基于定量文献的青少年创新能力测量指标的元分析

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2026.02.003

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

构建符合时代发展要求、兼顾科学性与可操作性的青少年创新能力测量指标体系是实现我国创新人才识别、推动拔尖创新人才自主培养的重要抓手。鉴于以往研究在指标效度上存在不一致性，研究利用元分析方法对WOS数据库中与青少年创新能力测量指标及影响因素相关的45篇定量文献、35424个独立样本进行综合分析。研究发现，学习敏捷能力、问题解决能力、实践操作能力、团队协作能力和抗挫折能力5项一级维度均能够显著预测青少年创新能力；在二级指标中，思维流畅性与创新能力水平的关系强度最大，共情能力对创新能力的预测效应最低；样本平均年龄、性别和测量工具类型显著调节各指标与创新能力之间的关系，文化背景则不存在调节作用。基于元分析结果，最终构建出由5项一级维度、14项二级指标组成的青少年创新能力测量指标体系。

关键词: 青少年, 创新能力, 测量指标, 元分析

Abstract:

Building a scientifically valid and operationally feasible measurement indicator system for adolescent innovation capability that aligns with contemporary developmental demands is crucial for identifying innovative talent and advancing the autonomous cultivation of top-tier innovators in China. Given the inconsistent validity of indicators in prior studies, this study employs meta-analysis to comprehensively analyze 45 quantitative studies (including 35,424 independent samples) from the Web of Science database, focusing on measurement indicators and influencing factors of adolescent innovation capability. The results reveal that five first-level dimensions—learning agility, problem-solving ability, practical operational ability, teamwork competency, and resilience—significantly predict adolescent innovation capability. Among the second-level indicators, ideational fluency demonstrates the strongest correlation with innovation capability, whereas empathic ability shows the weakest predictive effect. Furthermore, the meta-analysis identifies sample mean age, gender, and measurement tool type as significant moderators of the relationship between these indicators and innovation capability, while cultural background exhibits no moderating effect. The study proposes a multidimensional measurement system for adolescent innovation capability based on these findings, comprising five primary dimensions and 14 specific indicators.

Key words: adolescent, innovation capability, measurement indicators, meta-analysis

方芳, 娄益, 陈剑. 基于定量文献的青少年创新能力测量指标的元分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2026, 44(2): 43-60.

Fang Fang, Yi Lou, Jian Chen. A Meta-Analysis of Measurement Indicators for Adolescent Innovation Capability Based on Quantitative Literature[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educationa, 2026, 44(2): 43-60.

图/表 11

表 1

表 2

青少年创新能力综合分析框架"

维度	二级指标	指标含义
学习敏捷能力 (learning agility)	速度(speed)	接收、处理和响应信息时的速率
	选择性注意 (selective attention)	面对众多刺激时，有意识地将注意力集中于某些特定的刺激或信息上，同时忽略其他非相关的刺激
	敏捷性(agility)	从经验中高效学习并应用所学的能力
问题解决能力 (problem solving)	定势打破能力 (freedom from functional fixedness)	超越既有的思维模式和习惯，探索新的可能性和创新解决方案的能力
	思维流畅性(fluency)	产生想法的数量及思维的丰富性
	独创性(originality)	产生的想法具有新颖性，与众不同
	精细性(elaboration)	思考的复杂性与深度及表达想法时的翔实程度
	灵活性(flexibility)	在解决问题时使用不同类别的能力
实践操作能力 (practical skills)	管理能力(manage)	组织和统筹各类要素以达成特定目标的过程
	资源利用(use resources)	有效地识别、获取、使用和维护各种资源
	开发与实践 (develop and realize)	选择和使用一系列技能，以批判性地做出决策并实现计划的结果
	审查与反思(review)	对已有行为、决策进行系统的评估并持续改进
	任务完成度 (task completion)	任务执行的成功率和完成情况
团队协作能力 (cooperation)	共情能力(empathy)	能够换位思考，体验他人正在经历的情绪及反应的能力
	概念整合能力 (conceptual integration)	将不同来源的信息、概念或框架结合起来，以构建新的意义和理解的能力
	提出问题能力 (problem posing)	问题提出的数量和质量
抗挫折能力 (frustration tolerance)	情绪稳定 (emotional stability)	在面对压力、挑战或变化时，能够保持情绪平衡和控制情绪反应
	尝试错误(trial and error)	尝试不同的行动或解决方案，并根据结果来评估其有效性
	复原力/韧性(resilience)	在面临挑战或威胁的情况下成功应对创伤经历，取得积极成果

