BibTex RIS Cite

-

Year 2014, , 1516 - 1530, 03.11.2014

Feyzullah Şahin

https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2014.02374
Cited By: 4

Abstract

Threshold theory is one of the theories which is used to explain the relationship between creative thinking skills and intelligence. According to this theory, an individual is supposed to have at least moderate intelligence to perform creative activities. However, it has been seen that there is a greater relationship between the creativity potential and intelligence of individuals with an average intelligence, whose score is 120 or less, than those with an intelligence score of 120 or more. The research was maintained in the descriptive pattern out of survey models. The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between creativity potentials of primary school students and general intelligence level. In the study, 16.839 students from 24 different primary schools in Istanbul were pre-assessed. An intelligence and creativity test was applied to 330 students who were considered to be gifted. According to the research results, while there was not a significant relationship between the intelligence and creativity scores of highly gifted students, there is a significant low positive relationship between the scores of average-mildly intelligence students and moderately gifted students. These results are in accordance with the threshold theory. Also, intelligence could only explain the 5% of the general creativity.

Keywords

Threshold theory creativity potential gifted. Purpose and significance: In the international literature there are contradictory results in the studies which investigated Threshold theory. In Turkey a study which investigated Threshold theory has not

References

  • Akkaş, (2013). Üstün yeteneklilerde uyum ve destek eğitimi programlarının yaratıcılığa etkisi. Journal of Gifted Education Researches, 1(2). 108-116.
  • Aslan, E. (2001). Torrance yaratıcı düşünce testi’nin Türkçe versiyonu. M.Ü Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 14, 19-40.
  • Ayverdi, L., Asker, E., Aydın, S. Ö.,& Sarıtaş, T., (2012). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin bilimsel yaratıcılıkları ile fen ve teknoloji dersi akademik başarıları arasındaki ilişkinin belirlenmesi. İlköğretim Online, http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr , 11(3), 646-659.
  • Barron, F.,& Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review Psychology, 32, 439-476.
  • Batey, M.,& Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, intelligence, and personality: A critical review of the scatter literature. Genetic, social and general psychology monographs, 132 (4), 355-429.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş.& Demirel, F. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. (4.ncü Baskı), Pegem yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Cho, S. H.,Nijenhuis, J. T., VanVianen, A. E., Kim, H. B., & Lee, K. H. (2010). The relationship between diverse components of intelligence and creativity. The Journal of Creative Behaviour, 44, 125-137.
  • Cramond, B., Matthews-Morgan, J., Zuo, L.& Bandalos, D. (2005). A report on the 40-year follow-up of the torrance tests of creative thinking: Alive and well in the new millennium. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49 (4), 283-292.
  • Feldhusen, J. F.& Goh, B. E. (1995). Assessing and accessing creativity: An integrative review of theory, research, and development, Creativity Research Journal, 8(3), 231-247.
  • Furnham, A.,& Bachtiar, V. (2008). Personality and intelligence as predictors of creativity, Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 613-617.
  • Gagne, F., (2000). Understanding the complex choreography of talent development through DMGTbased analysis, In Heller, A., K., Mönks, F., J., Sternberg, R., J.,& Subotnik, R., F., (Ed), International handbook of giftedness and talented, (2 nd pg.67-93) Pergamon Press, Oxford.
  • Gagne, F., (2004). Giftedness and talent: Reexamining a reexamination of the definitions, In Sternberg, R., J., (Eds), Definitions and conceptions of giftedness, (pg.79-98), Sage Publication, California.
  • Gagne, F., (2005). From gifts to talents the dmgt as a developmental model, In Sternberg, R., J., Davidson, J., E., (Eds), Conceptions of giftedness (2 nd 98-119), Cambridge University Press.
  • Gökdere, M., (2004). Üstün yetenekli çocukların fen bilimleri öğretmenlerin eğitimine yönelik bir model geliştirme çalışması (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi), Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon.
  • Guilford, J. P. (1966). Measurement and creativity, Theory into Practice, 5 (4), 186-202.
  • Hamivand, L., (2012). A comparative study of creativity and intelligence of students in wechsler intelligence scale and children’s apperception test. Journal of American Sciences, 8 (8), 184-188. Heller, K. H., Perleth, C.,& Lim, T. K. (2005). The Munich model of giftedness designed to identify and promote gifted students, In Sternberg, R., J., Davidson, J., E., (Ed) Conceptions of giftedness (2 nd 327-342), Cambridge University Press.
  • Hocevar, D. (1980). Intelligence, divergent thinking and creativity, Intelligence, 4, 25-40.
  • Hu, W., Wu, B., Jia, X., Yi, X., Duan, C., Meyer, W.,& Kaufman, J. C., (2013). Increasing students’ scientific creativity: The “learn to think” intervention program. Creative Education Foundation, 47 (1), 3-21.
  • Jauk, E., Benedek, M., Dunst, B.& Neubauer, A., C. (2013). The relationship between intelligence and creativity: New support fort he threshold hypothesis by mean of empirical breakpoints detection. Intelligence, 41(4), 212-221.
