ArticleBMC medical education2026
Convergent thinking, divergent thinking, and openness to experience as predictors of academic success among high-achieving and typical-achieving medical students.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCreativity-related cognitive processes and personality traits are not often examined together in educational contexts, particularly when discussing high-achieving subgroups of medical students. This study investigated these predictors of academic performance among high-achieving and typical-achieving medical students within a problem-based learning (PBL) environment of a medical school.
methodsData were collected from 274 Doctor of Medicine students at Arabian Gulf University during the 2024–2025 academic year. Participants completed assessments of convergent thinking (Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices and Watson–Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal), divergent thinking (Alternative Uses Test and Figural Divergent Thinking Test), and openness to experience (NEO-FFI). Students’ grade point averages (GPAs) were obtained from institutional records. Hierarchical regression analyses and moderation tests were performed, controlling for age and sex.
resultsConvergent thinking (β = 0.20, p < .001) and divergent thinking (β = 0.25, p < .001) emerged as modest-to-moderate positive predictors of GPA, whereas openness to experience showed a small negative association (β = −0.13, p = .026). Achievement status, defined as high-achieving versus typical-achieving GPA, significantly moderated the effects of both convergent and divergent thinking, such that the academic benefits of higher thinking skills were meaningfully stronger among high-achieving students, while these associations were weaker among their typical-achieving peers. No moderating effect was observed for openness to experience.
conclusionsConvergent and divergent thinking independently enhance academic performance in medical students, with amplified effects for high-achieving students. In contrast, openness to experience was negatively linked with GPA, reflecting the complex interplay between personality traits and structured medical training. These findings underscore the need for medical curricula that balance convergent reasoning with creative problem-solving while considering diverse student cognitive and personality profiles.
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.