表 2

图 1

图 2

表 3

表 4

表 5

表 6

表 7

表 8

表 9

参考文献

	贡喆, 刘昌, 沈汪兵. (2016). 有关创造力测量的一些思考. 心理科学进展, 24 (01), 31- 45.
	胡朗宁, 吕立杰. (2024). 学生创造力评估: 国际经验及未来展望. 外国教育研究, 51 (04), 63- 80.
	李刚, 赵佳琦, 郑泽琳. (2023). 面向未来的下一代评估设计——基于OECD《创新评估以测量与支持复杂能力》报告的思考. 开放教育研究, 29 (06), 34- 41.
	李文福, 王康程, 陈井婷, 刘传新, 邱江. (2025). 基于远距离联想测验的聚合思维脑机制研究. 心理发展与教育, 41 (01), 22- 31.
	李志义, 潘超. (2024). 面向工业4.0的高等工程教育横贯能力培养. 高等工程教育研究, 205 (02), 12- 17.
	米哈里·希斯赞特. (2015). 创造力: 心流与创新心理学. 杭州: 浙江人民出版社.
	任志洪, 赖丽足. (2023). 心理学元分析方法: 理论、案例与操作. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.
	徐红, 陆如萍, 魏春丽. (2023). 超常儿童创新潜能识别与评价的校本研究. 现代特殊教育, 456 (09), 17- 20.
	徐瑾劼, 安德烈亚斯·施莱歇尔. (2024). 数智时代学生创造力发展的全球洞察——基于PISA 2022创造性思维测评结果的分析. 开放教育研究, 30 (04), 11- 19.
	臧玲玲. (2020). 构建新的学习生态系统——OECD学习框架2030述评与反思. 比较教育研究, 42 (01), 11- 18+32.
	翟雪松, 束永红. (2018). 创新能力的内涵、测量与培养——访美国教育传播与技术协会前主席布拉德·霍坎森教授. 开放教育研究, 24 (05), 4- 10.
	詹泽慧, 季瑜, 梅虎李, 通德, 李圆敏. (2023). 打开创新人才培养的“黑箱”: 创新性问题解决的过程模型与技术赋能. 现代远程教育研究, 35 (05), 75- 85+103.
	张春莉, 程黎, 王本陆, 王艳芝. (2018). 青少年创新素质模型的理论构建. 北京教育学院学报, 32 (03), 28- 34.
	张冬梅, 刘晓鸣, 刘禹, 徐雁龙. (2021). 构建青少年创新素质测评与训练新模式. 中国科学院院刊, 36 (07), 779- 786.
	张凤娟, 洪灵芝, 张忠炉. (2022). 情绪类型与整体-局部加工方式对创造性思维的影响. 心理研究, 15 (06), 507- 514.
	张亚利, 李森, 俞国良. (2019). 自尊与社交焦虑的关系: 基于中国学生群体的元分析. 心理科学进展, 27 (06), 1005- 1018.
	周达, 李河霖. (2025). 国际视域下数学创造力的评价与培养——基于2013—2023年文献的分析. 比较教育学报, 355 (01), 160- 174.
	Abdulla, A. M., Paek, S. H., Cramond, B., & Runco, M. A. (2020). Problem finding and creativity: A meta-analytic review. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 14(1), 3—14.
	Abrahams, I. & Reiss, M. J. (2012). Practical work: Its effectiveness in primary and secondary schools in England. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49 (8), 1035- 1055.
	ALVES, N. D. C., von Wangenheim, C. G., & Martins-Pacheco, L. H. (2021). Assessing product creativity in computing education: A systematic mapping study. Informatics in Education, 20 (1), 19- 45.
	Alves‐Oliveira, P., Arriaga, P., Xavier, C., Hoffman, G., & Paiva, A. (2022). Creativity Landscapes: Systematic Review Spanning 70 Years of Creativity Interventions for Children. Journal of Creative Behavior, 56 (1), 16- 40.
	Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43 (5), 997- 1013.
	Averill, J. R. (1999). Individual Differences in Emotional Creativity: Structure and Correlates. Journal of Personality, 67 (2), 331- 371.
	Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The amusement park theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Roeper review, 27(3), 158—163.
	Besemer, S. P., & O'Quin, K. (1986) Analyzing creative products: refinement and test of a judging instrument. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 20(2), 115—126.
	Boden, M. (1990). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms. London: George Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
	Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retentions in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review, 67 (6), 380- 400.
	Chen, X. J., Cheung, H. Y., Fan, X. T., & Wu, J. (2018). Factors related to resilience of academically gifted students in the Chinese cultural and educational environment. Psychology in the Schools, 55 (2), 107- 119.
	Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture and person: A systems view of creativity. In R J Sternberg (Ed.). The Nature of Creativity. N.Y.: Cambridge University Press, 325—339.
	Davis M. A. (2009). Understanding the relationship between mood and creativity: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108 (1), 25- 38.
	Derue, D. S., Ashford, S. J., & Myers, C. G. (2012). Learning agility: in search of conceptual clarity and theoretical grounding. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5 (3), 258- 279.
	De Dreu, C. K. W., Baas, M., & Nijstad, B. A. (2008). Hedonic tone and activation level in the mood- creativity link: Toward a dual pathway to creativity model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94 (5), 739- 756.
	DeYoung, C. G., Flanders, J. L., & Peterson, J. B. (2008). Cognitive abilities involved in insight problem solving: An individual differences model. Creativity Research Journal, 20 (3), 278- 290.
	Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. British Medical Journal, 315 (7109), 629- 634.