  • Kalaycı, Ş. (2008). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri, (3.Baskı), Asil Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara.
  • Karolyi, C. V., Ramos-Ford, V.,& Gardner, H. (2003). Multiple intelligences: A perspective on giftedness. In Colangelo, N,& Davis, G. A., (Ed), Handbook of gifted education, (2 th ed. 100112), Boston.
  • Kim, K. H. (2005). Can only intelligent people be creative? A meta-analysis, Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 57-66.
  • Kim, K.H., Cramond, B. & Bandalos, L.D. (2006). The latent structure and measurement ınvariance of scores on the torrance tests of creative thinking-figural. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 459-477.
  • Kim, K. H., Cramond, B. & VanTassel-Baska, J. (2010). The relationship between creativity and intelligence. In J. C. Kaufman, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.). Handbook of creativity (pg.395-412). Cambridge University Press.
  • Kozbelt, A., Beghetto, R. A.,& Runco, M. A. (2010). Theories of creativity. In J. C. Kaufman, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.). Handbook of creativity (pg.20-47). Cambridge University Press.
  • Liang, J. C. (2002). Exploring scientific creativity of eleventh grade students in Taiwan (Unpublished doctoral thesis). The University of Texas.
  • Lin, C., Hu, W., Adey, P.,& Shen, J., (2003). The Influence of case on scientific creativity. Research in Science Education, 33, 143-162.
  • Özgüven, İ. E. (2007). Psikolojik testler, Sistem ofset, Ankara.
  • Preckel, F., Holling, H.,& Wiese, M. (2006). Relationship of intelligence and creativity in gifted and non-gifted students: An investigation of threshold theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 159-170.
  • Raven, J., Raven, J. C.& Court, J. H. (1998). Manual for raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales (Section I). Pearson publisher.
  • Raven, J., Raven, J.C.& Court, J. H. (2000). Standard progressive matrices including the parallel and plus versions (Section III). Pearson publisher.
  • Renzulli, J., R., (2004). Myth: The gifted constitute 3 – 5% of the population, In Reis, M., S.,& Renzulli, J., R., (Eds), Identification of students for gifted and talented programs, (pg.63-70), Corwin Press, California.
  • Renzulli, J. R., (2005a). Equity, excellence, and economy ın a system for ıdentifying students in gifted education: A guidebook, Connecticut State Department Of Education, RM05208.
  • Renzulli, J. S., (2005b). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for promoting creative productivity, In Sternberg, R., J., Davidson, J., E., (Ed) Conceptions of giftedness (2 nd ed. 246-279), Cambridge University Press.
  • Runco, M. A.,& Acar, S. (2012). Divergent thinking as an indicator of creative potential, Creative Research Journal, 24 (1), 66-75.
  • Runco, M. A.,& Albert, R. S. (1986). The threshold theory regarding creativity and intelligence: An empirical test with gifted and nongifted children, The Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 11 (4), 212-2
  • Sak, U.,& Oz, O. (2010). The effectiveness of the creative reversal act (CREACT) on students’ creative thinking, Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5, 33-39.
  • Simonton, D. K. (2000). Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55 (1), 151-158.
  • Silverman, L. K. (1998). The highly gifted, In Vantassel-Baska, J., (Eds), Excellence in educating gifted and talented learners, (3 rd ed., 115-128), Love Publishing, Colorado.
  • Silvia, P. J. (2008). Another look at creativity and intelligence: Exploring higher- order models and probable confounds. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1012-1021.
  • Sligh A. C., Conners F.A.,& Roskos-Ewoldsen B. (2005). Relation of creativity to fluid and crystallized intelligence. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 123-136.
  • Spearman, C. (1904). General intelligence. Objectively determined and mesaured. The American Journal of Psychology, 15 (2), 201-292.
  • Sternberg, R., J., (1984). What should intelligence tests test? Implications of a triarchic theory of intelligence for intelligence testing. American Educational Research Association, 13 (1), 5-15.
  • Sternberg, R. J., (2003). Giftedness according to the theory of successful intelligence. In Colangelo, N, & Davis, G., A., (Eds), Handbook of gifted education, (3 rd ed. 88-99), Boston.
  • Sternberg, R. J., (2005). The WICS model of giftedness, In Sternberg, R., J., (Eds), Definitions and conceptions of giftedness, (pg.327-342), Sage Publication, California.
  • Sternberg, R. J., (2009). Wisdom, intelligence and creativity synthesized. School Administration.
  • Sternberg, R. J.,& Lubart, T. I. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its development. Human Development, 34, 1-32.
  • Sternberg, R. J., O’Hara, L. A.,& Lubart, T. I. (1997). Creativity as investment. California Management Review, 40(1), 8-21.
  • Şahin, F. (2013). The psychometric properties of the scale for rating the behavioral characteristics of gifted and talented students: Factor structure, reliability and validity analysis studies on primary school teachers. Journal of Educational Sciences, 38, Doi: 10.15285/EBD.2013385570, 119-132. Tan, S., Soysal, Ş., Aldemir, S.& Işık, B. (2012). Üstün zeka düzeyindeki bir grup öğrencinin WISC-R profillerinin incelenmesi. Yeni Tıp Dergisi, 29 (3), 170-173.
  • Terreffinger, D. J., Young, G. C., Selby, E., C.& Shepardson, C. (2002). Assessing creativity: A guide for educators. Center for Creative Learning Sarasota, Florida (RM02170).
  • Virgolim, A. M. (2005). Creativity and intelligence: A study of Brazilian gifted and talanted students (unpublished masther thesis). Universitiy of Connecticut.

