Two's Company: How Academic Diversity in Dyads Enhances Divergent Thinking

IF 3 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Journal of Creative Behavior Pub Date : 2025-02-24 DOI:10.1002/jocb.1539
Xiaochen Liu, Gregory T. Boldt, Donald J. Leu, James C. Kaufman
{"title":"Two's Company: How Academic Diversity in Dyads Enhances Divergent Thinking","authors":"Xiaochen Liu,&nbsp;Gregory T. Boldt,&nbsp;Donald J. Leu,&nbsp;James C. Kaufman","doi":"10.1002/jocb.1539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Group diversity is an active topic in research as studies examine how differences in background, culture, job position, gender, and ethnicity can all impact group creativity. One relatively overlooked component is how diversity in academic knowledge affects group and individual creativity. In this study, 56 graduate students from a research university in the United States were paired into a dyad with another academically similar or diverse student. They then took the Alternate Uses Test (AUT) alone, as a team, and then alone again. The AUT was used to obtain three divergent thinking scores—fluency, flexibility, and originality. The scores were analyzed to determine if graduate students in academically diverse dyads worked better together (and, subsequently, alone) compared to academically similar dyads. The results showed that academically diverse dyads had significantly higher scores on originality for both increases in individual task scores and the team creativity task, as well as higher fluency scores compared to academically similar dyads. In addition, the results suggest that academically similar and diverse dyads demonstrate varying patterns of fluency and originality scores over time. Results indicated that embracing academic diversity can lead to both dyads and, subsequently, individuals being more productive in generating novel ideas.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":39915,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Creative Behavior","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Creative Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jocb.1539","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Group diversity is an active topic in research as studies examine how differences in background, culture, job position, gender, and ethnicity can all impact group creativity. One relatively overlooked component is how diversity in academic knowledge affects group and individual creativity. In this study, 56 graduate students from a research university in the United States were paired into a dyad with another academically similar or diverse student. They then took the Alternate Uses Test (AUT) alone, as a team, and then alone again. The AUT was used to obtain three divergent thinking scores—fluency, flexibility, and originality. The scores were analyzed to determine if graduate students in academically diverse dyads worked better together (and, subsequently, alone) compared to academically similar dyads. The results showed that academically diverse dyads had significantly higher scores on originality for both increases in individual task scores and the team creativity task, as well as higher fluency scores compared to academically similar dyads. In addition, the results suggest that academically similar and diverse dyads demonstrate varying patterns of fluency and originality scores over time. Results indicated that embracing academic diversity can lead to both dyads and, subsequently, individuals being more productive in generating novel ideas.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
两个人的公司:二人组的学术多样性如何增强发散思维
群体多样性是研究中的一个活跃话题,因为研究考察了背景、文化、工作职位、性别和种族的差异如何影响群体创造力。一个相对被忽视的因素是学术知识的多样性如何影响群体和个人的创造力。在这项研究中,来自美国一所研究型大学的56名研究生与另一名学术相似或不同的学生配对。然后他们作为一个团队单独进行了替代用途测试(AUT),然后又单独进行了一次。使用AUT获得三个发散性思维得分:流利性、灵活性和独创性。研究人员对这些分数进行了分析,以确定与学术相似的两组相比,学术不同的两组研究生在一起(以及随后的单独)是否表现得更好。结果显示,与学术相似的二组相比,学术不同的二组在个人任务得分和团队创造力任务得分上的独创性得分都明显更高,而且流畅性得分也更高。此外,研究结果表明,随着时间的推移,学术上相似和不同的组合在流利性和独创性得分方面表现出不同的模式。研究结果表明,接受学术多样性可以导致双方,随后,个人在产生新想法方面更有成效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Creative Behavior
Journal of Creative Behavior Arts and Humanities-Visual Arts and Performing Arts
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The Journal of Creative Behavior is our quarterly academic journal citing the most current research in creative thinking. For nearly four decades JCB has been the benchmark scientific periodical in the field. It provides up to date cutting-edge ideas about creativity in education, psychology, business, arts and more.
期刊最新文献
Beyond Imagination: Developing and Validating the Young Children's Inventory of Creative Activities The PISA 2022 Creative Thinking Assessment: A Welcome Opportunity to Explore the Mechanics of Flexibility Scoring Cognitive Conflict in Rule Violation and Creativity: Evidence for a Shared Cognitive Basis Do Fans of Violent Stories Show a Higher Potential for Creative Harm? True Crime as a Stimulating Environment for Malevolent Creativity Using Immersive Technology to Understand the Effect of Emotional Shift on Creativity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1