	Farkas D., Denham S. L., Bendixen A., & Winkler I. (2016). Assessing the validity of subjective reports in the auditory streaming paradigm. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 139 (4), 1762- 1772.
	Farr, J. L., and Ford, C. M. (1990). Individual innovation. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr (Eds. ), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies(pp. 63-80). UK, Chichester: Wiley.
	Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2 (4), 290- 309.
	Gardner, H. (1993). Creating Minds. N.Y.: Basic Books.
	Gauselmann, P., Frings, C., Schmidt, M., & Tempel, T. (2023). Protecting against mental impasses: Evidence of selective retrieval mitigating the impact of fixation in creative problem-solving. Cognition, 239, 105547.
	Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P. W. (1962). Creativity and intelligence: explorations with gifted Students. Oxford: Wiley.
	Gignac, G. E., & Szodorai, E. T. (2016). Effect size guidelines for individual differences researchers. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 74- 78.
	Gu, C., Hu, B. Y., Ngwira, F. F., Jing, Z. & Zhou, Z. (2016). The effect of general creative personality and freedom of task choice on adolescents' social creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 50 (2), 132- 149.
	Guckelsberger, C., Salge, C., & Colton, S. (2017). Addressing the “why?” in computational creativity: A non-anthropocentric, minimal model of intentional creative agency. In International Conference on Computational Creativity 2017. Association for Computational Creativity (ACC).
	Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5 (9), 444- 454.
	Guilford, J. P. (1967). Some theoretical views of creativity. Contemporary Approaches to Psychology, 419—459.
	He, W. J., & Wong, W. C. (2021), Gender differences in the distribution of creativity scores: Domain-specific patterns in divergent thinking and creative problem solving. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 626911.
	Ho, M. Y., Cheung, F. M., You, J., Kam, C., Zhang, X., & Kliewer, W. (2013). The moderating role of emotional stability in the relationship between exposure to violence and anxiety and depression. Personality and Individual Differences, 55 (6), 634- 639.
	Hülsheger, U., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J. (2010). Selecting for innovation: What's good for job performance doesn't need to be good for innovative performance. In 14th Congress of the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology Santiago (pp. 13-16).
	Jo, Y., & Hong, A. J. (2022). Impact of agile learning on innovative behavior: a moderated mediation model of employee engagement and perceived organizational support. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 900830.
	Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The Four C Model of Creativity. Review of general psychology, 13(1), 1—12.
	Kozbelt, B. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Runco, M. A. (2010). Theories of creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds. ), The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity: 20-47. New York: Cambridge University Press.
	Kunio, Shirahada., & Kazuma, Hamazaki. (2013). Trial and error mindset of R&D personnel and its relationship to organizational creative climate. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(6),1108—1118.
	Lai, E. R., Yarbro, J., DiCerbo, K., & De Geest, E. (2018). Skills for today: What we know about teaching and assessing creativity. London: Pearson.
	Lassig, C. J. (2013). Approaches to creativity: How adolescents engage in the creative process. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 3- 12.
	Lunke, K., & Meier, B. (2016). Disentangling the impact of artistic creativity on creative thinking, working memory, attention, and intelligence: Evidence for domain-specific relationships with a new self-report questionnaire. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1089.
	Luthar S S, Cicchetti D & Becker B. (2000). The construct of resilience: a critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71 (3), 543- 562.
	Ma, H. H. (2009). The effect size of variables associated with creativity: A meta-analysis. Creativity Research Journal, 21 (1), 30- 42.
