创造性产品评价中的从众效应

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00688

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

尽管对从众效应已经开展了广泛的研究, 但对于创造性产品的评价是否存在从众效应仍有待探讨。本实验以原创性程度不同的两类创造性产品——“创新产品”和“革新产品” ——为材料, 采用“初次评价-从众诱导-延时再评”的实验程序, 研究了人们在创造性产品的两个基本维度——新颖性和实用性——的感知和评价上是否存在从众效应。结果发现, 两类产品在两个维度的评价上都存在从众效应; 但“创新产品”在实用性维度的评价上比“革新产品”更容易从众。实验进一步比较了被试在做出两个维度的评价时其确定性程度有无差异, 发现被试在对“创新产品”进行实用性评价时所伴随的不确定感较之革新产品更强, 这提示可能是对“创新产品”进行实用性判断时所具有的更大的不确定感导致了从众程度的增加。

关键词: 创新产品, 革新产品, 实用性, 新颖性, 从众效应, 不确定性

Abstract:

Although previous studies have found that a conformity effect exists widely, whether people are affected by groups in the evaluation of creative products, the new products with the basic characteristics of novelty and practicability, remains a question to be studied. Compared to artistic products, such products are closely related to real life, reflecting actual creativity, and they are typical creative products in life. Although such products reveal new perspectives for consumers, they also promote a sense of uncertainty. Research shows that when faced with uncertainty, participants are more likely to follow others. Almost all studies on this subject have involved the evaluation of creativity, yet novelty and practicability are two important aspects of creativity. Researchers have studied the characteristics of creativity or creative products; however, creative products can be divided into innovative products and renovative products according to their originality. Therefore, we plan to compare the conformity effect of the two kinds of creative products in the evaluation of novelty and practicability in this study.

An “initial evaluation-conformity induced-delay re-evaluation” paradigm was used in Experiment 1, in which participants were first asked to evaluate the practicability (or novelty) of creative products; then the 200 undergraduates' average rating and the participants' own ratings were revealed. The group rating would be revealed as higher or lower than or similar to the participants' rating. Thirty-minutes later, participants evaluated the task again were entirely unexpected. To further analyze the difference in conformity degree between the two types of creative products, the subjects were required to make a certainty judgment on the novelty and practicality of the product in Experiment 2.

Experiment 1 revealed that participants had decreased their practicability (or novelty) ratings when the group rating was lower than their first rating, increased their practicability (or novelty) ratings when the group rating was higher than their first rating, and did not change their ratings significantly when the group rating was comparable to their first rating. In the evaluation of practicability, it was found that the conformity of variation (the second rating - the first rating) of innovative products was significantly higher than that of renovative products. Nevertheless, in the evaluation of novelty, the two types of creative products had the same conformity of variation. Similarly, Experiment 2 found that the uncertainty of the evaluation of the practicability of the innovative product was greater than that of the renovative product. In the evaluation of the novelty of the two kinds of products, the degree of uncertainty was the same.

In summary, both the evaluation of novelty and the practicability of creative products had a conformity effect. In the practicality evaluation of innovative products, it was easier for respondents to follow others, which might be caused by the greater uncertainty in the practical evaluation of innovative products than in that of renovative products. Nevertheless, in the absence of knowledge of new things, blindly following the crowd is likely to have unimaginable consequences. For long-term development, we should fully understand that innovative products are practical and decide what to do the next.

Key words: innovative products, renovative products, practicability, novelty, conformity effect, uncertainty

中图分类号:

B849: F713.55

张红, 任靖远, 刘晨阳, 罗劲. (2019). 创造性产品评价中的从众效应. 心理学报, 51(6), 688-698.

ZHANG Hong, REN jingyuan, LIU Chenyang, LUO Jing. (2019). Conformity effect of the evaluation of creative products. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(6), 688-698.

图/表 7

图1 产品图片举例注：革新产品是指在原型产品的基础上经过创新改造而成的新产品, 比如六刃西瓜刀就是在普通菜刀(普通菜刀就是六刃西瓜刀的原型产品)的基础上多加了两片刀刃而成的新产品。创新产品是根据创造灵感产生的绝对新颖的产品, 如单手看书器就是没有原型的全新产品。

表1 筛选后的两类产品在各维度的平均分M (± SD), 及各维度上的差异检验t值

产品类型	理解时间(ms)	新颖性评分	实用性评分	复杂性评分	可理解性评分	有无原型	是否见过
创新产品	5120 (± 1088)	5.91 (± 0.6)	5.80 (± 0.6)	4.46 (± 1.1)	6.06 (± 0.4)	0.45 (± 0.2)	0.17 (± 0.1)
革新产品	5321 (± 1000)	6.09 (± 0.3)	5.75 (± 0.6)	4.54 (± 0.8)	6.06 (± 0.5)	0.56 (± 0.1)	0.16 (± 0.1)
t值	-0.816	-1.446	0.336	-0.328	-0.016	-2.74**	0.626

