本研究旨在建立「中文詞彙遠距聯想測驗」(Chinese Word Remote Associate Test, CWRAT) 的臺灣國、高中常模並檢驗其信、效度。選取臺灣北、中、南、東四區，共1486名國高中職學生進行施測，發現在CWRAT信度上國中生為.81、高中生為.82。在效度上，CWRAT與頓悟性問題作業的相關國中甲、乙及高中甲、乙式分別為.36、.38、.31、.18。CWRAT與威廉斯創造傾向量表各分量表的相關方面，僅有高中乙式與冒險、挑戰有顯著相關（r=.40、.42），其餘各版本與威廉斯創造傾向量表各分量表皆無顯著相關。CWRAT與新編創造思考測驗間，僅有國中甲式與語文獨創，其餘均無相關。CWRAT甲乙式與國中同儕互評創造力排序達顯著相關（r=.25）；與高中學業成績班級排名有顯著相關（r = .30）；與高中教師評定之創造力得分呈現顯著正相關（r = .33）。CWRAT國高中生得分的性別差異方面，不論甲、乙式女生的答對率皆顯著高於男生。CWRAT國高中生得分的學歷差異方面，高中生的答對率顯著高於國中生。綜合上述可知，CWRAT的信效度部分得到支持。

The Analysis of Chinese Word Remote Associates Test Among High School Students in Taiwan
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to develop the norm and to examine the reliability and validity of Chinese Word Remote Associates Test (CWRAT) among high school students in Taiwan. 1486 high school students were tested with two versions of the CWRAT and the results show that the test-retest reliability coefficients are .81 and .82 among high school students. The correlation between CWRAT and the Insight Problem Test was found (r = .36, .38, .31, .18). In addition, the result shows that CWRAT version two correlates with Risk-Taking and Complexity among senior high school students(r=.40, .42), whereas no correlations were found with the Williams Scale of Creative Tendency and the Revised Tests of Creative Thinking. The results also show CWRAT correlates with peer assessment(r=.25), academic performance(r=.30) and teacher assessment(r=.33). Female students and senior high school students score higher in both versions of CWRAT. In sum, the reliability and validity of CWRAT were partially supported.

Keywords: remote association, Chinese Word Remote Associates Test, creativity measurement

