Looking for Renaissance People: Examining Domain Specificity-Generality of Creativity Using Item Response Theory Models

REFERENCES

• Akarakiri, J. B. (1998). Utilisation of creativity and innovation by the practice of new product planning in developing countries. Psychologia: An International Journal, 6, 64–80.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review, 76, 77–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• An, D., & Runco, M. A. (2016). General and domain-specific contributions to creative ideation and creative performance. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 12, 523–532. doi:10.5964/ejop.v12i4.1132
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. Paris, France: OECD Education Working Papers, No. 41. doi:10.1787/218525261154
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1991). Generality of creativity across performance domains. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 23–39. doi:10.1080/10400419109534371
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1993). Divergent thinking and creativity: A task-specific approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1994). Divergent thinking is not a general trait: A multi-domain training experiment. Creativity Research Journal, 7, 35–46. doi:10.1080/10400419409534507
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1996). The effects of task-specific divergent-thinking training. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30, 183–187. doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.1996.tb00767.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1998). The case for domain specificity of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 173–177. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1102_7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (2010). Is creativity domain specific? In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The Amusement Park Theoretical (APT) Model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27, 158–163. doi:10.1080/02783190509554310
   Google Scholar
• Carson, S. H., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Reliability, validity, and factor structure of the Creative Achievement Questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 37–50. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1701_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan, S., & Yuen, M. (2014). Personal and environmental factors affecting teachers’ creativity-fostering practices in Hong Kong. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 12, 69–77. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, C., Himsel, A., Kasof, J., Greenberger, E., & Dmitrieva, J. (2006). Boundless creativity: Evidence for the domain generality of individual differences in creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 40, 179–199. doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.2006.tb01272.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Boeck, P., & Wilson, M. (2004). A framework for item response models. In P. De Boeck & M. Wilson (Eds.), Explanatory item response models: A generalized linear and nonlinear approach (pp. 3–41). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Florida, R. (2012). The rise of the creative class revisited. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Boston, MA: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Hayton, J. C., Allen, D. G., & Scarpello, V. (2004). Factor retention decisions in exploratory factor analysis: A tutorial on parallel analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 7, 191–205. doi:10.1177/1094428104263675
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hocevar, D. (1976). Dimensions of creativity. Psychological Reports, 39, 869–870. doi:10.2466/pr0.1976.39.3.869
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hocevar, D. (1979, April). The development of the Creative Behavior Inventory. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED170350)
   Google Scholar
• Holland, J. L. (1961). Creative and academic achievement among talented adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 52, 136–147. doi:10.1037/h0044058
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1–12. doi:10.1037/a0013688
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Plucker, J. A., & Baer, J. (2008). Essentials of creativity assessment. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Kline, T. J. B. (2005). Psychological testing: A practical approach to design and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Cole, J. C., & Baer, J. (2009). The construct of creativity: A structural model for self-reported creativity ratings. Journal of Creative Behavior, 43, 119–134. doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01310.x
   Google Scholar
• Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, Mass: Addsion-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Messick, S. (1989a). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18, 5–11. doi:10.3102/0013189X018002005
   Google Scholar
• Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment. American Psychologist, 50, 741–749. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milgram, R. M., & Hong, E. (1999). Creative out-of-school activities in intellectually gifted adolescents as predictors of their life accomplishment 545 in young adults: A longitudinal study. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 77–87. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1202_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2013). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
   Google Scholar
• Nandakumar, R., & Ackerman, T. A. (2004). Test modeling. In K. Kaplan (Ed.), The Sage handbook of quantitative methodology for the social science (pp. 93–105). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Paek, S.-H., & Runco, M. A. (2017). Dealing with the criterion problem by measuring the quality and quantity of creative activity and accomplishment. Creativity Research Journal, 29, 167–173. doi:10.1080/10400419.2017.1304078
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pang, W., & Plucker, J. A. (2013). Recent transformations in China’s economic, social, and education policies for promoting innovation and creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 247–273. doi:10.1002/jocb.17
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (Eds.). (2013). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A. (1998). Beware of simple conclusions: The case for content generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 179–182. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1102_8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A. (1999). Reanalyses of student responses to creativity checklists: Evidence of content generality. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 33, 126–137. doi:10.1002/jocb.1999.33.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A. (2004). Generalization of creativity across domains: Examination of the method effect hypothesis. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 38, 1–12. doi:10.1002/jocb.2004.38.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A. (2005). The (relatively) generalist view of creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse (pp. 307–312). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A., & Beghetto, R. A. (2004). Why creativity is domain general, why it looks domain specific, and why the distinction doesn’t matter. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko, & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 153–168). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–96. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reich, R. B. (2001, July 20). Standards for what? Education Week, 20, 64.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, A. G., & Stern, S. (1997). Corporate creativity. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
   Google Scholar
• Runco, M. A. (1987). The generality of creative performance in gifted and non-gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31, 121–125. doi:10.1177/001698628703100306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runco, M. A. (1989). The creativity of children’s art. Child Study Journal, 19, 177–190.
   Google Scholar
• Runco, M. A., Acar, S., Kaufman, J. C., & Halliday, L. R. (2016). Changes 575 in reputation and associations with fame and biographical data. Journal of Genius and Eminence, 1, 52–60.
   Google Scholar
• Runco, M. A., & Pritzker, S. R. (2011). Encyclopedia of creativity (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P., & Gao, X. (1993). Sampling variability of performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 215–232. doi:10.1111/jedm.1993.30.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silvia, P. J., Wigert, B., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Assessing creativity with self-report scales: A review and empirical evaluation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 19–34. doi:10.1037/a0024071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stecher, B. M., & Hamilton, L. S. (2014). Measuring hard-to-measure student competencies: A research and development plan [Report RR-863-WFHF]. Santa Monica, Calif: RAND Corporation. Retrieved July 7, 2015, from, http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR863
   Google Scholar
• Stevens, G., & Burley, B. (1999). Creativity + business discipline = higher profits faster from new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16, 455–468. doi:10.1016/S0737-6782(98)00070-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Wallach, M. A., & Wing, C. (1969). The talented student. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Walpole, M. B., Burton, N. W., Kanyi, K., & Jackenthal, A. (2002). Selecting successful graduate students: In-depth interviews with GRE users. (GRE Board Research Report No.99-1R, ETS Research Report. 02-8). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
   Google Scholar
• Zhu, G. F. (2007). Innovation and engineering education – An initial discussion of the requirements for higher engineering education in building innovative country. Research in Higher Education of Engineering, 1, 1–5.
   Google Scholar