A Reliability Generalization of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Figural

IF 3.2 3区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED

European Journal of Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2024-03-25 DOI:10.1027/1015-5759/a000819

Selcuk Acar, L. E. Lee, Ronny Scherer

{"title":"A Reliability Generalization of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Figural","authors":"Selcuk Acar, L. E. Lee, Ronny Scherer","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Figural (TTCT-F) is a well-known measure of creativity, yet its reliability evidence is hardly reported. In this meta-analysis, we provide such evidence by performing parameter-based meta-analytic structural equation modeling on empirical studies that reported the correlations among the TTCT-F indices. Examining the factor structure of the TTCT-F showed that a two-factor structure (Innovative and Adaptive) fitted the primary study data better than a previously assumed single-factor structure. We conducted a reliability generalization study with a sample of 44 correlation matrices from 38 studies ( N = 13,108). We obtained McDonald’s Omega coefficients for the two factors and the composite reliability. Our analyses indicated that the composite reliability was acceptable (ω = .81). Furthermore, we found higher reliability coefficients for the Innovative (INNOV) factor (ω = .85) as compared to the Adaptive (ADAPT) factor (ω = .62). Moderator analyses showed that reliability estimates for the INNOV factor were higher with Form A and when there is evidence of discriminant evidence violation. Between the two forms, Form A had higher reliability estimates than Form B. Our findings suggest that composite scores and INNOV scores are more precise than the ADAPT factor scores, supporting their use in research and practical settings.","PeriodicalId":48018,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000819","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Figural (TTCT-F) is a well-known measure of creativity, yet its reliability evidence is hardly reported. In this meta-analysis, we provide such evidence by performing parameter-based meta-analytic structural equation modeling on empirical studies that reported the correlations among the TTCT-F indices. Examining the factor structure of the TTCT-F showed that a two-factor structure (Innovative and Adaptive) fitted the primary study data better than a previously assumed single-factor structure. We conducted a reliability generalization study with a sample of 44 correlation matrices from 38 studies ( N = 13,108). We obtained McDonald’s Omega coefficients for the two factors and the composite reliability. Our analyses indicated that the composite reliability was acceptable (ω = .81). Furthermore, we found higher reliability coefficients for the Innovative (INNOV) factor (ω = .85) as compared to the Adaptive (ADAPT) factor (ω = .62). Moderator analyses showed that reliability estimates for the INNOV factor were higher with Form A and when there is evidence of discriminant evidence violation. Between the two forms, Form A had higher reliability estimates than Form B. Our findings suggest that composite scores and INNOV scores are more precise than the ADAPT factor scores, supporting their use in research and practical settings.

查看原文本刊更多论文

托伦斯创造性思维测试的可靠性归纳--结构化

摘要：托伦斯创造性思维测验（TTCT-F）是一种著名的创造性测量方法，但其可靠性证据却鲜有报道。在本荟萃分析中，我们通过对报告了 TTCT-F 各指数之间相关性的实证研究进行基于参数的荟萃分析结构方程建模，提供了此类证据。对 TTCT-F 因子结构的研究表明，双因子结构（创新性和适应性）比之前假设的单因子结构更适合主要研究数据。我们对来自 38 项研究的 44 个相关矩阵样本（N = 13108）进行了可靠性推广研究。我们获得了两个因子和综合信度的麦克唐纳欧米茄系数。分析表明，综合信度是可以接受的（ω = .81）。此外，我们还发现创新（INNOV）因子的信度系数（ω = .85）高于适应（ADAPT）因子的信度系数（ω = .62）。调节分析表明，INNOV因子的信度估计值在表格A和有证据表明违反判别证据的情况下更高。我们的研究结果表明，综合分数和 INNOV 分数比 ADAPT 因子分数更精确，支持在研究和实际环境中使用。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

European Journal of Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED-

CiteScore

6.40

自引率

4.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The main purpose of the EJPA is to present important articles which provide seminal information on both theoretical and applied developments in this field. Articles reporting the construction of new measures or an advancement of an existing measure are given priority. The journal is directed to practitioners as well as to academicians: The conviction of its editors is that the discipline of psychological assessment should, necessarily and firmly, be attached to the roots of psychological science, while going deeply into all the consequences of its applied, practice-oriented development.