Creative Problem Solving in Small Groups: The Effects of Creativity Training on Idea Generation,Solution Creativity,and Leadership Effectiveness

This investigation evaluated the degree to which creativity training, idea generation instruction, and creative process impacted idea production, creativeness of solutions, and leadership effectiveness. Three sets of hypotheses were tested with a 114 groups of adults. First, groups whose members had some (i.e., one CPS course) or advanced training (i.e., graduate-level study in creativity or creativity professionals) were significantly more effective at idea generation than groups without training. Furthermore, leaders with some and advanced training were perceived to be significantly more effective than those with no creativity training. With respect to creativeness of solutions, the advanced training groups outperformed all others. The second set of hypotheses focused on the effectiveness of idea generation instruction (i.e., instructions without brainstorming, brainstorming, and brainstorming with criticism). Analysis revealed no significant difference for idea generation instruction relative to idea production or creativeness of solutions. The final set of hypotheses examined the use of a simple process structure for groups without prior creativity training (i.e., distinct phases for idea generation and solution development). Analysis revealed that those meetings that followed a simple process structure out performed groups that did not follow a process for both idea generation and creativeness of solutions. Further results are presented and implications discussed.     

Using Daily Creativity Planning to Promote Creative Behavior

Research has demonstrated that on the path from a creative idea to a creative outcome, high creativity motivation and self-efficacy do not necessarily lead to creative behavior. The present study proposed and examined the notion that daily creativity planning could promote creative behavior and contribute to the cultivation of creativity. A total of 77 middle school students (39 students in the experimental group and 38 in the control group) participated in this study, for which a quasi-experimental design was administered. The experimental group conducted a two-week daily planning for creative activities, while the control group did not conduct any intervention. The results showed that students' creativity motivation and creative self-efficacy were at relatively high levels overall and were positively and moderately correlated with creative behavior. Daily planning could effectively facilitate students' creative behavior. These findings point to a promising and simple creativity enhancement strategy for cultivating students to develop the habit of making creative plans in their daily lives.     

Schedule interactions involving punishment with pigeons and humans

The principal aim of the present experiments was to assess whether punishment increased or decreased the rate of unpunished behavior (contrast and induction, respectively) for which reinforcement rate was held constant, with physical and nonphysical punishers (electric shock and response cost), pigeon and human subjects, signaled and unsignaled components (multiple and mixed schedules), and the presence or absence of a blackout period between components. Across the three experiments there were 20 punishment conditions. Induction was found in nine of those, less consistent response-rate reduction was found in three, contrast was found in four, and in four there was no change in responding from conditions without punishment. Contrast occurred consistently only with multiple schedules during the first exposure to electric-shock punishment. Induction and no change, however, were found with every combination of the independent variables studied. Four conclusions regarding the interactions between punished and unpunished responding emerged from the present results: (a) Both contrast and induction occurred with the reinforcement rate held constant and a blackout between components, (b) induction was more common than contrast, (c) contrast occurred only in the presence of a stimulus different from that correlated with the punisher, and (d) contrast diminished with prolonged exposure to punishment. None of the current theoretical accounts of punishment contrast can explain the present results.     

How much woe when we go: A quantitative method for predicting culture shock

Culture shock is defined as the confusion and discomfort caused by the conflict in perceived motives and expected behaviors between the home culture and the foreign culture. Several quantitative and graphical methods employing techniques of cluster analysis and similarity mapping are offered for predicting the magnitude of culture shock between pairs of countries using data extracted from Hofstede's 1980–83 studies of national cultural values. Implications for business, politics, and personal stress management are discussed.     

Responding maintained under fixed-interval and fixed-time schedules of electric shock presentation

Following initial histories under a schedule of electric shock postponement, lever pressing in squirrel monkeys was maintained under fixed-interval and fixed-time schedules of electric shock presentation. No difference in either rate or pattern of responding was obtained when these schedules were presented as components of a multiple schedule. When they were presented singly for long periods of time, the fixed-interval schedule consistently maintained a higher response rate than the fixed-time schedule. The pattern of responding under both schedules was similar, typically consisting of a pause at the beginning of each interval followed by either a steady or a positively accelerating rate of responding. The results suggest that the response-shock dependency is of critical importance in the maintenance of high rates of responding under schedules of electric shock presentation, and support the general view that such responding may be conceptualized as operant behavior under control of many of the same variables that control responding under comparable schedules of food or water reinforcement.     

