Expertise in Evaluating Choreographic Creativity: An Online Variation of the Consensual Assessment Technique.
Identifieur interne : 000709 ( Main/Curation ); précédent : 000708; suivant : 000710Expertise in Evaluating Choreographic Creativity: An Online Variation of the Consensual Assessment Technique.
Auteurs : Lucie Clements [Royaume-Uni] ; Emma Redding [Royaume-Uni] ; Naomi Lefebvre Sell [Royaume-Uni] ; Jon May [Royaume-Uni]Source :
- Frontiers in psychology [ 1664-1078 ] ; 2018.
Abstract
In contemporary dance, experts evaluate creativity in competitions, auditions, and performances, typically through ratings of choreography or improvisation. Audiences also implicitly evaluate choreographic creativity, so dancers' livelihoods also hinge upon the opinions of non-expert observers. However, some argue that the abstract and often pedestrian nature of contemporary dance confuses non-expert audiences. Therefore, agreement regarding creativity and appreciation amongst experts and non-experts may be low. Finding appropriate methodologies for reliable and real-world creativity evaluation remains the subject of considerable debate within the psychology creativity research field. Although considerably variant in methodological operationalisation, the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) asks individuals to use an implicit definition to assess creativity in others' work. This study aimed to investigate the role of experience and expertise in the evaluation of choreographic creativity, with a secondary aim of testing the feasibility of an online snowballing methodology for large-scale dance-specific research, informed by the methodology of the CAT. We filmed 23 Contemporary Dance students each performing a 3-min peer-choreographed solo and then recruited 850 online evaluators with varying degrees of expertise and experience in dance and creativity. Evaluators viewed at least one randomly selected video and rated creativity, technical ability, appreciation and understanding of the work, each using a seven-point Likert scale. A one-way ANOVA showed a significant difference in creativity ratings across the 23 videos, and creativity correlated significantly with the other variables. We then categorized evaluators on nine aspects of their dance and creative experience and entered the data into a repeated-measures linear mixed model. Two of the fixed effects yielded differences in creativity evaluations: (i) contemporary choreographic experience and (ii) self-reported creative expertise, as did the random effect of the video. The results indicate that personal experience of the choreographic process impacts creativity assessment, above and beyond experience in dance class participation. Implications for creativity assessment within creativity research and practice are discussed.
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01448
PubMed: 30197611
PubMed Central: PMC6117233
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Main, to step Corpus: Pour aller vers cette notice dans l'étape Curation :000709
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:30197611Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Expertise in Evaluating Choreographic Creativity: An Online Variation of the Consensual Assessment Technique.</title><author><name sortKey="Clements, Lucie" sort="Clements, Lucie" uniqKey="Clements L" first="Lucie" last="Clements">Lucie Clements</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>Department of Psychology and Counselling, University of Chichester, Chichester, United Kingdom.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Psychology and Counselling, University of Chichester, Chichester</wicri:regionArea></affiliation><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London, United Kingdom.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Redding, Emma" sort="Redding, Emma" uniqKey="Redding E" first="Emma" last="Redding">Emma Redding</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London, United Kingdom.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Sell, Naomi Lefebvre" sort="Sell, Naomi Lefebvre" uniqKey="Sell N" first="Naomi Lefebvre" last="Sell">Naomi Lefebvre Sell</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London, United Kingdom.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="May, Jon" sort="May, Jon" uniqKey="May J" first="Jon" last="May">Jon May</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>School of Psychology, Cognition Institute, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>School of Psychology, Cognition Institute, University of Plymouth, Plymouth</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2018">2018</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:30197611</idno><idno type="pmid">30197611</idno><idno type="doi">10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01448</idno><idno type="pmc">PMC6117233</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Corpus">000709</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Main" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">000709</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">000709</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Main" wicri:step="Curation">000709</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Expertise in Evaluating Choreographic Creativity: An Online Variation of the Consensual Assessment Technique.</title><author><name sortKey="Clements, Lucie" sort="Clements, Lucie" uniqKey="Clements L" first="Lucie" last="Clements">Lucie Clements</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>Department of Psychology and Counselling, University of Chichester, Chichester, United Kingdom.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Psychology and Counselling, University of Chichester, Chichester</wicri:regionArea></affiliation><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London, United Kingdom.