Human creativity is viewed as a talent that is considered a source of success with an impact on human society. In the history of human society, appreciation has been given to creative problem solving or the development of completely new things in all areas of society, including culture. The individual aspect of creativity is marked by the ability to view the current reality from an unconventional perspective and thus bring new and unconventional solutions. Creativity is also considered to be an important manifestation of a person’s intellectual functioning. For the learning process, both in schooling and as an important part of human life, creativity is one of the important supporting factors. The level of creativity of an individual can be assessed using performance measures derived from creative thinking.
Study Design | Statistical Methods Used | Aim | Tools | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Daramola et al., 2019 [23][30] | Case series | Split half, Cronbach’s Alpha, Spearman-Brown correlation | Difference between DHH and TH | a tool created by the authors Questionnaire on the Creativity Level of Students with Hearing- impaired and Hearing | |
Ebrahim, 2006 [25][32] | Case series | Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) | Difference between DHH and TH | Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Figural, Form A (A1-3) | |
Ebrahim, 2006 [26][33] | Case series | Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) | Difference between DHH and TH | Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Figural, Form A (A1-3) | |
Gallagher, 1968 [27][34] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Split half and Kuder-Richardson coefficient of reliability | The relationship between Creativity thinking and IQ | The Abbreviated Form VII, Minnesota Tests of Creative Thinking. Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales |
|
Johnson, 1975 [29][36] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Factor analysis | The relationship between creativity and onomatopoeic words | Onomatopoeia and Images, Form lB | |
Johnson, 1977 [30][37] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Analysis of variance (ANOVA) | Difference between DHH and TH + intellectual function | Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking—Figural Form B; | |
Johnson and Khatena, 1975 [29][36] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | F-test, correlation | Difference between DHH and TH | Onomatopoeia and Images, Form 1B | |
Kaltsounis, 1970 [32][39] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Analysis of variance (ANOVA) | Difference between DHH and TH | Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Figural, Form A | |
Kaltsounis, 1970 [33][40] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Three two-way factorial analyses | Difference between DHH and TH | Torrance Test of Thinking Creatively With Words, Form A | |
Kaltsounis, 1971 [34][41] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Two-way factor analysis | Level of creativity of DHH | Torrance Test of Thinking Creatively With Pictures, Form A (1966) | |
Laughton, 1988 [35][42] | Before and after studies | Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) | Influence of creativity + two curricular designs | Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking | |
Lubin and Sherrill, 1980 [36][43] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) | Difference between DHH and TH + motor creativity | Torrance Tests of Thinking Creatively in Action and Movement | |
Pang and Horrocks, 1968 [43][50] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Analysis of variance (ANOVA) | Difference between DHH and TH + intellect | Raven’s Coloured Progressive Matrices, Wallach and Kogan Creativity Test; | |
Paszkowska-Rogacz, 1992 [44][51] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Medium values, standard deviation | Difference between DHH and TH | Barron–Welsh Art Scale, Torrance’s Tests of Creative Thinking, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children |
|
Reber and Sherrill, 1981 [45][52] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Pearson correlation, Student’s t-test and frequency analysis |
Difference between DHH and TH + classroom behavior | The Test for Creative Thinking–Drawing Production; Raven’s Progressive Matrices test; Pupil Behavior Inventory | |
Stanzione et al., 2013 [20][22] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Test-retest; Correlation; Covariations; F-test | Influence of creativity + dance/movement skills |
Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking, Figural form B; Dance/Movement Skills Assessment | |
Szobiová and Zborteková, 2006 [47][54] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Multivariate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA) | Difference between DHH and TH | Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking | |
Yu et al., 2009 [48][55] | Quasi-experimental Research Design | Student’s t-test | Difference between DHH and TH | General Ability Tests (Smith and Whetton) | |
Daramola et al., 2019 [23][30] | Quasi-experimental Research Design, Control study | t-test | Difference between DHH and TH | New Creativity Test, Raven’s Test | |
Authors and Publication Date | Country | Respondents | |||
Number N (DHH) |
Gender | Age | Characteristic of DHH | ||
Arnidha and Hidayatulloh, 2019 [22][29] | Indonesia | 5 | NS | fifth grade | deaf |
Daramola et al., 2019 [23][30] | Nigeria | 248 (146) | NS | second year | NS |
Davies, 1984 [24][31] | United States of Amerika | NS | NS | NS | Hearing-impaired |
Ebrahim, 2006 [25][32] | United States of Amerika | 410 (210) | NS | 8–11 y | Hear loss 90–131 dB |
Ebrahim, 2006 [26][33] | United States of Amerika | 410 (210) | NS | 8–11 y | Hear loss 90–131 dB |
Gallagher, 1968 [27][34] * | United States of Amerika | 74 | Boys 34 Girls 40 |
4th–8th grades | deaf |
Halpin and Torrance, 1973 [21][28] | United States of Amerika | 68 (34) | NS | 9–11 y | Hearing deprivation was substantial enough to prevent them from making satisfactory progress in public schools. |
Hicks, 1942 [28][35] * | United States of Amerika | 8 (8) | Boys 4 Girls 4 |
5 y 11 m–8 y 9 m | deaf |
Johnson, 1975 [29][36] | United States of Amerika | 182 | Males 90 Females 92 |
10–19 y | Profoundly deaf; not benefit from hearing aids. |
Johnson, 1977 [30][37] | United States of Amerika | 133 (133) | Males 68 Females 65 |
11–19 y | deaf—not benefiting from hearing aids |
Johnson and Khatena, 1975 [29][36] | United States of Amerika | 417 (181) | Males 89 Females 92 |
10–19 y | profoundly deaf, i.e., they did not benefit from hearing aids |
Kaltsounis, 1969 [31][38] | United States of Amerika | 35 | NS | second grade | deaf |
Kaltsounis, 1970 [32][39] | United States of Amerika | 777 (172) | NS | 1st–6th grades | Deaf–hearing deprivation was substantial enough |
Kaltsounis, 1970 [33][40] | United States of Amerika | 418 (67) |
NS | 4th–6th grades | hearing deprivation was substantial enough to prevent them from making satisfactory progress in public schools |
Kaltsounis, 1971 [34][41] | United States of Amerika | 233 | Boys 114 Girls 119 |
1st–4th grades | deaf |
Laughton, 1988 [35][42] | United States of Amerika | 28 | Male 14 Female 14 |
8–10 y | 85 dB loss or greater |
Lubin and Sherrill, 1980 [36][43] | United States of Amerika | 24 (12) | Boys 7 Girls 5 |
3–5 y | hearing loss (moderate, severe, profound) |
Marschark and Clark, 1987 [37][44] | United States of Amerika | NS | NS | NS | NS |
Marschark et al., 1987 [38][45] | United States of Amerika | NS | NS | NS | deaf |
Marschark and West, 1985 [39][46] | United States of Amerika | 8 (4) | Boys 3 Girl 1 |
12.10–15.0 y | ≥80 dB |
Marschark et al., 1986 [40][47] | United States of Amerika | 40 (20) | Male 11 Female 9 |
8.1–14.8 y | deaf |
Minarsih and Wahab, 2019 [41][48] * | Indonesia | 1 | NS | high school | deaf |
Moorjhani et al., 1998 [42][49] | Rajasthan | 80 (NS) |
NS | 6–11 y | from 55 dB to 89 dB |
Pang and Horrocks, 1968 [43 |
Research Design | Methods Used | Aim | Tools | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Marschark and West, 1985 [39][46] | Phenomenological Studies + Quasi-experimental Research Design | Coding + Descriptive analysis and correlation. | Relationships between language and cognition and creativity | Story Production | |
Marschark et al., 1986 [40][47] | Phenomenological studies and Quasi-experimental Research Design |
Coding + Descriptive analysis and correlation. | Description of the development of linguistic and cognitive flexibility and its impact on creativity | Story Production | |
Silver, 1977 [46][53] | Observation + Quasi-experimental Research Design | Thematic analysis + Descriptive analysis and correlation. | Cognitive skills and creativity skills | Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking | |
] | |||||
[ | |||||
50 | |||||
] | |||||
United States of Amerika | |||||
NS (11) | |||||
Boys 6 | |||||
Girls 5 | |||||
11–12 y | |||||
deaf | |||||
Paszkowska-Rogacz, 1992 | |||||
[ | |||||
44 | |||||
] | |||||
[ | |||||
51 | |||||
] | Poland | 44 (22) | Boys 10 Girls 12 |
13–15 y | deaf |
Reber and Sherrill, 1981 [45][52] | United States of Amerika | 10 | Male 8 Female 2 |
9–14 y | 71–90 dB 4 90 dB + 6 |
Silver, 1977 [46][53] | United States of Amerika | 44 (22) | NS | NS | deaf |
Stanzione et al., 2013 [20][22] | United States of Amerika | 52 (17) | Male 10 Female 7 |
14–18 y | CI 3 hearing aids 14 |
Szobiová and Zborteková, 2006 [47][54] | Slovakia | 69 (45) | Male 18 Female 27 | 18–88 y | NS |
Yu et al., 2009 [48][55] * | People’s Republic of China | 144 (122) | Male 62 Female 60 |
8–16 | deaf |