从混合创造性问题解决中增强动机和决策

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT
P. Ahn, Lyn M. van Swol, Sang Jung Kim, Hyelin Park
{"title":"从混合创造性问题解决中增强动机和决策","authors":"P. Ahn, Lyn M. van Swol, Sang Jung Kim, Hyelin Park","doi":"10.1177/10464964211043565","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hybrid brainstorming is ecologically more valid than all-interactive or all-noninteractive brainstorming, yet understudied. Although ideational benefits of hybrid groups have been found, studies have rarely focused on its affective/motivational contributions or ability to select ideas. In a randomized experiment, noninteractive-then-interactive (hybrid) groups perceived (1) higher goal clarity, engagement, and task attractiveness, and (2) chose more quality ideas than all-noninteractive groups. Additionally, (3) given the instruction for both hybrid and all-noninteractive conditions to be critical in idea selection, participants individually selected ideas that were more useful, thus overall higher quality, than the nonselected.","PeriodicalId":47912,"journal":{"name":"Small Group Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enhanced Motivation and Decision Making from Hybrid Creative Problem Solving\",\"authors\":\"P. Ahn, Lyn M. van Swol, Sang Jung Kim, Hyelin Park\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10464964211043565\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Hybrid brainstorming is ecologically more valid than all-interactive or all-noninteractive brainstorming, yet understudied. Although ideational benefits of hybrid groups have been found, studies have rarely focused on its affective/motivational contributions or ability to select ideas. In a randomized experiment, noninteractive-then-interactive (hybrid) groups perceived (1) higher goal clarity, engagement, and task attractiveness, and (2) chose more quality ideas than all-noninteractive groups. Additionally, (3) given the instruction for both hybrid and all-noninteractive conditions to be critical in idea selection, participants individually selected ideas that were more useful, thus overall higher quality, than the nonselected.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47912,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Small Group Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Small Group Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10464964211043565\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Small Group Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10464964211043565","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

混合头脑风暴在生态学上比全互动或全非互动头脑风暴更有效,但尚未得到充分研究。虽然已经发现了混合群体的思想优势,但研究很少关注其情感/动机贡献或选择思想的能力。在一项随机实验中,非互动-再互动(混合)组感知到(1)更高的目标清晰度、参与度和任务吸引力,(2)比所有非互动组选择了更多高质量的想法。此外,(3)考虑到混合和全非互动条件在想法选择中都是至关重要的,参与者个人选择的想法比非选择的更有用,因此整体质量更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enhanced Motivation and Decision Making from Hybrid Creative Problem Solving
Hybrid brainstorming is ecologically more valid than all-interactive or all-noninteractive brainstorming, yet understudied. Although ideational benefits of hybrid groups have been found, studies have rarely focused on its affective/motivational contributions or ability to select ideas. In a randomized experiment, noninteractive-then-interactive (hybrid) groups perceived (1) higher goal clarity, engagement, and task attractiveness, and (2) chose more quality ideas than all-noninteractive groups. Additionally, (3) given the instruction for both hybrid and all-noninteractive conditions to be critical in idea selection, participants individually selected ideas that were more useful, thus overall higher quality, than the nonselected.
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
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
5.40%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: Policy: Small Group Research is an international and interdisciplinary journal presenting research, theoretical advancements, and empirically supported applications with respect to all types of small groups. Through advancing the systematic study of small groups, this journal seeks to increase communication among all who are professionally interested in group phenomena.
×
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