Search

A deeper understanding of the processes leading to problem framing and behind finding solutions to problems should help explain variability in the quality of the solutions to those problems. Using Sternberg's WICS model as the conceptual basis of problem solving, this article discusses the relations between creative, analytical, practical, and wisdom-based approaches as bases for solutions to problems. We use a construct of "meta-intelligence" to encompass understanding, control, and coordination between these constructs. We propose that constraints can act at each of three levels--individual, contextual, and interactive. Individual constraints include the metacomponents (executive processes) that underpin each of the four kinds of solutions. Contextual constraints direct which of the four approaches are preferred under what circumstances. Finally, interactive constraints involve individual and contextual constraints directly impacting each other's actions. The model of meta-intelligence and its functioning helps to explain the variability in the ways that individuals frame problems and, as a consequence, in the solutions that are found. The model of meta-intelligence also helps explain why some solutions to problems are so much more comprehensive, and often better, than others.

The term "creativity" can conjure various ideas and meanings. It's no surprise that methods for measuring such a concept vary widely and are not without controversy. This is particularly true among people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), who are a unique yet incredibly diverse group of individuals. This article provides an overview of the assessment of creativity among individuals with ASD. Findings among studies that have sought to determine whether individuals with ASD are more or less creative than their neurotypical peers are mixed, yet the authors propose that intentional development of creativity in all youth, including those with ASD, can be beneficial.

The original 90-item Creative Behavior Inventory (CBI) was a landmark self-report scale in creativity research, and the 28-item brief form developed nearly 20 years ago continues to be a popular measure of everyday creativity. Relatively little is known, however, about the psychometric properties of this widely used scale. In the current research, we conduct a detailed psychometric investigation into the 28-item CBI by applying methods from item response theory using a sample of 2,082 adults. Our investigation revealed several strengths of the current scale: excellent reliability, suitable dimensionality, appropriate item difficulty, and reasonably good item discrimination. Several areas for improvement were highlighted as well: (1) the four-point response scale should have fewer options; (2) a handful of items showed gender-based differential item functioning, indicating some gender bias; and (3) local dependence statistics revealed clusters of items that are redundant and could be trimmed. These analyses support the continued use of the CBI for assessing engagement in everyday creative behaviors but suggest that the CBI could benefit from thoughtful revision.

Immersive virtual reality (IVR) takes advantage of exponential growth in our technological abilities to offer an array of new forms of entertainment, learning opportunities, and even psychological interventions and assessments. The field of creativity is a driving force in both large-scale innovations and everyday progress, and imbedding creativity assessment in IVR programs has important practical implications for future research and interventions in this field. Creativity assessment, however, tends to either rely on traditional concepts or newer, yet cumbersome methods. Can creativity be measured within IVR? This study introduces the VIVA, a new IVR-based visual arts creativity assessment paradigm in which user create 3D drawings in response to a prompt. Productions are then rated with modern extensions of a classic product-based approach to creativity assessment. A sample of 67 adults completed the VIVA, further scored using item-response modeling. Results demonstrated the strong psychometric properties of the VIVA assessment, including its structural validity, internal reliability, and criterion validity with relevant criterion measures. Together, this study established a solid proof-of-concept of the feasibility of measuring creativity in IVR. We conclude by discussing directions for future studies and the broader importance and impact of this line of work for the field of creativity and virtual reality.

What is the aim of giftedness? Is the goal to narrow in on the gifts of a select few or to nurture everyone's gifts such that they may be exchanged with each other? Drawing from creativity theory, we emphasize the possible interactive element of giftedness. Current paradigms risk ignoring hidden creativities and for potential to remain in the shadows. Is the promise of one possible eminent creator worth thousands of everyday creators? Do we need to make such a choice? By fostering perspective-taking and other collaborative skills, we may try to have it all.

