提供及时的例子可以提高创意的数量和质量

Pao Siangliulue, Joel Chan, Krzysztof Z Gajos, Steven W. Dow
{"title":"提供及时的例子可以提高创意的数量和质量","authors":"Pao Siangliulue, Joel Chan, Krzysztof Z Gajos, Steven W. Dow","doi":"10.1145/2757226.2757230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Emerging online ideation platforms with thousands of example ideas provide an important resource for creative production. But how can ideators best use these examples to create new innovations? Recent work has suggested that not just the choice of examples, but also the timing of their delivery can impact creative outcomes. Building on existing cognitive theories of creative insight, we hypothesize that people are likely to benefit from examples when they run out of ideas. We explore two example delivery mechanisms that test this hypothesis: 1) a system that proactively provides examples when a user appears to have run out of ideas, and 2) a system that provides examples when a user explicitly requests them. Our online experiment (N=97) compared these two mechanisms against two baselines: providing no examples and automatically showing examples at a regular interval. Participants who requested examples themselves generated ideas that were rated the most novel by external evaluators. Participants who received ideas automatically when they appeared to be stuck produced the most ideas. Importantly, participants who received examples at a regular interval generated fewer ideas than participants who received no examples, suggesting that mere access to examples is not sufficient for creative inspiration. These results emphasize the importance of the timing of example delivery. Insights from this study can inform the design of collective ideation support systems that help people generate many high quality ideas.","PeriodicalId":231794,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"90","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Providing Timely Examples Improves the Quantity and Quality of Generated Ideas\",\"authors\":\"Pao Siangliulue, Joel Chan, Krzysztof Z Gajos, Steven W. Dow\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/2757226.2757230\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Emerging online ideation platforms with thousands of example ideas provide an important resource for creative production. But how can ideators best use these examples to create new innovations? Recent work has suggested that not just the choice of examples, but also the timing of their delivery can impact creative outcomes. Building on existing cognitive theories of creative insight, we hypothesize that people are likely to benefit from examples when they run out of ideas. We explore two example delivery mechanisms that test this hypothesis: 1) a system that proactively provides examples when a user appears to have run out of ideas, and 2) a system that provides examples when a user explicitly requests them. Our online experiment (N=97) compared these two mechanisms against two baselines: providing no examples and automatically showing examples at a regular interval. Participants who requested examples themselves generated ideas that were rated the most novel by external evaluators. Participants who received ideas automatically when they appeared to be stuck produced the most ideas. Importantly, participants who received examples at a regular interval generated fewer ideas than participants who received no examples, suggesting that mere access to examples is not sufficient for creative inspiration. These results emphasize the importance of the timing of example delivery. Insights from this study can inform the design of collective ideation support systems that help people generate many high quality ideas.\",\"PeriodicalId\":231794,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-06-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"90\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/2757226.2757230\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2757226.2757230","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 90

摘要

新兴的在线创意平台拥有成千上万的创意示例,为创意生产提供了重要的资源。但是,如何才能最好地利用这些例子来创造新的创新呢?最近的研究表明,不仅例子的选择,而且表达的时机也会影响创造性的结果。基于现有的关于创造性洞察力的认知理论,我们假设,当人们想不出主意时,他们可能会从例子中受益。我们探索了两种示例交付机制来测试这一假设:1)当用户似乎已经用尽想法时主动提供示例的系统,以及2)当用户明确要求时提供示例的系统。我们的在线实验(N=97)将这两种机制与两种基线进行了比较:不提供示例和定期自动显示示例。要求举例的参与者自己提出的想法被外部评估人员评为最新颖的。那些在陷入困境时自动接受想法的参与者产生了最多的想法。重要的是,定期接受例子的参与者比没有接受例子的参与者产生的想法更少,这表明仅仅接触例子是不足以获得创造性灵感的。这些结果强调了示例交付时间的重要性。这项研究的见解可以为集体创意支持系统的设计提供信息,帮助人们产生许多高质量的创意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Providing Timely Examples Improves the Quantity and Quality of Generated Ideas
Emerging online ideation platforms with thousands of example ideas provide an important resource for creative production. But how can ideators best use these examples to create new innovations? Recent work has suggested that not just the choice of examples, but also the timing of their delivery can impact creative outcomes. Building on existing cognitive theories of creative insight, we hypothesize that people are likely to benefit from examples when they run out of ideas. We explore two example delivery mechanisms that test this hypothesis: 1) a system that proactively provides examples when a user appears to have run out of ideas, and 2) a system that provides examples when a user explicitly requests them. Our online experiment (N=97) compared these two mechanisms against two baselines: providing no examples and automatically showing examples at a regular interval. Participants who requested examples themselves generated ideas that were rated the most novel by external evaluators. Participants who received ideas automatically when they appeared to be stuck produced the most ideas. Importantly, participants who received examples at a regular interval generated fewer ideas than participants who received no examples, suggesting that mere access to examples is not sufficient for creative inspiration. These results emphasize the importance of the timing of example delivery. Insights from this study can inform the design of collective ideation support systems that help people generate many high quality ideas.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信