Selective punishment of interresponse times

Lever pressing by two squirrel monkeys was maintained under a variable-interval 60-second schedule of food presentation. When response-dependent electric shock was made contingent on comparatively long interresponse times, response rate increased, and further increases were obtained when the minimum interresponse-time requirement was decreased. When an equal proportion of responses produced shock without regard to interresponse time, rates decreased. Thus, shock contingent on long interresponse times selectively decreased the relative frequency of those interresponse times, and increased the relative frequency of shorter interresponse times, whereas shock delivered independent of interresponse times decreased the relative frequency of shorter interresponse times while increasing the frequency of longer ones. The results provide preliminary evidence that interresponse times may be differentiated by punishment, further supporting the notion that interresponse times may be considered functional units of behavior.     

Effects of signaled and unsignaled shock on schedule-controlled lever pressing and schedule-induced licking: Shock intensity and body weight

Schedule-controlled lever pressing and schedule-induced licking were studied in rats under a multiple fixed-interval fixed-interval schedule of food reinforcement. Following acquisition of stable rates of pressing and licking, a multiple variable-time variable-time schedule of electric-shock delivery was superimposed upon the baseline schedule. In only one component of the multiple schedule, a 5-sec stimulus preceded each shock (signaled shock). In the other component shock was unsignaled. Several shock intensities (Experiment 1) and body weights (Experiment 2) were studied. Lever pressing and licking were affected similarly by experimental manipulations, although with parametric differences. Depending upon shock intensity and body weight, rates of lever pressing and licking were hardly suppressed, suppressed primarily in the unsignaled shock component (differential suppression), or markedly suppressed in both components. Differential suppression during components with signaled and unsignaled shock and conditioned suppression of responding during the preshock stimulus appeared not to be functionally related. Differential suppression depended more on the discriminability of shock-free time, and on shock intensity, body weight, and the type of response than on the “preparatory” behavior preceding shock.     

Duration-reduction of avoidance sessions as negative reinforcement

Five rats were exposed to a shock-postponement procedure in which responses on each of two levers initially had equivalent effects. After an initial training sequence that ensured at least some responding on each lever, an additional consequence was made conjointly operative on the previously less-preferred lever for each animal. Each response on this lever continued to postpone shock, but also reduced the session duration by one minute. The conjoint contingencies were operative until, through session-shortening responses and the passage of time, the session was scheduled to end in two minutes; during the final two minutes the session-shortening contingency was disabled while the shock-postponement contingency continued to be operative on both levers. When responding shifted to a predominance on the session-shortening lever, the conjoint contingency was shifted to the other lever; for four of the five rats this reversal was followed by two additional reversals. Two of the rats' responding showed clear, strong, and unambiguous sensitivity to the session-shortening contingency. The responding of two others was also systematically controlled by that contingency, but the effects were less clearcut. The fifth animal showed an initial shift when session-shortening was introduced, but its subsequent behavior proved insensitive to reversals of procedure. The results clearly indicate a sensitivity of behavior to events on a time scale quite distinct from that of immediate consequences. They also support an interpretation of avoidance sessions, considered in their entirety, as events whose contingent relationship to behavior can affect that behavior—even in the absence of stimuli that delineate those relationships. Finally, these results support an interpretation of aversively based conditioning within a broader context, analogous to the “open versus closed economy” interpretation of appetitively controlled behavior.     

Two types of pigeon key pecking: suppression of long- but not short-duration key pecks by duration-dependent shock

The key pecking of eight pigeons was maintained on a variable-interval 1-minute schedule of food reinforcement. Sometimes, all responses between 35 and 50 milliseconds in duration produced a shock; sometimes, all responses between 10 and 25 milliseconds produced a shock; sometimes, shocks were produced by pecks without regard to duration (nondifferential punishment), and sometimes shocks were delivered independently of responding. Punishment of 35- to 50-millisecond responses selectively suppressed those responses, while punishment of 10- to 25-millisecond responses and nondifferential punishment suppressed responding overall but did not suppress responses of particular duration. Punishment of 35- to 50-millisecond responses suppressed key pecking slightly less than did nondifferential punishment. Punishment of 10- to 25-millisecond responses and response-independent shock produced roughly equal amounts of suppression, substantially less than the other punishment procedures. The data support the view that there are at least two kinds of key peck, identifiable on the basis of duration, one of which (short duration) is insensitive to its consequences.     

Electric shock produced drinking in the squirrel monkey.

Squirrel monkeys were periodically exposed to brief electric tail shocks in a test environment containing a rubber hose, response lever, and a water spout. Shock delivery produced preshock lever pressing and postshock hose biting. Additionally, all subjects displayed licking responses following postshock biting-attack episodes. Further experiments showed that licking was: (1) influenced by hours of water deprivation; (2) drinking behavior; (3) the direct result of shock delivery; and (4) developed spontaneously in naive subjects with or without opportunities for hose biting or lever pressing. Removing the opportunity to attack increased postshock drinking. A noxious environmental stimulus that causes aggression can also produce drinking.