Creativity, and more recently dark creativity, have yet to be studied in relation to moral foundations, especially against the background of dark traits. This study identified moral foundations that predicted creativity, particularly malevolent creativity, after accounting for Dark Triad/Tetrad traits. Data (N = 529, M[subscript age] = 20.10 years, SD = 4.55) on self-reported creativity, personality, and moral foundations were collected. Results indicated that lower concerns for binding foundations (loyalty, authority, and purity) explained creativity, especially malevolent creativity. In contrast, higher concern for individualizing foundations (care and fairness) predicted creativity, whereas lower regard for these morals predicted malevolent creativity. Planned mediations indicated that lower concerns for all foundations explained greater malevolent creativity due to higher dark personality dispositions. Limitations and implications are discussed.

Students display resistance, including academic dishonesty, at all educational levels. In the present study, we qualitatively examined the extent and incidence of academic misbehaviors by 101 US college students (M[subscript age] = 22.98 years, SD = 6.70). Using a combination of self-reported closed- and open-ended questions, we developed a multi-faceted understanding of how students perceived their own classroom misbehaviors to avoid work as being original, clever, deceptive, and unethical. Questions pertaining to possible prevention, impact on grade, and repetition of the misbehavior were also included. Further, environmental contributors of such behavior were explored, inclusive of the teacher, curriculum, larger school/institutional reasons, peers, and out-of-school issues. Thematic analyses identified distinct themes related to each factor, with poor time management emerging as a salient antecedent across factors. The present study also reviews and provides strategies to improve time management among students to mitigate future instances of academic misbehavior.

Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS) is a self-report of creative behavior in five distinct domains. The present study aims to translate K-DOCS into Russian and evaluate its psychometric properties. The psychometric analysis was performed on a sample of adults recruited through Yandex Toloka (N = 1011; M[subscript age] = 35.94, SD[subscript age] = 10.95) from various regions of Russia and Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) countries. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses indicated that the model with five correlated factors showed the best fit to empirical data. All factors demonstrated good internal consistency and moderate test-retest reliability. The correlation and hierarchical regression analyses for K-DOCS factors, creative achievements by CBI (Creative Behavior Inventory), and personality traits by BFI-2 (Big Five Inventory -- 2) yielded evidence for an adequate level of convergent and discriminant validity. We also examined differences across K-DOCS factors among occupations defined by Holland's typology and attempted to investigate K-DOCS measurement invariance across gender. As a result, we obtained evidence supporting the construct validity of K-DOCS and established its partial measurement invariance across gender. The current study shows that Russian K-DOCS has satisfactory psychometric properties and can serve as a trusted guide into various manifestations of humans' creative behavior.

The Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS; Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Counting the muses: Development of the Kaufman domains of creativity scale (K-DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 298-308. doi:10.1037/a0029751) is a self-report assessment of five creative domains: Everyday, Scholarly, Performance, Scientific, and Artistic. This investigation was designed to reassess the factor structure of the K-DOCS, examine its measurement invariance across men and women, and develop norms across the five domains. Data on 22,013 American participants who had completed the assessment as part of past or ongoing studies between 2012 and 2020 were collated across multiple samples. Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that both five- and nine-factor solutions had superior fit compared to a one-factor solution. The models were also gender invariant, indicating that creative domains were assessed similarly across male and female samples. Norms across gender and age-groups were provided to enable future comparisons in research settings; it is not recommended to use these norms in clinical or diagnostic contexts. The investigation concluded that the K-DOCS is a robust psychometric tool for the self-assessment of creativity across domains.

The present study examines effort in narrative creative writing (operationalized as time-on-task) using a new assessment approach, the storyboard task. Participants (N = 125) completed alternate forms of the storyboard task in two sessions five weeks apart. They also completed measures of divergent thinking and self-reported ideational behavior. Time-on-task, story length, and rated creativity scores were obtained for the participants' stories. The storyboard task demonstrated good alternate form reliability and convergent validity with the criterion measures. Although time-on-task was strongly, positively associated with creativity scores, this relationship was confounded by the contribution of story length. Relationships amongst these variables were similar when creativity was rated by novice raters using a rubric or experienced raters using the consensual assessment technique. Additionally, story length and time-on-task were moderately correlated with the external criterion measures of creativity. Thus, the strong associations between rated creativity, story length, and time in creative writing raise important issues and avenues for future research, and results for the storyboard task suggest that it is a valuable assessment of narrative creative writing.

