Culture and the Assessment of Creativity

A Positive Association between Working Memory Capacity and Human Creativity: A Meta-Analytic Evidence

Creativity serves as a fountain for social and scientific development. As one of the most crucial human capabilities, creativity has been believed to be supported by the core component of higher cognitive functions—working memory capacity (WMC). However, the evidence supporting the association between WMC and creativity remains contradictory. Here, we conducted a meta-analysis using random-effects models to investigate the linear association between WMC and creativity by pooling the individual effect size from the previous literature. Further, a subgroup analysis was performed to examine whether such association is specific for different WMC categories (i.e., verbal WMC, visual−spatial WMC and dual-task WMC). The main meta-analytic results showed a significantly positive association between WMC and creativity (r = .083, 95% CI: .050−.115, p < .001, n = 3104, k = 28). The subgroup analysis demonstrated consistent results by showing a significantly positive association between them, irrespective of WMC category. We also found that cultural environments could moderate this association, and we identified a strong correlation in participants from an Asian cultural context. In conclusion, this study provides the evidence to clarify the positive association between WMC and creativity, and implies that the Asian cultural context may boost such an association.

In search of mediators of leadership behavior to Team Creativity in Team Start-ups

Creativity is believed as the first step to innovation, especially in a team or workgroup in an organization. Team Creativity will lead to several innovations in a team, such as product and process innovation. Team leaders play a significant role in embracing Team Creativity. Our study investigates the mediator variables to foster the impact of leadership behavior on Team Creativity in Team Start-up. Earlier research shows that two value-based leadership styles, Transformational and Servant Leadership, significantly affect a team's creativity. We proposed two mediators of leadership behavior to foster Team Creativity: Team Climate and Team Ambidexterity. The sample is early Team Start-ups in several cities in Indonesia, run and led by young people. It is empirical cross-sectional quantitative research with more than 434 participants aggregated into 145 teams. The result shows that Team Climate and Team Ambidexterity are good mediators of Servant and Transformational Leadership behavior to Team Creativity in Team Start-ups. The two variables maximize the impact of leadership behavior on Team Creativity.

Novelty and Usefulness Trade-Off: Cultural Cognitive Differences and Creative Idea Evaluation

Creativity and innovation have become critical organizational capabilities in today’s global environment, and leveraging creative potential of employees across various cultural contexts has become increasingly important. Although recognized among researchers, cross-cultural differences in creativity are not yet well understood. We contribute to this line of research by constructing a theoretical model that focuses on cultural differences in cognition (i.e., holistic vs. analytic thinking) that affect the evaluation of creative ideas. The cultural cognition perspective allows us to theorize about the interrelationship between an idea’s novelty and its usefulness. We propose that to the extent there is a trade-off between an idea’s novelty and usefulness, cultural differences in cognition will systematically influence the trade-off relationship such that Easterners will perceive a stronger trade-off between novelty and usefulness as compared with their Western counterparts. Such effects of cultural cognition, however, can be reduced by contextual factors of multicultural exposure, cognitive team diversity, and organizational climate for innovation. Our cultural cognition perspective complements the extant cultural value and social norms perspectives on cross-cultural differences in creativity and innovation.

Technological Innovation Research in China and India: A Bibliometric Analysis for the Period 1991–2015

Although a substantial literature on the management of technological innovation exists, several scholars argue that much of this research has been rooted in Western contexts, where key assumptions are very different from those in emerging economies. Building on this viewpoint, we investigate the current state of knowledge on technological innovation in two of the largest and fastest growing emerging economies: China and India. We undertook a bibliometric analysis of author keywords and combined different quantitative approaches – frequency analysis, cluster analysis, and co-word analysis – to review 162 articles on technological innovation published about China and India for the period 1991–2015. From the analyses, the trends in technological innovation research in the two countries and the dominant themes of discussion were identified. These themes were further classified into eight sub-themes. Our key findings indicate a near absence of research on the management of technological innovation based on India, limited volume of research on indigenous aspects of innovation, and a lack of theory-building based on these countries’ contexts. Several suggestions for future research are offered based on the gaps identified.

