The study of creativity has been increasing due to its link with critical thinking and problem-solving. However, no scales have been found that evaluate this variable in distinct domains in the Spanish population. This study attempts to validate the K-DOCS using 821 undergraduates, and its factorial invariance according to sex. Correlations between creativity factors and attitude towards the Didactics of Artistic Expression (ADEP) and Aesthetic Experience (EE) were also analyzed. The results revealed a version of the K-DOCS with 22 items and 5 factors obtained the best results and that this version is invariant by sex. Positive and significant correlations were also observed in most dimensions of the ADEP and EE. In conclusion, an instrument for assessing creativity in the Spanish adult population is offered and it is estimated that it will improve the ADEP and EE of the population with the aim of increasing the dimensions of creativity.
AcarS.CevikE.FesliE.BozkirtN.KaufmanJ. C. (2024). Testing the domain specificity of creativity with Kaufman domains of creativity scale: A meta-analytic confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Creative Behavior, 58(1), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.641
2.
AmabileT. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357
3.
Aparicio-Flores, M.P., Esteve-Faubel, R.P., Fernández-Sogorb, A. & Gonzálvez, C. . (2024a). Diseño y validación de la Escala breve de Actitudes sobre la Didáctica de la Expresión Plástica (EADEP). Revista Complutense de Educación, 35(2), 315–326. https://doi.org/10.5209/rced.85321
4.
Aparicio-Flores, M.P., Esteve-Faubel, R.P., Fernández-Sogorb, A. & Gonzálvez, C. (2024b). Spanish validation perceived ease of ICT among future early childhood education and primary school teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 5133–5148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12983-7
5.
Aparicio-Flores, M.P., Vicent, M., Fernández Sogorb, A. & Gonzálvez, C. (2024). Perfiles de curiosidad y diferencias en experiencia estética en futuros maestros. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 30(2), 65–79. https://doi.org/10.31876/rcs.v30i2.41891
6.
AshrafF.NusratA.MehboobD. (2019). Predictive role of personality characteristics in positive emotions and creativity: A study of Pakistani nuns. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 34(2), 383–400. https://doi.org/10.33824/PJPR.2019.34.2.21
AwofalaA. O. A.FatadeA. O. (2015). Validation of the domains of creativity scale for Nigerian preservice science, technology, and mathematics teachers. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 13(1), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.14204/ejrep.35.14057
BaerJ. (2016). Creativity doesn’t develop in a vacuum. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 151(3), 9–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20151
11.
BaerJ. (2024). How to teach creativity when there’s no such thing as creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 0(0), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.1518
12.
BaerJ.KaufmanJ. C. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The amusement park theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27, 158–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190509554310
13.
BentlerP. M. (2004). EQS 6: Structural equation program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
14.
BrandonP. R.LawtonB. E. (2013). The development, validation, and potential uses of the student interest in the arts questionnaire. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39, 90–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.01.001
15.
BrauerK.SendatzkiR.KaufmanJ. C.ProyerR. T. (2022). Counting the muses in German speakers – evaluation of the German-language translation of the Kaufman domains of creativity scales (k-DOCS). Psychological Test Adaptation and Development, 3, 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1027/2698-1866/a000024
16.
BrownT. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guildford Press.
17.
ChenF. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
18.
DimitrovD. M. (2010). Testing for factorial invariance in the context of construct validation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling, 43(2), 121–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175610373459
19.
FaletičL.AvsecA. (2019). Validation of the Slovene form of Kaufman domains of creativity scale. Horizons of Psychology, 28, 40–52. https://doi.org/10.20419/2019.28.499
20.
FarringtonC. A.MaurerJ.McBrideM. R. A.NagaokaJ.PullerJ. S.ShewfeltS. … WrightL. (2019). Arts education and social-emotional learning outcomes among K-12 students: developing a theory of action. Chicago: Consortium on School Research.
21.
FerrandoP. J.Lorenzo-SevaU.Hernández-DoradoA.MuñizJ. (2022). Decalogue for the factor analysis of test items. Psicothema, 34(1), 7–17. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2021.456
22.
GajdaA.KarwowskiM.BeghettoR. A. (2016). Creativity and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(2), 269–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000133
23.
HagmanG. (2009). Art and self. A new psychoanalytic perspective on creativity and aesthetic experience. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1159(1), 164–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2008.04344.x
24.
HennesseyB. A. (2019). Motivation and creativity. In KaufmanE. J. C.SternbergR. J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 374–395). New York: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Hernández-SerranoM. J.JonesB.Renés-ArellanoP.Campos-OrtuñoR. A. (2022). Analysis of digital self-presentation practices and profiles of spanish adolescents on Instagram and TikTok. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 11(1), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2022.1.797
26.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
27.
KandemirM. A.KaufmanJ. C. (2019). The Kaufman domains of creativity scale: Turkish validation and relationship to academic major. Journal of Creative Behavior, 5(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.428
28.
KapoorH.Reiter-PalmonR.KaufmanJ. C. (2021). Norming the muses: Establishing the psychometric properties of the Kaufman domains of creativity scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 39(6), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829211008334
29.
KapoorH.ZhengM.Reiter-PalmonR.KaufmanJ. C. (2023). Toward equitable creativity self-assessment: Measurement invariance and mean differences across ethnicity in the Kaufman domains in creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 17(4), 487–494. https://doi.org/https://dx.https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000594
30.
