ArticleBehavior research methods2024
AuDrA: An automated drawing assessment platform for evaluating creativity.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Know when to trust: Making AI scoring more reliable for educational assessment.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Random Forest Predicts Human Ratings of Creative Stories Using Very Small Training Samples.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Reshapes Creativity: A Multidimensional Evaluation.PsyCh journal · 2025Review
- Contemporary architectural aesthetic preferences based on popular AI images and models of the Civitai architect community.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Automated grading of embroidery assignments: a multi-region deep learning framework with ResNet-50.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- CAP: The creativity assessment platform for online testing and automated scoring.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Subjective valuation as a domain-general process in creative thinking.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Creativity supports learning through associative thinking.NPJ science of learning · 2025Article
- Scoring German Alternate Uses Items Applying Large Language Models.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Article
- The analysis of entrepreneurship evaluation system for talent cultivation in artistic creativity and animation under artificial intelligence.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Beyond human perception: challenges in AI interpretability of orangutan artwork.Primates; journal of primatology · 2025Article
- Automated Graphic Divergent Thinking Assessment: A Multimodal Machine Learning Approach.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Article
- Legal and ethical considerations around the use of existing illustrations to generate new illustrations in the anatomical sciences.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Review
- Creativity and aesthetic evaluation of AI-generated artworks: bridging problems and methods from psychology to AI.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The visual modality is central to both reception and expression of human creativity. Creativity assessment paradigms, such as structured drawing tasks Barbot (2018), seek to characterize this key modality of creative ideation. However, visual creativity assessment paradigms often rely on cohorts of expert or naïve raters to gauge the level of creativity of the outputs. This comes at the cost of substantial human investment in both time and labor. To address these issues, recent work has leveraged the power of machine learning techniques to automatically extract creativity scores in the verbal domain (e.g., SemDis; Beaty & Johnson 2021). Yet, a comparably well-vetted solution for the assessment of visual creativity is missing. Here, we introduce AuDrA - an Automated Drawing Assessment platform to extract visual creativity scores from simple drawing productions. Using a collection of line drawings and human creativity ratings, we trained AuDrA and tested its generalizability to untrained drawing sets, raters, and tasks. Across four datasets, nearly 60 raters, and over 13,000 drawings, we found AuDrA scores to be highly correlated with human creativity ratings for new drawings on the same drawing task (r = .65 to .81; mean = .76). Importantly, correlations between AuDrA scores and human raters surpassed those between drawings' elaboration (i.e., ink on the page) and human creativity raters, suggesting that AuDrA is sensitive to features of drawings beyond simple degree of complexity. We discuss future directions, limitations, and link the trained AuDrA model and a tutorial ( https://osf.io/kqn9v/ ) to enable researchers to efficiently assess new drawings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.