The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of online information searching strategies, digital literacy, and innovative thinking skills on university students’ creative thinking dispositions. A structural equation model has been developed to explore the structural relationships among these variables. In this causal research, the analysis focuses on cause-effect relationships between variables that have either emerged or already exist within the given context. Data were collected from 815 students across various Turkish universities through an online Google Form. 815 students from various Turkish universities participated via online Google form. As for the data collection tools, university students were administered the Marmara Creative Thinking Scale, the Online Information Search Strategies Scale, the Digital Literacy Scale, and The Innovative Thinking Skills Scale. According to the results of the study, the constructed model explains creative thinking dispositions at a level of 61%. The findings indicate that digital literacy levels positively influence online information searching strategies and innovative thinking levels. However, it is observed that digital literacy levels do not directly impact creative thinking dispositions; instead, they have an indirect effect. Thus, it is inferred that enhancement in students’ online information search strategies and innovative thinking levels coincides with an elevation in their creative thinking dispositions.
Adegbilero-IwariOEOluwadareTAdegbilero-IwariI (2023) Predictors of online health information seeking behaviour of non-medical undergraduate students might vary. Health Information and Libraries Journal: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12479
AkanbiemuAA (2017) Leadership and innovative practices in Nigerian academic libraries. Ebonyi Journal of Library and Information Science4(1): 150–161. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1943/
4.
AmabileTM (1983) The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology45(2): 357–376.
AntoninisMMontoyaS (2018) A Global Framework to Measure Digital Literacy. Canada: UIS. UNESCO.
7.
ArıkEArıkBT (2020) Yaratıcılık ve yaratıcı olma kavramlarının günlük dilde anlamları [the meanings of the concepts of creativity and being creative in everyday language]. Psikoloji Çalışmaları40(2): 335–359.
8.
AşkarPMazmanSG (2013) Çevrimiçi bilgi arama stratejileri envanteri’nin türkçe’ye uyarlama çalışması [adaptation of online information searching strategy inventory into turkish]. Eğitim ve Bilim38(168): 167–181. https://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/1288
9.
AtaberkBMiriciIH (2022) An investigation of the 21st century skills in English language teaching (ELT) programs in Turkey. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching9(4): 1513–1544. ISSN: 2148-225X
10.
Atman UsluNYildiz DurakH (2022) The relationships between university students’ information-seeking strategies, social-media specific epistemological beliefs, information literacy, and personality traits. Library and Information Science Research44: 101155.
11.
AtoyMBGarciaFROCadungogRR, et al. (2020) Linking digital literacy and online information searching strategies of philippine university students: The moderating role of mindfulness. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science52(4): 1015–1027.
12.
AvcıÜYıldız DurakH (2023) Innovative thinking skills and creative thinking dispositions in learning environments: Antecedents and consequences. Thinking Skills and Creativity47: 101225.
13.
BergsmaWCroonMHagenaarsJA (2009) Causal Analyses: Structural Equation Models and (Quasi-) Experimental Designs. In: Marginal Models. Statistics for Social and Behavioral Sciences. New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/b12532_5
14.
BrandGHendyLHarrisonR (2015) Mining the gap! Fostering creativity and innovative thinking. Procedia Technology20: 79–84.
15.
CelumeM-PBesançonMZenasniF (2019) How a dialogic space can impact children’s creativity and mood valence in drama pedagogy training: Study with a French 4th grade sample. Thinking Skills and Creativity33: 100576.
16.
CevikYD (2015) Predicting college Students’ online information searching strategies based on epistemological, motivational, decisionrelated, and demographic variables. Computers & Education90: 54–63.
17.
ChamblissDFSchuttRK (2018) Making Sense of the Social World: Methods of Investigation. USA: Sage Publications.
18.
ChashechnikovaOOdintsovaOHordiienkoI, et al. (2024) Innovative technologies for the development of critical thinking in students. Amazonia Investiga13(81): 197–213.
19.
ComreyALLeeHB (1992) A First Course in Factor Analysis, 2nd ed.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
CreelyEHenriksenD (2019) Creativity and Digital Technologies. In: PetersMHeraudR (eds) Encyclopedia of Educational Innovation. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2262-4_143-1
21.
DanielsLM (2015) From pre-service to practicing teacher: Considering the stability of personal and classroom mastery and performance goals. Educational Psychology35: 984–1005.
22.
DavisFD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of ınformation technology. MIS Quarterly13(3): 19.
23.
FajriahYNSeptiyantiSNA (2021) The challenges encountered by EFL teachers in developing students’ 4C skills in 21st-century education. JEPAL (Journal of English Pedagogy and Applied Linguistics)1(2): 106–121.
24.
FuYLomasEInskipC (2021) Library log analysis and its implications for studying online information seeking behavior of cultural groups. Journal of Academic Librarianship47: 102421.
25.
GorbunovaIBGovorovaAA (2018) Music computer technologies as a means of teaching the musical art for visually-impaired people. TSETWM-18,CAAES-18,LLHSS-18,LEBDM-18 Oct. 2-4, 2018 Budapest (Hungary). https://doi.org/10.17758/URUAE4.UH10184022
26.
GutmanLMSchoonI (2013) The impact of non-cognitive skills on outcomes for young people: Literature review. London, England: Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) and Institute of Education, University of London.
27.
HamutoğluNBGüngörenÖCUyanıkGK, et al. (2017) Dijital okuryazarlık ölçeği: Türkçe’ye uyarlama çalışması [Adapting digital literacy scale into Turkish]. Ege Eğitim Dergisi18(1): 408–429.
28.
HuLBentlerPM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal6(1): 1–55.
29.
JawadLFMajeedBHALRikabiHT (2021) The impact of teaching by using STEM approach in the development of creative thinking and mathematical achievement among the students of the fourth scientific class. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies15(13): 172–188.
30.
KaeophanuekSNa-SongkhlaJNilsook (2018) How to enhance digital literacy skills among information sciences students. International Journal of Information and Education Technology8(4): 92.
31.
KesiciA (2022) The effect of digital literacy on creative thinking disposition: The mediating role of lifelong learning disposition. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age7(2): 260–273.
32.
KholikovaDM (2021) Development of innovative thinking skills in higher education students. Theoretical & Applied Science98(6): 549–552.
33.
KlineRB (2016) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 4th ed.New York: Guilford Press.
34.
KockNHadayaP (2018) Minimum sample size estimation in pls-sem: The inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods: Sample size in pls-based SEM. Information Systems Journal28: 227–261.
35.
KoliouskaCAndreopoulouZ (2020) A multicriteria approach for assessing the impact of ICT on EU sustainable regional policy. Sustainability12: 4869.
36.
KorucuATKaraS (2023) Öğretmen adaylarının dijital okuryazarlık düzeyleri ile web ortamında bilgi arama ve yorumlama stratejileri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri Dergisi5(2): 130–157.
37.
KoseBTKocakÖ (2024) The predictors of academics’ online information searching strategies: A structural model integrating cognitive absorption and digital literacy. Library & Information Science Research46(2): –9.
38.
KurtAAEmiroğluBG (2018) Analysis of students’ online ınformation searching strategies, exposure to ınternet ınformation pollution and cognitive absorption levels based on various variables. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology6(1): 18–29. https://mojet.net/index.php/mojet/article/view/118
39.
LucchiariCSalaPMVanutelliME (2019) The effects of a cognitive pathway to promote class creative thinking. An experimental study on Italian primary school students. Thinking Skills and Creativity31: 156–166.
40.
Mangual FigueroaASuhSByrnesM (2015) Coconstructing beliefs about parental involvement: Rehearsals and reflections in a family literacy program. Linguistics and Education31: 44–58.
41.
MoleAJCDimCLHorsfallMN (2016) Re-engineering LIS education to meet industrial needs for knowledge societies. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science49(3): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000616637907
42.
MonchauxSAmadieuFChevalierA, et al. (2015) Query strategies during information searching: Effects of prior domain knowledge and complexity of the information problems to be solved. Information Processing and Management51(5): 557–569.
OlalereJOSoyemiOD (2022) Digital literacy skills of library and ınformation science undergraduates in south-west, Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice (Ejournal): 7049.
49.
OloruntegbeKIkpeAKukuruJ (2010) Factors in students’ ability to connect school science with community and real-world life. Educational Research and Reviews5: 372–379. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ898838
50.
OlubiyoOP (2022) Library and ınformation science (lıs) education in the 21st century: Emerging skills for a changing world. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-Journal): 7245. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/7245
51.
OrakciŞ (2023) Structural relationship among academic motivation, academic self-efficacy, problem solving skills, creative thinking skills, and critical thinking skills. Psychology in the Schools60(7): 2173–2194.
52.