Past research has demonstrated that the hierarchical value structures of creative individuals differ systematically from their less creative counterparts. However, earlier studies used a global creativity score, which is inconsistent with both creativity's movement toward a domain-specific viewpoint, and Lebedeva et al.'s 2019 study suggests the relationship between values and the frequency of creative behaviors differs by domain. We conducted two studies to determine if different creative domains are associated with distinct value hierarchies in creative ability, self-perception, and achievement. Study 1 (N = 156) examined whether Schwartz's core values demonstrated a different pattern of correlations with verbal versus visual creative performance, assessed with story and drawing tasks. Study 2 (N = 492) examined the pattern of values across a broader set of domains (i.e., artistic, everyday/self, science, performance, and scholarly), assessed using measures of creative self-concept and self-reported creative achievement. The value hierarchies associated with each of the domains were not consistent with each other or with the findings of past studies. The implications of these results for creative domain specificity and motivation are discussed.

Students display resistance in the classroom in numerous ways, often in the form of academic misconduct. Some argue that resistance can reflect cleverness and creativity, rather than apathy. This investigation aimed to develop a psychometric tool to examine classroom resistance as well as identify individual and situational determinants of the same. Data from 853 participants (M[subscript age] = 19.36 years, SD = 1.93) was collected on measures of resistance behaviors in educational contexts and their environmental contributors, creativity, personality, and deception. Further, participants indicated their frequency of resistance across two time periods: kindergarten through middle school, and high school through college. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses identified a robust three-factor structure for the Classroom Resistance Scale, comprising Test-Oriented Cheating, Blatant Academic Dishonesty, and Unethical Shortcuts. The person-situation analysis indicated that students who engaged in resistance shared some consistent characteristics: they were more likely to be closed to new experiences, unimaginative, more extraverted, and highly influenced by their peers. Moreover, the frequency of classroom resistance increased in higher grades as compared to lower ones. Implications of spillover effects of academic dishonesty into the workplace are discussed, in addition to suggestions for future research.

A critical need exists in engineering education to draw on the non-traditional divergent thinking and risk-taking necessary for making radical technological breakthroughs. Literature suggests that individuals with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) characteristics demonstrate unparalleled creativity and risk-taking potential. While this group of students may offer significant benefits to the advancement of the nation, they are currently significantly underrepresented in engineering programs because of the major academic and emotional challenges that the rigidly structured engineering programs impose on them. Funded by the Division of Engineering Education and Centers of the National Science Foundation, this study is aimed at understanding creative potential and challenges of engineering students with ADHD characteristics. A cohort of 18 female and 36 male undergraduate students were recruited from the School of Engineering at the University of Connecticut (n=54). To quantify the level of ADHD-related characteristics and the creative potential of the participants, the investigators administered Brown ADD Scales for Adults and Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT) Figural Form A, respectively. A 40-question instrument was designed and administered to understand the learning styles, the perception of current engineering programs in terms of rewarding creativity and risk-taking, and the difficulties of the participants in engineering programs. It was found that there is a statistically significant positive correlation between the Brown total score and the Creativity Index (r=.45, p=.001). Among Brown subscale scores, attention was found to have the largest correlation with the Creativity Index. There were positive significant correlations with the Creativity Index and all of the Brown subscales except for memory. The Brown scores were found to have positive significant correlations with three of the TTCT sub-categories: fluency, originality, and resistance to premature closure. A negative correlation exists between the GPA and total Brown score, suggesting weaker academic accomplishments of students with ADHD characteristics. GPA showed no correlation with the Creativity Index, suggesting a lack of creativity appreciation in current engineering programs. The Mann-Whitney test on survey questions revealed that students with a higher Brown t-score are significantly more willing to take a chance in which they may fail in order to pursue innovation. This study found that only three of the eighteen students who are formally diagnosed with ADHD are receiving services from the Center of Students with Disabilities CSD. It is expected that the outcomes of this study lead to a paradigm shift in how these individuals are perceived by both our society and our engineering educational system. The knowledge generated through this study will help to identify the academic struggles of this group of students and facilitate development of specialized education programs that foster largely unrecognized talents and unique potential of this underrepresented population.