Yaratıcılık - Zekâ İlişkisi: Yeni Deliller

Year 2014, , 1516 - 1530, 03.11.2014

Feyzullah Şahin

https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2014.02374
Cited By: 4

Abstract

Eşik değer, yaratıcı düşünme becerileri ile zekâ arasındaki ilişkinin açıklanmasında kullanılan hipotezlerden birisidir. Bu hipoteze göre bireyin yaratıcı performans sergileyebilmesi için en az orta düzey bir zekâya sahip olması gerektiği varsayılır. Ancak, 85-120 IQ puan aralığında zekâya sahip olan bireylerin yaratıcılıkları ile zekâları arasındaki ilişkinin, 120’nin üzerinde zekâya sahip olan bireylerden daha yüksek çıkması beklenmektedir. Bu araştırmada, ilköğretim öğrencilerinin yaratıcılık potansiyelleri ile genel zekâ düzeyi arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmada, İstanbul’da bir ilçedeki 24 farklı ilköğretim okulundan 16.839 çocuk ön değerlendirmeye alınmıştır. Üstün zekâlı olduğu kanaati oluşan 330 öğrenciye zekâ ve yaratıcılık testi uygulanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, yüksek düzeyde üstün zekâlı öğrencilerin zekâ ve yaratıcılık puanları arasında anlamlı bir ilişki çıkmaz iken, normal - parlak öğrenciler ile orta düzeyde üstün zekâlı öğrencilerin puanlarının anlamlı düşük düzeyde pozitif bir ilişkisi olduğu belirlenmiştir. Bu sonuçlar, eşik değer hipotezini desteklemektedir. Ayrıca, bu çalışmada zekâ genel yaratıcılık potansiyelinin %5’ini açıklayabilmiştir.

