Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research Findings on Ideational Creativity in Groups

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Creativity and Innovation

Part of the book series: Understanding Complex Systems ((UCS))

  • 689 Accesses

Abstract

Generating creative ideas in groups is a common process in many contexts. However, research has shown that the outcomes of group idea generation are often lower than those obtained without collaboration. The effectiveness of group idea generation is influenced by the method of sharing ideas, the task structure, and the personal characteristics of the group members. The use of electronic or writing modalities for idea exchange, appropriate instructions, brief breaks, challenging goals, and focusing on one issue at a time can enhance group performance. Task-relevant diversity in group composition and some degree of training in effective group processes also enhance the performance of idea generation groups. Alternation of group and solitary idea generation sessions can also be beneficial.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adánez, A. M. (2005). Does quantity generate quality? Testing the fundamental principle of brainstorming. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 8, 215–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. West-view Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297–1333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (2015). The importance of domain-specific expertise in creativity. Roeper Review, 37(3), 165–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, M., Oldham, G. R., Jacobsohn, G. C., & Hollingshead, A. B. (2008). The personality composition of teams and creativity: The moderating role of team creative confidence. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 42, 255–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bantel, K. A., & Jackson, S. E. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10(S1), 107–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B., & Stewart, G. L. (1997). Composition, process, and performance in self-managed groups: The role of personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 62–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruah, J., & Paulus, P. B. (2008). Effects of training on idea generation in groups. Small Group Research, 39, 523–541.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruah, J., & Paulus, P. B. (2011). Category assignment and relatedness in the group ideation process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1070–1077.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruah, J., & Paulus, P. B. (2016). The role of time and category relatedness in electronic brainstorming. Small Group Research, 47(3), 333–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batey, M., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2010). Individual differences in ideational behavior: Can the big five and psychometric intelligence predict creativity scores? Creativity Research Journal, 22, 90–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann, M. R., & Bonner, B. L. (2013). Member awareness of expertise, information sharing, information weighting, and group decision making. Small Group Research, 44(5), 532–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S. T. (2007). Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 595–615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., Lukasik, M. A., Belau, L., & Briggs, A. (2011). Getting specific about demographic diversity variable and team performance relationships: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 37, 709–743.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, M., Jonides, G., Kaplan, J., & S. (2008). The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature. Psychological Science, 19, 1207–1212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boh, W. F., Evaristo, R., & Ouderkirk, A. (2014). Balancing breadth and depth of expertise for innovation: A 3M story. Research Policy, 43(2), 349–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, V. R., & Paulus, P. B. (2002). Making group brainstorming more effective: Recommendations from an associative memory perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 208–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camacho, L. M., & Paulus, P. B. (1995). The role of social anxiousness in group brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1071–1080.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coskun, H. (2000). The effects of outgroup comparison, social context, intrinsic motivation, and collective identity in brainstorming groups. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Arlington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coskun, H. (2005). Cognitive stimulation with convergent and divergent thinking exercises in brainwriting: Incubation, sequence priming, and group context. Small Group Research, 36, 466–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coskun, H., Paulus, P. B., Brown, V., & Sherwood, J. J. (2000). Cognitive stimulation and problem presentation in idea generation groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4, 307–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coskun, H., & Yilmaz, O. (2009). A new dynamical model of brainstorming: Linear, nonlinear, continuous (simultaneous) and impulsive (sequential) cases. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53, 253–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2009.03.003

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Coursey, L. E., Gertner, R. T., Williams, B. C., Kenworthy, J. B., Paulus, P. B., & Doboli, S. (2019). Linking the divergent and convergent processes of collaborative creativity: The impact of expertise levels and elaboration processes. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 699. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coursey, L. E., Paulus, P. B., Kenworthy, J., & Williams, B. (2018). The role of individual differences in group and team creativity. In R. Reiter-Palmon & J. Kaufman (Eds.), Individual Creativity in the Workplace (pp. 311–338). Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coursey, L. E., Williams, B. C., Kenworthy, J. B., Paulus, P. B., & Doboli, S. (2018). Diversity and group creativity in an online, asynchronous environment. Journal of Creative Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.363