The concept of "creativity" as a desirable attribute within education is long-standing. The fields of education and creativity have developed, and periodically intersected with, government reports, policies, commentaries, and advice. Recently, an increasing number of countries have emphasized creativity in their official curricula. However, the journey from openly acknowledging the importance of creativity to systematically and purposefully supporting its promotion in the classroom is a long one. The research reported in this article focuses on what might be regarded as the first step in this journey: school curriculum. This article analyzes curricula in 12 countries and asks three key questions: if and how creativity is defined, where is it placed in the curriculum, and what concrete advice is provided for teachers? Despite widespread interest and a productive field of research in creativity, our examination reveals little support for teachers to turn policy into practice.

One common self-assessment of creativity is the Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS). This article provides support for a Turkish translation of the instrument, offering exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to determine whether the factors were consistent across cultures. The participants consisted of two groups. The first group consisted of 1,260 undergraduate students (912 females, 348 males) at a public university in Turkey and was utilized for the principal axis factoring analysis. Horn's parallel analysis, a robust statistical technique, was employed to determine the number of factors to be extracted from a scale. The second group consisted of 1,215 participants (885 females and 330 males) who were utilized for confirmatory factor analysis. Results supported a nine-factor solution as a better fit for this sample than the five-solution originally used by Kaufman. Of the original five factors, four factors were divided into two sub-factors, which were distinct although moderately correlated. Finally, we determined the relationship between K-DOCS factors and college major. We also found good evidence for the construct, discriminant, and convergent validity of the scale. Relationships between K-DOCS factors and college major were largely consistent with predictions, providing additional evidence for the construct validity of the scale.

In this paper, we organize past and present theories and models of creativity by using a new conceptual framework--the creativity matrix--with the aim of highlighting the dimensions of creativity we know a lot about and those we tend to either ignore or find difficult to study. This matrix is formed by bringing together a developmental model of creativity (the 4 C's) and a structural one (the 5 A's). We start by briefly describing these two conceptual frameworks, and then, we proceed to exploring the matrix itself by describing how the 5 A's are dynamically organized at each "level" of the 4 C's. Importantly, our overview of the matrix is informed by existing models and concepts that address one of more of the C's and the A's. This gives us a unique opportunity to take stock of what has been studied so far and, toward the end, consider new avenues for the development of theory and research agendas within creativity studies.

This manifesto, discussed by 20 scholars, representing diverse lines of creativity research, marks a conceptual shift within the field. Socio-cultural approaches have made substantial contributions to the concept of creativity over recent decades and today can provide a set of propositions to guide our understanding of past research and to generate new directions of inquiry and practice. These propositions are urgently needed in response to the transition from the Information Society to the Post-Information Society. Through the propositions outlined here, we aim to build common ground and invite the community of creativity researchers and practitioners to reflect up, study, and cultivate creativity as a socio-cultural phenomenon.

Although the relationship between creativity and ADHD is uncertain, recent studies examining how dimensionally assessed characteristics of ADHD relate to creativity and divergent thinking in adults suggest an occasional positive, linear relationship between the constructs. However, the executive functions proposed to underlie characteristics of ADHD have not been examined in relation to creativity. This study was conducted to determine how different characteristics of ADHD related to executive functioning (as assessed by the Brown ADD Scales) predict different components of figural divergent thinking, intellectual risk-taking, and creative self-efficacy. Undergraduate engineering students (N = 60) completed the Brown ADD Scales, a figural divergent thinking task, and self-report measures of intellectual risk-taking and creative self-efficacy. A series of multivariate regression models demonstrated that several components of divergent thinking (i.e., fluency, originality, and resistance to closure) were predicted by different characteristics of ADHD. Although fluency was predicted by affect only and originality was predicted by activation only, resistance to closure was predicted by activation, effort, and attention. Additionally, intellectual risk-taking was predicted by memory, effort, and activation, whereas creative self-efficacy was predicted by effort. The implications of these results relating to the relationship between ADHD and creativity, as well as for engineering undergraduate education are discussed.

The Amusement Park Theory of Creativity, which represents both domain-specific and domain-general perspectives of creativity, calls for more research on how individual difference constructs are related to creativity at all ends of the domain-specificity and general spectrum. Toward this goal, this study examined emotional intelligence (using the Emotional Intelligence Scale) in relationship with both a domain-general measure (the Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults) and a domain-specific measure (Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale) in a sample of 281 Chinese undergraduates. Although emotional intelligence demonstrated no relationship with divergent thinking, it did positively predict all five domains of creativity on the self-report measure (ranging from 0.52 to 0.77). These findings add to the nuanced relationship between emotional intelligence and creativity and serve as a call for more work of this nature.

Background: Creativity is increasingly recognized as an important skill for success in the field of engineering, but most traditional, post-secondary engineering education programs do not reward creative efforts. Failing to recognize creativity or creative efforts can have particularly negative effects for those students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), who may exhibit enhanced divergent thinking ability yet struggle in the traditional educational environment. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study was conducted to investigate how ADHD characteristics, academic aptitude, and one important component of creativity (divergent thinking) contribute to academic performance in engineering programs and how traditional markers of academic performance and ADHD characteristics predict divergent thinking. Design/Method: Undergraduate engineering students (n = 60) completed measures of ADHD symptoms and divergent thinking. Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores and grade point average (GPA) were collected from university records, and hypotheses were tested using a series of multivariate regression models. Results: Verbal SAT scores were the only positive predictor of overall GPA and engineering GPA. ADHD characteristics did not significantly predict overall GPA but negatively predicted engineering GPA. ADHD characteristics were the only positive predictor of divergent thinking ability. Conclusions: ADHD characteristics negatively predict academic performance (i.e., GPA) in engineering programs but are more predictive of divergent thinking ability than traditional markers of academic performance.

The "standard" definition of creativity as novel and useful describes creative products, but creativity is constituted by processes. This misalignment contributes to the oft-noted challenges of operationalizing creativity. Here, we distinguish creativity as a process from creativity as an attribute (i.e. "creative-ness"). Operating from a priori premises of creativity theory, we develop a process definition of creativity. Specifically, creativity is defined as internal attention constrained by a generative goal. This definition comprises three criteria: 1) attention is directed internally (toward mental representations); 2) attentional operations (e.g. search, manipulation) are constrained to fit parameters of a to-be-achieved goal state (whether or not a goal is actually achieved); and 3) the goal state is generative (not already precisely held in memory). We illustrate how these three definitional process elements align with insights yielded by creativity neuroscience, clarify ontological distinctions (e.g. from mind-wandering and retrieval), and relate the process definition to process-based models. The process definition provides minimal necessity and sufficiency criteria for whether a process should be considered creativity, but does not exclude the many other perceptual, emotional, etc. elements that can contribute to creativity processes. Researchers should specify whether they are studying creativity-as-process vs. "creative-ness," and consider including process-focused assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This report reviews the literature on noncognitive and other background predictors (e.g., personality, attitudes, and interests) as it pertains to graduate education. The first section reviews measures typically used in studies of graduate school outcomes, such as attrition and time to degree. A review of qualities faculty members and administrators say they desire and cultivate in graduate programs is conducted. There appears to be a divergence between the qualities faculty members say are important and the measures researchers typically use in validity studies. The second section reviews three categories of noncognitive variables that might predict outcomes (general personality factors, quasi-cognitive factors, and attitudinal factors) and the definitions, measures, correlates, and the validity of those measures. The role of background factors, both environmental and group, is part of this review.

