AN EDUCATIONAL COMPUTERIZED GAME TO TRAIN : FIRST DEVELOPMENT AND EVIDENCE OF ITS CREATIVITY CORRELATES

Vũ Bích Phượng1

Abstract: Creativity, the ability to generate new and useful ideas, is one of the most desirable employability skills in the twenty-first century. Despite this need, creative ideas are scarce because we have a tendency to activate semantically related information and and thus are constrained from producing new, unconventional ideas. Thus, we conducted this current study as part of a research project to develop and test a gamification training program that helps the practice of far conceptual combination. In this study, a computerized game was programmed in PsyhoPy2, and then validated by correlating 49 participants’ game performances with several creativity measures, including divergent thinking, and insight . The results suggest that divergent thinking is central and necessary for game performance. Potential for an effective gamification approach and possible improvements for the game training was finally discussed. Keywords: Creative thinking, game training, Divergent thinking, Convergent thinking, Insight problem solving.

Introduction In the fast-changing and uncertain economic outlook, creative thinking has been one of the top five employability skills of employees that organizations desire (Right Management, 2014). Previous studies have developed several training programs and suggested that creativity can be trained (for example, Feldhusen, Treffinger, & Bahlke, 1970; Im, Hokanson, & Johnson, 2015; McFadzean, 1998; Ritter & Mostert, 2017). Specifically, a meta-analysis on training effectiveness suggested that training programs targeting cognitive components of creativity often yield the best results (Scott, Leritz, & Mumford, 2004a). The objective of this research was to develop a training program that targets the underlying cognitive mechanism of creative thinking. In the following paragraphs, the cognitive foundation of this

