Different neural correlates of deception: Crafting high and low creative scams

Deception is a complex social behavior that manifests in various forms, including scams. To successfully deceive victims, liars have to continually devise novel scams. This ability to create novel scams represents one kind of malevolent creativity, referred to as lying. This study aimed to explore different neural substrates involved in the generation of high and low creative scams. A total of 40 participants were required to design several creative scams, and their cortical activity was recorded by functional near-infrared spectroscopy. The results revealed that the right frontopolar cortex (FPC) was significantly active in scam generation. This region associated with theory of mind may be a key region for creating novel and complex scams. Moreover, creativity-related regions were positively involved in creative scams, while morality-related areas showed negative involvement. This suggests that individuals might attempt to use malevolent creativity while simultaneously minimizing the influence of moral considerations. The right FPC exhibited increased coupling with the right precentral gyrus during the design of high-harmfulness scams, suggesting a diminished control over immoral thoughts in the generation of harmful scams. Additionally, the perception of the victim's emotions (related to right pre-motor cortex) might diminish the quality of highly original scams. Furthermore, an efficient and cohesive neural coupling state appears to be a key factor in generating high-creativity scams. These findings suggest that the right FPC was crucial in scam creation, highlighting a neural basis for balancing malevolent creativity against moral considerations in high-creativity deception.

Bullying Victimization and Malevolent Creativity in Rural Adolescents: The Longitudinal Mediational Role of Hostile Attribution

Extensive research has documented bully victimization as a pivotal risk factor contributing to aggressive behaviors among adolescents. Particularly, the negative outcome of increased aggressive behaviors may be exacerbated when the aggressive actions are novel and difficult to detect. The present study aims to explore the complex relationships between cyberbullying and school bullying victimization and malevolent creativity and the potential mediating role of hostile attribution using two-wave longitudinal data. The present study analyzed data from 262 rural adolescents. The results revealed that cyberbullying victimization significantly predicted malevolent creativity, whereas school bullying victimization did not. Hostile attribution served as a mediator in the relationship between cyberbullying victimization and malevolent creativity in the longitudinal models. These findings provide significant implications for mitigating the negative influence of bullying victimization on the emergence of malevolent creativity in rural adolescents.

The costs of curiosity and creativity: Minimizing the downsides while maximizing the upsides

The unbridled positivity toward curiosity and creativity may be excessive. Both aid species survival through exploration and advancement. These beneficial effects are well documented. What remains is to understand their optimal levels and contexts for maximal achievement, health, and well-being. Every beneficial element to individuals and groups carries the potential for harm - curiosity and creativity included.

The effect of justice sensitivity on malevolent creativity: the mediating role of anger and the moderating role of emotion regulation strategies

BACKGROUND

the AMORAL model emphasizes the close connection of individuals' belief system and malevolent creativity. Belief in a just world theory (BJW) states that people have a basic need to believe that the world they live in is just, and everyone gets what they deserve. Therefore, justice matters to all people. Justice sensitivity, as one of individual trait, has been found associated with negative goals. However, relevant studies have not tested whether justice sensitivity can affect malevolent creativity and its psychological mechanisms. Additionally, researchers have found that both anger and emotion regulation linked with justice sensitivity and malevolent creativity, but their contribution to the relationship between justice sensitivity and malevolent creativity remained unclear. The current study aims to explore the influence of justice sensitivity on malevolent creativity, the mediating effect of trait anger/state anger on the relationship between justice sensitivity and malevolent creativity, and the moderating effect of emotion regulation on this mediating effect.

METHODS

A moderated mediating model was constructed to test the relationship between justice sensitivity and malevolent creativity. A sample of 395 Chinese college students were enrolled to complete the questionnaire survey.

RESULTS

Justice sensitivity positively correlated with malevolent creativity, both trait anger and state anger partly mediated the connection between justice sensitivity and malevolent creativity. Moreover, emotion regulation moderated the indirect effect of the mediation model. The indirect effect of justice sensitivity on malevolent creativity through trait anger/state anger increased as the level of emotion regulation increased. The results indicated that justice sensitivity can affect malevolent creativity directly and indirectly through the anger. The level of emotion regulation differentiated the indirect paths of justice sensitivity on malevolent creativity.

CONCLUSIONS

Justice sensitivity and malevolent creativity was mediated by trait anger/state anger. The higher sensitivity to justice, the higher level of trait anger/state anger, which in turn boosted the tendency of malevolent creativity. This indirect connection was moderated by emotion regulation, individuals with high emotion regulation are better able to buffer anger from justice sensitivity.

Hotspots and research trends of the 'dark side of creativity' in the last decade

Creativity can function as a catalyst for social development; however, it also possesses a destructive potential. In recent years, scholars have discovered that creativity harbors a dark side, counterbalancing its positive aspects. This study aims to offer a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics surrounding research on the 'dark side of creativity', disseminate the findings, and provide a valuable reference for future researchers in the field. To achieve this objective, bibliometric methods were employed to visualize the overall landscape of the literature, identify prevailing topics, significant works, highly cited authors, and forecast future trends. The following conclusions were drawn: (1) Society presently places substantial importance on investigating the 'dark side of creativity'. (2) Research exploring this facet of creativity spans across multiple disciplines, fields, and geographical locations. (3) The 'dark side of creativity' exhibits a close association with psychological states and the social environment. (4) Investigations into the 'dark side of creativity' reveal a scientific, diversified, and open research trajectory. (5) Future research is expected to focus on themes such as 'anxiety', 'malevolent creativity', 'COVID-19', 'trait', 'gender', 'depression', 'strategy' as emerging trends.

