MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794093056 · doi:10.5539/ies.v11n3p77

An Exploratory Study on the Relationship between Creativity and Processing Speed for Gifted Children

2018· article· en· W2794093056 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kadir Bahar, Mehmet Ali Öztürk

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCreativity in Education and Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityFluencyPsychologyCreativityDevelopmental psychologyCreative thinkingElaborationTest (biology)Wechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleTorrance Tests of Creative ThinkingCognitionSocial psychologyMathematics educationHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explored the relationship between processing speed and five dimensions of creativity, which were fluency, originality, elaboration, abstractness of titles, and resistance to premature closure (RPC). It is the first empirical study that examines this relationship, also relating it to gender and level of giftedness. Data came from 133 gifted students at grades one through four in three private schools in Istanbul, Turkey. Creativity was measured through the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking – Figural. Scores from the Coding subtest of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children were used as the data on processing speed. The findings showed that girls had significantly higher scores in processing speed, elaboration, abstractness of titles, and RPC. There were no significant differences in fluency and originality. While fluency and originality were the only two subscores correlated with processing speed for boys (both positively correlated), four subscores were correlated with processing speed for girls (all four negatively correlated). Girls had higher processing speed scores in the group of low giftedness, but not in the group of high giftedness. A distinct finding about the boys of high giftedness was the high positive interrelationships among originality, fluency, and processing speed, which were not there for boys of low giftedness or girls of high giftedness. With its findings, the study supports some of the previous explanations around the topic, and generates new hypotheses to be tested experimentally.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.310
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicCreativity in Education and NeuroscienceFrench-language works237,207