预期交流与创造力的关系:解释水平的调节作用

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.01178

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

该研究探讨了预期交流对创造力的影响, 以及解释水平在其中的调节作用。实验1采用结构性想象任务探讨预期交流是否影响创造力。结果表明, 相较于没有预期交流, 预期交流条件下的个体表现出更高的创造力。实验2采取了创意产生任务, 并探讨了解释水平在其中的调节作用。结果表明, 当完成抽象的、高解释水平任务时, 相较于无预期交流, 预期交流条件下个体在新奇性和变通性两个维度上表现出了更高的创造力; 当完成具体的、低解释水平任务时, 预期交流的效应不复存在。也就是说, 只有当创造力任务要求高解释水平的抽象思维时, 预期交流才能促进创造力的发挥。总结而言, 本研究在过往对于交流与创造力以及解释水平与创造力的研究基础上进一步发现, 对于抽象创造力任务, 虽然真正的信息交流尚未发生, 但仅仅对于交流的预期就会提高创造力水平。

关键词: 预期交流, 创造力, 解释水平, 调节作用

Abstract:

Early research on creativity viewed it as intellectual skills and thinking styles, or as a personal trait. In recent decades, however, researchers recognized that creativity can be influenced by social contexts, and therefore can vary within individuals. Among the social factors that significantly increase creativity, communication is a substantial one. Past research proposed that the generation of creative ideas is often a result of communication among different people. However, little research investigated how anticipated communication might affect creativity. This omission is striking because although communication helps to refine an idea, some important original ideas often come up before any communication actually takes place. In generating these original ideas, would differences in levels of creativity already manifest for creators who expect communication versus those who do not? Without any prior exchange of knowledge, skills and ideas, would mere anticipation of subsequent communication influence creativity? The current research examines the influence of anticipated communication on creativity and the moderating role of construal levels in this process.
Experiment 1 adopted a structured imagination task to explore the main effect of anticipated communication on creativity. In this experiment, each participant performed an alien-drawing task. We hypothesized that the anticipation of communication, as opposed to no such anticipation, facilitates creative generation in drawing aliens. Experiment 2 used a new paradigm - an idea generation task - to measure creativity and examined the moderating role of construal levels required by the task. In this experiment, we devised two creative generation tasks that varied in their construal levels. Both tasks centered around the same topic—greetings. The high construal level task asked about why one should greet others whereas the low construal level one asked about how one can greet others. We hypothesized that for tasks with a high level of construal, anticipated communication facilitates creative generation, whereas for tasks with a low level of construal, the anticipated communication group no longer has the edge.
The results of Experiment 1 showed the influence of anticipated communication on creativity. When people anticipated communication, compared with when they did not hold this anticipation, the aliens they drew were considered as more creative. Results of Study 2 suggested that when responding to why they greet others, people displayed more novelty and flexibility when they anticipated communication than not. However, when people responded to how they greet others, the effect of anticipated communication was no longer present. That is to say, construal levels play a moderating role between the anticipation of communication and creative generation, and the anticipation of communication only enhances creativity when the creative task requires high-level, abstract thinking.
Taken together, the studies build upon past research on the relationship between communication and creativity as well as research on the relationship between construal levels and creativity. For abstract creative tasks, expectation about communication is sufficient to bring about an increase in creativity even before any informational exchange happens. Creativity can be promoted before any communication actually takes place, as long as communication is expected.

Key words: anticipated communication, creativity, construal level, moderating effect

中图分类号:

B842

栾墨, 吴霜, 李虹. (2020). 预期交流与创造力的关系:解释水平的调节作用. 心理学报, 52(10), 1178-1188.

LUAN Mo, WU Shuang, LI Hong. (2020). The relationship between anticipated communication and creativity: Moderating role of construal level. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(10), 1178-1188.

图/表 5

图1 研究的理论框架

表1 不同预期交流条件下的新奇性得分、新奇特征数、熟悉度、享受度和动机

预期交流	新奇性得分		新奇特征数		熟悉度		享受度		动机
预期交流	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
有(N = 53)	4.59	2.13	2.04	1.35	1.47	0.95	5.05	1.30	5.38	1.02
无(N = 57)	3.31	1.87	1.26	1.21	1.77	1.10	5.13	1.46	5.37	1.03

图2 不同交流预期和任务解释水平下的新奇性得分(误差线表示95%置信区间, **p < 0.01)

图3 不同交流预期和任务解释水平下的变通性得分(误差线表示95%置信区间, **p < 0.01)

图4 不同交流预期和任务解释水平下的流畅性得分(误差线表示95%置信区间)

