Silvia and colleagues (2008, 2009) proposed and evaluated alternative subjective scoring approaches (i.e., Top 2 and Snapshot) to assessing creativity on divergent thinking (DT) tasks, highlighting the advantages and compromises of using simpler scoring methods (vs. the more effortful and complex Average scoring system) when including DT as an ancillary or exploratory research variable. The current study replicates and extends Silvia et al.’s (2008, 2009) findings in a sample of N = 202 undergraduate students who were also assessed on everyday creative activities and personality traits. Correlation and regression analyses were conducted to compare concurrent validities of scores yielded from the three subjective scoring techniques. On the whole, results further supported the superiority of Top 2 over Average scoring as well as the adequacy and promise of the most quick-and-simple Snapshot scoring method; Snapshot scoring showed equivalent validity compared to the most laborious Average scoring approach. Additionally, Openness to Experience was identified as the most consistent and strongest predictor of DT across all three scoring indexes, whereas intelligence (as indicated by SAT total scores) was found to be associated with the Top 2 index only. Implications and future research directions (e.g., more fine-grained analyses to determine whether and how extra complexity in scoring methods may translate into added practical value) are discussed.

Silvia及其同事（2008年，2009年）提出并评估了替代性主观评分方法（即，Top 2和Snapshot），以评估发散思维（DT）任务的创造力，强调了使用更简单的评分方法的优势和劣势（相对于较省力的方法）和复杂的平均评分系统）纳入DT作为辅助或探索性研究变量。本研究在N样本中复制并扩展了Silvia等人（2008，2009）的发现。 = 202名本科生，他们的日常创造活动和性格特征也得到了评估。进行了相关和回归分析，以比较三种主观评分技术产生的分数的同时有效性。总体而言，结果进一步证明了前2名优于平均得分的优势，以及最快速，最简单的Snapshot得分方法的充分性和前景；与最费力的“平均”评分方法相比，快照评分显示出相同的有效性。此外，经验开放性被认为是所有三个得分指数中DT的最一致和最强的预测因子，而发现智力（如SAT总分所示）仅与前2个指数相关。含义和未来的研究方向（例如，