Measuring Creativity in Academic Writing: An Analysis of Essays in Advanced Placement Language and Composition

Abstract

The demand for a creative workforce has never been higher, yet schools struggle to teach and assess creativity among students efficiently. Compositions are an effective way to incorporate creativity across the curriculum; however, essays are time consuming to evaluate for quality or creativity. This study explored (a) if high creativity scores are related to high quality and sophistication in academic writing, and (b) if extant text-mining tools effectively identify quality, sophistication, and creativity in academic essays. Four teacher raters analyzed quality, sophistication, and creativity of 230 essays written by students aged 15–17 for Advanced Placement Language and Composition. We also used text-mining tools (e.g., semantic distance, Shannon's entropy, idea density) to score these essays. Teacher-rated creativity scores correlated with quality and sophistication scores, as well as with some of the text-mining tools, suggesting that these tools can capture quality and sophistication in addition to creativity. Implications for educational practice are discussed.

Keywords

creativity advanced placement academic writing composition text-mining

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acar

Berthiaume

Grajzel

Dumas

Flemister

C. T.

Organisciak

(2023). Applying automated originality scoring to the verbal form of Torrance tests of creative thinking. Gifted Child Quarterly, 67(1), 00169862211061874.

Acar

Burnett

Cabra

J. F.

(2017). Ingredients of creativity: Originality and more. Creativity Research Journal, 29(2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2017.1302776

Acar

Runco

M. A.

(2014). Assessing associative distance among ideas elicited by tests of divergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 26(2), 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2014.901095

Acar

Runco

M. A.

(2015). Thinking in multiple directions: Hyperspace categories in divergent thinking. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038501

Alin

(2010). Multicollinearity. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 2(3), 370–374. https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.84

Allen

L. K.

Snow

E. L.

McNamara

D. S.

(2016). The narrative waltz: The role of flexibility in writing proficiency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(7), 911–924. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000109

Amabile

T. M.

(1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997–1013. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997

Amabile

T. M.

(1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Westview.

Amabile

T. M.

Collins

M. A.

Conti

Phillips

Picariello

Ruscio

Whitney

(2018). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Routledge.

10.

AP English Language: Scoring Rubric . (2019). College Board . https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap-english-language-and-composition-frqs-1-2-3-scoring-rubrics.pdf

11.

Aqili

S. R.

(2021). An analysis of the status of moral values in primary school textbooks: Shannon entropy method. Journal of Islamic Education, 16(35), 143–164.

12.

Ayob

(2020). Effect of divergent thinking models based on bitmap graphical sources towards student's achievement in exploring fact essay writing content. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 7(1), 87–92. https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.509.2020.71.87.92

13.

Beaty

R. E.

Johnson

D. R.

Zeitlen

D. C.

Forthmann

(2022). Semantic distance and the Alternate Uses Task: Recommendations for reliable automated assessment of originality. Creativity Research Journal, 34(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2022.2025720

14.

Beketayev

Runco

M. A.

(2016). Scoring divergent thinking tests by computer with a semantics-based algorithm. Europe's Journal of Psychology, 12(2), 210. http://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v12i2.1127 https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v12i2.1127

15.

Boden

M. A.

(2004). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms (2nd ed.). Routledge.

16.

Brownlee

(2019). Probability: A gentle introduction to information entropy . https://machinelearningmastery.com/what-is-information-entropy/

17.

Bruning

Dempsey

Kauffman

D. F.

McKim

Zumbrunn

(2013). Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029692

18.

Chamorro-Premuzic

(2006). Creativity versus conscientiousness: Which is a better predictor of student performance? Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 20(4), 521–531. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1196

19.

Chand

Baynes

Bonnici

L. M.

Farias

S. T.

(2012). A rubric for extracting idea density from oral language samples. Current Protocols in Neuroscience, 58(1), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471142301.ns1005s58

20.

