Furious Activity vs. Understanding: How much expertise is needed to evaluate creative work?

Authors

Learning Research Institute
John Baer, Rider University
David H. Cropley, University of South Australia
Roni Reiter-Palmon, University of Nebraska at OmahaFollow

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2013

Publication Title

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts

Abstract

What is the role of expertise in evaluating creative products? Novices and experts do not assess creativity similarly, indicating domain-specific knowledge’s role in judging creativity. We describe two studies that examined how quasi-experts (people who have more experience in a domain than novices but also lack recognized standing as experts) compared to novices and experts in rating creative work. In Study One, we compared different types of quasi-experts with novices and experts in rating short stories. In Study Two, we compared experts, quasi-experts, and novices in evaluating an engineering product (a mousetrap design). Quasi-experts (regardless of type) seemed to be appropriate raters for short stories, yet results were mixed for the engineer quasi-experts. Some domains may require more expertise than others to properly evaluate creative work.

Comments

This work has been peer reviewed buy has not yet been published. © 2013 American Psychological Association

Recommended Citation

Learning Research Institute; Baer, John; Cropley, David H.; and Reiter-Palmon, Roni, "Furious Activity vs. Understanding: How much expertise is needed to evaluate creative work?" (2013). Psychology Faculty Publications. 32.
https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/psychfacpub/32