1 Khoa Tâm lý học, Trường ĐH Khoa học Xã hội và Nhân văn - ĐHQG TP. Hồ Chí Minh, Email: [email protected]

Phần 2. CÔNG NGHỆ VÀ GIÁO DỤC 259 creativity training will be elaborated on. Then, several elements and advantages of this computerized game will be specified. Creativity commonly refers to the generation and recognition of new and useful ideas (Mumford, 2003). However, creative thoughts happen less often than conventional thoughts due to a cognitive structure called schema, which maps knowledge into domains and categories (Gentner, 1983). A conceptual structure theory proposes that, because of this cognitive mapping of knowledge, concepts (such as objects and events) and their compatible attributes are processed within a single semantic space (Simmons & Barsalou, 2003). This semantic relatedness explains, for example, why we often have the first thought about “apple” asan exemplar of fruit, instead of thinking about technologies (Apple Inc.). Moreover, the more compatible properties the concepts share, the more likely they will be activated together. For example, “dog” is related to “cat” because they are both pets, have fur and four legs. This tendency to process information in schemas explains why we often reach a common, conventional solution when solving problems. However, once problems present information in an unexpected manner, such as in case of riddles, conventional thinking cannot provide alternative perspectives to solve these problems. For example, in this riddle: “What goes up and down but does not move?”, “go” and “move” both describe changes in location. Therefore, this challenging, unexpected situation requires a newer, more creative approach to solve. Instead of thinking about something that goes up and down in terms of positions, it will make more sense if we think about something that increases and decreases (and the answer is “temperature”). Thus, escaping the existing frameworks and proximity of information may facilitate the production of novel ideas, and possibly creative ideas (Sassenberg & Moskowitz, 2005). It is suggested that mental synthesis of previously unrelated concepts can help generate new properties, functions or associations for them (Ward, Smith, & Finke, 1999). This mental synthesis of concepts is known as conceptual combination. The novelty of such combinations depend on how distant the concepts are in terms of semantic relatedness (Howard-Jones, Blakemore, Samuel, Summers, & Claxton, 2005), or the degree of incompatible attributes in the parent concepts (Wan & Chiu, 2002). The more distant, dissimilar they are, the more unconventional the conceptual combination is (Chan & Schunn, 2015). It has been found that conceptual combination facilitates divergent thinking, the ability to generate new ideas and a major cognitive process in creativity (Mumford, 2003). In the study of Wan and Chiu (2002), an experimental group who was trained in novel conceptual combination showed significant improvements in the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (Torrance, 1974), a standard test of creativity involving divergent thinking Kỷ yếu Hội thảo quốc tế 260 Các vấn đề mới trong khoa học giáo dục: tiếp cận liên ngành và xuyên ngành skill, while a control group did not. In another study, stories created by using a set of unrelated words were judged as more creative than by a set of related words, suggesting that semantic divergence in combining concepts is necessary for creative thought (Howard-Jones et al., 2005). Given that cognitive training with a focus on unique requirements of creativity is more likely to be effective (Scott et al., 2004b), the computerized game developed in this research will incorporate the practice of conceptual combination to train creative thinking. Given the four main accounts to be considered when designing a creativity training program (Scott et al., 2004b) including targeted cognitive process and skill of creativity, means of delivery, training technique and type of exercises. Firstly, in terms of targeted cognitive process and skill, the training program in this research focuses on developing conceptual combination and divergent thinking skill. This cognitive approach has been shown to have large effect size and high successful rate (Scott et al., 2004b). Secondly, the delivery of our training is computerized and gamified. It has been found that game-based learning environment can be entertaining while also engaging the leaners and enhancing their intrinsic motivation (Azriel, Erthal, & Starr, 2005; Hamari et al., 2014; Kang & Tan, 2014). Thirdly, our game training uses visualization as a creativity technique. It is suggested that, because visual images can be scanned and mentally transformed, this will benefit the creative thoughts by allowing rapid detection of incompatible properties of objects or events (Finke, 1996). In the literature, the studies which target distant associations to enhance creative thinking have also applied imagery technique (Scott et al., 2004a). Moreover, using universal images can ensure that the training is independent. Therefore, the practice of conceptual combination in the game is based on visual, colored representations of a wide range of concepts, taken from different semantic categories. For example, there are “dog” and “fish”, which are typically known as animals, and there are “durian” and “orange”, which are typical fruits. This collection of both related (“dog” and “fish”) and unrelated (“fish” and “durian”) concepts will encourage players to visualize and generate associations among them. For the final element, type of exercise, we want to make the game domain-unspecific by using colored images of familiar, common concepts that can be encountered every day as training stimuli. This means that the skill gained through the exercises can be applied in various settings without specific technical knowledge, making this game training appropriate for the general population. Taken together, this research aimed to develop a computerized game, which provides an environment for practicing conceptual combination based on visual representations of concepts. The game was programmed in PsychoPy 2 (Peirce, 2007)

Phần 2. CÔNG NGHỆ VÀ GIÁO DỤC 261 and several criteria were developed to measure game performance. However, due to copyrighted contents, the details of the game will not be discussed in this article. In this study, we validated the game by correlating game performance measures with several creativity tests scores. We hypothesized that there were positive correlations between game performance and the creativity measures. Additional information about the participants’ personalities and their opinions about the game were also collected.