参考文献 44

[1]	Aiken, M., & Hage, J. (1971). The organic organization and innovation. Sociology, 5(1), 63-82.
[2]	Amabile, T. M. (1979). Effects of external evaluation on artistic creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(2), 221-233.
[3]	Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997-1013.
[4]	Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357-376.
[5]	Amabile, T. M. (1985). Motivation and creativity: Effects of motivational orientation on creative writers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(2), 393-399.
[6]	Amabile, T. M., & Pillemer, J. (2012). Perspectives on the social psychology of creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 3-15.
[7]	Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organization Science, 3(3), 321-341.
[8]	Barron, F. (1955). The disposition toward originality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 478-485.
[9]	Dijksterhuis, A., & Meurs, T. (2006). Where creativity resides: The generative power of unconscious thought. Consciousness and Cognition, 15(1), 135-146.
[10]	Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2003). Effects of communication goals and expectancies on language abstraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 682-696. URL pmid: 12703643
[11]	Ebadi, Y. M., & Utterback, J. M. (1984). The effects of communication on technological innovation. Management Science, 30(5), 572-585.
[12]	Förster, J., Friedman, R. S., & Liberman, N. (2004). Temporal construal effects on abstract and concrete thinking: Consequences for insight and creative cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), 177-189. URL pmid: 15301626
[13]	Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54( 1), 73-96.
[14]	Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
[15]	Hirt, E. R., Devers, E. E., & McCrea, S. M. (2008). I want to be creative: Exploring the role of hedonic contingency theory in the positive mood-cognitive flexibility link. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 214-230. URL pmid: 18211173
[16]	Isen, A. M., Daubman, K. A., & Nowicki, G. P. (1987). Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1122-1131. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.52.6.1122 URL pmid: 3598858
[17]	Jia, L., Hirt, E. R., & Karpen, S. C. (2009). Lessons from a faraway land: The effect of spatial distance on creative cognition. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(5), 1127-1131.
[18]	Joshi, P. D., & Wakslak, C. J. (2014). Communicating with the crowd: Speakers use abstract messages when addressing larger audiences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(1), 351-362. doi: 10.1037/a0032413 URL
[19]	Joshi, P. D., Wakslak, C. J., Raj, M., & Trope, Y. (2016). Communicating with distant others: The functional use of abstraction. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(1), 37-44.
[20]	Kanter, R. M. (1988). Three tiers for innovation research. Communication Research, 15(5), 509-523.
[21]	Koestler, A. (1964). The act of creation. New York, NY: Macmillan.
[22]	Lepper, M. R., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1973). Undermining children's intrinsic interest with extrinsic reward: A test of the "overjustification" hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28(1), 129-137.
[23]	Lu, J. G., Akinola, M., & Mason, M. F. (2017). “Switching On” creativity: Task switching can increase creativity by reducing cognitive fixation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 139, 63-75.
[24]	Lu, J. G., Hafenbrack, A. C., Eastwick, P. W., Wang, D. J., Maddux, W. W., & Galinsky, A. D. (2017). “Going out” of the box: Close intercultural friendships and romantic relationships spark creativity, workplace innovation, and entrepreneurship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(7), 1091-1108. doi: 10.1037/apl0000212 URL pmid: 28358527
[25]	Monge, P. R., Cozzens, M. D., & Contractor, N. S. (1992). Communication and motivational predictors of the dynamics of organizational innovation. Organization Science, 3(2), 250-274.
[26]	Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103(1), 27-43.
[27]	Paulus, P. B., & Nijstad, B. A. (2003). Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press Innovation through collaboration. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
[28]	Plucker, J. A., & Makel, M. C. (2010). Assessment of creativity. In J. C.Kaufman & R. J.Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 48-73). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
[29]	Polman, E., & Emich, K. J. (2011). Decisions for others are more creative than decisions for the self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(4), 492-501. doi: 10.1177/0146167211398362 URL pmid: 21317316
[30]	Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Educating for innovation. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1), 41-48. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2005.08.001 URL
[31]	Semin, G. R., de Montes, G. L., & Valencia, J. F. (2003). Communication constraints on the linguistic intergroup bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(2), 142-148. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00523-1 URL
[32]	Shalley, C. E., & Gilson, L. L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 33-53. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.12.004 URL
[33]	Shalley, C. E., & Perry-Smith, J. E. (2001). Effects of social-psychological factors on creative performance: The role of informational and controlling expected evaluation and modeling experience. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 84(1), 1-22. URL pmid: 11162295
[34]	Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., Willse, J. T., Barona, C. M., Cram, J. T., Hess, K. I., ... 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. doi: 10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.68 URL
[35]	Simonton, D. K. (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55(1), 151-158. URL pmid: 11392859
[36]	Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 845-851. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.845 URL pmid: 16393019
[37]	Steinmetz, J., & Pfattheicher, S. (2017). Beyond social facilitation: A review of the far-reaching effects of social attention. Social Cognition, 35(5), 585-599.
[38]	Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440-463. doi: 10.1037/a0018963 URL pmid: 20438233
[39]	Uziel, L. (2007). Individual differences in the social facilitation effect: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(3), 579-601.
[40]	Uziel, L. (2010). Look at me, I’m happy and creative: The effect of impression management on behavior in social presence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(12), 1591-1602. doi: 10.1177/0146167210386239 URL pmid: 20956356
[41]	Vallacher, R. R., & Wegner, D. M. (1989). Levels of personal agency: Individual variation in action identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(4), 660-671.
[42]	van de Ven, A. H. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science, 32(5), 590-607.
[43]	Ward, T. B. (1994). Structured imagination: The role of category structure in exemplar generation. Cognitive Psychology, 27(1), 1-40.
[44]	Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293-321.