  • Cronin, M. A., & Weingart, L. R. (2007). Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams. The Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 761–773.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossan, M. M., & Apaydin, M. (2010). A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), 1154–1191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihályi, M. (1997). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. Harper Perennial.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, J. N., & Kiesler, S. (2008). Who collaborates successfully? Prior experience reduces collaboration barriers in distributed interdisciplinary research. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 437–446). ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, J. N, Kiesler, S., Zadeh, R. B. & Balakrishnan, A. D. (2013). Group heterogeneity increases the risks of large group size: A longitudinal study of productivity in research groups. Psychological Science, 24(6), 880–890.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dane, E. (2010). Reconsidering the trade-off between expertise and flexibility: A cognitive entrenchment perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 579–603.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. K., Nijstad, B. A., & van Knippenberg, D. (2008). Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(1), 22–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Connolly, T., & Wynne, B. E. (1996). Process structuring in electronic brainstorming. Information Systems Research, 7, 268–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, A. R., Minas, R. K., & Williams, M. I. (2019). Creativity in computer-mediated virtual groups. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Handbook of group creativity and innovation (pp. 253–269). Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeRosa, D. M., Smith, C. L., & Hantula, D. A. (2007). The medium matters: Mining the long-promised merit of group interaction in creative idea generation tasks in a meta-analysis of the electronic group brainstorming literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1549–1581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deuja, A., Kohn, N. W., Paulus, P. B., & Korde, R. M. (2014). Taking a broad perspective before brainstorming. Group Dynamics; Theory, Research, and Practice, 18(3), 222–236. https://doi.org/10.1037/gdn0000008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devine, D. J., & Philips, J. L. (2001). Do smarter teams do better: A meta-analysis of cognitive ability and team performance. Small Group Research, 32, 507–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dugosh, K. L., Paulus, P. B., Roland, E. J., & Yang, H. (2000). Cognitive stimulation in brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 722–735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In T. S. Ward, S. M. Smith, & J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes. American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dzindolet, M. T. (1992). An assessment of blocking and social influence processes in brainstorming (Order No. 9315979). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (304075542). https://login.ezproxy.uta.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/304075542?accountid=7117

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2014). Creative genius: A view from the expert-performance approach. In D. K. Simonton (Ed.), The Wiley Handbook of Genius (pp. 321–349). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118367377.ch16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Ward, P. (2007). Capturing the naturally occurring superior performance of experts in the laboratory: Toward a science of expert and exceptional performance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(1), 346–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, H. J. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Problems in the behavioral sciences, 12. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, M. P. (2001). Collaborative circles: Friendship dynamics and creative work. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 290–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Firestien, R. L. (1990). Effects of creative problem solving on communication behaviors in small groups. Small Group Research, 21, 507–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontenot, N. A. (1993). Effects of training in creativity and creative problem finding upon business people. Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 11–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallupe, R. B., Cooper, W. H., Grise, M. L., & Bastianutti, L. (1994). Blocking electronic brainstorms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1), 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Personality Psychology in Europe, 7, 7–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldenberg, O., Larson, J. R., & Wiley, J. (2013). Goal instructions, response format, and idea generation in groups. Small Groups Research, 44(3), 227–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gryskiewicz, S. S. (1988). Trial by fire in an industrial setting: A practical evaluation of three creative problem-solving techniques. In K. Gronhaug & G. Kaufmann (Eds.), Innovation: A cross-disciplinary perspective (pp. 205–232). Norwegian University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, S., & Kou, C. Y. (2013). Collective engagement in creative tasks: The role of evaluation in the creative process in groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(3), 346–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horwitz, S. K., & Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33(6), 987–1015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hülsheger, U. R., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J. F. (2009). Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1128–1145.

