ABSTRACT
The assessment of creativity as an individual difference has historically focused on divergent thinking, which is increasingly viewed as involving the associative processes that are also understood to be a key component of creative potential. Research on associative processes has proliferated in many sub-fields, often using Compound Remote Associates (CRA) tasks with an open response format and relatively small participant samples. In the present work, we introduce a new format that is more amenable to large-scale data collection in survey designs, and present evidence for the reliability and validity of CRA measures in general using multiple large samples. Study 1 uses a large, representative dataset (N = 1,323,480) to demonstrate strong unidimensionality and internal consistency (α = .97; ωt = .87), as well as links to individual differences in temperament, cognitive ability, occupation, and job characteristics. Study 2 uses an undergraduate sample (N = 685) to validate the use of a multiple-choice format relative to the traditional approach. Study 3 uses a crowdsourced sample (N = 357) to demonstrate high test-retest reliability of the items (r =.74). Finally, Study 4 uses a sample that overlaps with Study 1 (N = 1,502,922) to provide item response theory (IRT) parameters for a large set of high-quality CRA items that use a multiple-choice response mode, thus facilitating their use in future research on creativity, insight, and related topics.
ABSTRACT
Despite their known influence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, spatial abilities remain an underassessed aspect of cognition, particularly in educational settings. One explanation could be a lack of affordable, valid instruments for measuring various aspects of spatial ability. We evaluate the validity of a set of public-domain, algorithmically generated two-dimensional rotation items using a sample from the Synthetic Aperture Personality Assessment (SAPA) Project (N = 1,020,195). We examine the psychometric properties of the items and their relationship with various other cognitive abilities and personality traits. In addition, we identify the highest performing college majors and occupations on the 2D rotation items and on a set of 3D rotation items. Findings suggest strong unidimensionality for the 2D rotation items and the presence of lower-order factors which reflect differences across items in mental rotation demands. The highest scoring majors and occupations were similar-but not identical-across the 2D and 3D rotation measures and point to potentially meaningful differences across areas of expertise.