Method Participants. A total of 49 undergraduate university students (40 females) from the University of Social Sciences and Humanities Ho Chi Minh city (USSH), Vietnam, were recruited. Their mean age was 20.71 (SD = 2.01). Most of them (94%) were majored in psychology. The experiment took approximately one hour to complete and the participants were rewarded with ₫30,000. Creativity measures. Prior to the main testing, a pilot study was conducted to develop Vietnamese versions of the testing materials. Then these Vietnamese materials were used in this main study. Stimuli were programmed in Vietnamese language in PsychoPy 2 (Peirce, 2007). Please note that the details of the Vietnamese tests are not revealed here because they have not been published. Divergent thinking. Researchers have recognized that creativity is not a single act but a complex phenomenon, involving, but not limited to, generating many ideas and selecting the most creative, suitable idea (Mumford, 2003). Thus, one of the creative processes to be measured in this study was divergent thinking, the ability to generate multiple ideas or solutions. The Alternative Uses Test (AUT, Guilford, 1967) is commonly used to evaluate divergent thinking skill. In this test, the participants were required to list as many uses for a common object as possible in four minutes. All participants were presented with two test versions, a brick and a newspaper. The order of the versions were counterbalanced across the participants. Following the AUT scoring guidelines (Guilford, Christensen, Merrifield, & Wilson, 1960), performance in the AUT was judged based on how many ideas they could generate (fluency), how flexible the participants were in changing perspectives (flexibility), and how novel and useful the ideas were (creativity). Convergent thinking. While divergent thinking is crucial for idea generation, convergent thinking, the ability to select a single best, most correct answer to a problem, is also important for the creative process. The Remote Associates Test (RAT, Mednick, 1962) was used to measure convergent thinking skill. In this test, a combination of three seemingly unrelated cue words were presented (for example, Kỷ yếu Hội thảo quốc tế 262 Các vấn đề mới trong khoa học giáo dục: tiếp cận liên ngành và xuyên ngành lapse - vivid - elephant). The participants were asked to find a fourth word that can relate to all the cue words to form three meaningful words (the answer is memory: memory lapse, vivid memory, elephant memory). Because the original version of RAT was in English, a Vietnamese version of RAT was constructed and piloted as mentioned. The participants were presented with ten three-word combinations. They had 20 seconds to solve each combination, and the order of the combinations was randomized. Each correct answer earned one point, while an incorrect score earned zero. Insight problems solving. Besides idea generation and idea selection, creative thought is also crucial when solving problems, especially insight problems that represent information in an unexpected, challenging manner. Although minimal technical knowledge is required, these insight problems can only be solved by overcoming functional fixedness, in which typical thought and about the problem block awareness of the solution (Batchelder & Alexander, 2012). We used the Duncker’s candle problem (Duncker, 1945) and the Maier’s two-string problem (Maier, 1931) to measure insight problem solving. The order of the problems was randomized. The participants had three minutes to read and solve each problem. Each correct answer received one point while an incorrect answer received a zero. Game instruction video. Instructions on how to play “The Associates” game was recorded by a video using the built-in screen recording function of Windows 10. In this video, the gaming screen was showed and accompanied with verbal explanations about how to play the game and how to earn scores. Demographic data and personalities. We collected demographic data such as age, gender and major subject. Self-reported creativity was also measured on a Likert scale from 0 (not very creative) to 4 (very creative). A short, standardized version of the Big Five personality scale (Van Eijck, & de Graaf, 2004) was translated into Vietnamese to collect subjective measures of extroversion, friendliness, conscientiousness, emotional stability and openness. This questionnaire includes 30 items, in which six items assess each personality trait on a Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Feedback for the game.A questionnaire was used to assess whether the instructions for the game were sufficient, and whether the participants enjoyed playing the game. It also asks for suggestions and recommendations for improvements. This questionnaire includes 10 multiple-choice and short-answer questions. Design. Thissection briefly describes the game rules and how to score game performance.

