People are increasingly asked to generate creative ideas for brands in campaigns intended to generate new ideas. We draw on and extend a growing stream of research suggesting that being creative can foster social connection by showing that generating creative ideas for a brand can strengthen self-brand connection. In six pre-registered experiments (N = 1,635), participants worked on either a creative or less-creative product idea generation task. Creative (vs. less-creative) idea generators reported feeling more connected to the brand (Studies 1A and 1B), and these effects manifested in real product choices (Study 4). The underlying psychological mechanism, perceived self-disclosure, emerged via both mediation (Study 2) and moderation (Study 3). In a high-powered replication (Study 5), we addressed alternative explanations including effort, engagement, brand liking, and willingness to pay. We discuss the implications of our findings for the broader possibility that being creative can foster social connection—a source of psychological well-being.
AakerJ. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3), 347–356.
2.
AakerJ.FournierS.BraselS. A. (2004). When good brands do bad. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 1–16.
3.
AggarwalP.LawS. (2005). Role of relationship norms in processing brand information. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(3), 453–464.
4.
AltmanI.TaylorD. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
5.
AmabileT. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376.
6.
AmabileT. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 123–167.
7.
BelkR. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168.
8.
BergJ. M.DuguidM. M.GoncaloJ. A.HarrisonS. H.Miron-SpektorE. (2023). Escaping irony: Making research on creativity in organizations more creative. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 175, 104235.
9.
BrodieR. J.IlicA.JuricB.HollebeekL. (2013). Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 105–114.
10.
CannonC.RuckerD. D. (2019). The dark side of luxury: Social costs of luxury consumption. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(5), 767–779.
11.
ChengS. Y.WhiteT. B.ChaplinL. N. (2012). The effects of self-brand connections on responses to brand failure: A new look at the consumer–brand relationship. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(2), 280–288.
12.
DanceF. E. X. (1970). The “concept” of communication. Journal of Communication, 20(2), 201–210.
13.
DuguidM. M.GoncaloJ. A. (2015). Squeezed in the middle: The middle status trade creativity for focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(4), 589–603.
14.
EscalasJ. E. (2004). Narrative processing: Building consumer connections to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1–2), 168–180.
15.
EscalasJ. E.BettmanJ. R. (2003). You are what they eat: The influence of reference groups on consumers’ connections to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 339–348.
16.
EscalasJ. E.BettmanJ. R. (2005). Self-construal, reference groups, and brand meaning. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(3), 378–389.
17.
EscalasJ. E.BettmanJ. R. (2009). Self-brand connections: The role of reference groups and celebrity endorsers in the creation of brand meaning. In MacInnisD. J.ParkC. W.PriesterJ. R. (Eds.), Handbook of brand relationships (pp. 107–123). M. E. Sharpe Incorporated.
18.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191.
19.
FerraroR.EscalasJ. E.BettmanJ. R. (2011). Our possessions, our selves: Domains of self-worth and the possession–self link. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(2), 169–177.
FiedlerK.SchottM.MeiserT. (2011). What mediation analysis can (not) do. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1231–1236.
22.
FinkenauerC.Buyukcan-TetikA. (2015). To know you is to feel intimate with you: Felt knowledge is rooted in disclosure, solicitation, and intimacy. Family Science, 6(1), 109–118.
23.
FournierS. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343–373.
24.
GodartF.SeongS.PhillipsD. J. (2020). The sociology of creativity: Elements, structures, and audiences. Annual Review of Sociology, 46, 489–510.
25.
GoncaloJ. A.VincentL. C.KrauseV. (2015). The liberating consequences of creative work: How a creative outlet lifts the physical burden of secrecy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 59, 32–39.
26.
GoncaloJ. A.KatzJ. H. (2020). Your soul spills out: The creative act feels self-disclosing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(5), 679–692.
27.
GoncaloJ. A.KatzJ. H.VincentL. C.KrauseV.YangS. (2021). Creativity connects: How the creative process fosters social connection and combats loneliness at work. In RouseE. D.ZhouJ. (Eds.), Handbook of research on creativity and innovation (pp. 204–223). Edward Elgar Publishing.
