This study investigates a critical and previously unexplored question: Does habitual AI adoption diminish individual creativity? If so, what are the boundary conditions that may amplify or mitigate this negative effect? A total of 77 participants were recruited to complete a creativity task, with their self-reported lay creativity, goal orientation, and habitual AI adoption assessed 1 week prior. Using a combination of self-report measures and ecologically valid creative evaluations, the findings reveal that habitual AI adoption significantly reduces creativity, even after controlling for self-reported creativity, and emotional attachment towards AI. Furthermore, goal orientation moderates this relationship: individuals with a higher learning/mastery orientation experience a greater negative impact, while those with a higher performance orientation show an attenuated negative effect. These findings apply to both the novelty and usefulness dimensions of creativity. This study makes a novel contribution by being the first to demonstrate the detrimental effects of habitual AI adoption on human creativity, contributing to the theoretical understanding of how motivational goals moderate this effect. In practice, training programs that prioritize creativity could leverage current results to design teaching materials that account for individuals’ motivational goals when AI-human interaction is present.
AdıgüzelT.KayaM. H.CansuF. K. (2023). Revolutionizing education with AI: Exploring the transformative potential of ChatGPT. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep429. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13152
2.
Ali ElfaM. A.DawoodM. E. T. (2023). Using artificial intelligence for enhancing human creativity. Journal of Art, Design and Music, 2(2), 3. https://doi.org/10.55554/2785-9649.1017
3.
AmabileT. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997–1013. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.43.5.997
4.
AmabileT. 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
5.
AmabileT. M.ContiR.CoonH.LazenbyJ.HerronM. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154–1184. https://doi.org/10.2307/256995
AshkinazeJ.MendelsohnJ.QiweiL.BudakC.GilbertE. (2025). How AI ideas affect the creativity, diversity, and evolution of human ideas: Evidence from a large, dynamic experiment. In Proceedings of the ACM collective intelligence conference (pp. 198–213). Cornell University.
8.
AutorD. H. (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(3), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.29.3.3
9.
BaerJ. (1993). Divergent thinking and creativity: A task-specific approach: Erlbaum.
10.
BaerJ. (1994). Divergent thinking is not a general trait: A multidomain training experiment. Creativity Research Journal, 7(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419409534507
BaerJ. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.002
13.
BonsuE. M.Baffour-KoduahD. (2023). From the consumers’ side: Determining students’ perception and intention to use ChatGPT in Ghanaian higher education. Journal of Education, Society & Multiculturalism, 4(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.2478/jesm-2023-0001
14.
BouffardT.VezeauC.BordeleauL. (1998). A developmental study of the relation between combined learning and performance goals and students’ self-regulated learning. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(3), 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1998.tb01293.x
15.
BowdenE. M.Jung-BeemanM. (2003). Normative data for 144 compound remote associate problems. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers: A Journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc, 35(4), 634–639. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03195543
16.
ButtonC.MathieuJ. E.ZajacD. M. (1996). Goal orientation in organizational research: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(1), 26–48. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.0063
ColquittJ. A.SimmeringM. J. (1998). Conscientiousness, goal orientation, and motivation to learn during the learning process: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4), 654–665. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.83.4.654
20.
ContiR.CoonH.AmabileT. M. (1996). Evidence to support the componential model of creativity: Secondary analyses of three studies. Creativity Research Journal, 9(4), 385–389. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj0904_9
DergaaI.Fekih-RomdhaneF.HallitS.LochA. A.GlennJ. M.FessiM. S.SaadH. (Eds.). (2024). ChatGPT is not ready yet for use in providing mental health assessment and interventions. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 14(1277756). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1277756
23.
DoshiA. R.HauserO. P. (2024). Generative AI enhances individual creativity but reduces the collective diversity of novel content. Science Advances, 10(28), eadn5290. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adn5290
24.
DuK.WangY.MaX.LuoZ.WangL.ShiB. (2020). Achievement goals and creativity: The mediating role of creative self-efficacy. Educational Psychology, 40(10), 1249–1269. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2020.1806210
25.
DuhaylungsodA. V.ChavezJ. V. (2023). ChatGPT and other AI users: An innovative and creative shift in utilitarian value and mindset. Journal of Namibian Studies: History Politics Culture, 33, 4367–4378.