Phần 2. CÔNG NGHỆ VÀ GIÁO DỤC 263

Game rules. Given a set of concepts presented as graphic cards, the participants were asked to form as many creative associations between the concepts as possible by placing the cards next to each other. The participants could freely associate the concepts using their properties and attributes, although associations based on the color of the images were not encouraged and deemed invalid as real-life concepts may have different colors (for example, a card of “apple” may represent a red apple, but in real life apples can be green). They continued develop their connections of ideas. Each round of game lasted for 10 minutes and they completed three rounds. For each association they made, a verbal explanation was required. The computer screen and the participants’ talks while playing the game were recorded for scoring and analysis. Scoring game performance. Five game performance measures were developed, including fluency, flexibility, and creativity. The fluency score was the total number of the cards used to form associations. The flexibility score was the total number of associations with valid, comprehendible explanations. Each explanation for an association earned one point. For example, participant A earns one point by associating “fridge” with “eye glasses”, explaining that they are “things made of metal”. In case participant A continues to associate “eye glasses” with “cctv” by the same “metal” explanation again, this does not earn a point. A sum score of flexibility was calculated for all participants. The higher the score was, the more flexible the participants were in changing perspectives and approaches when forming associations. Each explanation for the associations was then given a creativity score. This was judged based on the novelty and usefulness of the ideas, on a Likert scale from 0 (not at all creative) to 4 (very creative). To account for the dependence on quantity, a mean score of creativity for each participant was calculated by dividing the sum creativity score by the number of associations. This means that the mean score of creativity equaled the sum score of creativity divided by the sum score of flexibility. Importantly, 30% of the sample was scored by three Vietnamese raters to analyze the consistency and agreement in judging creativity. The inter-rater reliability of the creativity scores was calculated with a two-way random intra-class correlation coefficient analysis and considered substantial (ICC = 0.82). Procedure. Recruited participants were welcomed to a quiet lab room at the Faculty of Psychology, USSH. The participants sat in front of a computer. The order of testing was fixed for all participants, starting with the AUT test, then the RAT test and finally the insight problems. Before playing the game, the participants watched the instruction video to understand the game rules and how to play. Then, the screen recorder was turned on, and the participants played three rounds of the game in thirty minutes. They finished the experiment by completing the demographic questionnaire, the short Big Five, and the game feedback questionnaire. Kỷ yếu Hội thảo quốc tế 264 Các vấn đề mới trong khoa học giáo dục: tiếp cận liên ngành và xuyên ngành

Results Divergent thinking and game performance. Preliminary tests showed that non- normal distributions existed for AUT fluency, game density and game intersection. These three variables were logarithmically transformed and used throughout the analyses. Pearson’s bivariate correlations were performed to examine the relationship between three AUT scores and five game performance measures. The results showed that AUT fluency significantly correlated with game fluency (r = .315, p = .029) and game flexibility (r = .390, p = .007). This means that people who generated more ideas in the divergent thinking test also used more concept cards and formed more associations in the game. No significant correlations were found between AUT creativity, flexibility and other game performance measures (Table 1).

Table 1. Correlations Between Creativity Measures and Game Performance

1 2 3 4 5 6 M SD

1. AUT fluency (log) - .81 .12

2. AUT flexbility .681** - 4.33 .95

3. AUT creativity .233 .219 - 2.59 .32

4. RAT .020 -.016 .021 - 5.24 1.90

5. Game fluency .315* .247 -.150 .113 - 24.59 9.93

6. Game flexibility .390* .200 -.040 .115 .786** - 17.30 6.77 7. Game creativity .110 -.059 .205 -.178 -.390** -.220 1.00 .26 Note. *p< .05, ** p< .01.

Subsequently, multiple linear regressions were performed to investigate whether game fluency and flexibility can be predicted by AUT fluency. Preliminary check showed that all assumptions of independence of errors, homoscedasticity of residuals, absence of multivariate outliers and multicollinearity were met. The results showed that AUT fluency positively predicted game flexibility (b = 28.31, p = .013) (Table 2).

Phần 2. CÔNG NGHỆ VÀ GIÁO DỤC 265

Table 2. Summary of Multiple Linear Regression Analyses with Divergent Thinking Measures as predictors of Game Performance

Game fluency a Game flexibility b Game creativity c Predictors b SE β p b SE β p b SE β p

AUT -7.56 4.46 -.24 .097 -2.84 3.06 -.13 .358 .17 .13 .20 .183 creativity

AUT fluency 26.65 16.15 .32 .106 28.31 10.88 .50 .013* .54 .44 .25 .227 (log) AUT .87 1.96 .08 .659 -.77 1.32 -.11 .563 -.07 .05 -.27 .184 flexibility

Note. *p< .05. **p<.0. N = 45; aR2= .16, bR2= .18, cR2= .09.

Convergent thinking and game performance. Pearson’s bivariate correlations were computed between the total number of correct RAT answers and five game performance measures. The results showed that RAT did not correlate with any game performance measures (Table 1), suggesting that conceptual combination practice in the game did not relate to convergent thinking skill. Insight problem solving and game performance. A one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed to examine whether game performance significantly differ in the three groups of participants who solved zero (n = 19), one (n = 25) and two (n = 5) insight problems. Preliminary check showed that the assumption of homogeneity of variance-covariance matrixes was met, Box’s M = 32.40, F(15,4125.375) = 1.83, p =.026. The results showed no differences in all game performance measures between the three groups, F(10,76) = .642, p = .774, Wilks’ Lambda = .850, partial η2 = .078, suggesting that game performance did not differ depending on insight problem solving. Exploratory analyses for game behavior, sample characteristics and participants’ game feedback. Game behavior was analyzed by checking the relationships between all game performance measures. Pearson’s bivariate correlations showed that game fluency significantly and positively correlated with game flexibility (Table 1). However, game fluency negatively correlated with game creativity (r = -.39, p = .007), suggesting that the more cards used to form associations, the less creative the associations were. Mean self-reported creativity of this sample was 2.51 on a scale from 0 to 4 (SD = .82), and mean openness was 3.61 on a scale from 1 to 5 (SD = .68), meaning that Kỷ yếu Hội thảo quốc tế 266 Các vấn đề mới trong khoa học giáo dục: tiếp cận liên ngành và xuyên ngành they perceived themselves to be slightly above average in being creative and open to new experience. There was a significant positive correlation between openness and AUT creativity (r = .293, p = .041), suggesting that those who reported to be more open had higher creative performance in the divergent thinking test. No significant correlations between personality, RAT and game performance were found, however (Table 3). Group differences in self-reported creativity and openness with regards to insight problem solving were insignificant, F(4, 90) = .528, p = .716, partial η2 = .023.

Table 3. Correlations Between Self-reported Creativity, Openness, Game Performance and Creativity Measures

1 2

1. Openness (squared) -

2. Self-reported creativity (squared) .756** -

3. Game fluency -.046 -.156 4. Game flexibility -.003 -.171 5. Game creativity -.060 -.115 6. AUT fluency (log) .177 -.041 7. AUT flexibility .116 -.063 8. AUT creativity .293* .115 9. RAT -.176 -.071 Note. *p< .05, ** p< .01.

Regarding feedback for the game, most participants (75.5%) agreed that the instructions for the game were very clear. Only 14.3% indicated that the associations they formed in the game were generated randomly, while the rest of the participants reported that they depended on semantic and functional relatedness to form the associations.

Discussion The results of this research support our hypothesis that divergent thinking, the ability to generate multiple ideas and solutions, is central and necessary for the performance in the computerized game. Specifically, higher number of ideas (fluency) and creative level of those ideas (creativity) in the AUT test of divergent thinking are consistently associated with higher creative performance and flexibility in changing perspectives to combine concepts in the game (game creativity and flexibility). In

Phần 2. CÔNG NGHỆ VÀ GIÁO DỤC 267 contrast, inconsistent relationships were found between game performance and convergent thinking, the ability to select a single best idea, and insight problem solving, an interplay of divergent thinking and convergent thinking skills. While performances in the RAT test of convergent thinking and insight problem solving did not show significant correlations with overall measures of game performance, additional analyses revealed that they had some associations with performance in one of the game rounds in the first study. Our research adds to the study of conceptual combination and creativity by developing a computerized game that provides exercises for conceptual combination. It has been suggested that new ideas can be generated for existing concepts using conceptual combination, a mental synthesizing process in which previously unrelated concepts are combined (Ward et al., 1999). As conceptual combination provides new perspectives to a problem and leads to the production of novel ideas, it is suggested that manipulations intended to encourage this practice can contribute to creative performance (Meador, 1994; Mumford, Baughman, Maher, Costanza, & Supinski, 1997; Phye, 1997). The exercise of conceptual combination in our game share some similarities with the paradigm of category-exemplar generation in the work of Mumford and colleagues (Mobley, Doares, & Mumford, 1992; Mumford et al., 1997). In these studies, participants were presented with a list of typical exemplars (e.g. chair) from several taxonomic categories (e.g. furniture). Labels of the categories were not shown to avoid verbal priming. The participants were requested to generate a category label that can account for all presented exemplars before generating more exemplars for this new category. In our game, several concepts from different categories were presented and the participants were asked to combine them in a meaningful, creative ways, hinting that they should avoid using the original categories of concepts to form the associations. Our finding of the positive correlation between game performance and performance in the AUT test supports the positive relationship between conceptual combination training and divergent thinking skill. In line with Wan and Chiu (2002), our results show that those who have higher divergent thinking skill tend to be more successful, i.e. making more creative associations, in the conceptual combination practice, although it can mean vice versa that those who are good at synthesizing existing concepts to create new ideas also have higher divergent thinking skill. In contrast, the results indicate that convergent thinking and insight problem solving are not consistently involved in the game performance. We conjecture that, because conceptual combination is one of the early-cycle processing activities of creativity (together with problem finding, information gathering, and concept selection) while idea selection involving convergent thinking is often a late-cycle process (Scott et Kỷ yếu Hội thảo quốc tế 268 Các vấn đề mới trong khoa học giáo dục: tiếp cận liên ngành và xuyên ngành al., 2004a), convergent thinking skill was not necessarily required in the game that mostly relies on associating concepts without strict requirements to select the best ideas. Alternatively, it could also mean that our game performance measures did not explicitly capture this ability. In case of insight problem solving, it is a complex, higher process that can be difficult to understand scientifically (Batchelder & Alexander, 2012). The collection of classic insight problems, such that was used in our studies, is very heterogeneous in which each insight problem has its own character to provoke insights (Chu & MacGregor, 2011). Overall, the relationship between insight problem solving and game performance across three rounds was not found, although a significant finding emerged regarding the creative performance in one of the rounds in the game. We conjecture that the low number of insight problems used in our studies might have limited our observation of the participants’ insight problem solving skill. The relationship between game performance and personality Exploratory analyses showed that, although openness to experience often relates to creativity (Feist, 1999), it does not correlate with the creative performance in the game. This means that how creative and open-minded a person is does not relates to how creatively they will play the game and implies that individuals with either high or low creative divergent thinking can be encouraged to practice forming creative associations in the game. Feedback for the game, limitations and suggestions for future research By collecting game feedback, it was found that most participants still depended on semantic relatedness to form associations. This suggests that more explicit, stricter game rules can be made to encourage breaking this pattern. Moreover, analyses of game behavior help us to understand how participants perform in the game. In contrast to the presumption of Osborn (1957) that more ideas generated will increase the average creativity of those ideas, our results showed that this is not the case within the game. Specifically, the more concept cards used to form associations, the less creative those associations are. This can be explained that, with a set of both related and unrelated concepts presented in the game (concepts from the same category versus concepts from different categories), a tendency to associate related concepts by using semantic relatedness will result in more cards played but less creative explanations for their associations. Our finding of a negative relationship between game fluency and game creativity supports other studies (Baruah & Paulus, 2008; Rietzschel, Nijstad, & Stroebe, 2007), suggesting that fluency and creativity

Phần 2. CÔNG NGHỆ VÀ GIÁO DỤC 269 may not necessarily be complementary to each other. This implies that clear and explicit instructions should be made to encourage players focusing on the quality (creativity) instead of the quantity (fluency) of associations in the game. There are some points that should be addressed in future research, such as extending our concept card database and consider adding more game elements to retain enjoyment and benefits to players with scientific evidence. A development of an automatic scoring system will also be beneficial for the analysis of game performance. Taken together, our research offers some first evidence of creativity correlates of a potential creativity training game, which focuses on developing conceptual combination practice, an important cognitive skill for creative thought.

