Creativity
Alternative Uses Task
Also called: AUT, unusual uses task, divergent thinking task
Measure divergent thinking as participants type creative uses for everyday objects under a time limit, scored by fluency with every answer kept for originality ratings.
8-9 minUntimed
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Preview any test free after you sign up.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 509
- Evidence grade
- B
- Registered clinical studies
- 19
- 1.hand puppet
- 2.dust cloth
- 3.phone case
- 4.draft stopper
What it measures
Measures divergent thinking. Participants see the name of an everyday object and type as many creative uses for it as they can, one at a time, with 3 minutes for each of 2 objects by default. The main score is fluency, the mean number of different uses per object. Every answer is kept for originality ratings.
Constructs
- Divergent thinking
- Creative idea generation
- Executive control of memory search
Research uses
- Creativity research
- Aging and cognition studies
- Studies that rate answers for originality
How the paradigm works
The alternative uses task measures divergent thinking: producing many different ideas for an open question. Participants see the name of an everyday object and type as many creative uses for it as they can, one use at a time, pressing Enter or Add after each one. Each use joins a visible list, and a clock shows the time left. The instructions ask for uses that are unusual, clever or surprising and new to the participant, and to keep adding uses until the time runs out. The standard run has two objects, a sock and then a bucket, with 3 minutes for each. A study can show up to four objects (adding an umbrella and a coat hanger, in that order) and give 1 to 5 minutes per object.
More about the paradigm
An untimed practice with a spoon comes first: the participant adds at least two uses and presses Done, then sees how many uses were added. Each use can be up to 150 characters long. Pasting is blocked and attempts are counted, and text still in the box when the time runs out is saved but not scored.
Scoring cleans each use: lower case, single spaces and no punctuation at either end. An entry with no letter is empty, and an exact repeat of an earlier use for the same object counts once. The main score is fluency, the mean number of different uses per object. Elaboration (mean words per use), total uses, repeats, empty entries, paste attempts and uses per object are also given. Uses are not judged for quality, and originality is not scored automatically: every answer is kept with its object and time in the trial data, ready for originality ratings by raters (Silvia et al., 2008). The procedure follows the typed task of Nusbaum, Silvia and Beaty (2014), who gave 3 minutes per object and scored fluency as the number of different responses; in their study, asking people to be creative gave fewer but better ideas than asking for as many as possible. The scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- Fluencycount
- Mean number of different uses per object, after cleaning.
- Higher means more ideas
- Elaborationcount
- Mean number of words per different use, over all objects.
- Higher means more detailed uses
- Total Usescount
- Different uses over all objects.
- Higher means more ideas
- Repeatscount
- Entries that repeated an earlier use for the same object. Each use counts once.
- Informational
- Empty Entriescount
- Entries with no letter, such as punctuation only. They are not counted.
- Informational
- Paste Attemptscount
- Attempts to paste or drop text into the entry box, which were blocked.
- Above 0 is flagged for review
- Objects Without Usescount
- Objects for which no use was entered.
- Above 0 is flagged for review
- Objects Completeditems
- Objects scored, each run to the end of its time.
- Equal to the number of objects when the task was finished
Use and evidence
509 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 56% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 49 of 395 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 135 |
| 2024 | 116 |
| 2023 | 105 |
| 2022 | 86 |
| 2021 | 67 |
| 2020 | 86 |
| 2019 | 71 |
| 2018 | 75 |
| 2017 | 46 |
| 2016 | 49 |
| 2015 | 51 |
| 2014 | 37 |
| 2013 | 29 |
| 2012 | 29 |
| 2011 | 27 |
| 2010 | 33 |
| 2009 | 14 |
| 2008 | 16 |
| 2007 | 13 |
| 2006 | 14 |
| 2005 | 19 |
| 2004 | 12 |
| 2003 | 6 |
| 2002 | 7 |
| 2001 | 9 |
| 2000 | 10 |
Use grade B
300 to 999 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade B
At least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 8
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 108
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 19
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Objects
- 2 (standard, 2 to 4), always in this order: sock, bucket, umbrella, coat hanger.
- Time
- 3 minutes per object (standard, 1 to 5), with a clock showing the time left.
- Instructions
- Ask for creative uses: unusual, clever or surprising ideas that are new to the participant, added until the time runs out.
- Entry
- One use at a time, typed as a short phrase of up to 150 characters and added with Enter or Add; pasting is blocked.
- Practice
- Untimed, with a spoon: at least 2 uses, then the number added.
- Scoring
- Uses are lower cased, spaces and end punctuation are trimmed, entries with no letter are dropped and exact repeats for an object count once.
- Answers
- Every use is saved with its object and time, ready for originality ratings.
Nusbaum, Silvia and Beaty (2014) gave 3 minutes per object with typed answers and scored fluency as the number of different responses. Here the instructions ask for creative uses and also to keep adding uses until the time runs out, the objects are a sock and a bucket, and originality is left to raters. The scores support research and do not diagnose.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: alternative_uses_test objects (practice excluded). Typed uses have no right answer, no chance level and no reaction time, so only objects with no use and blocked paste attempts are flagged. A hidden tab withholds the percentile.
Why these rules
Uses are not judged for quality, so the checks look only at whether the participant typed. Each object runs on a fixed timer, so time on a hidden tab is lost thinking time. A hidden tab lets the study, delay or response timers run without the participant, so a percentile is withheld after one.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Objects | 2 | 2 to 4 |
| Time per object | 3 minutes (standard) | 1 minute, 2 minutes, 3 minutes (standard), 4 minutes, 5 minutes |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Alternative Uses Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Guilford, 1967; Nusbaum, Silvia & Beaty, 2014), with the standard settings (objects: 2; time per object: 3 minutes). The main score was fluency (mean number of different uses per object, after cleaning).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. McGraw-Hill.
- Nusbaum, E. C., Silvia, P. J., & Beaty, R. E. (2014). Ready, set, create: What instructing people to "be creative" reveals about the meaning and mechanisms of divergent thinking. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(4), 423-432. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036549Typed uses, the 3-minute limit, creative instructions and fluency scoring.
- Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., Willse, J. T., Barona, C. M., Cram, J. T., Hess, K. I., Martinez, J. L., & Richard, C. A. (2008). Assessing creativity with divergent thinking tasks: Exploring the reliability and validity of new subjective scoring methods. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(2), 68-85. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.68Rating answers for creativity.
- Reiter-Palmon, R., Forthmann, B., & Barbot, B. (2019). Scoring divergent thinking tests: A review and systematic framework. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 13(2), 144-152. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000227Choices in scoring divergent thinking tasks.
Source papers
- Nusbaum EC, Silvia PJ, Beaty RE (2014). Ready, set, create: What instructing people to "be creative" reveals about the meaning and mechanisms of divergent thinking. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(4):423-432.Paradigm source, College students (mean age 19.6)
- Guilford JP (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.Paradigm source, Adults
Questions
How long does the Alternative Uses Task take?
About 8 to 9 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Fluency, Elaboration, Total Uses, Repeats, Empty Entries, Paste Attempts, Objects Without Uses and Objects Completed. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Alternative Uses Task used in research?
509 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 56% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 49 of 395 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade B). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Alternative Uses Task have?
In the published research, 8 papers report its test-retest reliability and 19 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade B in the ConductCognition test census).
Which settings can a researcher change?
Objects (2 to 4) and time per object (1 minute, 2 minutes, 3 minutes (standard), 4 minutes, 5 minutes). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese, with its words in the same language. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.
Related tests