Analysis of the criteria of originality in projective methods in the study of talented and gifted individuals
AbstractAnalysis of the criteria of originality in projective methods in the study of talented and gifted individuals. The study analyses the criterion of originality in projective diagnostic tests used for the assessment of creative and gifted persons. For the analysis, the tests of Torrance, Gilford, Wartegg, and the methodology of "Pictogram" were utilized. The concept of originality is assessed in all these projective methods. This concept, according to J. Gilford, is strongly related to the creativity of a person. The originality, according to the scientist, is the capability to find the non-standard solutions, which are different from most answers for the particular test task. Thus, this parameter is related to the capability to create the new ideas based on the standard stimuli, which is the basis of creativity. However, the true originality, as the ability to produce a new product, cannot be measured within the testing procedure. Thus, J. Gilford created the criterion of originality of projective tests as a statistical parameter. For different tests, the frequency of the solution, needed for describing it as original, can be different. Precisely, in Torrance’s test, the answer is considered original if it occurs in less than 5% of answers. In Gilford's test, the original solution was shown to be presented in less than then 2.5% cases. For the "Pictogram" methodology, the original answer occurs in less than 2%, and in Wartegg’s test – in less than 1%. When analysing the concept of originality, it is also necessary to ensure the adequacy of the proposed solution is also evaluated. A tested person can propose the answer to the test task that ignores the instruction or the essential characteristics of stimuli. In this case, such a variant of the solution of the problem will be original, as it occurs rarely. However, this solution does not appear to be adequate and it might not be related to the creativity of a person. Hence, original but adequate answers should be applied as indicators of the true creativity. Thus, the criterion of originality is a statistical one. To evaluate the originality of the answer, a researcher assesses the frequency of a particular result in the entire assessed group. This criterion in the significant way depends on the cultural code of the person as well as on the sample of the study. The same solution can be considered as original for one sample and standard, normative for another one. On the other hand, creativity of a person not always can be controlled and applied consciously. The creative process is frequently spontaneous. Therefore, the absence of the original solutions in the results of proactive tests does not necessarily mean the absence of creativity in a particular person. In such a rank, the criterion of originality can serve as an indicator of a non-standard process of thinking of an individual. However, the assessment of creativity and giftedness requires a comprehensive and individual approach.
2. Eremina, L. I. (2014). Development of personality creativity: Psychological aspect. Society: Sociology, Psychology, Pedagogy, 1, 42-47. [In Russian].
3. Gorbachova, M. (2018). Diagnostic of the formation of creative abilities of junior schoolchildren as a manifestation of talent. Retrieved from https://dspace.vspu.edu.ua/bitstream/handle/123456789/4649/%D0%97%D0%91%D0%86%D0%A0%D0%9D%D0%98%D0%9A%2018.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y#page=130 [In Ukrainian].
4. Hersonskiy, B. G. (2000). The method of pictograms in psychodiagnostics. St. Petersburg, RF: Sensor. [In Russian].
5. Ilyin, E. P. (2009). Psychology of creativity, creativity, giftedness. St. Petersburg, RF: Piter Publishing House “Piter”. [In Russian].
6. Kazakova, N. (2009). Diagnostics of giftedness in children of primary school age. Scientific Bulletin of Ternopil National Pedagogical University. Series: Pedagogy, 4, 13-18 [In Ukrainian].
7. Litvinova, A.L (2002). The role of intuition in scientific knowledge. In E.F. Karavaeva (ed.), Philosophy of the subject and the subject of scientific knowledge (pp. 135-150). St.Peterburg, RF: St. Petersburg Philosophical Society. [In Russian].
8. Methods for diagnostics of the creativity of schoolchildren. Good Educate. Retrieved from http://www.cerbas.ru/ereps-234-1.html [In Russian].
9. Rodina, N. V. (2014). Normative and original solutions in the Wartegg’s test in the system of individual psychological features of personality. Bulletin of the National University of Defense of Ukraine, 5, 326-330. [In Ukrainian].
10. Rodina, N.V. (2014). Warthegg's drawing test. The history of the creation and development of the method. PEM: Psychology. Educology. Medicine, 3, 13-21. [In Russian].
11. Rodina, N. V., Vigdorchik, M. I., & Biron, B. V. (2017). History of creation and prospects of application of projective methods. Proceedings of the IV International Scientific-Practical Internet Conference "Cognitive and transformative potential of historical psychology and science". Odessa, February 2 - March 2, 2017. [In Russian].
12. Shlyapnikova, I. A. (2005). Projective methods of psychodiagnostics. Tutorial. Chelyabinsk, RF: South Ural State University. [In Russian].
13. Sirotyuk, A. S. (2014). Diagnostics of giftedness. Tutorial. Moscow, RF: Directmedia. [In Russian].
14. Sokolova, E.T. (1998). Projective methods of personality investigation. Moscow, RF: Moscow State University. [In Russian].
15. Vasilishin, N. (2017, April 20). What does the "Pictogram" technique investigate and how it can be applied? Retrieved from https://paidagogos.com/chto-issleduet-metodika-piktogramma-i-kak-eyo-primenyat.html [In Russion].
16. Volkova, E. V. (2007). The use of Torrens methodology to study the abilities of chemistry students. Bulletin of the Ural State University. Ser. 1, Problems of Education, Science and Culture, 50(21), 241-253. [In Russion].
17. Crisi, A. (2007). Manuale del test di Wartegg. Roma, Italy: Ma.Gi.
Abstract views: 15 PDF Downloads: 5