magistrsko delo
Nika Leskovar (Author), Andreja Avsec (Mentor)

Abstract

Eno izmed še ne popolnoma raziskanih področij v okviru ustvarjalnosti je merjenje kognitivne komponente ustvarjalnosti: divergentnega mišljenja (natančneje dimenzije originalnosti). Magistrsko delo se ukvarja s primerjavo merskih značilnosti (zanesljivosti in veljavnosti) objektivnih in subjektivnih metod vrednotenja odgovorov pri Nalogi alternativne uporabe. originalnost odgovorov smo ovrednotili na štiri različne načine, uporabili smo dve subjektivni (metoda povprečenja, metoda splošnega vtisa) in dve objektivni metodi (metoda pražnega točkovanja, komplementarna metoda). Zanimalo nas je, v kolikšni meri so subjektivne in objektivne metode zanesljive ter kakšna je povezanost med različnimi metodami. Zanesljivost metod smo preverjali tako, da smo preverjali skladnost med ocenjevalkama, poleg tega tudi skladnost med ocenami originalnosti za vse tri predmete na AUT pri vsaki metodi. Ocenjevalki sta bili pri ocenjevanju zmerno skladni (ICC = 0,66 – 0,76). Alfa koeficienti za celoten vzorec so bili naslednji: komplementarna metoda (0,87), metoda praga (0,76), metoda splošnega vtisa (0,74) in metoda povprečenja (0,37 – nesprejemljivo, kaže na nizko notranjo zanesljivost). Nato smo preverjali konstruktno veljavnost, tako da smo računali povezanost med ocenami originalnosti in ocenami ustvarjalnosti istih posameznikov pri preizkušnji pojmovne razširitve (Žival s tujega planeta). Preverili smo tudi, kako se ocene originalnosti povezujejo z merami odprtosti (odprtost za izkušnje in njene facete). Vse korelacije med metodami vrednotenja originalnosti so bile statistično značilne (z izjemo korelacije med metodo povprečenja in estetsko občutljivostjo), korelacije so bile nizke do zmerne. Zanimalo nas je tudi, v kolikšni meri lahko napovemo posameznikov rezultat pri izpolnjevanju vprašalnika BFI-2 in ustvarjalnost pri preizkušnji pojmovne razširitve Žival s tujega planeta z različnimi vidiki divergentnega mišljenja: originalnost, fluentnost in fleksibilnost. Rezultati regresij so nam razkrili, da originalnost, ovrednotena s subjektivno ali objektivno metodo, ne pripomore v veliki meri k pojasnjeni varianci v katerikoli izmed dveh odvisnih spremenljivk. Ocene originalnosti se namreč v veliki meri prekrivajo z ocenami fluentnosti. Izkazalo se je, da so subjektivne metode v primerjavi z objektivnimi boljše, ker ne korelirajo tako visoko z mero fluentnosti odgovorov, vendar pa je bila razlika med metodami zelo majhna. Kot optimalna za uporabo se je izkazala metoda splošnega vtisa. Magistrsko delo pomembno doprinese k raziskovanju področja originalnosti in s tem ustvarjalnosti, saj v literaturi še vedno naletimo na nestrinjanja med psihologi glede tega, katere metode za vrednotenje originalnosti so pri nalogi alternativne uporabe najbolj primerne ter kako izboljšati metode za vrednotenje originalnosti.

Keywords

merjenje ustvarjalnosti;divergentno mišljenje;konstruktna veljavnost;notranja konsistentnost;skladnost med ocenjevalci;Naloga alternativne uporabe;magistrska dela;Žival s tujega planeta;Vprašalnik velikih pet BFI-2;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Typology: 2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization: UL FF - Faculty of Arts
Publisher: [N. Leskovar]
UDC: 159.954.072(043.2)
COBISS: 192160771 Link will open in a new window
Views: 314
Downloads: 28
Average score: 0 (0 votes)
Metadata: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Other data

Secondary language: English
Secondary title: Comparison between objective and subjective methods of scoring originality in the Alternative Use Task
Secondary abstract: One of the not yet fully explored areas in creativity is the measurement of the cognitive component of creativity: divergent thinking (more precisely, the dimension of originality). The master's thesis deals with the comparison of the measurement characteristics (reliability and validity) of objective and subjective methods of evaluating answers in the Alternative Use Task. the originality of the answers was evaluated in four different ways, we used two subjective (averaging method, snapshot method) and two objective methods (threshold scoring method, complementary method). We were interested in the extent to which subjective and objective methods are reliable and what is the connection between the different methods. The reliability of the methods was evaluated by checking the consistency between the raters, as well as the consistency between the originality ratings for all three subjects at the AUT for each method. The two raters were moderately consistent in their assessment (ICC = 0.66 – 0.76). Alpha coefficients for the entire sample were as follows: complementary method (0.87), threshold method (0.76), snapshot method (0.74), and averaging method (0.37 – unacceptable, indicating low internal reliability). Then we evaluated the construct validity by calculating the correlation between originality ratings and creativity ratings of the same individuals in the conceptual expansion test (Animal from an alien planet). We also examined how ratings of originality relate to measures of openness (openness to experience and its facets). All correlations between the originality evaluation methods were statistically significant (with the exception of the correlation between the averaging method and aesthetic sensitivity), the correlations were low to moderate. We were also interested in the extent to which we can predict an individual's result when completing the BFI-2 questionnaire and creativity when testing the conceptual expansion of Animals from an alien planet with different aspects of divergent thinking: originality, fluency and flexibility. The results of the regressions revealed to us that originality, evaluated with a subjective or objective method, does not contribute significantly to the explained variance in any of the two dependent variables. Indeed, originality scores largely overlap with fluency scores. It turned out that the subjective methods are better compared to the objective ones because they do not correlate as highly with the fluency of the answers, but the difference between the methods was very small. Snapshot method proved to be optimal for use. The master's thesis contributes significantly to research in the field of originality and thus creativity, as in the literature we still encounter disagreements among psychologists regarding which methods for evaluating originality are most suitable for the task of alternative use and how to improve methods for evaluating originality.
Secondary keywords: creativity measurement;divergent thinking;construct validity;internal consistency;interrater reliability;Alternative use task;masters theses;Conceptual expansion;Big five inventory BFI-2;
Type (COBISS): Master's thesis/paper
Study programme: 0
Embargo end date (OpenAIRE): 1970-01-01
Thesis comment: Univ. v Ljubljani, Filozofska fak., Oddelek za psihologijo
Pages: 55 str.
ID: 21950125