    Google Scholar 

  • John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative collaboration. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 681–706.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenworthy, J. B., Marusich, L. R., Paulus, P. B., Abellanoza, A., & Bakdash, J. Z. (2020). The impact of top performers in idea generation groups. Journal of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000365

  • Kohn, N. W., Paulus, P. B., & Choi, Y. (2011). Building on the ideas of others: An examination of the idea combination process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 554–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korde, R., & Paulus, P. B. (2017). Alternating individual and group idea generation: Finding the elusive synergy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 177–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, M. W., Fleming, G. P., & Mannis, S. M. (2001). Improving face-to-face brainstorming through modeling and facilitation. Small Group Research, 32, 533–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larey, T. S., & Paulus, P. B. (1995). Social comparison and goal setting in brainstorming groups. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1579–1596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larey, T. S., & Paulus, P. B. (1999). Group preference and convergent tendencies in groups: A content analysis of group brainstorming performance. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 175–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewandowsky, S., Little, D., & Kalish, M. L. (2007). Knowledge and expertise. In F. T. Durso, R. S. Nickerson, S. T. Dumais, S. Lewandowsky, T. J. Perfect, D. Little, & M. L. Kalish (Eds.), Handbook of Applied Cognition (2nd ed., pp. 83–109). Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang, D. W., Moreland, R., & Argote, L. (1995). Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating factor of transactive memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(4), 384–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litchfield, R. C. (2008). Brainstorming reconsidered: A goal-based view. Academy of Management Review, 33, 649–668. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2008.32465708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Litchfield, R. C., Fan, J., & Brown, V. R. (2011). Directing idea generation using brainstorming with specific novelty goals. Motivation and Emotion, 35, 135–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Littlepage, G. E., & Mueller, A. L. (1997). Recognition and utilization of expertise in problem-solving groups: Expert characteristics and behavior. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1(4), 324–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luan, K., Ling, C., & Xie, X. (2016). The nonlinear effects of educational diversity on team creativity. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 54(4), 465–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, D. B., & Finger, J. R. (1978). Comparison of a written feedback procedure, group brainstorming, and individual brainstorming. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 120–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1995). Trait explanations in personality psychology. European Journal of Personality, 9, 231–252. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2410090402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLeod, P. L., Lobel, S. A., & Cox, T. H. (1996). Ethnic diversity and creativity in small groups. Small Group Research, 27, 248–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadow, A., Parnes, S. J., & Reese, H. (1959). Influence of brainstorming instructions and problem sequence on a creative problem solving test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43(6), 413–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michinov, N. (2012). Is electronic brainstorming or brainwriting the best way to improve creative performance in groups? An overlooked comparison of two idea-generation techniques. Journal of Applied Psychology, 42(S1), E222–E243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milliken, F. J., Bartel, C. A., & Kurtzberg, T. R. (2003). Diversity and creativity in work groups: A dynamic perspective on the affective and cognitive processes that link diversity and performance. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 32–62). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, K. C. (1998). The effect of break task on performance during a second session of brainstorming. Unpublished Master’s thesis. University of Texas at Arlington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mone, M. A., McKinley, W., & Barker, V. L. (1998). Organizational decline and innovation: a contingency framework. Academy of Management Review, 23, 115–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullen, B., Johnson, C., & Salas, E. (1991). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12(1), 3–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M. D. (2012). Handbook of organizational creativity. Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M. D., & Todd, E. M. (2020). Creativity and innovation in organizations. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakui, T., Paulus, P. B., & van der Zee, K. I. (2011). The role of attitudes in reactions to diversity in work groups. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 2327–2351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nemeth, C. J., Personnaz, B., Personnaz, M., & Goncalo, J. A. (2004). The liberating role of conflict in group creativity: A study in two countries. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 365–374. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2006). How the group affects the mind: A cognitive model of idea generation in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 186–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nijstad, B. A., Stroebe, W., & Lodewijkx, H. F. M. (1999). Persistence of brainstorming groups: How do people know when to stop? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 165–185. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1998.1374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunamaker, J. F., Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Vogel, D. R., & George, J. F. (1991). Electronic meeting systems to support group work. Communications of the ACM, 34(7), 41–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Offner, A. K., Kramer, T. J., & Winter, J. P. (1996). The effects of facilitation, recording, and pauses on group brainstorming. Small Group Research, 27, 283–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborn, A. F. (1942). How to “Think Up”. McGraw-Hill Book Co..