	Mednick, S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69 (3), 220- 232.
	Mednick, S. A. (1968). The remote associates test. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 2 (3), 213- 214.
	OECD (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can Do. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en.
	OECD (2023). PISA 2022 Assessment and analytical framework. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1787/dfe0bf9c-en.
	OECD (2023). Innovating assessments to measure and support complex skills. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/e5f3e341-en/1/3/2/2/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/e5f3e341-en&_csp_=f8cd08a73f7411a73eba225857184a20&itemIGO=oecd&itemContentType=book.
	Osborn, A. (1963). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking. New York: Scribner's.
	Plucker, J. A., Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2010). What we know about creativity: Part of the 4Cs research series. Washington, DC: P21 Partnership for 21st Century Skill.
	Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (1991). The assessment of creative products in programs for gifted and talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35 (3), 128- 134.
	Rinn, A. N., & Bishop, J. (2015). Gifted adults: A systematic review and analysis of the literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59 (4), 213- 235.
	Ritter, S. M., Gu, X., Crijns, M., & Biekens, P. (2020). Fostering students’ creative thinking skills by means of a one-year creativity training program. PLoS One, 15 (3), e0229773.
	Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86 (3), 638- 641.
	Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Sage Publications, Inc.
	Simonton, D. K. (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American psychologist, 55(1), 151—158.
	Shute, V. J. (2011). Stealth assessment in computer-based games to support learning. Computer Games and Instruction, 55 (2), 503- 524.
	Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its development. Human development, 34(1), 1—31.
	Stolte, M., García, T., Van Luit, J. E. H., Oranje, B., & Kroesbergen, E. H. (2020). The contribution of executive functions in predicting mathematical creativity in typical elementary school classes: A twofold role for updating. Journal of Intelligence, 8 (2), 26.
	Storme, M., Celik, P., & Myszkowski, N. (2021). Creativity and unethicality: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(4), 664—672.
	Tan, C. (2020). A Confucian interpretation of creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 54 (3), 636- 645.
	Tidikis, V., Ash, I. K., & Collier, A. F. (2017). The Interaction of Emotional Valence and Arousal on Attentional Breadth and Creative Task Performance. Creativity Research Journal, 29(3), 313—330.
	Torrance, E. P. (1966). Torrance tests of creative thinking: Norms technical manual (Research Edition). Princeton: Personnel Press.
	Torrance E. P. (1987). Future career image as a predictor of creative achievement in a 22-year longitudinal study. Psychological Reports, 60 (2), 574- 574.
	Treffinger, D. J., Selby, E. C., & Schoonover, P. F. (2012). Creativity in the person: Contemporary perspectives. LEARNing Landscapes, 6 (1), 409- 419.
	Van Hooijdonk, M., Mainhard, T., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Van Tartwijk, J. (2022). Examining the assessment of creativity with generalizability theory: An analysis of creative problem-solving assessment tasks. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 43, 100994.
	Wang, L., & Jiang, N. (2022). Managing students’ creativity in music education–the mediating role of frustration tolerance and moderating role of emotion regulation. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 843531.
	Woodman, R. W., & Schoenfeldt, L. F. (1990). An interactionist model of creative behavior. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 24(1), 11—20.
	Yang, H., & Yang, S. (2016). Sympathy fuels creativity: The beneficial effects of sympathy on originality. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 132- 143.
	Zhou, P. (2023). Harmonizing the mind: Music education, education neurosciences, and frustration tolerance enhance creativity in Thailand. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 105, 159—178.