Keywords

Eşik değer hipotezi yaratıcılık potansiyeli üstün zekâ

References

  • Akkaş, (2013). Üstün yeteneklilerde uyum ve destek eğitimi programlarının yaratıcılığa etkisi. Journal of Gifted Education Researches, 1(2). 108-116.
  • Aslan, E. (2001). Torrance yaratıcı düşünce testi’nin Türkçe versiyonu. M.Ü Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 14, 19-40.
  • Ayverdi, L., Asker, E., Aydın, S. Ö.,& Sarıtaş, T., (2012). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin bilimsel yaratıcılıkları ile fen ve teknoloji dersi akademik başarıları arasındaki ilişkinin belirlenmesi. İlköğretim Online, http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr , 11(3), 646-659.
  • Barron, F.,& Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review Psychology, 32, 439-476.
  • Batey, M.,& Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, intelligence, and personality: A critical review of the scatter literature. Genetic, social and general psychology monographs, 132 (4), 355-429.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş.& Demirel, F. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. (4.ncü Baskı), Pegem yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Cho, S. H.,Nijenhuis, J. T., VanVianen, A. E., Kim, H. B., & Lee, K. H. (2010). The relationship between diverse components of intelligence and creativity. The Journal of Creative Behaviour, 44, 125-137.
  • Cramond, B., Matthews-Morgan, J., Zuo, L.& Bandalos, D. (2005). A report on the 40-year follow-up of the torrance tests of creative thinking: Alive and well in the new millennium. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49 (4), 283-292.
  • Feldhusen, J. F.& Goh, B. E. (1995). Assessing and accessing creativity: An integrative review of theory, research, and development, Creativity Research Journal, 8(3), 231-247.
  • Furnham, A.,& Bachtiar, V. (2008). Personality and intelligence as predictors of creativity, Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 613-617.
  • Gagne, F., (2000). Understanding the complex choreography of talent development through DMGTbased analysis, In Heller, A., K., Mönks, F., J., Sternberg, R., J.,& Subotnik, R., F., (Ed), International handbook of giftedness and talented, (2 nd pg.67-93) Pergamon Press, Oxford.
  • Gagne, F., (2004). Giftedness and talent: Reexamining a reexamination of the definitions, In Sternberg, R., J., (Eds), Definitions and conceptions of giftedness, (pg.79-98), Sage Publication, California.
  • Gagne, F., (2005). From gifts to talents the dmgt as a developmental model, In Sternberg, R., J., Davidson, J., E., (Eds), Conceptions of giftedness (2 nd 98-119), Cambridge University Press.
  • Gökdere, M., (2004). Üstün yetenekli çocukların fen bilimleri öğretmenlerin eğitimine yönelik bir model geliştirme çalışması (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi), Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon.
  • Guilford, J. P. (1966). Measurement and creativity, Theory into Practice, 5 (4), 186-202.
  • Hamivand, L., (2012). A comparative study of creativity and intelligence of students in wechsler intelligence scale and children’s apperception test. Journal of American Sciences, 8 (8), 184-188. Heller, K. H., Perleth, C.,& Lim, T. K. (2005). The Munich model of giftedness designed to identify and promote gifted students, In Sternberg, R., J., Davidson, J., E., (Ed) Conceptions of giftedness (2 nd 327-342), Cambridge University Press.
  • Hocevar, D. (1980). Intelligence, divergent thinking and creativity, Intelligence, 4, 25-40.
  • Hu, W., Wu, B., Jia, X., Yi, X., Duan, C., Meyer, W.,& Kaufman, J. C., (2013). Increasing students’ scientific creativity: The “learn to think” intervention program. Creative Education Foundation, 47 (1), 3-21.
  • Jauk, E., Benedek, M., Dunst, B.& Neubauer, A., C. (2013). The relationship between intelligence and creativity: New support fort he threshold hypothesis by mean of empirical breakpoints detection. Intelligence, 41(4), 212-221.
  • Kalaycı, Ş. (2008). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri, (3.Baskı), Asil Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara.
  • Karolyi, C. V., Ramos-Ford, V.,& Gardner, H. (2003). Multiple intelligences: A perspective on giftedness. In Colangelo, N,& Davis, G. A., (Ed), Handbook of gifted education, (2 th ed. 100112), Boston.
  • Kim, K. H. (2005). Can only intelligent people be creative? A meta-analysis, Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 57-66.
  • Kim, K.H., Cramond, B. & Bandalos, L.D. (2006). The latent structure and measurement ınvariance of scores on the torrance tests of creative thinking-figural. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 459-477.
  • Kim, K. H., Cramond, B. & VanTassel-Baska, J. (2010). The relationship between creativity and intelligence. In J. C. Kaufman, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.). Handbook of creativity (pg.395-412). Cambridge University Press.