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking. Scribners.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxley, N. L., Dzindolet, M. T., & Paulus, P. B. (1996). The effects of facilitators on the performance of brainstorming groups. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11, 633–646.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parnes, S. J., & Meadow, A. (1959). Effects of “brainstorming” instructions on creative problem solving by trained and untrained subjects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 50(4), 171–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putman, V. L., & Paulus, P. B. (2009). Brainstorming, brainstorming rules, and decision making. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 43, 23--39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., Baruah, J., & Kenworthy, J. (2018). Enhancing collaborative ideation in organizations. Frontiers in Organizational Psychology, 9, 2024.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., & Brown, V. (2003). Enhancing ideational creativity in groups: Lessons from research on brainstorming. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 110–136). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., & Brown, V. R. (2007). Toward more creative and innovative group idea generation: A cognitive-social-motivational perspective of group brainstorming. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1, 248–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., & Coskun, H. (2013). Group creativity. In J. M. Levine (Ed.), Group processes (pp. 215–239). Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., & Dzindolet, M. (1993). Social influence processes in group brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(5), 575–586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., Dzindolet, M. T., & Kohn, N. (2012). Collaborative creativity—Group creativity and team innovation. In M. D. Mumford (Ed.), Handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 327–357). Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., Larey, T. S., & Ortega, A. H. (1995). Performance and perceptions of brainstormers in an organizational setting. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 249–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., Larey, T. S., Putman, V. L., Leggett, K. L., & Roland, E. J. (1996). Social influence processing in computer brainstorming. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 18(1), 3–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., Kohn, N. W., & Arditti, L. E. (2011). Effects of quantity and quality instructions on brainstorming. Journal of Creative Behavior, 45, 38–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., Kohn, N. W., Arditti, L. E., & Korde, R. M. (2013). Understanding the group size 816 effect in electronic brainstorming. Small Groups Research, 44, 332–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., Korde, R. M., Dickson, J. J., Carmeli, A., & Cohen-Meitar, R. (2015). Asynchronous brainstorming in an industrial setting: Exploratory studies. Human Factors, 57(6), 1076–1094.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., Levine, D. S., Brown, V. R., Minai, A. A., & Doboli, S. (2010). Modeling ideational creativity in groups: Connecting cognitive, neural, and computational approaches. Small Group Research, 41, 688–724.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., & Nijstad, B. A. (2003). Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., & Nijstad, B. A. (2019). The Oxford handbook of group creativity and innovation. .