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Redding, Emma" sort="Redding, Emma" uniqKey="Redding E" first="Emma" last="Redding">Emma Redding</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London, United Kingdom.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Sell, Naomi Lefebvre" sort="Sell, Naomi Lefebvre" uniqKey="Sell N" first="Naomi Lefebvre" last="Sell">Naomi Lefebvre Sell</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London, United Kingdom.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="May, Jon" sort="May, Jon" uniqKey="May J" first="Jon" last="May">Jon May</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>School of Psychology, Cognition Institute, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>School of Psychology, Cognition Institute, University of Plymouth, Plymouth</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Frontiers in psychology</title><idno type="ISSN">1664-1078</idno><imprint><date when="2018" type="published">2018</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">In contemporary dance, experts evaluate creativity in competitions, auditions, and performances, typically through ratings of choreography or improvisation. Audiences also implicitly evaluate choreographic creativity, so dancers' livelihoods also hinge upon the opinions of non-expert observers. However, some argue that the abstract and often pedestrian nature of contemporary dance confuses non-expert audiences. Therefore, agreement regarding creativity and appreciation amongst experts and non-experts may be low. Finding appropriate methodologies for reliable and real-world creativity evaluation remains the subject of considerable debate within the psychology creativity research field. Although considerably variant in methodological operationalisation, the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) asks individuals to use an implicit definition to assess creativity in others' work. This study aimed to investigate the role of experience and expertise in the evaluation of choreographic creativity, with a secondary aim of testing the feasibility of an online snowballing methodology for large-scale dance-specific research, informed by the methodology of the CAT. We filmed 23 Contemporary Dance students each performing a 3-min peer-choreographed solo and then recruited 850 online evaluators with varying degrees of expertise and experience in dance and creativity. Evaluators viewed at least one randomly selected video and rated creativity, technical ability, appreciation and understanding of the work, each using a seven-point Likert scale. A one-way ANOVA showed a significant difference in creativity ratings across the 23 videos, and creativity correlated significantly with the other variables. We then categorized evaluators on nine aspects of their dance and creative experience and entered the data into a repeated-measures linear mixed model. Two of the fixed effects yielded differences in creativity evaluations: (i) contemporary choreographic experience and (ii) self-reported creative expertise, as did the random effect of the video. The results indicate that personal experience of the choreographic process impacts creativity assessment, above and beyond experience in dance class participation. Implications for creativity assessment within creativity research and practice are discussed.</div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="PubMed-not-MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">30197611</PMID><DateRevised><Year>2020</Year><Month>09</Month><Day>30</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Electronic-eCollection"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Print">1664-1078</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Print"><Volume>9</Volume><PubDate><Year>2018</Year></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>Frontiers in psychology</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Front Psychol</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>Expertise in Evaluating Choreographic Creativity: An Online Variation of the Consensual Assessment Technique.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>1448</MedlinePgn></Pagination><ELocationID EIdType="doi" ValidYN="Y">10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01448</ELocationID><Abstract><AbstractText>In contemporary dance, experts evaluate creativity in competitions, auditions, and performances, typically through ratings of choreography or improvisation. Audiences also implicitly evaluate choreographic creativity, so dancers' livelihoods also hinge upon the opinions of non-expert observers. However, some argue that the abstract and often pedestrian nature of contemporary dance confuses non-expert audiences. Therefore, agreement regarding creativity and appreciation amongst experts and non-experts may be low. Finding appropriate methodologies for reliable and real-world creativity evaluation remains the subject of considerable debate within the psychology creativity research field. Although considerably variant in methodological operationalisation, the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) asks individuals to use an implicit definition to assess creativity in others' work. This study aimed to investigate the role of experience and expertise in the evaluation of choreographic creativity, with a secondary aim of testing the feasibility of an online snowballing methodology for large-scale dance-specific research, informed by the methodology of the CAT. We filmed 23 Contemporary Dance students each performing a 3-min peer-choreographed solo and then recruited 850 online evaluators with varying degrees of expertise and experience in dance and creativity. Evaluators viewed at least one randomly selected video and rated creativity, technical ability, appreciation and understanding of the work, each using a seven-point Likert scale. A one-way ANOVA showed a significant difference in creativity ratings across the 23 videos, and creativity correlated significantly with the other variables. We then categorized evaluators on nine aspects of their dance and creative experience and entered the data into a repeated-measures linear mixed model. Two of the fixed effects yielded differences in creativity evaluations: (i) contemporary choreographic experience and (ii) self-reported creative expertise, as did the random effect of the video. The results indicate that personal experience of the choreographic process impacts creativity assessment, above and beyond experience in dance class participation. Implications for creativity assessment within creativity research and practice are discussed.