擴散性思考與聚斂性思考的交會：有限解答之擴散性思考測驗之編製與信效度檢驗

The Connection of Divergent Thinking and Convergent Thinking: Developing of Constrained Divergent Thinking Test and Examining Reliability and Validity

陳學志(Hsueh-Chin Chen)；洪素蘋(Su-Pin Hung)；許禕芳(Yi-Fang Hsu)；邱皓政(Haw-Jeng Chiou)；關秉寅(Ping-Yin Kuan)；詹志禹(Chih-Yu Chan)

創造認知能力測量 ； 頓悟性思考 ； 頓悟性問題 ； 擴散性思考 ； cognitive measure of creativity ； insight ； insight problems ； divergent thinking

教育科學研究期刊

54卷4期（2009 / 12 / 01）

29 - 62

繁體中文

本研究旨在編擬一套適用於臺灣高中職學生的創造認知能力測量工具。測驗的建置，融合擴散性思考與頓悟性思考兩種客觀測量工具的優勢並改善其缺失，同時利用中文方塊字富有變化的有限集合特性，編製「有限解答之擴散性思考測驗」。測驗內容要求學生在某中文字（例如「里」字）上，進行部分筆畫的刪減，以拆解出其他合法的中文字。依據學生作答反應的個數、類別與新奇性，分別評定其流暢力、變通力與獨創力。其優點：一、評量兼顧新奇性與適切性；二、評分簡便且指標多元。本研究以北臺灣地區的高中職學生為母群體進行抽樣與施測，取得效標關聯效度證據。最後，以1,200位高中職學生為樣本建立測驗的獨創性常模，提供後續研究者一套合宜的評量工具。

The purpose of this study was to develop a measure of creative cognition which would enable educators to more accurately and objectively measure the development of creativity in Taiwanese high school students. The instrument was designed to measure the constructs of divergent-thinking and insight, as previous research has suggested that these are the only two dimensions of creativity which can be measured objectively. To overcome problems encountered in previous attempts to measure these two abilities, and to combine the strengths of separate measures of both, a test was developed which involves having students subtract strokes from the Chinese characters ”里” to form another legal Chinese character. Responses are scored for fluency (the number of legal responses), flexibility (the variety of perspectives represented in the responses), and originality (statistical infrequency). The stroke-subtraction test offers advantages compared to other measures of creativity in that it emphasizes the novelty and appropriateness of the responses simultaneously. Further, use of the three score indexes simplifies the scoring process. The test was piloted with 1,200 Taiwanese high school students, and this sample was used to establish a norm for the purpose of norm-referenced score interpretations. The results were also compared with those from several other measurements to provide evidence supporting the criterion-related validity of the instrument. Based on the findings, implications for educational administrators, schools, teachers are discussed. Finally, suggestions for future research are offered.