中文部分
毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台 (2000)，創造力研究。臺北：心理出版社。
任純慧、陳學志、練竑初（2001），中文遠距聯想量表的編製：新策略的嘗試。國科會大專生研究計畫。
任純慧、陳學志、練竑初、卓淑玲 (2004)，創造力測量的輔助工具：中文遠距聯想量表的編製。應用心理研究，21，195-218。
朱智賢（1989）。心理學大辭典。北京：北京師範大學。
吳清麟（2008）。Mednick聯結理論之檢驗暨中文遠距聯想測驗之解題歷程分析。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理輔導系碩士論文，臺北市。
吳靜吉、陳嘉成、林偉文（1998），創造力量表簡介。國科會研究結案報告。
吳靜吉、陳甫彥、郭俊賢、林偉文、劉士豪、陳玉樺（1998）。新編創造思考測驗研究第二年期末報告。臺北市：教育部輔導工作六年計畫研究報告。
李秀瓊 (1999)，高低創造力者在詞彙連結型態上有否差異？-檢驗Mednick 的「連結層級」假說。臺灣大學心理學研究所碩士論文。
杜明城譯，Ｍihaly Csiksentmihalyi著(1999)，創造力。臺北：時報出版社。
林幸台、王木榮（1987）。威廉斯創造力測驗指導手冊。臺北市：心理。
林幸台、王木榮（1994），威廉斯創造力測驗。臺北市：心理。
林幸台、王木榮（1994），威廉斯創造力測驗指導手冊。臺北市：心理。
邱發忠（2005），創造力認知運作機制之探究。臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系博士論文。
邱發忠（2010）。「詞彙概念聯結測驗」──創造潛能測量工具的發展」。測驗學刊，57，295-324。
邱發忠、陳學志、徐芝君、吳相儀，卓淑玲（2009）。內隱與外顯因素對創造作業表現的影響。中華心理學刊，50(2)，152-145。
邱皓政（2000）。量化研究與統計分析：SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例解析。臺北市：五南。
邱皓政（2005）。創造力的測量與共識衡鑑。教育集刊，第三十期，50-73 頁。
徐芝君（2009）。心情與創意思考關係的多成份模式：調整焦點、向性、激發心情對創意思考的影響暨中介變項之探討。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文，未出版，臺北市。
張春興（1989）。張氏心理學辭典。臺北市：東華。
教育部（2002）。創造力教育白皮書：打造創造力國度。臺北：教育部。
教育部（2012）。各縣市高級中等學校概況統計。未出版之統計數據。
許禕芳（2006）。語文頓悟性問題索解的認知歷程。臺灣師範大學教育心理輔導系碩士論文，臺北市。
許禕芳、陳學志 (2005)，牛頓被蘋果砸到之前─以遠距聯想測驗之答題直覺探討創造思考醞釀階段的認知歷程。國科會大專生研究計畫。
郭生玉（1985）。心理與教育測驗。中和市：精華。
郭有遹（1983）。創造心理學。臺北市：正中。
陳怡潔、陳學志、劉浩敏（2002），中文遠距聯想量表之修訂︰如何避免知識與策略因素之介入。國科會大專生研究計畫。
陳學志（1999），認知及認知的自我監控--中文詞聯想常模的建立。國科會專題研究計畫成果報告。
陳學志（2007），頓悟性創造問題的解題歷程研究。國科會研究計畫成果報告。
曾千芝（2008）。頓悟性問題解題歷程之眼動分析。臺灣師範大學教育心理輔導系碩士論文，臺北市。
黃博聖（1995）。詞彙聯想策略測驗的發展。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理輔導系
碩士論文，臺北市。
黃博聖、陳學志（2003），新版中文遠距聯想測驗(CRAT)之效度研究與作答認知歷程之分析。國科會大專生研究計畫。
黃博聖、陳學志（2013）。遠距聯想創造測驗－詞彙版本。台北：行為科學社。
黃博聖、陳學志、洪素蘋（2010）。中文詞彙遠距聯想量表之編製與信效度報告。第九屆海峽兩岸心理與教育測驗暨2010 NAER「永續教育發展-創新與實踐」國際學術研討會，台北：國家教育研究院籌備處，2010年10月22日。

黃博聖、陳學志、黃鴻程、劉政宏（2009）。「詞彙聯想策略擴散性思考測驗」之 編製。測驗學刊，56，153-177。
黃博聖、陳學志、劉政宏（2012）。中文詞彙遠距聯想測驗之編製及其信、效度報告。測驗學刊，59，581-607。（TSSCI）
詹志禹（2005）。從演化觀點看創造力教育政策的推動——以「創意教師成長工程」為例。教育資料集刊，30，113-142。

