English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Amabile’s consensual assessment technique (CAT)—taking the consensus opinions of domain experts—is considered a “gold standard” of creativity assessment for research purposes. While several studies have identified how specific procedural choices impact the CAT’s reliability as a measure, researchers’ depth of knowledge about procedures and their effects still remains incomplete. This article explores gaps in the research by reviewing CAT and creativity literature and aims to explore to what extent the creativity research community needs to revisit and reflect on the CAT and solidify protocols for its implementation. The conclusion highlights the need for new debate and a program of research to clarify, evidence, and harmonize CAT methodology while simultaneously preserving the CAT’s flexibility. This would enable the development and sophistication of the CAT, including possible new assistive technologies, to further strengthen its use within the science of creativity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)

A scattered CAT: A critical evaluation of the consensual assessment technique for creativity research.