Assessing Creativity-Enhancing Learning Environments: Psychometric Model Validation for Undergraduates
Abstract
This study investigates a proposed measurement model, grounded in Amabile's (1996) componential model of creativity, to explore the causal relationships among perceived learning environments, proactive personality motivation, and creativity index. The study's primary objectives are threefold: i) To evaluate the goodness-of-fit indices of the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) measurement model, ii) to examine parameter estimates within the CFA measurement model and iii) to establish discriminant validity for the measured constructs. The measurement model's fitness is assessed using data collected from a survey of 374 undergraduate students and analyzed through AMOS. Goodness-of-fit indices, including the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), and Normed Chi-Square (cmin/df), are employed to validate the model's fit with the data. Additionally, the study investigates convergent and discriminant validity of the instruments by scrutinizing disattenuated correlations among the constructs. Notably, this research expands Amabile's Componential Theory by incorporating proactive personality into the model. The study's findings hold potential value for enhancing program syllabuses, co-curricular activities, and soft-skill enhancement programs within higher learning institutions.
Downloads
References
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to "The Social Psychology of Creativity. Westview Press.
Brown, T.A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guildford Press
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230-258.
Byrne, B. (2005). Factor analytic model: Viewing structure of an assessment instrument from three different perspectives. Journal of Personality Assessment, 85, 17-32
Chua, Y. P. (2012). Mastering research methods. Mcgraw-Hill Education.
Collier, J. (2020). Applied structural equation modeling using AMOS: Basic to advanced techniques. Routledge.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Hsu, M. L., & Chen, F. H. (2017). The cross‐level mediating effect of psychological capital on the organizational innovation climate–employee innovative behavior relationship. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(2), 128-139.
Jahromi, M. S. G., Mitra Amini, M. D., Moosavi, M., Salehi, A., Delavari, S., Hayat, A. A., & Nabeiei, P. (2021). Psychometric properties of the Persian version of bedside teaching (BST) Instrument. Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism, 9(1), 44.
John, O. P., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2000). Measurement: Reliability, construct validation, and scale construction. Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology. https://personality-project.org/revelle/publications/rg.Scaleconstruction.2022.pdf
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications.
Kyriazos, T. A. (2018). Applied psychometrics: sample size and sample power considerations in factor analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in general. Psychology, 9(08), 2207.
Matus, C., & Infante, M. (2020). Undoing diversity: knowledge and neoliberal discourses in colleges of education. In Judith Butler and Education (pp. 140-154). Routledge.
Maydeu-Olivares, A., Fairchild, A. J., & Hall, A. G. (2017). Goodness of fit in item factor analysis: Effect of the number of response alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 24(4), 495-505.
Samuelsen, K. M., & Dayton, C. M. (2018). Latent class analysis. In The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences. Routledge.