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., Nakui, T., Putman, V. L., & Brown, V. R. (2006). Effects of task instructions and brief breaks on brainstorming. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 10(3), 206–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., & van der Zee, K. I. (2015). Creative processes in culturally diverse teams. In S. Otten, K. I. van der Zee, & M. Brewer (Eds.), Towards inclusive organizations: Determinants of successful diversity management at work (pp. 108–131). Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., van der Zee, K. I., & Kenworthy, J. B. (2017). Cultural diversity and team creativity. In V. P. Glāveanu (Ed.), The Palgrave handbook of creativity and culture research (pp. 57–76). Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., van der Zee, K. I., & Kenworthy, J. (2019). Diversity and group creativity. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Handbook of group creativity and innovation (pp. 33–49). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., & Yang, H. (2000). Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 76–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiter-Palmon, R. (Ed.). (2018). Team creativity and innovation. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiter-Palmon, R., Wigert, B., & de Vreede, T. (2012). Team creativity and innovation: The effect of group composition, social processes, and cognition. In M. D. (Ed.), Handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 295–326). Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ren, Y., & Argote, L. (2011). Transactive memory systems 1985–2010: An integrative framework of key dimensions, antecedents, and consequences. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 189–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2007). The effects of knowledge activation on the quantity and quality of ideas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(6), 933–946.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2014). Effects of problem scope and creativity instructions on idea generation and selection. Creativity Research Journal, 26(2), 185–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salas, E., Rosen, M. A., Burke, C. S., & Goodwin, G. F. (2009). Wisdom of collectives in organizations: An update of the teamwork competencies. In E. Salas, G. F. Goodwin, & C. S. Burke (Eds.), Team effectiveness in complex organizations: Cross-disciplinary perspectives and approaches (pp. 39–79). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (2015). “So we meet again!” Replies to Gabora and Weisberg. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(1), 25–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (2019). Creativity in sociocultural systems: Cultures, nations, and civilizations. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Handbook of group creativity and innovation (pp. 271–284). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. (2003). The constraining effects of initial ideas. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 15–31). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Costs of expertise. In K. A. Ericsson (Ed.), The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports and games (pp. 347–354). Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (2006). Creating a vision of creativity: The first 25 years. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1, 2–12. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.S.1.2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, R. I., & Hargadon, A. (1996). Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4), 685–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tadmor, C. T., Satterstrom, P., Jang, S., & Polzer, J. T. (2012). Beyond individual creativity: The superadditive benefits of multicultural experience for collective creativity in culturally diverse teams. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(3), 384–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang, M., & Joos, I. (2017). Evaluation of training initiatives about the management of creativity and innovation: practice of an intensive program. In M. Tang, & C. H. Werner (Eds.), Handbook of the management of creativity and innovation: Theory and practice (Vol. 279–298). Singapore: World Scientific Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taggar, S. (2002). Individual creativity and group ability to utilize individual creative resources: A multilevel model. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 315–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taggar, S. (2019). The distal and proximal antecedents of creativity in teams. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Handbook of group creativity and innovation. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, D. W., Berry, P. C., & Block, C. H. (1958). Does group participation when using brainstorming facilitate or inhibit creative thinking? Administrative Science Quarterly, 3, 23–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L., & Choi, H.-S. (2006). Creativity and innovation in organizational teams. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valacich, J. S., & Schwenk, C. (1985). Devil’s advocacy and dialectical inquiry effects on group decision making using computer-mediated versus verbal communication. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63(2), 158–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., & Delbecq, A. L. (1974). The effectiveness of nominal, delphi, and interacting group decision making processes. Academy of Management Journal, 17(4), 605–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, H., van Engen, M. L., & van Knippenberg, D. (2012). Defying conventional wisdom: A meta-analytical examination of the differences between demographic and job-related diversity relationships with performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119(1), 38–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg, D., & Mell, J. N. (2016). Past, present, and potential future of team diversity research: From compositional diversity to emergent diversity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136, 135–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanGundy, A. B. (1983). Brainwriting for new product ideas: An alternative to brainstorming. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 1, 67–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vincent, A. S., Decker, B. P., & Mumford, M. D. (2002). Divergent thinking, intelligence, and expertise: A test of alternative models. Creativity Research Journal, 14(2), 163–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Davidson, R. A. (2004). The role of individualism and the five-factor model in the prediction of performance in a leaderless group discussion. Journal of Personality, 72(1), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, M. A., & Richter, A. W. (2008). Climates and cultures for innovation and creativity at work. In J. Zhou & C. E. Shalley (Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Creativity (pp. 211–236). Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, J. (1998). Expertise as mental set: The effects of domain knowledge in creative problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 26, 716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. Y., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 77–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in the production of knowledge. Science, 316, 1036–1039.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, J., & Shalley, C. E. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of organizational creativity. Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Some of the research reported in this chapter were supported by a series of grants from the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Some of the research reported was partially supported by the Army Research Office under grant W911NF-20-1-0213. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the US Army Research Laboratory or the US government. The US government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation herein. 

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA

    Paul B. Paulus & Jared B. Kenworthy

Authors
  1. Paul B. Paulus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jared B. Kenworthy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jared B. Kenworthy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY, USA

    Simona Doboli

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA

    Jared B. Kenworthy

  3. Department of Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Ali A. Minai

  4. Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA

    Paul B. Paulus

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Paulus, P.B., Kenworthy, J.B. (2021). Research Findings on Ideational Creativity in Groups. In: Doboli, S., Kenworthy, J.B., Minai, A.A., Paulus, P.B. (eds) Creativity and Innovation. Understanding Complex Systems. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77198-0_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation