2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0022-1031(02)00500-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cognitive stimulation and interference in groups: Exposure effects in an idea generation task

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

13
264
4
4

Year Published

2004
2004
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 286 publications
(285 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
13
264
4
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Typically, these have contributed with large sample sizes and a rigorous scientific approach. However, many of these studies use only hypothetical problems, studying ideas from nonprofessional engineers or designers (Massetti 1996;Benami and Jin 2002;Nijstad et al 2002;Kristensson and Norlander 2003;Helquist et al 2007;Perttula and Sipila 2007;Mak and Shu 2008) with few exceptions (Kim et al 2005;Napier and Nilsson 2006) and thus show "little similarity [to] design concept generation in the real world" (Shah and Vargas-Hernandez 2003). Little empirical work has been conducted using professional designers working on actual design tasks within industry.…”
Section: Assessing Creative Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Typically, these have contributed with large sample sizes and a rigorous scientific approach. However, many of these studies use only hypothetical problems, studying ideas from nonprofessional engineers or designers (Massetti 1996;Benami and Jin 2002;Nijstad et al 2002;Kristensson and Norlander 2003;Helquist et al 2007;Perttula and Sipila 2007;Mak and Shu 2008) with few exceptions (Kim et al 2005;Napier and Nilsson 2006) and thus show "little similarity [to] design concept generation in the real world" (Shah and Vargas-Hernandez 2003). Little empirical work has been conducted using professional designers working on actual design tasks within industry.…”
Section: Assessing Creative Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In many of these studies, creative performance of a group is determined by the evaluation of the outputs (ideas, concepts or designs) in terms of two dependant variables: number of ideas (Nijstad et al 2002;Perttula and Sipila 2007), and, quality of ideas (Wierenga 1998). From the literature reviewed, it would appear that creative quality of an idea is generally defined by a proposition's 'originality' and 'appropriateness' to a task (Massetti 1996) and in some instances a third specialising criteria such as 'unexpectedness' (Gero 1996) or 'unobviosness' (Howard et al 2006;) which can be linked to the time that the idea was produced.…”
Section: Assessing Creative Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In most research, the group performance is defined by evaluating the proposals regarding the number of ideas (Nijstad et al, 2002;Shah et al, 2003;Perttula and Sipila, 2007) and quality of ideas (Wierenga, 1998;Shah et al, 2003). Consequently, the quality of an idea is determined by appropriateness and originality on the target task (Massetti, 1996;Runco and Jaeger, 2012) and some situations unexpectedness (Gero, 1996) and Non-obviousness (Howard et al, 2006 and2008).…”
Section: What Are Sub-indexes Of Setting For Narrative Fiction Illustmentioning
confidence: 99%