Human Creativity: Reflections on the Role of Culture

In commenting on the articles in this Editors' Forum, three questions are addressed: (i) how should we operationalize and measure creative outputs to enable a sound analysis of cross-cultural differences in creativity; (ii) could it be that culture impacts not only the valuation of originality and usefulness but also the psychological processes through which original yet useful ideas and insights are achieved; and (iii) does culture impact the domains in which individuals are more or less motivated to perform creatively? Using recent work on creativity as a starting point, and the key findings reported in this Editors' Forum, I propose that new research on culture and creativity would benefit from separating creative products from creative processes, and would do justice to the nature and functionality of cultures by asking not only when and how individuals and groups achieve creativity, but also why they would bother to be creative in the first place.

Asian-Americans' Creative Styles in Asian and American Situations: Assimilative and Contrastive Responses as a Function of Bicultural Identity Integration

Bicultural individuals vary in the degree to which their two cultural identities are integrated. Among Asian-Americans, for instance, some experience their Asian and American sides as compatible whereas others experience them as conflicting. Past research on judgments finds this individual difference affects the way bicultural individuals respond to situations that cue their cultures. Asian-Americans with high bicultural identity integration (BII) assimilate to norms of the cued culture (e.g., they exhibit typically American judgments when in situations that cue American culture), whereas Asian-Americans with low BII do the opposite, contrasting against the cue (e.g., they exhibit typically Asian judgments when in American situations). We investigated whether this dynamic similarly affects creative performance, which differs cross-culturally in that novelty is encouraged more by American than East Asian norms. In two experiments, we found that cues to American (vs. Asian) culture increase the novelty of solutions in divergent thinking tasks for Asian-Americans with high BII (assimilative response) yet decrease it for Asian-Americans with low BII (contrastive response). We discuss theoretical implications for culture and creativity research and practical implications for firms seeking to foster creativity.

Creativity East and West: Perspectives and Parallels

This Editors' Forum – ‘Creativity East and West’ – presents five papers on the question of cultural differences in creativity from the perspective of different research literatures, followed by two integrative commentaries. The literatures represented include historiometric, laboratory, and organizational studies. Investigation of cultural influences through country comparisons and priming manipulations, focusing on how people perform creatively and how they assess creativity. This introduction notes parallels in the findings across these research perspectives, suggesting some cultural universals in creativity and some systematic differences. Many differences can be explained in terms of the model that creativity means a solution that is both novel/original and useful/appropriate, yet that Western social norms prioritize novelty whereas Eastern norms prioritize usefulness – an account which predicts cultural differences would arise in contexts that activate social norms. The commentaries elaborate this argument in terms of processes – at the micro cognitive level and at the macro societal level – through which creativity occurs.

Culture and Creativity: A Process Model

The articles in this forum present many innovative ideas on the role of culture in creativity. In this commentary, we first discuss the contributions of these articles in relation to two recurrent themes: (i) where creativity resides and (ii) what conceptual refinements are needed to push the field forward. Next, we oudine a process model of creativity and explain the role of culture at each stage of knowledge creation. We argue that successful innovation involves one or more iterations of the following three stages: (i) authoring new ideas; (ii) selecting, editing, and marketing new ideas; and (iii) acceptance of the new ideas in the market. The desired outcomes are different at the different stages, and culture influences all stages of the process. Specifically, existing knowledge provides a reference point for evaluating the originality of ideas; assumed cultural consensus provides the normative basis for idea selection, editing, and marketing; and actual cultural norms determine how likely an idea will be accepted in a culture. Furthermore, different social and psychological processes are at work at different stages of the creativity process, and culture can affect the outcomes of the creativity process through its effects on these social and psychological processes.