| Test Number |
4 |
| Title |
AC Test of Creative Ability |
| Author |
Harris, R. H.; Simberg, A. L. |
| Category |
Test |
| Copyright Date |
1953/1960 |
| Availability |
http://ericae.net/tc3/TC002074.htm |
| Restrictions |
|
| Age/Grade Level |
Adults |
| Cost |
Out of print. |
| Forms |
2 forms, form B is open ended with short answers. |
| Source |
No current source available |
| Address |
|
| Phone |
|
| Fax |
|
| web or e-mail |
|
| Definition |
|
| Purposes |
This instrument is designed “to give a measure of quantity and the uniqueness of the ideas an individual can produce in a given situation.” |
| Characteristics |
Generating Ideas |
| Manual |
| Poor |
No manual available. |
| Validity |
| Poor |
An in-house study was carried out. All validity evidence is based on small samples. |
| Reliability |
| Poor |
Equivalence reliability was .75 with 39 cases, internal consistency was found to be .92 on the KR-20. The number of cases was not specified. No data reported on the reliability of sub-scores. |
| Utility |
| Good |
This paper and pencil test is timed for 80 minutes for the full test. The materials seem clear and well printed. Subjects are asked to write the consequences of a described situation. Scoring keys for uniqueness and quality are developed locally. |
| Interpretation |
| Poor |
There are 9 scores including: quantity, uniqueness , quality, and total. Scores are based on the number and uniqueness of ideas. The items search for quality, uniqueness, and quantity of responses. Other information needed for interpretation is unavailable. |
| Propriety |
| Poor |
Bias is reported in the review. |
| Reviews & Related Lit |
| (An original review sheet is on file at CCL. TiP III, 1983, MMY #6, 1965) Mayo, S. T. Undoubtedly contaminated by verbal fluency. There is a bias potential around past experience of different individuals. The items are dated. Not recommended. Merrifield, P. R. “…the test items are ingenious and stimulating; they should induce interesting results in situations where semantic, not figural or symbolic, fluency is considered an appropriate measure.” Thompson, A. S. “…this test appears to be soundly constructed to yield a sample of the individual’s productive behavior, for which quantity and quality scores can be derived.” See: Voss, H. G. (1977) The effect of experimentally induced activation on creativity. Journal of Psychology. 96, 3-9. Albaum, G., & Baker, K. (1977). Cross-validation of a creativity scale for the adjective check list. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 37(4), 1057-1061. Bessmer, M. A., & Ramanaiah, N. V. (1981). Convergent and discriminant validity of selected need scales from the Adjective Check List and Personality Research Form. Psychological Reports, 49(1), 311-316. Domino, G. (1970). Identification of potentially creative persons from the Adjective Check List. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35 (1), 48-51. Gough, H. (1979). A creative personality scale for the Adjective Check List. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(8), 1398-1405. Ironson, G. H., & Davis, G. A. (1979). Faking high or low creativity scores on the Adjective Check List. Journal of Creative Behavior, 13(2), 139-145. |
Back to Index Next Test |
Center for