图2 实验程序流程图注：在第一阶段的实验中, 先让被试对产品的实用性(新颖性)进行评价, 随后同时呈现200名大学生的平均评价和被试的评价。30分钟后, 要求被试在第二阶段的实验中对第一阶段评价的产品再评价一次。

图3 创造性产品实用性评价从众效应注：A图为被试前后两次实用性评分的差异检验; B图为实用性评价时从众调节方式和产品类型的交互效应比较 *表示p < 0.05, **表示p < 0.01。误差线表示标准误。

图4 被试前后两次评价变异(标准差)的分布情况注：图4A为实验1a实用性评价前后两次的变异情况; 图4B为实验1b新颖性评价前后两次的变异情况

图5 创造性产品新颖性评价从众效应注：A图为被试前后两次新颖性评分的差异检验; B图为新颖性评价时从众调节方式和产品类型的交互效应比较 *表示p < 0.05, **表示p < 0.01。误差线表示标准误。

图6 创新产品与革新产品实用性与新颖性评价的确定性程度评分注：**表示p < 0.01。误差线表示标准误。

参考文献 42

[1]	Amabile T. M . ( 1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 43( 5), 997-1013.
[2]	Asch S. E. ( 1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men: Research in human relations (pp. 177-190). Oxford, England: Carnegie Press.
[3]	Berns G. S., Chappelow J., Zink C. F., Pagnoni G., Martin- Skurski M. E., & Richards J . ( 2005). Neurobiological correlates of social conformity and independence during mental rotation. Biological Psychiatry, 58( 3), 245-253. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.04.012 URL
[4]	Besemer S. P . ( 2000). To buy or not to buy: Predicting the willingness to buy from creative product variables. International Journal of Creativity & Problem Solving, 10( 2), 5-18.
[5]	Campbell-Meiklejohn D. K., Kanai R., Bahrami B., Bach D. R., Dolan R. J., Roepstorff A., & Frith C. D . ( 2012). Structure of orbitofrontal cortex predicts social influence. Current Biology, 22( 4), R123-R124. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2012.01.012 URL
[6]	Cialdini R. B., & Goldstein N. J . ( 2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591-621. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015 URL
[7]	Deutsch M., & Gerard H. B . ( 1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgement. Journal Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51( 3), 629-636. doi: 10.1037/h0046408 URL
[8]	Diedrich J., Benedek M., Jauk E., & Neubauer A. C . ( 2015). Are creative ideas novel and useful? Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts, 9( 1), 35-40. doi: 10.1037/a0038688 URL
[9]	Escalas J. E., & Bettman J. R . ( 2005). Self-construal, reference groups, and brand meaning. Journal of Consumer Research, 32( 3), 378-389. doi: 10.1086/jcr.2005.32.issue-3 URL
[10]	Feldmann-Wüstefeld T., Schmidt-Daffy M., & Schubö A . ( 2011). Neural evidence for the threat detection advantage: Differential attention allocation to angry and happy faces. Psychophysiology, 48( 5), 697-707. doi: 10.1111/psyp.2011.48.issue-5 URL
[11]	Franken I. H. A., Muris P., Nijs I & van Strien, J. W. ., ( 2008). Processing of pleasant information can be as fast and strong as unpleasant information: implications for the negativity bias. Netherlands Journal of Psychology, 64( 4), 168-176. doi: 10.1007/BF03076419 URL
[12]	Gilson L. L., & Madjar , N. ( 2011). Radical and incremental creativity: Antecedents and processes. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts, 5( 1), 21-28. doi: 10.1037/a0017863 URL
[13]	Gourville J. T . ( 2006). Eager sellers and stony buyers: Understanding the psychology of new-product adoption. Harvard Business Review, 84( 6), 98-106.
[14]	Haller C. S., Courvoisier D. S., & Cropley D. H . ( 2011). Perhaps there is accounting for taste: Evaluating the creativity of products. Creativity Research Journal, 23( 2), 99-109. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2011.571182 URL
[15]	Herzenstein M., & Hoeffler S. , ( 2016). Of clouds and zombies: How and when analogical learning improves evaluations of really new products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26( 4), 550-557. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2016.01.002 URL
[16]	Hoeffler S. ,( 2002). Conceptualizing newness and positioning really new products. Advances in Consumer Research, 29( 1), 267-267.
[17]	Hoeffler S. , ( 2003). Measuring preferences for really new products. Journal of Marketing Research, 40( 4), 406-420. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.40.4.406.19394 URL
[18]	Hu W. P., Shi Q. Z., Han Q., Wang X. Q., & Adey P . ( 2010). Creative scientific problem finding and its developmental trend. Creativity Research Journal, 22( 1), 46-52. doi: 10.1080/10400410903579551 URL
[19]	Huang F. R., Chiu C. Y., & Luo J . ( 2016). Neural pathway of renovative and innovative products appreciation. Scientific Reports, 6, 1-9.
[20]	Huang Y-X., & Luo Y-J. ,( 2006). Temporal course of emotional negativity bias: An ERP study. Neuroscience Letters, 398( 1-2), 91-96. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2005.12.074 URL