28.
GoncaloJ. A.StawB. M. (2006). Individualism–collectivism and group creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100(1), 96–109.
29.
GoldsmithR. E. (2012). Brand engagement and brand loyalty. In KapoorA.KulshrethaC. (Eds.), Branding and sustainable competitive advantage: Building virtual presence (pp. 121–135). IGI Global.
30.
HarrisonS. H.RouseE. D.FisherC. M.AmabileT. M. (2022). The turn toward creative work. Academy of Management Collections, 1(1), 1–15.
31.
HayesA. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. https://www.afhayes.com/index.html
32.
HelzerE. G.KimS. H. (2019). Creativity for workplace well-being. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(2), 134–147.
33.
Huaman-RamirezR.LunardoR.Vasquez-ParragaA. (2022). How brand self-disclosure helps brands create intimacy with customers: The role of information valence and anthropomorphism. Psychology & Marketing, 39(2), 460–477.
34.
KatzJ. H. (2020). The cost of new ideas: Idea generators become less satisfied. Academy of Management Discoveries, 6(4), 663–673.
35.
KellerK. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–22.
36.
KhessinaO. M.GoncaloJ. A.KrauseV. (2018). It’s time to sober up: The direct costs, side effects, and long-term consequences of creativity and innovation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 38, 107–135.
37.
KimS.GoncaloJ. A.RodasM. A. (2023). The cost of freedom: Creative ideation boosts both feelings of autonomy and the fear of judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 105, 104432.
38.
KimS.LucasB. J.GoncaloJ. A. (2023). Low power warm-up effect: Understanding the effect of power on creativity over time. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 107, 104474.
39.
KimE.ZeppenfeldV.CohenD. (2013). Sublimation, culture, and creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(4), 639–666.
40.
KrauseV.VincentL. C.GoncaloJ. A. (2024). Creative ideation activates disinhibited reward-seeking and indulgent choices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 127(4), 796–821.
41.
KumarV.AksoyL.DonkersB.VenkatesanR.WieselT.TillmannsS. (2010). Undervalued or overvalued customers: Capturing total customer engagement value. Journal of Service Research, 13(3), 297–310.
42.
LaurenceauJ.-P.BarrettL. F.PietromonacoP. R. (1998). Intimacy as an interpersonal process: The importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1238–1251.
43.
LazarM.Miron-SpektorE.MuellerJ. S. (2022). Love at first insight: An attachment perspective on early-phase idea selection. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 172, 104168.
44.
LeckieC.NyadzayoM. W.JohnsonL. W. (2016). Antecedents of consumer brand engagement and brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(5–6), 558–578.
45.
LeungF. F.GuF. F.PalmatierR. W. (2022). Online influencer marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 50, 226–251.
46.
LeiteF. P.BaptistaP. P. (2022). Influencers’ intimate self-disclosure and its impact on consumers’ self-brand connections: Scale development, validation, and application. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 16(3), 420–437.
47.
LisjakM.LeeA. Y.GardnerW. L. (2012). When a threat to the brand is a threat to the self: The importance of brand identification and implicit self-esteem in predicting defensiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(9), 1120–1132.
48.
LoewensteinJ.MuellerJ. (2016). Implicit theories of creative ideas: How culture guides creativity assessments. Academy of Management Discoveries, 2(4), 320–348.
49.
LuaE.LiuD.ShalleyC. E. (2024). Multilevel outcomes of creativity in organizations: An integrative review and agenda for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 45(2), 209–233.
50.
MeadG. H. (1963). Mind, self, and society. In BroomL.SelznikP. (Eds.), Sociology (3rd ed.). Harper and Row.
51.
MikulincerM.NachshonO. (1991). Attachment styles and patterns of self-disclosure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 321–331.
52.
MorrisonK. R.JohnsonC. S. (2011). When what you have is who you are: Self-uncertainty leads individualists to see themselves in their possessions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(5), 639–651.
53.
MorwitzV. G.SteckelJ. H.GuptaA. (2007). When do purchase intentions predict sales?International Journal of Forecasting, 23(3), 347–364.
54.
NguyenC.SlepianM. (2022). Revealing secrets. Current Opinion in Psychology, 47, 101425.
55.
NijstadB. A.De DreuC. K.RietzschelE. F.BaasM. (2010). The dual pathway to creativity model: Creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence. European Review of Social Psychology, 21(1), 34–77.
56.
NortonM. I.MochonD.ArielyD. (2012). The IKEA effect: When labor leads to love. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 453–460.
57.
O’ReillyC. A.ChatmanJ. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 492.
58.
ParkC. W.MacInnisD. J.PriesterJ.EisingerichA. B.IacobucciD. (2010). Brand attachment and brand attitude strength: Conceptual and empirical differentiation of two critical brand equity drivers. Journal of Marketing, 74(6), 1–17.
59.
PaulusP. B.BrownV. R. (2007). Toward more creative and innovative group idea generation: A cognitive-social-motivational perspective of brainstorming. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1(1), 248–265.
60.
ReisH. T.PatrickB. C. (1996). Attachment and intimacy: Component processes. In HigginsE. T.KruglanskiA. W. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 523–563). The Guilford Press.
61.
ReisH. T.ShaverP. R. (1988). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. In DuckS. (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 367–389). Wiley.
62.
RindfleischA.BurroughsJ. E.WongN. (2009). The safety of objects: Materialism, existential insecurity, and brand connection. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(1), 1–16.
63.
SassenbergK.MoskowitzG. B. (2005). Don’t stereotype, think different! Overcoming automatic stereotype activation by mindset priming. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(5), 506–514.
64.
SpencerS. J.ZannaM. P.FongG. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 845–851.
65.
SprecherS.TregerS.WondraJ. D. (2013). Effects of self-disclosure role on liking, closeness, and other impressions in get-acquainted interactions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(4), 497–514.
66.
SprottD.CzellarS.SpangenbergE. (2009). The importance of a general measure of brand engagement on market behavior: Development and validation of a scale. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(1), 92–104.
67.
SternbergR. J.LubartT. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In SternbergR. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press.
68.
SuttonR. I.HargadonA. (1996). Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4), 685–718.
69.
SwaminathanV.PageK. L.Gürhan-CanliZ. (2007). “My” brand or “our” brand: The effects of brand relationship dimensions and self-construal on brand evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(2), 248–259.
70.
TanT. M.SaloJ.JuntunenJ.KumarA. (2018). A comparative study of creation of self-brand connection amongst well-liked, new, and unfavorable brands. Journal of Business Research, 92, 71–80.
71.
TateC. U. (2015). On the overuse and misuse of mediation analysis: It may be a matter of timing. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 37(4), 235–246.
72.
ThomsonM. (2006). Human brands: Investigating antecedents to consumers’ strong attachments to celebrities. Journal of Marketing, 70(3), 104–119.
73.
WatsonD.ClarkL. A.TellegenA. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070.
74.
WiesS.BleierA.EdelingA. (2023). Finding Goldilocks influencers: How follower count drives social media engagement. Journal of Marketing, 87(3), 383–405.
75.
WillemsY. E.FinkenauerC.KerkhofP. (2020). The role of disclosure in relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 31, 33–37.
76.
WorthyM.GaryA. L.KahnG. M. (1969). Self-disclosure as an exchange process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13(1), 59–63.
77.
WronskaM. K.KolańczykA.NijstadB. A. (2018). Engaging in creativity broadens attentional scope. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1772.
78.
ZhouJ.ShalleyC. E. (2008). Expanding the scope and impact of organizational creativity research. In ZhouJ. (Ed.), Handbook of organizational creativity. Erlbaum.
79.
ZunickP. V.TeenyJ. D.FazioR. H. (2017). Are some attitudes more self-defining than others? Assessing self-related attitude functions and their consequences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(8), 1136–1149.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