Academic learning and creativity should be overlapping goals that can be simultaneously pursued in programs of advanced academics. However, efforts aimed at nurturing creativity and academic learning sometimes are represented as two related but separate paths; this separation is unnecessary and can undermine the development of creative and academic potential. The idea that programs of advanced academics have "two paths" (one for creativity and one for academic learning) needs to be replaced with a new metaphor, and appropriate pedagogical strategies need to be developed to support that new metaphor. In order to facilitate this process, educators will need to broaden their traditional conceptions of learning and creativity to include interpretive perspectives on learning and creativity. A new metaphor, "intellectual estuary," illustrates the notion that streams of creative and academic interpretations can converge and thrive when educators in programs of advanced academic simultaneously support learning and creativity. Possible pedagogical strategies that utilize intellectual estuaries include exploratory talk and Socratic seminars.

Empirical studies on the relationship between affect and creativity often produce conflicting results. This inconsistency has led us to believe that the relationship between affect and creativity may be better understood by looking at potential moderators. Our study looked specifically at trait affect and self-perceived creativity. Using the Affect Infusion Model (AIM) theory with problem clarity as the potential moderator, we hypothesized that when individuals are faced with problems that lack clarity, trait affect has greater sway over their self-perceived creativity. Our results provided evidence that problem clarity moderated the relationship between positive trait affect and self-perceived creativity; the positive relationship between positive trait affect and self-perceived creativity is stronger when problem clarity is low and weaker when problem clarity is high. No moderating effect was found in the relationship between negative trait affect and self-perceived creativity.

This paper reviews the relationship between creativity and equitable thinking and the individual differences in personality, demographic, and experiential factors that influence both concepts as they affect each other. Given the nationwide push to increase equity in public schools, interventions beyond teaching about equity are becoming progressively more vital to school improvement. The work suggests that schools may be able to increase equitable thinking and, accordingly, community equity by employing creative thinking strategies in classrooms.

Equity is an important element of educational discourses pertaining to mathematics and science education. Creativity is an aspect of the classroom that is often ignored due to curricular constraints and the burden of testing. However mathematics offers avenues to infuse the regular curricula with activities that are thought provoking and require creativity and these are accessible to learners of all levels. This article reviews creativity strategies that can be embedded in mathematics curricula to increase classroom equity. These strategies will include the strength of presenting open-ended problems, modeling and encouraging risk taking, discussions and debate of mathematical concepts, concept based learning, divergent thinking strategies during problem solving activities, and incorporating cultural awareness and creativity into curricula and classroom environment. The article will focus both on teacher implementation of these strategies and student outcomes regarding creativity and equity.

Domain‐specificity is a topic of debate within the field of creativity. To shed light on this issue, we conducted a meta‐analysis of cross‐domain correlations based on the Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K‐DOCS). To evaluate the model fit of one general factor versus two factors that encompass the primary K‐DOCS subscales (Scholarly, Everyday, Artistic, Scientific, and Performance), we employed the one‐stage meta‐analytic structural equation modeling (OSMASEM) approach. Poor fit of these models would provide evidence of domain‐specificity, as the proposed models would not outperform the independence model. Our analysis included 45 correlation matrices from 30 studies, with a total sample size of 31,136 participants. The results provided support for a general domain of creativity, as well as a two‐factor solution consisting of Arts and Sciences factors. Among the subscales, the highest correlation was found between the Artistic and Performance domains (r =.478), while the smallest correlation was observed between the Everyday and Scientific domains (r =.178). Furthermore, moderator analyses incorporating age and gender revealed that the Scientific and Everyday subscales exhibited a stronger factor load in older participants compared to younger participants. Implications are discussed for research and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What are the personal characteristics that distinguish the creative scientist from the less creative scientist? This study used the concept of implicit theory in a four-part study of scientists and graduate students in science. In the first part, we collected 1382 adjective words that describe the personal characteristics of the creative scientist from 354 scientists. In the second part of the study, 542 additional scientists assessed these adjectives. We determined that the personal characteristics of the creative scientist fit into four factors: personality, thinking ability, research ability, and uniqueness. In the third part of the study, we found that the concepts of thinking ability and uniqueness would positively predict 221 graduate students' self-perceived creativity, and research ability would positively predict their creative motivation. The last part of the study involved having 283 creative scientists and 264 less creative scientists from 30 research institutions rated by three colleagues on the above four factors. A logistic regression found that thinking ability was best able to identify creative scientists while personality best predicted less creative scientists.