REFERENCES 1. Azriel, J A., Erthal, M. J., & Starr, E. (2005). Answers, questions, and deceptions: what is the role of games in business education? Journal of Education for Business, 81 (1), 9-14. 2. Baruah, J., & Paulus, P. B. (2008). Effects of training on idea generation in groups. Small Group Research, 39, 523–541. 3. Batchelder, W.H. & Alexander, G.E. (2012). Insight problem solving: a critical examination of the possibility of formal theory. Journal of Problem Solving, 5 (1), 56-100. 4. Chan, J., & Schunn, C.D. (2015). The importance of iteration in creative conceptual combination. Cognition, 145, 104–115. 5. Chu, Y., & MacGregor, J. (2011). Human performance on insight problem solving: a review. The Journal of Problem Solving, 3 (2), 119-150. 6. Duncker, K. (1945; original in German 1935). On problem solving. Psychological Monographs, 58 (270), i113. 7. Feist, G. J. (1999). The influence of personality on artistic and scientific creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 273–296). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. 8. Feldhusen, J. F., Trepfinger, D. J., & Bahlke, S. (1970). Developing creative thinking: the Purdue Creativity Program. Journal of Creative Behavior, 4, 85-90. 9. Finke, R.A. (1996). Imagery, creativity, and emergent structure. Consciousness and Cognition, 5, 381–393. Kỷ yếu Hội thảo quốc tế 270 Các vấn đề mới trong khoa học giáo dục: tiếp cận liên ngành và xuyên ngành

10. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. , 7 (3), 155-170. 11. Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill. 12. Guilford, J.P., Christensen, P.R., Merrifield, P.R., & Wilson, R.C. (1960). Alternative Uses Manual. Sheridan Supply Co. 13. Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller. B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2014). Challenging games help students learn: an empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 133–134. 14. Howard-Jones, P. A., Blakemore, S.-J., Samuel, E. A., Summers, I. R., & Claxton, G. (2005). Semantic divergence and creative story generation: an fMRI investigation. Cognitive Brain Research, 25, 240–250. 15. Im, H., Hokanson, B., & Johnson, K. K. P. (2015). Teaching creative thinking skills: a longitudinal study. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 33 (2), 129-142. 16. Kang, B., & Tan, S. H. (2014). Interactive games: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, achievement, and satisfaction. Journal of Management and Strategy, 5 (4), 110-116. 17. Maier, N. R. F. (1931). Reasoning in humans: the solution of a problem and its appearance in consciousness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 12(2), 181-194. 18. McFadzean, E. (1998). Enhancing creative thinking within organisations. Management Decision, 36 (5), 309-315. 19. Meador, K. S. (1994). The effects of synectics training on gifted and non-gifted kindergarten students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 18, 55-73. 20. Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220-232. 21. Mobley, M. I., Doares, L. M., & Mumford, M. D. (1992). Process analytic models of creative capacities: evidence for the combination and reorganization process. Creativity Research Journal, 5, 125–155. 22. Mumford, M. D. (2003). Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research. Creativity Research Journal, 15 (2-3), 107–120. 23. Mumford, M.D., Baughman, W.A., Maher, M.A., Costanza, D.P. & Supinski, E.P. (1997). Process-based measures of creative problemsolving skills: IV. Category combination, Creativity Research Journal, 10 (1), 59-71.