</AbstractText></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Clements</LastName><ForeName>Lucie</ForeName><Initials>L</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Department of Psychology and Counselling, University of Chichester, Chichester, United Kingdom.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London, United Kingdom.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Redding</LastName><ForeName>Emma</ForeName><Initials>E</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London, United Kingdom.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Sell</LastName><ForeName>Naomi Lefebvre</ForeName><Initials>NL</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Dance Science, Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance, London, United Kingdom.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>May</LastName><ForeName>Jon</ForeName><Initials>J</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>School of Psychology, Cognition Institute, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType></PublicationTypeList><ArticleDate DateType="Electronic"><Year>2018</Year><Month>08</Month><Day>24</Day></ArticleDate></Article><MedlineJournalInfo><Country>Switzerland</Country><MedlineTA>Front Psychol</MedlineTA><NlmUniqueID>101550902</NlmUniqueID><ISSNLinking>1664-1078</ISSNLinking></MedlineJournalInfo><KeywordList Owner="NOTNLM"><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">assessment</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">audience</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">choreography</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">contemporary dance</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">creativity</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">expertise</Keyword></KeywordList></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="received"><Year>2018</Year><Month>04</Month><Day>29</Day></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="accepted"><Year>2018</Year><Month>07</Month><Day>23</Day></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2018</Year><Month>9</Month><Day>11</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2018</Year><Month>9</Month><Day>11</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2018</Year><Month>9</Month><Day>11</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>1</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>epublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">30197611</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="doi">10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01448</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="pmc">PMC6117233</ArticleId></ArticleIdList><ReferenceList><Reference><Citation>Cogn Process. 2005 Dec;6(4):243-52</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">18239953</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>Cereb Cortex. 2005 Aug;15(8):1243-9</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">15616133</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>Psychol Bull. 1956 Jul;53(4):267-93</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">13336196</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>Am Psychol. 1950 Sep;5(9):444-54</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">14771441</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>J Abnorm Psychol. 1955 Nov;51(3):478-85</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">13285986</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276-82</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">23092060</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 1998;2(4):290-309</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">15647135</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>Percept Mot Skills. 1989 Dec;69(3 Pt 2):1227-34</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">2622738</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference><Reference><Citation>Psychon Bull Rev. 2002 Dec;9(4):625-36</Citation><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">12613670</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></Reference></ReferenceList></PubmedData></pubmed></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Sante/explor/SanteMusiqueV1/Data/Main/Curation
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000709 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Curation/biblio.hfd -nk 000709 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Sante
|area= SanteMusiqueV1
|flux= Main
|étape= Curation
|type= RBID
|clé= pubmed:30197611
|texte= Expertise in Evaluating Choreographic Creativity: An Online Variation of the Consensual Assessment Technique.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Curation/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:30197611" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Curation/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a SanteMusiqueV1
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.38. |  |