[21]	Janes L. M., & Olson J. M . ( 2000). Jeer pressures: The behavioral effects of observing ridicule of others. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 26( 4), 474-485.
[22]	Kaestner E. J., & Polich J. ,( 2011). Affective recognition memory processing and event-related brain potentials. Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 11( 2), 186-198.
[23]	Klucharev V., Hytönen K., Rijpkema M., Smidts A., & Fernández G . ( 2009). Reinforcement learning signal predicts social conformity. Neuron, 61( 1), 140-151. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.11.027 URL
[24]	Krasilo T. A . ( 2005). The relation of person's creativity level and his or her attitude to creative activity products. Psychological Science & Education. ( 3), 56-57.
[25]	Kristensson P. & Norlander T. , ( 2010). The creative product and the creative processes in virtual environments. Creativity and Innovation Management, 12( 1), 32-40.
[26]	Lu Y., Musalem A., Olivares M., & Schilkrut A. ,( 2013). Measuring the effect of queues on customer purchases. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 59(8), 1743-1763.
[27]	Luo J., Niki K., & Phillips S . ( 2004). Neural correlates of the 'Aha! reaction'. Neuroreport, 15( 13), 2013-2017. doi: 10.1097/00001756-200409150-00004 URL
[28]	Madjar N., Greenberg E., & Chen Z . ( 2011). Factors for radical creativity, incremental creativity, and routine, noncreative performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96( 4), 730-743. doi: 10.1037/a0022416 URL
[29]	Milgram S., Bickman L., & Berkowitz L . ( 1969). Note on the drawing power of crowds of different size. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13( 2), 79-82. doi: 10.1037/h0028070 URL
[30]	Mueller J. S., Melwani S., & Goncalo J. A . ( 2012). The bias against creativity: Why people desire but reject creative ideas. Psychological Science, 23( 1), 13-17. doi: 10.1177/0956797611421018 URL
[31]	Mueller J. S., Wakslak C. J., & Krishnan V . ( 2014). Construing creativity: The how and why of recognizing creative ideas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 51, 81-87. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.11.007 URL
[32]	Mugge R., & Dahl D. W . ( 2013). Seeking the ideal level of design newness: Consumer response to radical and incremental product design. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30( s1), 34-47. doi: 10.1111/jpim.2013.30.issue-s1 URL
[33]	Mukherjee A., & Hoyer W. D . ( 2001). The effect of novel attributes on product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 28( 3), 462-472. doi: 10.1086/323733 URL
[34]	Neighbors C., Larimer M. E., & Lewis M. A . ( 2004). Targeting misperceptions of descriptive drinking norms: Efficacy of a computer-delivered personalized normative feedback intervention. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72( 3), 434-447. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.72.3.434 URL
[35]	Rozin P., & Royzman E. B . ( 2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5( 4), 296-320. doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2 URL
[36]	Sternberg R. J., & Lubart, T. I . ( 1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51( 7), 677-688. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.51.7.677 URL
[37]	Tafarodi R. W., Kang S-J., & Milne A. B . ( 2002). When different becomes similar: Compensatory conformity in bicultural visible minorities. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28( 8), 1131-1142. doi: 10.1177/01461672022811011 URL
[38]	Tang C. Y., & Naumann S. E . ( 2016). The impact of three kinds of identity on research and development employees' incremental and radical creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 123-131. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2016.06.003 URL
[39]	Tanggaard L . ( 2015). The creative pathways of everyday life. Journal of Creative Behavior, 49( 3), 181-193. doi: 10.1002/jocb.95 URL
[40]	Valgeirsdottir D., Onarheim B., & Gabrielsen G . ( 2015). Product creativity assessment of innovations: Considering the creative process. International Journal of Design Creativity & Innovation, 3( 2), 95-106.
[41]	Welborn B. L., Lieberman M. D., Goldenberg D., Fuligni A. J., Galván A., & Telzer E. H . ( 2016). Neural mechanisms of social influence in adolescence. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 11( 1), 100-109. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsv095 URL
[42]	Zeki S . ( 2001). Artistic creativity and the brain. Science, 293( 5527), 51-52. doi: 10.1126/science.1062331 URL