The Effects of Elaboration in Creativity Tests as it Pertains to Overall Scores and How it Might Prevent a Person From Thinking of Creative Ideas During the Early Stages of Brainstorming and Idea Generation

Author(s):  
Caitlin Dippo ◽  
Barry Kudrowitz

Previous studies have found that the first few ideas we think of for a given prompt are likely to be less original than the later ideas. In this study, 460 participants were given the Alternative Uses Test (AUT) where they were asked to list alternative uses for a paperclip, creating a database of 235 unique answers, each having a relative occurrence rate in that pool. It was found that later responses were significantly more novel than early responses and on average the originality of responses exponentially increased with quantity. A closer look at this data reveals that a person is likely to have a lower overall originality score if he or she has more elaborate responses. 89 of these participants were also given the Abbreviated Torrance Test For Adults (ATTA) and the data from both tests was used to study relationships between elaboration, fluency, and originality. The data from the AUT reveals a strong negative correlation between an individual’s average number of words per response and his or her average originality score. It is hypothesized that people who spend more time writing multiple-word responses have less time to generate many different ideas thus hindering their ability to reach the novel ideas. Similarly, the ATTA reveals that after two extraneous details, elaboration on a drawing will negatively impact fluency and originality scores. This is not to say that elaborate ideas cannot be original, but rather that in time-limited situations, elaboration may hinder the production of original ideas. In applying this to real world problem solving and idea generation, it is suggested that people may prevent themselves from finding creative solutions if too much time is spent on discussing the first few suggested ideas from a brainstorming session. It is suggested that a more effective brainstorming session will delay discussion until a significant number of ideas are generated.

Author(s):  
Barry Kudrowitz ◽  
Caitlin Dippo

The Alternative Uses Test is a measure of divergent thinking in which participants are asked to list non-obvious uses for a common object in a fixed amount of time. In this study, participants were asked to list alternative uses for a paperclip in three minutes. From a pool of over 2000 participants including engineering professionals and students, 293 were chosen and evaluated. Using infrequency of responses as a measure of novelty, it was found that participants that produced more responses had more novel responses and a higher average novelty score. Later responses were significantly more novel than early responses and unoriginality of responses decreased with quantity. On average, a participant would list 9 responses before arriving at highly novel responses. Participants that did not reach 9 responses in the study were likely to have few if any highly novel responses. If this test maps to real world problem solving, it suggests that the first ideas we think of are likely to have been suggested already by others and thus not original. The results of this study can help restructure the format of the Alternative Uses Test.


Author(s):  
Marc J. Stern

This chapter covers systems theories relevant to understanding and working to enhance the resilience of social-ecological systems. Social-ecological systems contain natural resources, users of those resources, and the interactions between each. The theories in the chapter share lessons about how to build effective governance structures for common pool resources, how to facilitate the spread of worthwhile ideas across social networks, and how to promote collaboration for greater collective impacts than any one organization alone could achieve. Each theory is summarized succinctly and followed by guidance on how to apply it to real world problem solving.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Kelso ◽  
John D. Enderle ◽  
Kristina Ropella

2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 587-600 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. L. Gilhooly ◽  
K. J. Gilhooly ◽  
L. H. Phillips ◽  
D. Harvey ◽  
A. Brady ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document