The importance of creativity for learning, an equitable education, and a competitive nation warrants a broader and deeper understanding of this topic, including how creativity is assessed. This review focuses on subjective creativity assessment, a popular assessment approach that uses judges’ subjective definitions of creativity, and examines its reliability and validity evidence collected from 84 empirical studies under the theoretical frameworks of the 2014 Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing and rater-mediated assessments. The main findings include: 1) The reviewed studies vary across domains, characteristics of subjects/objects and raters, and rating instructions and scales; 2) The major reliability evidence was provided by Cronbach’s alpha and correlations of rating scores, and the major validity evidence came from the evidence based on relationships with other variables through the use of correlations; 3) Cronbach’s alpha values differed through an interaction between domains and judges’ expertise level, and correlations of rating scores differed by domain and judges’ expertise level; 4) There was strong convergent validity evidence between creativity and novelty but a weak discriminant validity evidence between creativity and technical goodness and liking. These findings suggest that the subjective creativity assessment approach shows a good level of reliability and validity but has some degrees of unreliability and invalidity that need to be addressed with good research practices and more advanced measurement theories and methods.

创造力对学习、公平教育和竞争国家的重要性需要对这个主题有更广泛和更深入的理解，包括如何评估创造力。这篇综述着重于主观创造力评估，这是一种流行的评估方法，它使用法官对创造力的主观定义，并在 2014 年教育和心理测试标准的理论框架下，从 84 项实证研究中收集到其信度和效度证据。 和评估者介导的评估。主要发现包括： 1) 所审查的研究因领域、受试者/对象和评估者的特征以及评级说明和量表而异；2）主要信度证据由Cronbach's alpha和评分相关性提供，主要有效性证据来自通过使用相关性与其他变量的关系建立的证据；3) Cronbach's alpha 值通过领域和法官专业水平之间的交互作用而不同，并且评分分数的相关性因领域和法官专业水平而异；4）创造力和新颖性之间有很强的收敛效度证据，但创造力和技术优点和喜好之间的区分效度证据很弱。