  • Kozbelt, A., Beghetto, R. A.,& Runco, M. A. (2010). Theories of creativity. In J. C. Kaufman, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.). Handbook of creativity (pg.20-47). Cambridge University Press.
  • Liang, J. C. (2002). Exploring scientific creativity of eleventh grade students in Taiwan (Unpublished doctoral thesis). The University of Texas.
  • Lin, C., Hu, W., Adey, P.,& Shen, J., (2003). The Influence of case on scientific creativity. Research in Science Education, 33, 143-162.
  • Özgüven, İ. E. (2007). Psikolojik testler, Sistem ofset, Ankara.
  • Preckel, F., Holling, H.,& Wiese, M. (2006). Relationship of intelligence and creativity in gifted and non-gifted students: An investigation of threshold theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 159-170.
  • Raven, J., Raven, J. C.& Court, J. H. (1998). Manual for raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales (Section I). Pearson publisher.
  • Raven, J., Raven, J.C.& Court, J. H. (2000). Standard progressive matrices including the parallel and plus versions (Section III). Pearson publisher.
  • Renzulli, J., R., (2004). Myth: The gifted constitute 3 – 5% of the population, In Reis, M., S.,& Renzulli, J., R., (Eds), Identification of students for gifted and talented programs, (pg.63-70), Corwin Press, California.
  • Renzulli, J. R., (2005a). Equity, excellence, and economy ın a system for ıdentifying students in gifted education: A guidebook, Connecticut State Department Of Education, RM05208.
  • Renzulli, J. S., (2005b). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for promoting creative productivity, In Sternberg, R., J., Davidson, J., E., (Ed) Conceptions of giftedness (2 nd ed. 246-279), Cambridge University Press.
  • Runco, M. A.,& Acar, S. (2012). Divergent thinking as an indicator of creative potential, Creative Research Journal, 24 (1), 66-75.
  • Runco, M. A.,& Albert, R. S. (1986). The threshold theory regarding creativity and intelligence: An empirical test with gifted and nongifted children, The Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 11 (4), 212-2
  • Sak, U.,& Oz, O. (2010). The effectiveness of the creative reversal act (CREACT) on students’ creative thinking, Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5, 33-39.
  • Simonton, D. K. (2000). Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55 (1), 151-158.
  • Silverman, L. K. (1998). The highly gifted, In Vantassel-Baska, J., (Eds), Excellence in educating gifted and talented learners, (3 rd ed., 115-128), Love Publishing, Colorado.
  • Silvia, P. J. (2008). Another look at creativity and intelligence: Exploring higher- order models and probable confounds. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1012-1021.
  • Sligh A. C., Conners F.A.,& Roskos-Ewoldsen B. (2005). Relation of creativity to fluid and crystallized intelligence. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 123-136.
  • Spearman, C. (1904). General intelligence. Objectively determined and mesaured. The American Journal of Psychology, 15 (2), 201-292.
  • Sternberg, R., J., (1984). What should intelligence tests test? Implications of a triarchic theory of intelligence for intelligence testing. American Educational Research Association, 13 (1), 5-15.
  • Sternberg, R. J., (2003). Giftedness according to the theory of successful intelligence. In Colangelo, N, & Davis, G., A., (Eds), Handbook of gifted education, (3 rd ed. 88-99), Boston.
  • Sternberg, R. J., (2005). The WICS model of giftedness, In Sternberg, R., J., (Eds), Definitions and conceptions of giftedness, (pg.327-342), Sage Publication, California.
  • Sternberg, R. J., (2009). Wisdom, intelligence and creativity synthesized. School Administration.
  • Sternberg, R. J.,& Lubart, T. I. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its development. Human Development, 34, 1-32.
  • Sternberg, R. J., O’Hara, L. A.,& Lubart, T. I. (1997). Creativity as investment. California Management Review, 40(1), 8-21.
  • Şahin, F. (2013). The psychometric properties of the scale for rating the behavioral characteristics of gifted and talented students: Factor structure, reliability and validity analysis studies on primary school teachers. Journal of Educational Sciences, 38, Doi: 10.15285/EBD.2013385570, 119-132. Tan, S., Soysal, Ş., Aldemir, S.& Işık, B. (2012). Üstün zeka düzeyindeki bir grup öğrencinin WISC-R profillerinin incelenmesi. Yeni Tıp Dergisi, 29 (3), 170-173.
  • Terreffinger, D. J., Young, G. C., Selby, E., C.& Shepardson, C. (2002). Assessing creativity: A guide for educators. Center for Creative Learning Sarasota, Florida (RM02170).
  • Virgolim, A. M. (2005). Creativity and intelligence: A study of Brazilian gifted and talanted students (unpublished masther thesis). Universitiy of Connecticut.
There are 51 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Feyzullah Şahin