西文部分
Ansburg, P. I. (2000). Individual Differences in Problem Solving via Insight. Current Psychology, 19(2), 143-146.
Bear, J. & Kaufman, J. C. (2008). Gender differences in creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 19, 143-146.
Beeman, M. J., & Bowden, E. M. (2000). The right hemisphere maintains solution-related activation for yet-to-be-solved problems. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1231-1241.
Belcher, T. L. & Davis, G. A. (1971). Interrelationships Among Three Standardized Creativity Tests and IQ. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New York. Feb 21.
Ben-Zur, H. (1989). Automatic and directed search processes in solving simple semantic-memory problems. Memory and Cognition, 17, 617-626.
Bowden, E. M., & Beeman, M. J. (2003a). Normative data for 144 compound remote associate problems. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 35(4), 634-639.
Bowden, E. M., & Beeman, M. J. (2003b). Aha! Insight experience correlates with solution activation in the right hemisphere. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 730-737.
Cerruti, C. & Schlaug, G.. (2009). Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Prefrontal Cortex Enhances Complex Verbal Associative Thought. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(10), 1980-1987.
Chronicle, E. P., MacGregor, J. N. & Ormerod, T. C. (2004). What makes an insight problem? The roles of Heuristics, Goal conception, and solution in knowledge-lean problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, memory, and cognition, 30, 14-27.
Chusmir, L. H., & Koberg, C. S. (1986). Creativity differences among managers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 29, 240-253.
Dallob, P. I. & Dominowski, R. L. (1993). Erroneous solutions to verbal insight problems: Effects of highlighting critical material. Paper presented at the 73rd annual meeting of the Western Psychological Association. Portland, OR.
Datta, L.-E. (1964). Remote associates test as a predictor of creativity in engineers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 48(3), 183.
Dominowski, R. L. & Dallob, P. (1995). Insight and problem solving. In R. J.
Finke, R. A. (1995). Creative insight and preinventive forms. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 255–280). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T.B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fodor, E. M. (1999). Subclinical inclination toward manic-depression and creative performance on the Remote Associates Test. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 1273-1283.
Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267-293.
Guildford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill
Guilford, J. P. (1975). Creativity: A quarter century of progress. In I. A. Taylor & J. W. Getzels (Eds.), Perspectives in creativity (pp. 37-59). Chicago: Aldine.
Harrington, D. M. (1975). Effects of explicit instructions to be creative on the psychological meaning of divergent test scores. Journal of Personality, 43, 434-454.
Harris, J. A. (2004). Measured intelligence, achievement, openness to experience, and creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 913-929.
Hocevar, D., & Michael, W. (1979). The effects of scoring formulas on the discriminant validity of tests of divergent thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 39, 917-921.
Hocevar, D., & Bachelor, P. (1989). A taxonomy and critique of measurements used in the study of creativity. In J. A. Glover, & R. R. Ronning (Ed), et al. Handbook of creativity. Perspectives on individual differences. (pp. 53-75). New York, NY, USA: Plenum Press.
Hsu, K., Lin, W., & Chen, H. (2011, January). Personality correlates of different creative processes: Perceptual sensitivity and effortful control as major constructs. Paper presented at the 12th Annual Meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, San Antonio, USA.
Kohler, W. (1929). Gestalt Psychology. New York: Liveright.
Lin, C. M. (1999). The effects of self-efficacy and task value on students’ commitment and achievement in web-based instruction for Taiwan higher education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Lubart, T. I. (1994). Creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Thinking and Problem Solving (pp. 289-332). Academic Press.
Mednick, M. T. (1963). Research creativity in psychology graduate students. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 27(3), 265-266.
Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 44(2), 220-232.
Mednick, S. A. (1968). The Remote Associates Test. Journal of Creative Behavior , 2(3), 213-214.
Ohlsson, S. (1984). Restructuring revisited: A summary and critique of the gestalt theory of problem solving. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 25, 67-78.
Perkins, D. N. (1990). The nature and nurture of creativity. In B. F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 415-443). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Plucker, J. A. & Renzulli, J. S. (1999). Psychometric approaches to the study of human creativity. In R. J. Sternberg, (ed), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 35-61).
Cambridge University Press.
Richardson, A. G. (1985). Sex differences in creativity among a sample of Jamaican adolescents. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 60, 424-426.
Robinson, K. (2001). Out of Our Minds: Learning to be Creative. Oxford : Capstone ; New York: John Wiley
Schooler, J. W. & Melcher, J. (1995). The ineffability of insight. In S. M. Smith, T. B.
Sternberg, & J. E. Davidson (Eds.) (1995). The nature of insight (pp. 33-62). The MIT Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the Crowd: Cultivating Creativity in a Culture of Conformity. New York Press.
Torrance, E.P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Wakefield, J. F. (1992). Creative thinking: Problem-Solving Skills and the Art Orientation. Norwood, New Jersey.
Ward , T. B. (1995). What’s old about new ideas? In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 157~178). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Williams, F. E. (1980). Creativity assessment packet. Buffalo, NY: DOK
Ying-Yao, C., Wen-Chung, W., Kun-Shia, L., & Yi-Ling, C. (2010). Effects of Association Instruction on Fourth Graders' Poetic Creativity in Taiwan. Creativity Research Journal, 22(2), 228-235
Zhong, C.-B., Dijksterhuis, A. & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). The Merits of Unconscious Thought in Creativity. Psychological Science, 19(9), 912-918.