Abstract

Measurement is fundamental to scientific inference, yet educational and psychological research often relies on instruments that are shortened, partially administered, or otherwise modified without evidence that the resulting scores remain valid. This article examines measurement fragmentation, defined as the use of selected parts, abbreviated forms, or derivative versions of an instrument as though they were interchangeable with the validated form. The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT) are used as a case example because their strong full-version psychometric foundation and frequent fragmented use in published research make the consequences of non-equivalent measurement unusually visible. The full TTCT is supported by stronger reliability and validity evidence than fragmented TTCT uses, whereas derivative forms such as the Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults have weaker support. When these non-equivalent forms are treated under a single instrument label, apparent theoretical inconsistency and attenuated meta-analytic estimates may reflect measurement artifacts rather than properties of creativity itself. The article concludes that stronger educational and psychological research requires explicit reporting of test versions, version-specific reliability and validity evidence, and closer editorial scrutiny of altered measurement procedures.

Keywords