Abstract
This chapter presents an overview of a recent line of research on how digital self-representations (i.e., avatars) can improve users’ creativity in virtual settings. We will first review research on the Proteus effect and the influence of personal identity cues provided through avatars. Then, we will present results that show the influence of avatars’ appearance on creative performance. These findings will also be discussed in terms of social representations that can guide – in a given population – what a creative avatar should look like. Beyond personal identity, we will also focus on the influence of avatars to embody a shared identity among the members of a virtual team. Thus, in the line of the Social Identity model of Deindividuation Effects, we will emphasize the importance of social identity and psychosocial processes to foster group cohesiveness, social identification and creative performance in collaborative virtual settings.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
We conducted a one-way ANOVA with the categories of avatar as repeated measures, and more specifically examined the linear contrast.
References
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357.
Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 230–244. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230.
Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 1–62). New York: Academic Press.
Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167291175001.
Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “we”? Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(1), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.83.
Buisine, S., Guegan, J., Barré, J., Segonds, F., & Aoussat, A. (2016). Using avatars to tailor ideation process to innovation strategy. Cognition, Technology and Work, 18(3), 583–594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-016-0378-y.
Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb, T. (1952). Some consequences of deindividuation in a group. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 47(2), 382–389. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057906.
Franck, M. G., & Gilovich, T. (1988). The dark side of self and social perception: Black uniforms and aggression in professional sports. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(1), 74–85. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.1.74.7.
Gallagher, A. G., Ritter, E. M., Champion, H., Higgins, G., Fried, M. P., Moses, G., … Satava, R. M. (2005). Virtual reality simulation for the operating room. Annals of Surgery, 241(2), 364–372. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000151982.85062.80
Griffin, A. M., & Langlois, J. H. (2006). Stereotype directionality and attractiveness stereotyping: Is beauty good or is ugly bad? Social Cognition, 24(2), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2006.24.2.187.
Guegan, J., Buisine, S., Mantelet, F., Maranzana, N., & Segonds, F. (2016). Avatar-mediated creativity: When embodying inventors makes engineers more creative. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.024.
Guegan, J., Maranzana, N., Barré, J., Segonds, F., & Buisine, S. (2015). Design and evaluation of inventive avatars for creativity and innovation. In The Third International Conference on Design Creativity (pp. 1–8). Bangalore, India, 12–14.
Guegan, J., Nelson, J., & Lubart, T. I. (2017). The relationship between contextual cues in virtual environments and creative processes. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 20(3), 202–206. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0503.
Guegan, J., Segonds, F., Barré, J., Maranzana, N., Mantelet, F., & Buisine, S. (2017). Social identity cues to improve creativity and identification in face-to-face and virtual groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 77(December), 140–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.08.043.
Haslam, S. A. (2004). The social identity approach. Psychology in Organizations. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446278819
Jackson, L. A., & Ervin, K. S. (1992). Height stereotypes of women and men: The liabilities of shortness for both sexes. Journal of Social Psychology, 132(4), 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1992.9924723.
James, K., & Greenberg, J. (1989). In-group salience, intergroup comparison, and individual performance and self-esteem. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15(4), 604–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167289154013.
Johnson, R. D., & Downing, L. L. (1979). Deindividuation and valence of cues: Effects on prosocial and antisocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(9), 1532–1538. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.9.1532.
Kiesler, S., & Cummings, J. N. (2002). What do we know about proximity in work groups? A legacy of research on physical distance. In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.), Distributed work (Vol. 51, pp. 57–80). Cambridge: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.107.103572.
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39(10), 1123–1134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.39.10.1123.
Kim, J. (2011). Two routes leading to conformity intention in computer-mediated groups: Matching versus mismatching virtual representations. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 16(2), 271–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01539.x.
Kim, J., & Park, H. S. (2011). The effect of uniform virtual appearance on conformity intention: Social identity model of deindividuation effects and optimal distinctiveness theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1223–1230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.01.002.
Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126(3), 390.
Lea, M., & Giordano, R. (1997). Representations of the group and group processes in CSCW research: A case of premature closure? In G. C. Bowker, S. L. Star, W. Turner, & L. Gasser (Eds.), Social science, technical systems and cooperative work: Beyond the great divide (pp. 5–26). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
Lee, E.-J. (2004). Effects of visual representation on social influence in computer-mediated communication. Human Communication Research, 30(2), 234–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2004.tb00732.x.
Markus, H. R., & Kunda, Z. (1986). Stability and malleability of the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(4), 858–866. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.4.858.
Markus, H. R., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38(1), 299–337. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.38.020187.001503.
Michinov, N., Michinov, E., & Toczek-Capelle, M.-C. (2004). Social identity, group processes, and performance in synchronous computer-mediated communication. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 8(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.8.1.27.
Moliner, P. (1993). Cinq questions à propos des représentations sociales [Five questions about social representations]. Cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale, 20, 5–14.
