This page is referenced by:

• 1 2025-03-17T14:41:57-07:00 An example of Notation 1 20 First example of notation for CMNS 858 plain 2025-03-26T12:59:32-07:00

  A technological case study of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking

  This section was designed as an example of how the notation assignment can be composed using a lowtech, narrative approach.

  Research Problem:

  I’m currently working on a project with Dr. Nicole Stewart at Texas State University that involves a media archaeology of research data for Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI). My own disciplinary background is in media sociology and cultural studies with a focus on the intersection of cultural production and digital technologies. In this project, we’re interested in analysing how psychometric tests conducted in late-19th to mid-20th century might provide useful insights into how people currently design and use Gen AI tools.
  I have two goals for making the following set of notations/annotations. The first goal is obviously pedagogical – the point is to create a demonstration of the process of notating/annotating data for you by doing one myself based on my own work. The second goal relates to the research itself – exploring how we might use visual materials as data for this research project.
  Because of these two goals, we will use a case study method to compose my notations/annotations. This is appropriate because we’ve used a conceptual framework taken from Science and Technology Studies (STS) for the research and this framework aligns well with the biographical case study of technology (Lesage & Natale 2019). Since the problem I’m exploring is a question of if/how to share this visual material as data in future publications, it seems like the right method to use. Of course, if your own research situation and goals are different, you will want to consider some of the other notation/annotation methods to decide what better suits what you want to achieve.

  Notation tools:

  The goal of this example is to show how "low-tech" these notations can be. The only tools we've used to create this case study to date are books and other archival material, the referencing platform Zotero, and the screenshot feature from my laptop.

  Data Situation:

  This specific case study is part of a larger research project. It will focus on the psychometric tests designed by E. Paul Torrance and his team called the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT for short - also sometimes referred to as the Minnesota Tests of Creative Thinking or MTCT). Without going into the details, I first encountered this test in recent literature on psychometric creativity tests like Reckwitz’s (2017) book “The Invention of Creativity” Sawyer & Henriksen’s (2023) chapter: “Defining Creativity Through Assessment”. In this literature, the tests are mostly discussed in a historical and/or methodological context but don’t show how the tests are implemented; the process for making images as part of the tests. It is this process —the techniques, technologies, and concepts involved — that we’re specifically interested in. For that reason, I went out searching for some more information about the TTCT.

  The case study

  To start the research, we needed to find would more bibliographic data to understand the TTCT – ie. references about the TTCT.

  1. Initial bibliographic research:

  TTCT_Figure_1

   
  • TTCT_Figure_1 shows some of the bibliographic material collected in Zotero about the TTCT. I read this material to gain a better understanding of how the TTCT works and created an annotated bibliography that summarises what each paper contributes to an understanding of "testing" creativity through image-making. (As will be made clear later, it is by tracking some of these documents down to read them that I found the primary data we needed to conduct the analysis we set out to achieve.)
  
  
  TTCT_Figure_5
  
  TTCT_Figure_6
  • This is additional bibliographic material in Zotero under the TTCT's other name, MTCT. This is a data challenge that often creeps up in research: all data doesn't fall into one convenient category. 
  
  
  
  TTCT_Figure_9
  • As part of the broader literature review, the first version of an actual guide for implementing the TTCT I found was the most recent version, which is still being administered by Scholastic Testing Service, Inc., located in Bensenville, Illinois. (https://www.ststesting.com/gift/TTCT_InterpMOD.2018.pdf)
  • The Torrance Center for Creativity and Talent Development at the University of Georgia even still provides training for administering the TTCT including its figural tests. https://coe.uga.edu/directory/torrancecenter/

  2. Success (almost):

  Torrance’s book provides useful information about the test and some discussion of process, but no actual materials about the tests.
  
  TTCT_Figure_2
  • The strangest image for a book cover I’ve seen in a long time!
  TTCT_Figure_3
  • Title page from the book.
  
  
  TTCT_Figure_4
  • Bingo! As indicated in my discussion of the literature review process above, when we found a digital copy of Yamamoto’s scoring manual for Minnesota Tests of Creative Thinking in the library, we were able to really get into the details of how these researchers expected the tests take place. Clearly, the scoring booklets are the best source of data for our research.
  • … But! This is a digital copy of the original booklet. It’s a bit “manicured” as a artefact for how to administer the TTCT.

  3. A happy accident and more success:

  TTCT_Figure_10L
  • While trying to tracking down a version of the TTCT booklet, Ian Fell from SFU Interlibrary Loans reaches out to me to let me know that he can’t find the most recent version of the booklet, but that there is a copy of the 1966 version tucked away somewhere on the 5th floor of the library which is currently closed for refurbishment. He asks if I’d like him to track it down for me. “Yes, please!”
  
  TTCT_Figure_11L
  
  TTCT_Figure_12L
   
  • The 1966 TTCT Booklets
  • A picture of the booklet collection kept in SFU’s library.
  • The booklets include a Norms – Technical Manual, a Directions Manual and Scoring Guide for Booklet A and Booklet B as well as Booklets A and B for “Thinking Creatively with Pictures” and “Thinking Creatively with Words”.
  • Booklet B “Thinking Creatively with Pictures”
  • From Booklet B, the picture construction activity with the actual paper “jelly bean” taped into the booklet. The scan isn’t very good.  Interesting to compare with the earlier MTCT version.
  • Also from Booklet B, an illustration of how to score the picture construction test for “elaboration”.
  • To me this is a great illustration of how “what counts as data” (Leonelli 2016) depends on the situation. As you can see, the TTCT was originally designed to collect psychometric data about children’s ability to be creative. In the current situation, I’ve turned the test into data for my own research problem.
  • One of the remaining challenges related to this data is to figure out if/how I can reproduce some of these images as part of a paper we’re writing about the psychometric testing through imagemaking. These copyright issues represent a kind of “data friction” (Bates et al. 2016) that come with any research involving visual data. We’re currently working with SFU Library’s Copyright Officer to figure out what can be done.

  References

  Bates, J., Lin, Y.-W., & Goodale, P. (2016). Data journeys: Capturing the socio-material constitution of data objects and flows. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 2053951716654502. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716654502
  Leonelli S. (2016), Data-Centric Biology: A Philosophical Study. University of Chicago Press.
  Lesage, F., & Natale, S. (2019). Rethinking the distinctions between old and new media: Introduction. Convergence, 25(4), 575–589. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856519863364
  Reckwitz, A. (with Steven Black (Translator)). (2017). The invention of creativity: Modern society and the culture of the new (English edition.). Polity Press.
  Sawyer, R. K., & Henriksen, D. (2023). Defining Creativity Through Assessment. In R. K. Sawyer & D. Henriksen (Eds.), Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197747537.003.0003