Publication Date November 3, 2014
Published in Issue Year 2014

Cite

APA Şahin, F. (2014). -. İlköğretim Online, 13(4), 1516-1530. https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2014.02374
AMA Şahin F. -. İOO. November 2014;13(4):1516-1530. doi:10.17051/io.2014.02374
Chicago Şahin, Feyzullah. “-”. İlköğretim Online 13, no. 4 (November 2014): 1516-30. https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2014.02374.
EndNote Şahin F (November 1, 2014) -. İlköğretim Online 13 4 1516–1530.
IEEE F. Şahin, “-”, İOO, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1516–1530, 2014, doi: 10.17051/io.2014.02374.
ISNAD Şahin, Feyzullah. “-”. İlköğretim Online 13/4 (November 2014), 1516-1530. https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2014.02374.
JAMA Şahin F. -. İOO. 2014;13:1516–1530.
MLA Şahin, Feyzullah. “-”. İlköğretim Online, vol. 13, no. 4, 2014, pp. 1516-30, doi:10.17051/io.2014.02374.
Vancouver Şahin F. -. İOO. 2014;13(4):1516-30.

Cited By

General intelligence, emotional intelligence and academic knowledge as predictors of creativity domains: A study of gifted students
Cogent Education
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1218315
An Investigation of the Threshold Hypothesis Using ASIS Intelligence Scale and Creative Imagination Cards
Talent
Gözde YILMAZ
https://doi.org/10.46893/talent.831465
SANATSAL YARATICILIK VE ZEKA İLİŞKİSİ: ÜSTÜN YETENEKLİ VE NORMAL GELİŞİM GÖSTEREN ÖĞRENCİLERİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI
Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi
Ümran BULUT
https://doi.org/10.26468/trakyasobed.738899
GÖRSEL SANATLAR DERSİ ORTA ÖĞRETİM KAZANIMLARININ YENİLENMİŞ BLOOM TAKSONOMİSİNE GÖRE DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ
Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi
Fatih KARIP
https://doi.org/10.31463/aicusbed.581301