Chen

Bai

Lin

Carbonell

J. G.

(2011, April). Sparse latent semantic analysis. In Proceedings of the 2011 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining (pp. 474–485). Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.

21.

Chenoweth

N. A.

Hayes

J. R.

(2001). Fluency in writing: Generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18(1), 80–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088301018001004

22.

Cheung

W. M.

Tse

S. K.

Tsang

H. W.

(2003). Teaching creative writing skills to primary school children in Hong Kong: Discordance between the views and practices of language teachers. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 37(2), 77–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2003.tb00827.x

23.

Chrysikou

E. G.

Morrow

H. M.

Flohrschutz

Denney

(2021). Augmenting ideational fluency in a creativity task across multiple transcranial direct current stimulation montages. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85804-3

24.

Cohen

Levi

Ben-Simon

(2018). Validating human and automated scoring of essays against “true” scores. Applied Measurement in Education, 31(3), 241–250. http://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2018.1464450 https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2018.1464450

25.

Costello

F. J.

Keane

M. T.

(2000). Efficient creativity: Constraint-guided conceptual combination. Cognitive Science, 24(2), 299–349. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2402_4

26.

Covington

M. A.

(2009, March). Idea density—A potentially informative characteristic of retrieved documents. In IEEE Southeastcon 2009 (pp. 201–203). IEEE.

27.

Covington

M. A.

(2012). CPIDR5.1 user manual .

28.

Covington

M. A.

(2016). Covington Innovations Software . Retrieved May 5, 2021 from http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/software.html

29.

Craney

T. A.

Surles

J. G.

(2002). Model-dependent variance inflation factor cutoff values. Quality Engineering, 14(3), 391–403. https://doi.org/10.1081/QEN-120001878

30.

Csikszentmihalyi

(1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. Harper Collins.

31.

Devlin

Chang

M. W.

Lee

Toutanova

(2018). Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805.

32.

Diedrich

Benedek

Jauk

Neubauer

A. C.

(2015). Are creative ideas novel and useful? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(1), 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038688

33.

Dollinger

S. J.

(2003). Need for uniqueness, need for cognition, and creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 37(2), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2003.tb00828.x

34.

Dumas

Dunbar

K. N.

(2014). Understanding fluency and originality: A latent variable perspective. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 14, 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.09.003

35.

Dumas

Organisciak

Doherty

(2021). Measuring divergent thinking originality with human raters and text-mining models: A psychometric comparison of methods. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(4), 645–663. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000319

36.

Dumas

Organisciak

Maio

Doherty

(2020). Four text-mining methods for measuring elaboration. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(2), 517–531. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.471

37.

Educational Testing Service. (2022). The Criterion® Online Writing Evaluation Service. ETS.org. https://www.ets.org/criterion/about.html

38.

Eke

C. I.

Norman

Shuib

Fatokun

F. B.

Omame

(2020, March). The significance of global vectors representation in sarcasm analysis. In 2020 International Conference in Mathematics, Computer Engineering and Computer Science (ICMCECS) (pp. 1–7).

39.

Foltz

P. W.

Laham

Landauer

T. K.

(1999). The intelligent essay assessor: Applications to educational technology. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning, 1(2), 939–944. http://imej.wfu.edu/articles/1999/2/04/index.asp

40.

Forster

E. A.

Dunbar

K. N.

(2009, July). Creativity evaluation through latent semantic analysis. In Proceedings of the annual conference of the cognitive science society (Vol. 31, No. 31, pp. 602–607). Retrieved August 2, 2021 from https://escholarship.org/content/qt4wp633ph/qt4wp633ph.pdf

41.

Forthmann

Oyebade

Ojo

Günther

Holling

(2018). Application of latent semantic analysis to divergent thinking is biased by elaboration. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 53(4), 559–575. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.240

42.

Fryer

Collings

J. A.

(1991). Teachers’ views about creativity. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 61(2), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1991.tb00976.x

43.

Gabora

(2017). Honing theory: A complex systems framework for creativity. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 21(1), 35–88. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1610.02484

44.

George

Mallery

(2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. Pearson.

45.

Green

A. E.

Cohen

M. S.

Kim

J. U.

Gray

J. R.

(2012). An explicit cue improves creative analogical reasoning. Intelligence, 40(6), 598–603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2012.08.005

46.

Guilford

J. P.

(1962). Potentiality for creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 6(3), 87–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698626200600307

47.

Haitovsky

(1969). Multicollinearity in regression analysis: Comment. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 51(4), 486–489. https://doi.org/10.2307/1926450

48.

Hasnudin

A. R.

Norfaizuryana

Nor

A. A. K.

(2015, June). Effective use of ICT in teaching and learning. In Proceeding of the International Conference on Information Technology & Society (pp. 8–9).

49.

Heinen

D. J.

Johnson

D. R.

(2018). Semantic distance: An automated measure of creativity that is novel and appropriate. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(2), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000125

50.

Hirsh

J. B.

Mar

R. A.

Peterson

J. B.

(2012). Psychological entropy: A framework for understanding uncertainty-related anxiety. Psychological Review, 119(2), 304–320. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026767

51.

Ippolito

Grangier

Callison-Burch

Eck

(2019, June). Unsupervised hierarchical story infilling. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Narrative Understanding (pp. 37–43).

52.

Johnson

D. M.

(1975). Increasing originality on essay examinations in psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 2(3), 99–102. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top0203_1

53.

Johnson

D. R.

Kaufman

J. C.

Baker

B. S.

Patterson

J. D.

Barbot

Green

A. E.

Beaty

R. E.

(2022). Divergent semantic integration (DSI): Extracting creativity from narratives with distributional semantic modeling. Behavior Research Methods, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-01986-2

54.

Kaufman

J. C.

Baer

Cole

J. C.

Sexton

J. D.

(2008). A comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the consensual assessment technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20(2), 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410802059929

55.

Kaufman

J. C.

Baer

Gentile

C. A.

(2004). Differences in gender and ethnicity as measured by ratings of three writing tasks. Journal of Creative Behavior, 38(1), 56–69. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2004.tb01231.x

56.

(2019). Automated essay scoring: A survey of the state of the art. In Proceedings of the twenty-eighth international joint conference on artificial intelligence survey track. (pp. 6300–6308).

57.

Kettler

Bower

(2017). Measuring creative capacity in gifted students: Comparing teacher ratings and student products. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(4), 290–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217722617

58.

Kettler

Lamb

K. N.

Willerson

Mullet

D. R.

(2018). Teachers’ perceptions of creativity in the classroom. Creativity Research Journal, 30(2), 164–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2018.1446503

59.

Kim

K. H.

Chae

(2019). Recapturing American innovation through education: The creativity challenge for schools. In Mullen

C. A.

(Ed.), Creativity under duress in education? (pp. 215–233). Springer.

60.

Koutsoftas

A. D.

Gray

(2012). Comparison of narrative and expository writing in students with and without language-learning disabilities. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 43(4), 395–409. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2012/11-0018)

61.

Krathwohl

D. R.

(2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 213–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2

62.

Landauer

T. K.

Dumais

S. T.

(1997). A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2), 211–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.211

63.

Latifi

Gierl

(2021). Automated scoring of junior and senior high essays using Coh-Metrix features: Implications for large-scale language testing. Language Testing, 38(1), 62–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220929918

64.

Malgady

R. G.

Barcher

P. R.

(1979). Some information-processing models of creative writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(5), 717–725. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.71.5.717

65.

Malvern

Richards

Chipere

Durán

(2004). Lexical diversity and language development (pp. 16–30). Palgrave Macmillan.

66.

Mednick

(1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3), 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048850

67.

Miura

Takagi

(2015, June). WSL: Sentence similarity using semantic distance between words. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval 2015) (pp. 128–131). Retrieved August 2, 2021 from https://aclanthology.org/S15-2023.pdf

68.

Mullet

D. R.

Willerson

Lamb

K. N.

Kettler

(2016). Examining teacher perceptions of creativity: A systematic review of the literature. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.001

69.

Novitz

(1997). Creativity and constraint. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 77(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048409912348811

70.

Olthouse

J. M.

(2012). Talented young writers’ relationships with writing. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 35(1), 66–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353211432039

71.

Olthouse

J. M.

(2014). Gifted children’s relationships with writing. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37(2), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214529044

72.

Organisciak

Dumas

(2020). Open Creativity Scoring [Computer software]. University of Denver. Retrieved April 3, 2022 from https://openscoring.du.edu/

73.

Orwig

Diez

Vannini

Beaty

Sepulcre

(2021). Creative connections: Computational semantic distance captures individual creativity and resting-state functional connectivity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 33(3), 499–509. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01658

74.

Pennebaker

J. W.

Boyd

R. L.

Jordan

Blackburn

(2015). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015. University of Texas at Austin.

75.

Pennington

Socher

Manning

C. D.

(2014, October). Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP) (pp. 1532–1543).

76.

Peters

Matthews

McBee

McCoach

D. B.

(2014). Beyond gifted education: Designing and implementing advanced academic programs. Sourcebooks, Inc.

77.

Peters

S. J.

Matthews

M. S.

(2016). An advanced academics approach to curriculum building. In Kettler

(Ed.), Modern curriculum for gifted and advanced academic students (pp. 55–68). Prufrock.

78.

Piirto

(1992). Understanding those who create. Psychology Press.

79.

Planet Calc. (2015). Unique words count . Planet Calc. https://planetcalc.com/3205/

80.

Plucker

J. A.

Beghetto

R. A.

Dow

G. T.

(2004). Why isn't creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1

81.

Powers

Escoffery

Duchnowski

(2015). Validating automated essay scoring: A (modest) refinement of the ‘gold standard’. Applied Measurement in Education, 28(2), 130–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2014.1002920

82.

Prabhakaran

Green

A. E.

Gray

J. R.

(2014). Thin slices of creativity: Using single-word utterances to assess creative cognition. Behavior Research Methods, 46(3), 641–659. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0401-7

83.

Pretz

J. E.

Kaufman

J. C.

(2017). Do traditional admissions criteria reflect applicant creativity? The Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(3), 240–251. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.120

84.

Puccio

G. J.

(2017). From the Dawn of humanity to the 21st century: Creativity as an enduring survival skill. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(4), 330–334. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.203

85.

Radford

Child

Luan

Amodei

Sutskever

(2019). Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI Blog, 1(8), 9. Retrieved August 2, 2021 from https://life-extension.github.io/2020/05/27/GPT%E6%8A%80%E6%9C%AF%E5%88%9D%E6%8E%A2/language-models.pdf

86.

Rose

L. H.

Lin

H. T.

(1984). A meta-analysis of long-term creativity training programs. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 18(1), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1984.tb00985.x

87.

Runco

M. A.

(1986). Flexibility and originality in children's divergent thinking. The Journal of Psychology, 120(4), 345–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1986.9712632

88.

Runco

M. A.

(1989). Parents’ and teachers’ ratings of the creativity of children. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4(1), 73–83. https://www.proquest.com/openview/dd746b50da2e0bd49ba6280ee0e082b6/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1819046

89.

Runco

M. A.

Jaeger

G. J.

(2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092

90.

Runco

M. A.

Turkman

Acar

Nural

M. V.

(2017). Idea density and the creativity of written works. Journal of Genius and Eminence, 2(1), 26–31. https://doi.org/10.18536/jge.2017.04.02.01.03

91.

Sadler-Smith

Akstinaite

Akinci

(2022). Identifying the linguistic markers of intuition in human resource (HR) practice. Human Resource Management Journal, 32(3), 584–602. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12410

92.

Scott

G. M.

Leritz

L. E.

Mumford

M. D.

(2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A meta-analysis. Creativity Research Journal, 16(4), 361–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410409534549

93.

Scott

G. M.

Lonergan

D. C.

Mumford

M. D.

(2005). Conceptual combination: Alternative knowledge structures, alternative heuristics. Creativity Research Journal, 17(1), 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1701_7

94.

Shannon

C. E.

(1951). Prediction and entropy of printed English. Bell System Technical Journal, 30(1), 50–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1951.tb01366.x

95.

Shrout

P. E.

Fleiss

J. L.

(1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420

96.

Snowdon

D. A.

Kemper

S. J.

Mortimer

J. A.

Greiner

L. H.

Wekstein

D. R.

Markesbery

W. R.

(1996). Linguistic ability in early life and cognitive function and Alzheimer's disease in late life: Findings from the Nun Study. JAMA, 275(7), 528–532. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1996.03530310034029

97.

Stein

M. I.

(1953). Creativity and culture. The Journal of Psychology, 36(2), 311–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1953.9712897

98.

Stokes

P. D.

(2014). Crossing disciplines: A constraint-based model of the creative/innovative process. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(2), 247–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12093

99.

Stolaki

Economides

A. A.

(2018). The creativity challenge game: An educational intervention for creativity enhancement with the integration of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). Computers & Education, 123, 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.009

100.

Tabachnick

B. G.

Fidell

L. S.

(2013). Using multivariate statistics: International edition. Pearson.

101.

Tausczik

Y. R.

Pennebaker

J. W.

(2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29(1), 24–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676

102.

Thorndike

E. L.

(1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(1), 25–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0071663

103.

Torrance

E. P.

(2008). The Torrance test of creative thinking: Norms-technical manual. Scholastic Testing Service.

104.

Turkman

Runco

M. A.

(2019). Discovering the creativity of written works: The keyword study. Gifted and Talented International, 34(1-2), 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2019.1690955

105.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2021). U.S. Census Bureau quick facts . Retrieved August 4, 2022 from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045221

106.

Vähäkangas

Pyykkö

(2012, January). Viscipad: Peeking into a collaborative creative writing project in elementary school. In 2012 10th International Conference on Creating, Connecting and Collaborating through Computing (pp. 37–44). IEEE.

107.

Vendetti

M. S.

Holyoak

K. J.

(2014). Far-out thinking: Generating solutions to distant analogies promotes relational thinking. Psychological Science, 25(4), 928–933. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613518079

108.

Wang

Tian

Yazar

Ones

D. S.

Landers

R. N.

(2022). Using natural language processing and machine learning to replace human content coders. Psychological Methods. Advance online publication. htttps://doi.org/10.1037/met0000518

109.

Weinstein

T. J.

Ceh

S. M.

Meinel

Benedek

(2022). What’s creative about sentences? A computational approach to assessing creativity in a sentence generation task. Creativity Research Journal, 34(4), 419–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2022.2124777

110.

Williams

A. D.

(2019). “I can't do cartwheels, so I write”: Students’ writing affect. Composition Studies, 47(2), 68–86. Retrieved August 5, 2021 from https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A638567275/LitRC?u=anon∼d7bd373d&sid=googleScholar&xid=87b9a4f4

111.

Zedelius

C. M.

Mills

Schooler

J. W.

(2019). Beyond subjective judgments: Predicting evaluations of creative writing from computational linguistic features. Behavior Research Methods, 51, 879–894. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1137-1

112.

Zhu

Khot

(2009, June). How creative is your writing? A linguistic creativity measure from computer science and cognitive psychology perspectives. In Proceedings of the workshop on computational approaches to linguistic creativity (pp. 87–93). Retrieved August 2, 2021 from https://aclanthology.org/W09-2012.pdf