1. 任純慧、陳學志、練竑初、卓淑玲(2004)。創造力測量的輔助工具：中文遠距聯想量表的發展。應用心理學研究，21，195-218。
   連結：
2. 江美惠(2005)。創造性問題解決教學方案對資優學生創造力及問題解決能力影響之研究。資優教育研究，5(2)，83-106。
   連結：
3. 張麗君(2008)。國臺雙語兒童期雙語能力與智力、創造力之相關探討。師大學報：教育類，53(1)，79-106。
   連結：
4. 陳學志、彭淑玲、曾千芝、邱皓政(2008)。藉由眼動迫蹤儀器探討平均掃視幅度大小與創造力之關係〔測驗與評量專刊〕。教育心理學報，39，127-149。
   連結：
5. Barron, F.,R. J. Sternberg (Ed.)(1988).The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives.New York:Cambridge University Press.
6. Cropley, A. J.(1972).A five-year longitudinal study of the validity of creativity tests.Developmental Psychology,6,119-124.
7. Dykes, M.,MeGhie, A.(1976).A comparative study of attention strategies in schizophrenics and highly creative normal subjects.British Journal of Psychiatry,128,50-56.
8. Eysenck, H. J.(1995).Genius: The natural history of creativity.New York:Cambridge University Press.
9. Finke, R. A.,Ward, T. B.,Smith, S. M.(1992).Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
10. Guilford, J. P.(1956).The structure of intellect.Psychological Bulletin,53,267-293.
11. Hocevar, D.,Bachelor, P.,J. A. Glover (Eds.),R. R. Ronning (Eds.),C. R. Reynolds (Eds.)(1989).Handbook of creativity.New York:Plenum Press.
12. Howieson, N.(1981).A longitudinal study of creativity: 1965-1975.Journal of Creative Behavior,15,117-134.
13. Kogan, N.,Pakove, E.(1974).Long-term predictive validity of divergent-thinking tests: Some negative evidence.Journal of Educational Psychology,66,802-810.
14. Lubart, T. I.,R. J. Sternberg (Ed.)(1994).Thinking and problem solving.New York:Academic Press.
15. Mednick, S. A.(1962).The associative basis of the creative process.Psychological Review,44,220-232.
16. Mumford, M. D.,Whetzel, D. L.(1996).Insight, creativity, and cognition: On Sternberg and Davidson's the nature of insight.Creativity Research Journal,1,103-107.
17. Plucker, J. A.,Renzulli, J. S.,R. J. Sternberg (Ed.)(1999).Handbook of creativity.New York:Cambridge University Press.
18. Rhodes, M.,S. G. Isaksen (Ed.)(1961).Frontiers of creativity research.New York:Bearly Limited.
19. Runco, M. A.(1985).Reliability and validity of ideational flexibility as a function of academic achievement.Perceptual and Motor Skills,61,1075-1081.
20. Schooler J. W.,Ohlsson, S.,Brooks, K.(1993).Thoughts beyond words: When language overshadows insight.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,122,166-183.
21. Sternberg, R. J.,Lubart, T. I.(1995).Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity.New York:Free Press.
22. Torrance, E. P.(1966).Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-technical manual.Prinecton, NJ:Personnel Press.
23. Wakefield, J. F.(1992).Creative thinking: Problem-solving skills and the art orientation.Norwood, NJ:Ablex.
24. Wallas, G.(1926).The art of thought.New York:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
25. Williams, F. E.(1980).Creativity assessment packet.Buffalo, NY:DOK.
26. 丁興祥、邱皓政、蔡啓通、林逸媛(1992)。國中學生拖弄思創造思考測驗評分常模修訂。測驗年刊，39，105-116。
27. 毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台(2000)。創造力研究。臺北市:心理。
28. 吳靜吉(1981)。語文創造思考測驗評分手冊。臺北市:遠流。
29. 吳靜吉(1981)。創造思考測驗評分手冊。臺北市:遠流。
30. 吳靜吉(1998)。教育部輔導工作六年計劃研究報告教育部輔導工作六年計劃研究報告,臺北市:教育部訓育委員會。
31. 吳靜吉(2002)。華人學生創造力的發掘與培育。應用心理學研究，15，17-42。
32. 吳靜吉、高泉豐、丁興祥、葉玉珠(1993)。拖弄思圖形創造思考測驗（甲式）指導手冊及研究手冊評分手冊。臺北市:遠流。
33. 吳靜吉、陳淑惠、李慧賢、郭俊賢、王文中、劉鶴龍(1996)。創新行為量表之編制與修訂。
34. 吳靜吉、陳嘉成、林偉文(1998)。創造力量表簡介。「技術創造力」研討活動（二），高雄市:
35. 林幸台、王木榮(1987)。威廉斯創造力測驗。臺北市:心理。
36. 邱發忠(2005)。博士論文(博士論文)。臺北市，國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系。
37. 邱發忠、陳學志(2005)。促發思考因素對創造表現之影響。「學習、教學、與評量」國際研討會論文集，臺北市:
38. 邱皓政(2008)。威廉斯創造傾向量表之修訂與因素效度檢驗威廉斯創造傾向量表之修訂與因素效度檢驗,未出版
39. 邱皓政(2008)。創意生活經驗量表之修訂與複核效度檢驗。
40. 洪素蘋(2004)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。新竹，國立交通大學教育研究所。
41. 陳昭儀(2000)。傑出理化科學家之人格特質及創造歷程之研究。師大學報：教育類，45(1)，27-45。
42. 陳學志、徐芝君(2006)。幽默創意課程對教師幽默感及創造力的影響〔創造力特刊〕。師大學報：教育類，51，71-93。
43. 黃博聖(2006)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺北市，國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系。

1. 唐裕傑(2016)。從聯想畫探究大學生的創意心像:性別與空間的視覺展演。臺中科技大學室內設計系碩士班學位論文。2016。1-125。
2. 李冠穎(2017)。問題解決能力、創新課程與學習成效之關系研究。義守大學工業管理學系學位論文。2017。1-74。