德语科学创造力自动评分系统

IF 2.8 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Journal of Creative Behavior Pub Date : 2024-05-15 DOI:10.1002/jocb.658
Benjamin Goecke, Paul V. DiStefano, Wolfgang Aschauer, Kurt Haim, Roger Beaty, Boris Forthmann
{"title":"德语科学创造力自动评分系统","authors":"Benjamin Goecke,&nbsp;Paul V. DiStefano,&nbsp;Wolfgang Aschauer,&nbsp;Kurt Haim,&nbsp;Roger Beaty,&nbsp;Boris Forthmann","doi":"10.1002/jocb.658","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Automated scoring is a current hot topic in creativity research. However, most research has focused on the English language and popular verbal creative thinking tasks, such as the alternate uses task. Therefore, in this study, we present a large language model approach for automated scoring of a scientific creative thinking task that assesses divergent ideation in experimental tasks in the German language. Participants are required to generate alternative explanations for an empirical observation. This work analyzed a total of 13,423 unique responses. To predict human ratings of originality, we used XLM-RoBERTa (Cross-lingual Language Model-RoBERTa), a large, multilingual model. The prediction model was trained on 9,400 responses. Results showed a strong correlation between model predictions and human ratings in a held-out test set (<i>n</i> = 2,682; <i>r</i> = 0.80; CI-95% [0.79, 0.81]). These promising findings underscore the potential of large language models for automated scoring of scientific creative thinking in the German language. We encourage researchers to further investigate automated scoring of other domain-specific creative thinking tasks.</p>","PeriodicalId":39915,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Creative Behavior","volume":"58 3","pages":"321-327"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jocb.658","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Automated Scoring of Scientific Creativity in German\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Goecke,&nbsp;Paul V. DiStefano,&nbsp;Wolfgang Aschauer,&nbsp;Kurt Haim,&nbsp;Roger Beaty,&nbsp;Boris Forthmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jocb.658\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Automated scoring is a current hot topic in creativity research. However, most research has focused on the English language and popular verbal creative thinking tasks, such as the alternate uses task. Therefore, in this study, we present a large language model approach for automated scoring of a scientific creative thinking task that assesses divergent ideation in experimental tasks in the German language. Participants are required to generate alternative explanations for an empirical observation. This work analyzed a total of 13,423 unique responses. To predict human ratings of originality, we used XLM-RoBERTa (Cross-lingual Language Model-RoBERTa), a large, multilingual model. The prediction model was trained on 9,400 responses. Results showed a strong correlation between model predictions and human ratings in a held-out test set (<i>n</i> = 2,682; <i>r</i> = 0.80; CI-95% [0.79, 0.81]). These promising findings underscore the potential of large language models for automated scoring of scientific creative thinking in the German language. We encourage researchers to further investigate automated scoring of other domain-specific creative thinking tasks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39915,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Creative Behavior\",\"volume\":\"58 3\",\"pages\":\"321-327\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jocb.658\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Creative Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jocb.658\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Creative Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jocb.658","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自动评分是当前创造力研究的热门话题。然而,大多数研究都集中在英语语言和流行的口头创造性思维任务上,如交替使用任务。因此,在本研究中,我们提出了一种大语言模型方法,用于在德语实验任务中评估发散性构思的科学创造性思维任务的自动评分。该任务要求参与者对经验观察结果做出替代性解释。这项工作共分析了 13,423 个独特的回答。为了预测人类对原创性的评分,我们使用了一个大型多语言模型 XLM-RoBERTa(跨语言语言模型-RoBERTa)。预测模型在 9,400 条回复上进行了训练。结果表明,在保留测试集中,模型预测与人类评分之间存在很强的相关性(n = 2,682; r = 0.80; CI-95% [0.79, 0.81])。这些令人鼓舞的发现强调了大型语言模型在德语科学创造性思维自动评分方面的潜力。我们鼓励研究人员进一步研究其他特定领域创造性思维任务的自动评分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Automated Scoring of Scientific Creativity in German

Automated scoring is a current hot topic in creativity research. However, most research has focused on the English language and popular verbal creative thinking tasks, such as the alternate uses task. Therefore, in this study, we present a large language model approach for automated scoring of a scientific creative thinking task that assesses divergent ideation in experimental tasks in the German language. Participants are required to generate alternative explanations for an empirical observation. This work analyzed a total of 13,423 unique responses. To predict human ratings of originality, we used XLM-RoBERTa (Cross-lingual Language Model-RoBERTa), a large, multilingual model. The prediction model was trained on 9,400 responses. Results showed a strong correlation between model predictions and human ratings in a held-out test set (n = 2,682; r = 0.80; CI-95% [0.79, 0.81]). These promising findings underscore the potential of large language models for automated scoring of scientific creative thinking in the German language. We encourage researchers to further investigate automated scoring of other domain-specific creative thinking tasks.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Creative Behavior
Journal of Creative Behavior Arts and Humanities-Visual Arts and Performing Arts
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The Journal of Creative Behavior is our quarterly academic journal citing the most current research in creative thinking. For nearly four decades JCB has been the benchmark scientific periodical in the field. It provides up to date cutting-edge ideas about creativity in education, psychology, business, arts and more.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Effects of Adverse Childhood Experiences on Creativity from Life History Theory Novelty Seeking Differences in Temporal Dynamics for Novelty and Appropriateness Processing of Creative Information: An ERP Investigation Collectivism–Individualism Makes the Relationships Between Digital Games Use and Creativity Different The Silver Lining of Workaholism: Its Impact on Employees' Creativity and Presenteeism Explained
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1