KaufmanJ. C. (2012). Counting the muses: Development of the Kaufman domains of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 298–308. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029751
KaufmanJ. C.PumaccahuaT. T.HoltR. E. (2013). Personality and creativity in realistic, investigative, artistic, social, and enterprising college majors. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 913–917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.01.013
33.
KaufmanS. B.QuiltyL. C.GraziopleneR. G.HirshJ. B.GirayJ. R.PetersonJ. B.DeYoungC. G. (2016). Openness to experience and intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Personality, 84(2), 248–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12156
34.
LiangW. (2022). The application of knowlege management thinking in college art education management. Frontiers in Art Research, 4(1), 66–69. https://doi.org/10.25236/FAR.2022.040114
35.
MakH. W.FancourtD. (2021). Do socio-demographic factors predict children’s engagement in arts and culture? Comparisons of in-school and out-of-school participation in the taking part survey. PLoS One, 16(2), e0246936. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246936
36.
McDonaldR. P. (2000). A basis for multidimensional item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(2), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/01466210022031552
McKayA.KarwowskiM.KaufmanJ. C. (2017). Measuring the muses: Validating the Kaufman domains creativity scale (K-DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(2), 216–230. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000074
39.
MiroshnikK. G.ShcherbakovaO. V.KaufmanJ. C. (2022). Kaufman domains of creativity scale: Relationship to occupation and measurement invariance across gender. Creativity Research Journal, 34(2), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2021.1953823
40.
Morales-CarunchoX.Chacón-GordilloP. (2018). Percepción y conocimiento de dos grupos de futuros docentes de Educación Primaria sobre la Educación Artística y las competencias que desarrolla. Investigación, 23(77), 527–546.
41.
MusselP.McKayA. S.ZieglerM.HewigJ.KaufmanJ. C. (2015). Predicting creativity based on the facets of the theoretical intellect framework. European Journal of Personality, 29(4), 459–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2000
42.
MyszkowskiN.StormeM.ZenasniF.LubartT. (2014). Is visual aesthetic sensitivity independent from intelligence, personality and creativity?Personality and Individual Differences, 59, 16–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.10.021
43.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
44.
PearsonJ. (2014). New directions in mental-imagery research: The binocular-rivalry technique and decoding fMRI patterns. Association for Psychological Science, 23(3), 178–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414532287
45.
PlhákováA.DostálD.ZáskodnáT. (2015). Hollandova typologie profesnich zajmu ve vztahu k domenove specificke kreativite [Holland’s typology of vocational interests in relation to domain-specific creativity. Ceskoslovenska Psychologie, 59, 17–56.
46.
PreckelF.GoetzT.PekrunR.KleineM. (2008). Gender differences in gifted and average-ability students. Gifted ChildQuarterly, 52(2), 146–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986208315834
47.
RaymondE.UduafemheE. M.AlomeS. A.OgumahB. A. O. (2018). Correlation between the five personality dimensions and creative behaviours of electrical and electronics teachers in Nigerian technical colleges. Journal of Technical Educaiton and Training, 10(2), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2018.10.02.003
48.
RepeykovaV.ToivainenT.LikhanovM.BroekhovenK. V.KovasY. (2023). Nothing but stereotypes? Negligibe sex differences across creativity measures in science, arts, and sports adolescent high achiervers. Journal of Creative Behavior, 58(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.623
49.
StajkovicA. D.BanduraA.LockeE. A.LeeD.SergentK. (2018). Test of three conceptual models of influence of the big five personality traits and self-efficacy on academic performance: A meta-analytic path-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 120, 238–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.08.014
SunM.WangM.WegerifR. (2020). Effects of divergent thinking training on students’ scientific creativity: The impact of individual creative potential and domain knowledge. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100682
53.
SusantoE.NovitasariY.NurhudayaA.RakhmatC.HidayatA.Budi WibowoS. (2018). Rash model analysis of Kaufman domains of creativity scale (K-DOCS) to Indonesian students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1114, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1114/1/012027
54.
TanC. S.TanS. A.ChengS. M.HashimI. H. M.OngA. W. H. (2021). Development and preliminary validation of the 20-item Kaufman domains of creativity scale for use with Malaysian populations. Current Psychology, 40(4), 1946–1957. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-0124-8
55.
TorranceE. P. (2008). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking Norms-Technical Manual Figural (Streamlined) Forms A & B. Illinois: Scholastic Testing Service.
WanzerD. L.FinleyK. P.ZarianS.CortezN. (2020). Experiencing flow while viewing art: Development of the aesthetic experience questionnaire. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts, 14(1), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000203
58.
YehY. C.HsuW. C.YastrubinskiyE. (2021). Decomposing the influences of aesthetic experience processes on creativity learning through various consciousness interventions. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39, 100756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100756
59.
ZaidiN. R.WajidR. A.ZaidiG. B.ZaidiM. T. (2013). The big five personality traits and their relationship with work engagement among public sector university teachers of Lahore. African Journal of Business Management, 7(15), 1344–1353. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM12.290
60.
ZhangS.ZhongL.ZhangY.RenJ.ZhangJ. (2023). Development and validation of the Kaufman domains of creativity scale-Chinese short version (K-DOCS-CSV). Thinking Skills and Creativity, 48, 101268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101268
