\Assessment of Real-Life Creativity: The Inventory of Creative Activities and Achievements (ICAA)

被引：168

作者：

Diedrich, Jennifer ^{[1
,2
]}

Jauk, Emanuel ^{[2
]}

Silvia, Paul J. ^{[2
,3
]}

Gredlein, Jeffrey M. ^{[4
]}

Neubauer, Aljoscha C. ^{[2
]}

Benedek, Mathias ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Fed Acad Lower Austria, Niederosterreich Landesakad, Vienna, Austria

[2] Karl Franzens Univ Graz, Inst Psychol, Graz, Austria

[3] Univ North Carolina Greensboro, Dept Psychol, Greensboro, NC USA

[4] Univ N Carolina, Div Liberal Arts, Sch Arts, Winston Salem, NC USA

来源：

PSYCHOLOGY OF AESTHETICS CREATIVITY AND THE ARTS | 2018年 / 12卷 / 03期

基金：

奥地利科学基金会;

关键词：

creativity; creative activity; creative achievement; meta-analysis; DIVERGENT THINKING; MODEL; PERSONALITY; INTELLIGENCE; RELIABILITY; EXPERIENCE; EXPERTISE; OPENNESS; DOMAINS; SCALES;

D O I：

10.1037/aca0000137

中图分类号：

C [社会科学总论];

学科分类号：

03 ; 0303 ;

摘要：

This article introduces the Inventory of Creative Activities and Achievements (ICAA), a broad-based assessment of individual differences in real-life creativity. The ICAA provides independent scales for the frequency of engagement in everyday creative activity and the level of creative achievement across 8 creative domains. A formal test analysis based on 7 Little-C samples and 2 Pro-C samples (overall N = 1,566) provides evidence for the reliability and validity of the ICAA test scores. The analyses shed light on the prevalence of specific creative activity and achievement and examine the relevance of personality, creative potential, and intelligence across domains of creativity. The findings further suggest that the assessment of creative activity is particularly suited for Little-C creativity, whereas the assessment of creative achievement appears more appropriate for Pro-C creativity. The ICAA offers researchers a broad and versatile assessment tool for studying creativity across domains and levels.

引用

页码：304 / 316

页数：13

共 60 条

[11] Assessment of Divergent Thinking by Means of the Subjective Top-Scoring Method: Effects of the Number of Top-Ideas and Time-on-Task on Reliability and Validity [J].