Current Psychology

, Volume 36, Issue 3, pp 565–576 | Cite as

Exploring the Role of Self-Confidence, Need-for-Cognition, and the Degree of IT Support on Individual Creativity: Multilevel Analysis Approach



In today’s creative economy, individuals generally have not been regarded as reservoirs of creativity who yield sustainable growth in hypercompetitive markets. Individuals rely on IT support to reduce clerical loads and enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of their work as well. When they work in teams, they also require self-confidence and the need for cognition to promote their individual creativity. Data were derived from the members of a large system integration company in South Korea (N = 256, 50 teams). As the study considered variables at both the team and individual levels, we adopted a multilevel analysis approach. We found that individual self-confidence, which indicates the degree of perceived possibility of success at a task, and the need for cognition, the intrinsic motivation to engage in and enjoy thinking, affected individual creativity significantly. Further, the degree of IT support, the team-level variable, had a significant effect on individual creativity. The degree of IT support did not have a significant effect on the relationship between self-confidence and individual creativity, but did have a moderating effect that weakened the relationship between the need for cognition and individual creativity. These findings have implications for theories of members’ creativity in organizations.


Creativity Self-confidence Need for cognition Degree of IT support Multilevel analysis 



This research was supported by National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2014S1A3A2038108).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Min Hee Hahn declares that he has no conflict of interest. Kun Chang Lee declares that he has no conflict of interest.


  1. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: a componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to" the social psychology of creativity.". Westview pressGoogle Scholar
  3. Arch, E. C. (1992). Sex differences in the effect of self-efficacy on willingness to participate in a performance situation. Psychological Reports, 70(1), 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bakos, J. Y., & Treacy, M. E. (1986). Information technology and corporate strategy: a research perspective. MIS Quarterly, 10(2), 107–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bandura, A. (1992). Exercise of personal agency through the self-efficacy mechanism. In This chapter includes revised and expanded material presented as an invited address at the annual meeting of the British Psychological Society, St. Andrews, Scotland, Apr 1989.. Hemisphere Publishing CorpGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyd, N. G., & Vozikis, G. S. (1994). The influence of self-efficacy on the development of entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 18(4), 63–77.Google Scholar
  7. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48(3), 306–307.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: the life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davis, G. A. (1986). Creativity is forever (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt Publishing CompanyGoogle Scholar
  11. Doll, W. J., & Torkzadeh, G. (1988). The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction. MIS Quarterly, 12(2), 259–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ein-Dor, P., & Segev, E. (1982). Organizational context and MIS structure: some empirical evidence. MIS Quarterly, 6(3), 55–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Estrada, C. A., Isen, A. M., & Young, M. J. (1994). Positive affect improves creative problem solving and influences reported source of practice satisfaction in physicians. Motivation and Emotion, 18(4), 285–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gallupe, R. B., Bastianutti, L. M., & Cooper, W. H. (1991). Unblocking brainstorms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 137.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Glick, W. H. (1985). Conceptualizing and measuring organizational and psychological climate: pitfalls in multilevel research. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 601–616.Google Scholar
  16. Henning, B., & Vorderer, P. (2001). Psychological escapism: predicting the amount of television viewing by need for cognition. Journal of Communication, 51(1), 100–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hirt, E. R., Melton, R. J., McDonald, H. E., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Processing goals, task interest, and the mood–performance relationship: a mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 245.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hofmann, D. A. (1997). An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. Journal of Management, 23(6), 723–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hollenbeck, G. P., & Hall, D. T. (2004). Self-confidence and leader performance. Organizational Dynamics, 33(3), 254–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1), 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt College Publishers.Google Scholar
  22. Khatena, J., & Torrance, E. P. (1976). Khatena-Torrance creative perception inventory. Stoelting Company.Google Scholar
  23. Kickul, J., Wilson, F., Marlino, D., & Barbosa, S. D. (2008). Are misalignments of perceptions and self-efficacy causing gender gaps in entrepreneurial intentions among our nation’s teens? Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 321–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2000). Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  25. Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. (1994). Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 195–229.Google Scholar
  26. Kolb, J. A. (1999). The effect of gender role, attitude toward leadership, and self-confidence on leader emergence: implications for leadership development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 10(4), 305–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kozlowski, S. W., & Hattrup, K. (1992). A disagreement about within-group agreement: disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(2), 161–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kwang, N. A., & Rodrigues, D. (2002). A big-five personality profile of the adaptor and innovator. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 36(4), 254–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Martindale, C. (1989). Handbook of creativity. In Personality, situation, and creativity (pp. 211–232). US: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. McClelland, D. C. (1987). Human motivation. CUP Archive.Google Scholar
  31. Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103(1), 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nonaka, I. (2008). The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review Press.Google Scholar
  33. O’Hara, L. A., & Sternberg, R. J. (2001). It doesn’t hurt to ask: effects of instructions to be creative, practical, or analytical on essay-writing performance and their interaction with students’ thinking styles. Creativity Research Journal, 13(2), 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Raudenbush, S. W. (1989). A response to Longford and Plewis. Multilevel Modelling Newsletter, 1(3), 8–10.Google Scholar
  35. Raudenbush, S. W. (2004). HLM 6: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
  36. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). SageGoogle Scholar
  37. Redmond, M. R., Mumford, M. D., & Teach, R. (1993). Putting creativity to work: effects of leader behavior on subordinate creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55(1), 120–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Robinson, W. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behavior of American individual. American Sociological Review, 15(3), 351–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rodan, S., & Galunic, C. (2004). More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 25(6), 541–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rosenberg, M., & Kaplan, H. B. (Eds.) (1982). Social psychology and the self-concept. Arlington Heights, IL: Harlan Davidson.Google Scholar
  41. Runco, M. A., & Chand, I. (1995). Cognition and creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 7(3), 243–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 207–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shalley, C. E., & Gilson, L. L. (2004). What leaders need to know: a review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 33–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shalley, C. E., Zhou, J., & Oldham, G. R. (2004). The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: where should we go from here? Journal of Management, 30(6), 933–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shneiderman, B. (2009). Engineering the User Interface. In Creativity support tools: A grand challenge for HCI researchers (pp. 1–9). London: Springer.Google Scholar
  46. Sternberg, R. J. (1988). The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives. CUP Archive.Google Scholar
  47. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its development. Human Development, 34(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Terry, M., Mynatt, E. D., Nakakoji, K., & Yamamoto, Y. (2004). Variation in element and action: supporting simultaneous development of alternative solutions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 711–718). ACMGoogle Scholar
  49. Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1137–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tuten, T. L., & Bosnjak, M. (2001). Understanding differences in web usage: the role of need for cognition and the five factor model of personality. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 29(4), 391–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vollmer, F. (1986). Why do men have higher expectancy than women? Sex Roles, 14(7–8), 351–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wierenga, B., & Bruggen, G. H. (1998). Drivers of Success for Marketing Management Support Systems: Towards a Theory of Marketing Decision Support. Faculteit Bedrijfskunde/Rotterdam School of Management: Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  53. Wilson, F., Kickul, J., & Marlino, D. (2007). Gender, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: implications for entrepreneurship Education1. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 31(3), 387–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293–321.Google Scholar
  55. Zhou, J., & George, J. M. (2001). When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 682–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zhou, J., & Shalley, C. E. (2003). Research on employee creativity: a critical review and directions for future research. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 22, 165–218.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SKK Business School, Creativity Science Research Institute (CSRI)Sungkyunkwan UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.SKK Business School, SAIHST (Samsung Advanced Institute for Health Sciences and Technology), Creativity Science Research InstituteSungkyunkwan UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations