative tasks,that is,the creative efficiency,namely the performance of completing creative tasks within unit time(create efficiency = creativity scores within the total time/ valid time.The total task time refers to the total time the experimenter gives the subject to complete the creative task.Effective time is the actual time taken by the subject to think and produce results within the total time of the task).The creative efficiency divided into fluency efficiency and uniqueness efficiency(fluency efficiency = fluency score within the total time/valid time;originality efficiency = originality score within the total time/valid time).This research adopts the Alternate Use of Task(the AUT)to measure divergent thinking,and select fluency and originality as measuring dimension.This paper discusses the evaluation index of creativity from the Angle of evaluation subject and evaluation reference context,meanwhile choose participants themselves and judges as evaluation rater.For this reason,there are three different kinds of evaluation methods,the first: the subjects evaluate themself reference their own answers,namely Self-Reference Rating(SRR);Second,Individual Reference Rating(IRR)was used,that is,the judges gave scores to each subject with reference to the answers of a single subject.Third,group-reference Rating(GRR),that is,judges give scores to each subject with reference to the answers of all subjects.To explore whether there are differences in the evaluation results of the three evaluation methods,and to investigate the relationship between the two evaluation indexes of creative efficiency and creative score from the perspective of the three evaluation methods.In experiment 1,the creative efficiency was preliminarily explored in the AUT task,and the specific performance of the two indexes of score and efficiency in the time period under the two evaluation methods of SRR and IRR in the same reference frame was investigated.Subjects complete four AUT tasks,each task lasting 3 minutes.After that,the subjects evaluate their answers on the scale of 1-4(1 means completely not unique--4 means very unique)according to the answers written by the subjects themselves,which is called SRR.And then,two graduate students majoring in psychology were selected as judges,they evaluate each answers with reference to the answers of a single subject on the scale of 1-4(1 means completely not unique--4 means very unique),that is IRR.The results showed that there was a significant positive correlation between the fluency score and the fluency efficiency,and both of them declined with time.On the aspect of originality,there was no significant difference between SRR score and IRR scores,meanwhile,the originality efficiency and originality score of the two methods of evaluation are significantly positive correlation.However,the specific performance of originality score and originality efficiency are different on the time quantum.On the originality score,SRR originality score and IRR originality score dropped sharply from the first minute to the second minute,and then become steady;In terms of originality efficiency,however,SRR originality efficiency and IRR originality efficiency show a trend of continuous decline in the whole time period.In experiment 2,during the AUT task with longer time,the specific performance of the twoindexes of score and efficiency in the time period under the two evaluation methods of SRR and IRR in the larger time window was investigated.Experiment 2 extended the time of AUT task to6 minutes,which broadened the window of creative performance in the time period.SRR and IRR were also adopted,and 3 graduate students majoring in psychology were selected as judges by IRR.The results showed that there was a significant positive correlation between fluency score and fluency efficiency,and both of them gradually declined with the extension of time,but the decline trend of fluency score and efficiency was different in specific time periods.The scores of SRR and IRR were significantly different,and the efficiency and scores of the two methods were significantly positively correlated.The uniqueness score and uniqueness efficiency of SRR and IRR both showed a trend of gradual decrease with the extension of time,but there were differences in the performance of specific stages: in terms of uniqueness score,SRR and IRR both decreased continuously from the first minute to the fifth minute,and remained basically stable in the last minute.In terms of uniqueness efficiency,SRR and IRR decreased sharply from the first minute to the fourth minute,then leveled off after four minutes and began to decline after the fifth minute.Experiment 3 included GRR evaluation methods,and examined the specific performance of scores and efficiency of the three evaluation methods in time periods in different reference frames and evaluation subjects.At the same time,how to explore the individual creative efficiency with high creative efficiency and how to explore the individual creative efficiency with high creative efficiency.Three graduate students majoring in psychology were selected as judges for GRR.After referring to the answers of all the subjects,1-4 points of uniqueness were scored for each subject(1 means completely not unique--4 means very unique).In addition,three graduate students majoring in psychology were selected as raters for IRR.The results showed that there was a significant positive correlation between fluency score and fluency efficiency,and individuals with high fluency score also had high fluency efficiency,and individuals with high fluency efficiency also had high fluency score,and there were significant differences between the high and low groups.In terms of scores,the score of the high fluency group continued to decline within six minutes,while the score of the low fluency group started to level off after the fourth minute.In terms of efficiency,the efficiency of the high fluency group showed a sharp decline in the whole period,while that of the low fluency group stopped declining after the fifth minute.The uniqueness scores of SRR,IRR and GRR are significantly different,among which SRR scores are significantly higher than IRR and GRR scores,while IRR and GRR scores are not significantly different.The scores and efficiency of SRR,IRR and GRR are significantly positively correlated respectively,and the individuals with highuniqueness scores are also highly efficient,and the individuals with high uniqueness efficiency are also highly scored,and the differences between the high and low groups are significant.In terms of the performance in specific time periods,there are differences in the variation trend of SRR,IRR and GRR high group and low group in different time periods.In terms of score,there is no interactive effect between the stage score and the time period of SRR high-low grouping,and both the scores of high-low grouping and high-low grouping gradually decrease with the increase of time.IRR score of high group and low group also decreased with the increase of time.The change trend of IRR high score continued to decline from the first minute to the fourth minute,then leveled off,and began to decline again after the fifth minute,while the score of low group only decreased significantly from the second minute to the third minute,and there was no significant change in other periods;GRR score of high group and low group also decreased with the increase of time.The score of high group showed a sharp decline until the fifth minute,while the score of low group only decreased significantly from the second minute to the third minute,and there was no significant change in other periods.In terms of efficiency,there is no significant interaction between the stage efficiency and time period of SRR,IRR and GRR scoring methods,and the efficiency of high group and low group decreases with the increase of time.To sum up,this study shows that:(1)The self-evaluation of the subject in creativity is different from the evaluation by the judges.The creativity score of the self-evaluation of the subject is high,while the creativity score of the other evaluation is low.Different evaluation subjects has different evaluation results.(2)There was no significant difference in the creative score between the reference context of the answers of a single subject and the reference context of the answers of all subjects when using the judges-evaluation method,and different reference context had no influence on the creative score when using the judges-evaluation method.(3)In the evaluation of creativity,individuals who are evaluated as highly creative score often have high creative efficiency,and can maximize the effective time to obtain a higher score;Individuals who are evaluated as less creative score often have low creative efficiency.(4)For the subjective evaluation method of creativity,score is still a simple and reliable evaluation criterion.However,under the premise of the same total score,individuals with high creative score and those with low creative score had different efficiency variation patterns during task time. |
PDF Full Text Request