核心维度	具体指标内容	代表性学者
创新思维	发散性思维：流利性，灵活性，独创性，敏捷性，广阔性	Torrance (1966) Guilford (1967) Torrance (1987) 张春莉等(2018) Ritter等(2020) Alves-Oliveira等(2021) 李文福等(2025)
	聚合性思维：定式打破，资源快速调用
	自我监控：反思，调节，评价
	认知技能：问题发现，信息收集，概念选择，概念整合，想法评估
创新人格	工作风格：工作中讲究理性、准备性和严格性，知觉敏锐	Guilford(1967) Plucker等(2010) OECD(2019) 张冬梅等(2021) 徐红等(2023)
	协作：协作意识，协作技能，协作情感
	意志：自律性，目的性，承担合理风险的意愿
创新产品	新颖性：原创的，令人惊叹的，具有发展性的	Reis等(1991) Averill(1999) Lai等(2018) Alves等(2021)
	实用性：有价值的，有逻辑性的，有效的
	精细性与综合性：有序的，精妙的，复杂的，可理解的，具有美学吸引力的

变量		K	N	综合效应值r	95%的置信区间		双尾检验
变量		K	N	综合效应值r	下限	上限	Z值	P值
学习敏捷能力	速度	5	767	0.254	0.186	0.319	7.113	0.001
	选择性注意	6	1698	0.242	−0.085	0.523	1.456	0.145
	敏捷性	8	1024	0.233	0.174	0.291	7.514	0.001
问题解决能力	定势打破能力	4	1988	0.512	0.271	0.693	3.851	0.001
	思维流畅性	8	2122	0.556	0.606	0.657	34.242	0.001
	独创性	4	634	0.518	0.140	0.764	2.597	0.009
	精细性	4	1469	0.257	0.208	0.304	10.016	0.001
	灵活性	8	1014	0.368	0.187	0.526	3.831	0.001
实践操作能力	管理能力	4	1367	0.380	0.002	0.663	1.969	0.049
	资源利用	2	419	0.346	−0.245	0.749	1.157	0.247
	开发与实践	4	2110	0.402	−0.054	0.719	1.740	0.082
	审查与反思	3	423	0.353	0.266	0.434	7.498	0.001
	任务完成度	10	5460	0.385	0.155	0.575	3.191	0.001
团队协作能力	共情能力	6	2008	0.200	0.012	0.374	2.088	0.037
	概念整合能力	7	4426	0.146	−0.037	0.319	1.565	0.118
	提出问题能力	4	5414	0.384	0.097	0.612	2.578	0.010
抗挫折能力	情绪稳定	4	1276	−0.237	−0.710	0.383	−0.733	0.463
	尝试错误	3	855	0.410	0.116	0.638	2.677	0.007
	韧性	3	950	0.415	0.009	0.704	1.999	0.046

变量	K	N	综合效应值r	95%的置信区间		双尾检验
变量	K	N	综合效应值r	下限	上限	Z值	P值
学习敏捷能力	13	1791	0.242	0.198	0.286	10.337	0.000
问题解决能力	28	7227	0.432	0.306	0.543	6.210	0.000
实践操作能力	17	7250	0.317	0.144	0.471	3.507	0.000
团队协作能力	10	7422	0.277	0.090	0.444	9.000	0.000
抗挫折能力	6	1805	0.413	0.199	0.589	5.000	0.000

分类	斜率	标准误	95%的置信区间	Z值	P值
学习敏捷能力	−0.068	0.017	−0.101~−0.035	−4.073	0.000
问题解决能力	−0.018	0.363	−0.043~1.381	−0.546	0.585
实践操作能力	0.390	0.333	−0.263~1.042	−0.082	0.935
团队协作能力	0.034	0.565	−1.074~1.141	0.395	0.693
抗挫折能力	−0.120	0.060	−0.238~−0.002	−1.986	0.047

分类	斜率	标准误	95%的置信区间	Z值	P值
学习敏捷能力	0.001	0.001	−0.001~0.004	0.900	0.368
问题解决能力	0.432	0.101	−0.234~0.630	0.599	0.549
实践操作能力	0.140	0.184	−0.220~0.501	1.444	0.149
团队协作能力	0.146	0.089	−0.028~0.321	2.297	0.022
抗挫折能力	—	—	—	—	—