{"title":"Does foreign language liberate or limit creativity? Three experiments on foreign language anxiety and use, and divergent and convergent thinking","authors":"Richard F.J. Haans , Arjen van Witteloostuijn","doi":"10.1016/j.ibusrev.2024.102305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study investigates the effects of being forced to work in a foreign language on individuals’ ability to be creative. Foreign language is expected to, respectively, hamper and strengthen individuals’ divergent and convergent thinking. However, because emotional responses to language differ, foreign language anxiety is expected to dampen these effects. Results from three experiments show that individuals with low foreign language anxiety have, on average, 58 % higher convergent thinking scores in the foreign language setting than those working in their native language. However, for highly anxious individuals, these scores become 49 % lower. The predictions for divergent thinking see weaker support. These results complement prior work investigating knowledge transfer and integration in response to foreign language use by focusing on processes related to knowledge generation. Moreover, by illustrating how individuals are differently affected by foreign language mandates, we contribute to the ongoing debate regarding whether language standardization is preferable to individualization.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51352,"journal":{"name":"International Business Review","volume":"33 4","pages":"Article 102305"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969593124000520/pdfft?md5=a84e5742fe90080aa23933291b83a742&pid=1-s2.0-S0969593124000520-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Business Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969593124000520","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study investigates the effects of being forced to work in a foreign language on individuals’ ability to be creative. Foreign language is expected to, respectively, hamper and strengthen individuals’ divergent and convergent thinking. However, because emotional responses to language differ, foreign language anxiety is expected to dampen these effects. Results from three experiments show that individuals with low foreign language anxiety have, on average, 58 % higher convergent thinking scores in the foreign language setting than those working in their native language. However, for highly anxious individuals, these scores become 49 % lower. The predictions for divergent thinking see weaker support. These results complement prior work investigating knowledge transfer and integration in response to foreign language use by focusing on processes related to knowledge generation. Moreover, by illustrating how individuals are differently affected by foreign language mandates, we contribute to the ongoing debate regarding whether language standardization is preferable to individualization.
期刊介绍:
The International Business Review (IBR) stands as a premier international journal within the realm of international business and proudly serves as the official publication of the European International Business Academy (EIBA). This esteemed journal publishes original and insightful papers addressing the theory and practice of international business, encompassing a broad spectrum of topics such as firms' internationalization strategies, cross-border management of operations, and comparative studies of business environments across different countries. In essence, IBR is dedicated to disseminating research that informs the international operations of firms, whether they are SMEs or large MNEs, and guides the actions of policymakers in both home and host countries. The journal warmly welcomes conceptual papers, empirical studies, and review articles, fostering contributions from various disciplines including strategy, finance, management, marketing, economics, HRM, and organizational studies. IBR embraces methodological diversity, with equal openness to papers utilizing quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method approaches.