Minority Dissent, Openness to Change and Group Creativity

IF 2.5 3区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Creativity Research Journal Pub Date : 2021-12-22 DOI:10.1080/10400419.2021.2018833

P. Curșeu, S. Schruijer, O. Fodor

引用次数: 5

Abstract

ABSTRACT We report the results of a quasi-experimental study that tests the interaction between minority dissent and organizational openness to change on group creativity. In a sample of 199 professionals, organized in 57 groups we have manipulated minority dissent (groups with or without a devil’s advocate) and openness to change (groups were informed that the company they work for IS versus it IS NOT open to change) and evaluated group creativity using two indicators: the creativity quotient and the peer-rated creativity on three dimensions (novelty, feasibility, and usefulness). Our results show that the minority dissent and openness to change have a positive impact on group creativity. However, the interaction effect of minority dissent and openness to change was only supported for peer-rated group creativity, rendering weak support for the moderating role of openness to change.

查看原文本刊更多论文

少数异议，对变化的开放和群体创造力

摘要：我们报道了一项准实验研究的结果，该研究测试了少数群体异议与组织开放性之间的互动，以改变群体创造力。在199名专业人员的样本中，我们分为57个小组，处理了少数人的异议（有或没有魔鬼代言人的小组）和对变革的开放性（小组被告知他们为IS工作的公司与它不开放变革），并使用两个指标评估了小组的创造力：创造力商和同行对创造力的三个维度（新颖性、可行性和有用性）。我们的研究结果表明，少数群体的异议和对变革的开放性对群体创造力有积极影响。然而，少数群体异议和对变革的开放性的互动效应只支持同行评价的群体创造力，而对对变革开放性的调节作用的支持较弱。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Creativity Research Journal Multiple-

CiteScore

5.10

自引率

7.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Creativity Research Journal publishes high-quality, scholarly research capturing the full range of approaches to the study of creativity--behavioral, clinical, cognitive, crosscultural, developmental, educational, genetic, organizational, psychoanalytic, psychometrics, and social. Interdisciplinary research is also published, as is research within specific domains (e.g., art, science) and research on critical issues (e.g., aesthetics, genius, imagery, imagination, incubation, insight, intuition, metaphor, play, problem finding and solving). Integrative literature reviews and theoretical pieces that appreciate empirical work are extremely welcome, but purely speculative articles are not published. Readers are encouraged to send commentaries, comments, and evaluative book reviews.