ÖzgenelMÇetinM (2017) Marmara yaratıcı düşünme eğilimleri ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Marmara Üniversitesi Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi46(46): 113–132. https://doi.org/10.15 285/m aruaebd.335087
53.
Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21) (2009) P21 Framework Definitions.
54.
PriorDDMazanovJMeacheamD, et al. (2016) Attitude, digital literacy and self efficacy: Flow-on effects for online learning behavior. Internet and Higher Education29(1): 91–97. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/199032/
55.
RankJPaceVLFreseM (2004) Three avenues for future research on creativity, innovation, and initiative. Applied Pyschology53(4): 518–528.
56.
RankinJBrownV (2016) Creative teaching method as a learning strategy for student midwives: A qualitative study. Nurse Education Today38: 93–100.
57.
RevelleW (2024) psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University. R package version 2.4.1, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych
58.
RhodesM (1961) An analysis of creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan42(7): 305–310.
59.
RosseelY (2012) Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software48(2): 1–36.
60.
Said-MetwalySVan den NoortgateWKyndtE (2017) Approaches to measuring creativity: A systematic literature review. Creatity Theories Research Applications4: 238–275.
ŞendururEYıldırımZ (2018) Development of metacognitive skills inventory for internet search (MSIIS): Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. İlköğretim Online17(4): 1896–1911.
63.
SevinçYSUyangörN (2020) İnovatif düşünme becerileri meslek liseleri öğrencilerine yönelik bir ölçek geliştirme çalışması [Innovative thinking skills a scale development study for vocational high school students]. Turkish Studies - Education15(5): 3669–3690.
64.
SofwanMPratamaRMuhaiminM, et al. (2021) Contribution of technology innovation acceptance and organizational innovation climate on innovative teaching behavior with ICT in Indonesian education. Qwerty - Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education16: 33–57.
65.
SzopińskiTBachnikK (2022) Student evaluation of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. TechnologicalForecasting & Social Change174: 121203.
66.
TangC (2014) The impact of connecting with Professional Virtual Forum, team member and external person on R&D employee creativity. Computers in Human Behavior39: 204–212.
67.
TangCMaoSXingZ, et al. (2022) Improving student creativity through digital technology products: A literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity44: 101032.
68.
TarkaP (2018) An overview of structural equation modeling: Its beginnings, historical development, usefulness and controversies in the social sciences. Quality & Quantity52: 313–354.
69.
TsaiMJ (2009) Online information searching strategy inventory (OISSI): A quick version and a complete version. Computers & Education53(2): 473–483.
70.
TsaiPS (2022) Research on information searching strategies in high school students’ quality of argumentative essay writing. Interactive Learning Environments31(10): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2046108
71.
UmarMYDangwaranTY (2023) Exploring the relationship between digital literacy and electronic information resources use among undergraduate student of Gombe state university. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-Journal): 7815. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/7815
72.
UstundagMTGunesEBahcivanE (2017) Turkish adaptation of digital literacy scale and investigating pre-service teachers’ digital literacy. Journal of Education and Future12: 19–29. Retrieved https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/332115
VerzatCO’SheaNJoreM (2017) Teaching proactivity in the entrepreneurial classroom. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development29(9–10): 975–1013.
75.
VygotskyLS (2004) Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology42: 7–97.
76.
WisetsatCNuangchalermP (2019) Enhancing ınnovative thinking of Thai pre-service teachers through multi-educational ınnovations. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists7(3): 409–419.
77.
WuYTTsaiCC (2005) Information commitments: Evaluative standards and ınformation searching strategies in web-based learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning21: 374–385.
78.
ZhanZShenWLinW (2022) Effect of product-based pedagogy on students’ project management skills, learning achievement, creativity, and innovative thinking in a high-school artificial intelligence course. Frontiers in Psychology: 13. https://doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.849842
79.
ZhangRWangH (2024) The impact of Chinese university music teachers’ teaching beliefs on creative teaching behaviors: the mediating role of technological acceptance. Frontiers in Education9: 01–08. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1404541
80.
ZhangXZhangYSunY, et al. (2017) Exploring the effect of transformational leadership on individual creativity in e-learning: A perspective of social exchange theory. Studies in Higher Education43(11): 1964–1978.
81.
ZhaoPKynäshlahtiHSintonenS (2018) A qualitative analysis of the digital literacy of arts education teachers in Chinese junior high and high schools. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science50(1): 77–87.