College admissions decisions have traditionally focused on high school academic performance and standardized test scores. An ongoing debate is the validity of these measures for predicting success in college; part of this debate includes how success is defined. One potential way of defining college success is a student's creative accomplishments. We tested the hypothesis that traditional admissions criteria fail to capture adequately the creativity of applicants by asking 610 college applicants to complete several creativity tasks. These included divergent thinking, caption-writing, an essay, and self-report measures of creativity in numerous domains. Creativity scores were compared to data from the college application, including high school rank, standardized test scores, and admissions interview scores. Results showed that traditional admissions criteria were only weakly related to creativity. Indeed, students who report the highest creative self-efficacy can be perceived as weaker applicants according to traditional criteria. Findings are discussed in light of the goals of higher education to increase diversity of the student body and the abilities of its students.

An understanding of the strengths, weaknesses, and achievement profiles of students with giftedness and learning disabilities (G&LD) is needed to address their asynchronous development. This study examines the subtests and error factors in the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement--Third Edition (KTEA-3) for strength and weakness patterns of students with G&LD in higher and lower level thinking skills by comparing G&LD students (n = 196) with academically gifted (GT; n = 69) and specific learning disability (SLD) students (n = 90). Several one-way MANCOVAs were conducted with subtest error factor scores as dependent variables and grouping variable (G&LD, GT, or SLD) as the independent variable. The G&LD means scores across subtests were in between the two control groups. On many higher level thinking tasks, the G&LD group scored similar to the gifted group. The results support the use of error analysis to gain further understanding into the profile of students with G&LD.

In this response, we commend Sternberg's Active Concerned Citizenship and Ethical Leadership (ACCEL) model yet urge him to consider an ACCEL-S model that more fully incorporates society's integrative role in giftedness. ACCEL-S builds on the highly complex and contextual view of giftedness proposed by Sternberg and transforms it into a participatory framework. Within it, the skills associated with giftedness shape but are also shaped by social context; they generate meaningful forms of collaboration as well as grow out of them. The concept of giftedness itself is transformed from a person-centric one to a distributed model in which being gifted is a relational instead of purely personal achievement. [This article responds to Robert Sternberg's "ACCEL: A New Model for Identifying the Gifted" (EJ1148989).]

Creativity is sexy, but are all creative behaviors equally sexy? We attempted to clarify the role of creativity in mate selection among an ethnically diverse sample of 815 undergraduates. First we assessed the sexual attractiveness of different forms of creativity: ornamental/aesthetic, applied/technological, and everyday/domestic creativity. Both males and females preferred ornamental/aesthetic forms of creativity in a prospective sexual partner than applied/technological and everyday/domestic forms of creativity. Secondly, we assessed the simultaneous prediction of general cognitive ability, personality, divergent thinking, self-perceptions of creativity, and creative achievement on preferences for different forms of creativity in a prospective sexual partner. The results were generally consistent with assortative mating. The most robust predictors of a preference for applied/technological forms of creativity in a potential sexual partner were intellectual interests and creative achievement in applied/technological domains. In contrast, the most robust predictor of a preference for ornamental/aesthetic forms of creativity was openness to experience. The results suggest that openness to experience and its associated aesthetic, perceptual, and affective aspects are the primary characteristics influencing the sexual attractiveness of a creative display. Further, the results demonstrate the importance of also taking into account individual differences in personality, interests, and creative achievement when considering the sexual attractiveness of different manifestations of creativity.