Phần 2. CÔNG NGHỆ VÀ GIÁO DỤC 271

24. Osborn, A. F. (1957). Applied imagination: principles and procedures of creative thinking (Rev. Ed.). New York: Scribner. 25. Peirce, J.W. (2007) PsychoPy - Psychophysics software in Python. Journal of Neuroscientific Methods, 162(1-2), 8-13. 26. Phye, G. A. (1997). Inductive reasoning and problem solving: The early grades. In J. G. Ryne (Ed.), Handbook of academic Learning (pp. 451-471). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 27. Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2007). Relative accessibility of domain knowledge and creativity: the effects of knowledge activation on the quantity and originality of generated ideas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 933-946. 28. Right Management (2014). The Flux Report: building a resilient workforce in the face of flux. Retrieved from: https://www.rightmanagement.co.uk/wps/wcm/ connect/350a18c6-6b19-470d-adba-88c9e0394d0b/Right+Management+Flux- +Report+Spread.pdf?MOD=AJPERES 29. Ritter, S.M., & Mostert, N. (2017). Enhancement of creative thinking skills using a cognitive-based creativity training. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement, 1 (3), 243-253. 30. Sassenberg, K., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2005). Don’t stereotype, think different! Overcoming automatic stereotype activation by mindset priming. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 506-514. 31. Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004a). The effectiveness of creativity training: a quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16 (4), 361–388. 32. Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004b). Types of creativity training: approaches and their effectiveness. Journal of Creative Behavior, 38 (3), 149–179. 33. Simmons, W.K., & Barsalou, L.W. (2003). The similarity-in-topography principle: reconciling theories of conceptual deficits.Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20(3-6), 451-486. 34. Torrance, E.P. (1974). Torrance tests of creativity thinking. Lexington, MA: Personnel Press. 35. Van Eijck, K., & de Graaf, P. M. (2004). The big five at school: The impact of personality on educational attainments. The Netherlands’ Journal of Social Sciences, 41(1), 24-42. 36. Wan, W. W. N., & Chiu, C.-Y. (2002). Effects of novel conceptual combination on creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 36, 227-240. Kỷ yếu Hội thảo quốc tế 272 Các vấn đề mới trong khoa học giáo dục: tiếp cận liên ngành và xuyên ngành

37. Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Finke, R. A. (1999). Creative cognition. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 189-212). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

NÂNG CAO SỰ SÁNG TẠO QUA GAME GIÁO DỤC TRÊN MÁY TÍNH: PHÁT TRIỂN VÀ KẾT QUẢ BAN ĐẦU VỀ MỐI TƯƠNG QUAN VỚI CÁC THANG ĐO TƯ DUY SÁNG TẠO

Tóm tắt: Sáng tạo, khả năng tạo ra những ý tưởng mới và hữu ích, là một trong những kỹ năng làm việc được mong muốn nhất trong thế kỷ 21. Bất chấp nhu cầu này, các ý tưởng sáng tạo vẫn khan hiếm vì chúng ta có xu hướng kích hoạt các thông tin và khái niệm liên quan đến nhau về mặt ngữ nghĩa, và do đó bị hạn chế trong việc tạo ra các ý tưởng mới và độc đáo. Do đó, chúng tôi thực hiện một nghiên cứu, và nghiên cứu này nằm trong chuỗi dự án nghiên cứu phát triển và thử nghiệm một phần mềm huấn luyện bằng game máy tính giúp thực hành việc liên kết khái niệm xa. Trong nghiên cứu này, trò chơi được lập trình bằng phần mềm PsychoPy2, và sau đó mối tương quan giữa kết quả trò chơi với một số thang đo tư duy sáng tạo được kiểm định, bao gồm tư duy phân kỳ, tư duy hội tụ và giải quyết vấn đề sáng tạo. Kết quả cho thấy tư duy phân kỳ là trọng tâm cần thiết để thực hiện trò chơi. Chúng tôi thảo luận tiềm năng và những sự cải tiến có thể được phát huy cho cách tiếp cận huấn luyện tư duy sáng tạo bằng game máy tính này ở cuối bài. Từ khóa: Tư duy sáng tạo, Huấn luyện bằng game, Tư duy phân kỳ, Tư duy hội tụ, Giải quyết vấn đề sáng tạo.