A systematic framework of creative metacognition

Creative cognition does not just involve cognitive processes in direct service of the main task objective (e.g., idea generation), but also metacognitive processes that monitor and regulate cognition adaptively (e.g., evaluation of ideas and task performance, or development and selection of task strategies). Although metacognition is vital for creative performance, relevant work is sparse, which may be partly due to persistent ambiguities in the theoretical conceptualization of creative metacognition. Therefore, this article proposes a systematic framework of creative metacognition (CMC), which builds on recent advancements in metacognition theory and extends them to meet the specifics of creative cognition. The CMC framework consists of two dynamic components-monitoring and control-and a more static component of metacognitive knowledge, each subsuming metacognitive processes applying to the level of task, performance, and responses. We describe the presumed function of these metacognitive components in the creative process, present evidence in support of each, and discuss their association with related constructs, such as creative self-beliefs. We further highlight the dynamic interplay of metacognitive processes across task performance and identify promising avenues for future research.

Similarities and Distinctions between Cortical Neural Substrates That Underlie Generation of Malevolent Creative Ideas

Creativity can be driven by negative intentions, and this is called malevolent creativity (MC). It is a type of creativity that serves antisocial purposes and deliberately leads to harmful or immoral results. A possible classification indicates that there are three kinds of MC in daily life: hurting people, lying, and playing tricks. This study aimed to explore similar and distinct neural substrates underlying these different kinds of MC idea generation. The participants were asked to perform different MC tasks, and their neural responses were recorded using a functional near-infrared spectroscopy device. The findings revealed that most regions within the prefrontal and temporal lobes [e.g., the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (rDLPFC), and right angular gyrus] were involved in the three MC tasks. However, the right frontopolar cortex (rFPC) was more activated and less coupled with the rDLPFC and right precuneus during the lying task than during the other tasks. Thus, rFPC may play an important role in constructing novel lies. In the lying task, individuals were more selfish and less compassionate. In the playing tricks and hurting people tasks, there was less neural coupling between the rDLPFC and the left inferior frontal gyrus/right inferior parietal lobule than that in the lying task. This may imply that selfish motivation is released when individuals try to ignore victims' distress or generate aggressive tricks in hurting people or playing tricks tasks. These findings indicate that the three kinds of MC idea generation involve common cortical regions related to creative idea generation and moral judgment, whereas differences in cortical responses exist because of their unique features.

Functional EEG Alpha Activation Patterns During Malevolent Creativity

On the dark side of creativity, creative ideation is intentionally used to damage others. This first EEG study on malevolent creativity investigated task-related power (TRP) changes in the alpha band while n = 89 participants (52 women, 37 men) generated original ideas for revenge in the psychometric Malevolent Creativity Test. TRP changes were assessed for different stages of the idea generation process and linked to performance indicators of malevolent creativity. This study revealed three crucial findings: 1) Malevolent creativity yielded topographically distinct alpha power increases similar to conventional creative ideation. 2) Time-related activity changes during malevolent creative ideation were reflected in early prefrontal and mid-stage temporal alpha power increases in individuals with higher malevolent creativity performance. This performance-related, time-sensitive pattern of TRP changes during malevolent creativity may reflect early conceptual expansion from prosocial to antisocial perspectives, and subsequent inhibition of dominant semantic associations in favor of novel revenge ideas. 3) The observed, right-lateralized alpha power increases over the entire ideation phase may denote an additional emotional load of creative ideation. Our study highlights the seminal role of EEG alpha oscillations as a biomarker for creativity, also when creative processes operate in a malevolent context.

Where is the When of Creativity?: Specifying the Temporal Dimension of the Four Cs of Creativity

Creativity researchers typically focus on the who, what, why, where, and how of creativity. A noticeable omission is when. The when is not completely ignored in the field; it surfaces in developmental and evolutionary perspectives, the study of eminent creators, and other avenues of scholarship. In this paper, we assert that for the concept of when to be fully addressed researchers need to more actively consider the past, present, and future and how they interact. More specifically, we propose an expanded way of thinking about the when of creativity by introducing a temporal dimension to the definition of creativity. Our definition offers a broader lens for researchers to consider the temporal dimensions of originality, meaningfulness, and impact of creativity. After introducing our definition and describing its unique features, we discuss how researchers can use our definition to trace creative phenomena across a full temporal trajectory and thereby provide more nuanced and dynamic representation of how the features of creativity change across time and contexts. Finally, we apply this temporal definition to the Four Cs Model of Creativity to illustrate how considering the when can help resolve lingering questions about this perspective.

The inhibitory effect of moral emotions on malevolent creativity: Exploring the mediation role of emotional valence and prosocial behavior

The current study aims to investigate the influence of positive and negative moral emotions (gratitude and guilt) on malevolent creativity by exploring the potential mediation role of valence and prosocial behavior. Using autobiographical recall, three groups of participants developed gratitude, guilt, or neutral emotion, respectively, and then their prosocial behavior and malevolent creativity performance were compared. Results showed that compared with the neutral condition, individuals in the gratitude state experienced more positive emotions with less malevolent creative ideas, but the positive valence pathway had a positive effect on malevolent creativity, indicating the promoting effect of positive emotion on creativity. By contrast, individuals in the guilt state experienced more negative emotions, which result in less malevolent creativity. Gratitude and guilt promoted prosocial behaviors, which did not mediate the effect of gratitude or guilt on malevolent creativity. In short, the results indicate that the positive and negative moral emotions (gratitude and guilt) inhibit malevolent creativity, which is mediated by valence, instead of prosocial behavior.