Stimulated by Novelty? The Role of Psychological Needs and Perceived Creativity

Abstract

In the current research, we aimed to address the inconsistent finding in the brainstorming literature that cognitive stimulation sometimes results from novel input, yet other times from non-novel input. We expected and found, in three experiments, that the strength and valence of this relationship are moderated by people’s psychological needs for structure and autonomy. Specifically, the effect of novel input (vs. non-novel input), through perceived creativity, on cognitive stimulation was stronger for people who were either low in need for structure or high in need for autonomy. Also, when the input people received did not fit their needs, they experienced less psychological cognitive stimulation from this input (i.e., less task enjoyment and feeling more blocked) compared with when they did not receive any input. Hence, to create the ideal circumstances for people to achieve cognitive stimulation when brainstorming, input novelty should be aligned with their psychological needs.

Finding Meaning With Creativity in the Past, Present, and Future

“…Creativity increases upon being primed for mortality salience only if the act itself is focused on community (Routledge, Arndt, Vess, & Sheldon, 2008) or related to leaving a legacy (Sligte, Nijstad, & De Dreu, 2013). It is also notable that people with a low need for structure (which has been associated with creativity; De Jonge, Rietzschel, & Van Yperen, 2018) are less likely to be successfully primed to think about mortality salience itself (Routledge & Juhl, 2012), as are those people who reported specific evidence of creative accomplishment (Perach & Wisman, 2016).…”

How constraints impact creativity: An interaction paradigm.

“…For example, culture, which represents a situational difference, has been shown to differentially predict preferences for the novelty versus usefulness criteria of creativity, a relationship that was mediated by uncertainty avoidance (Adair & Xiong, 2018). Need for autonomy and low need for structure, which represent individual differences, have been shown to moderate the effects of cognitive stimulation during brainstorming as a result of novel versus familiar input (De Jonge et al, 2018). As another example, when people work together rather than alone, they display a focus on usefulness, labeled the "practicality effect," possibly due to the easier communication and validation of useful ideas (Gl aveanu et al, 2019).…”

An argument for implementing and testing novelty in the classroom.

“…Slowly expanding what the student is capable of, based on previous learning experiences, can increase engagement (Koops, 2017, 2018) inquiry and performance (Simons & Klein, 2007). Scaffolding may be successful because it allows for growth in competence while engaging students’ curiosity and novelty perception (De Jonge, Rietzschel, & Van Yperen, 2018). Its implementation in research methods in psychology promotes higher levels of writing efficacy, better attitudes toward statistics, and higher perceived skills/abilities in statistics (Ciarocco, Lewandowski, & Van Volkom, 2013).…”