Moscovici, S. (1961). La psychanalyse, son image et son public. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Osborn, A. F. (1957). Applied imagination. Oxford: Scribner’s.
Parks, M. R., & Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of Communication, 46(1), 80–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01462.x.
Peña, J., & Blackburn, K. (2013). The priming effects of virtual environments on interpersonal perceptions and behaviors. Journal of Communication, 63(4), 703–720.
Peña, J., Hancock, J. T., & Merola, N. A. (2009). The priming effects of avatars in virtual settings. Communication Research, 36(6), 838–856. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209346802.
Peña, J., Ghaznavi, J., Brody, N., Prada, R., Martinho, C., Santos, P. A., et al. (2017). Effects of human vs. computer-controlled characters and social identity cues on enjoyment. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000218.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1998). Breaching or building social boundaries? Communication Research, 25(6), 689–715. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365098025006006.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (2002). Intergroup differentiation in computer-mediated communication: Effects of depersonalization. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.6.1.3.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., Sakhel, K., & de Groot, D. (2001). Social influence in computer-mediated communication: The effects of anonymity on group behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(10), 1243–1254. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672012710001.
Reicher, S. D., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. European Review of Social Psychology, 6(1), 161–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779443000049.
Rogers, P., & Lea, M. (2005). Social presence in distributed group environments: The role of social identity. Behaviour & Information Technology, 24(2), 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290410001723472.
Rosenberg, R. S., Baughman, S. L., & Bailenson, J. N. (2013). Virtual superheroes: Using superpowers in virtual reality to encourage prosocial behavior. PLoS One, 8(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055003.
Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1992). Social influence and the influence of the “social” in computer-mediated communication. In M. Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp. 30–65). London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or Panopticon? Communication Research, 21(4), 427–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365094021004001.
Spears, R., Lea, M., & Postmes, T. (2007). Computer-mediated communication and social identity. In A. Joison, K. McJenna, T. Postmes, & U.-D. Reips (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of internet psychology (pp. 253–269). New York: Oxford University Press.
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational. Management Science, 32(11), 1492–1512.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Straus, S. G., & McGrath, J. E. (1994). Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1), 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.1.87.
Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity and social comparison. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups. Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 61–76). London: Academic Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(05)37005-5.
Tanis, M., & Postmes, T. (2008). Cues to identity in online dyads: Effects of interpersonal versus intragroup perceptions on performance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12(2), 96–111. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.12.2.96.
Turkle, S. (1997). Life on the screen identity in the age of the internet. New York: Touchstone.
Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group process: Theory and research (pp. 77–121). Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press.
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., & McGarty, C. (1994). Self and collective: Cognition and social context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 454–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167294205002.
van Dick, R., Tissington, P. A., & Hertel, G. (2009). Do many hands make light work? How to overcome social loafing and gain motivation in work teams. http://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/09555340910956621
Vasalou, A., & Joinson, A. N. (2009). Me, myself and I: The role of interactional context on self-presentation through avatars. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 510–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.11.007.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication. Impersonal, interpersonal and Hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research. http://doi.org/0803973233
Ward, T. B., & Sonneborn, M. S. (2011). Creative expression in virtual worlds: Imitation, imagination, and individualized collaboration. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 1(S), 32–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/2160-4134.1.S.32.
Williams, K. D., Karau, S. J., & Bourgeois, M. J. (1993). Working on collective tasks: Social loafing and social compensation. In M. Hogg & D. Abrams (Eds.), Group motivation: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 130–148). New York, Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Worchel, S., Rothgerber, H., Day, E. A., Hart, D., & Butemeyer, J. (1998). Social and identity and individual productivity within groups. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37(4), 389–413.
Yee, N., & Bailenson, J. (2007). The proteus effect: The effect of transformed self-representation on behavior. Human Communication Research, 33(3), 271–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00299.x.
Yee, N., Bailenson, J. N., & Ducheneaut, N. (2009). The Proteus effect: Implications of transformed digital self-representation on online and offline behavior. Communication Research, 36(2), 285–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650208330254.
Yellowlees, P. M., & Cook, J. N. (2006). Education about hallucinations using an internet virtual reality system: A qualitative survey. Academic Psychiatry, 30(6), 534–539. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ap.30.6.534.
Yoon, G., & Vargas, P. T. (2014). Know thy avatar. Psychological Science, 25(4), 1043–1045. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613519271.
Acknowledgment
The present chapter was carried out as part of project CREATIVENESS (CREative AcTIvities in Virtual Environment SpaceS), funded by French National Research Agency (ANR-12-SOIN-0005).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Guegan, J., Lubart, T., Collange, J. (2019). (Social) Identity and Creativity in Virtual Settings: Review of Processes and Research Agenda. In: Lebuda, I., Glăveanu, V.P. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Social Creativity Research. Palgrave Studies in Creativity and Culture. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95498-1_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95498-1_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-95497-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-95498-1
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)