DweckC. S.LeggettE. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.95.2.256
28.
ElgammalA.LiuB.ElhoseinyM.MazzoneM. (2017). CAN: Creative adversarial networks, generating “art” by learning about styles and deviating from style norms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.07068.
29.
ElliotA. J.ChurchM. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), 218–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.1.218
30.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
31.
FraleyR. C.WallerN. G.BrennanK. A. (2000). An item response theory analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(2), 350–365. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.78.2.350
GongY.HuangJ. C.FarhJ. L. (2009). Employee learning orientation, transformational leadership, and employee creativity: The mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 765–778. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.43670890
HenkelL. A. (2014). Point-and-shoot memories: The influence of taking photos on memory for a museum tour. Psychological Science, 25(2), 396–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613504438
39.
HirstG.Van KnippenbergD.ZhouJ. (2009). A cross-level perspective on employee creativity: Goal orientation, team learning behavior, and individual creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 52(2), 280–293. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.37308035
40.
HongJ. W.CurranN. M. (2019). Artificial intelligence, artists, and art: Attitudes toward artwork produced by humans vs. artificial intelligence. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMM), 15(2s), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3326337
41.
HoughtonJ. D.DiLielloT. C. (2010). Leadership development: The key to unlocking individual creativity in organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(3), 230–245. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437731011039343
42.
JiaN.LuoX.FangZ.LiaoC. (2024). When and how artificial intelligence augments employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 67(1), 5–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2022.0426
43.
KaufmanJ. C. (2006). Self-reported differences in creativity by ethnicity and gender. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(8), 1065–1082. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1255
44.
KimT.MolinaM. D.RheuM.ZhanE. S.PengW. (2023). One AI does not fit all: A cluster analysis of the laypeople’s perception of AI roles. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–20). ACM Digital Library.
45.
KwanL. Y. Y.HungY. S. (2025). Unravelling team creativity: Complementarity between dyadic team members results in higher team creativity as mediated by informational exchange. Current Psychology, 44(6), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-025-07296-y
46.
LeeH. H.YangT. T. (2015). Employee goal orientation, work unit goal orientation and employee creativity. Creativity and Innovation Management, 24(4), 659–674. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12118
47.
McCarthyM.ChenC. C.McNameeR. C. (2018). Novelty and usefulness trade-off: Cultural cognitive differences and creative idea evaluation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(2), 171–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022116680479
48.
MednickS. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3), 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048850
OrwigW.BellaicheL.SpoonerS.VoA.BaigZ.RagnhildstveitA.SchacterD.BarrN.SeliP. (2024). Does human creativity matter in the age of generative AI?Unpublished manuscript.
51.
Reiter-PalmonR.Robinson-MorralE. J.KaufmanJ. C.SantoJ. B. (2012). Evaluation of self-perceptions of creativity: Is it a useful criterion?Creativity Research Journal, 24(2-3), 107–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.676980
ShalleyC. E.ZhouJ.OldhamG. R. (2004). The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where should we go from here?Journal of Management, 30(6), 933–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.007
55.
ShorsT. J.AndersonM. L.Curlik IiD. M.NokiaM. S. (2012). Use it or lose it: How neurogenesis keeps the brain fit for learning. Behavioural Brain Research, 227(2), 450–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2011.04.023
56.
SilviaP. J.WintersteinB. P.WillseJ. T.BaronaC. M.CramJ. T.HessK. I.RichardC. A. (2008). Assessing creativity with divergent thinking tasks: Exploring the reliability and validity of new subjective scoring methods. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(2), 68–85. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.68
57.
SmithS. M.WardT. B.SchumacherJ. S. (1993). Constraining effects of examples in a creative generation task. Memory & Cognition, 21(6), 837–845. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03202751
58.
SparrowB.LiuJ.WegnerD. M. (2011). Google effects on memory: Cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science, 333(6043), 776–778. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1207745
59.
SternbergR. J. (2024). Do not worry that generative AI may compromise human creativity or intelligence in the future: It already has. Journal of Intelligence, 12(7), 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence12070069
StormB. C.StoneS. M. (2015). Saving-enhanced memory: The benefits of saving on the learning and remembering of new information. Psychological Science, 26(2), 182–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614559285
62.
TorranceE. P. (1990). The Torrance tests of creative thinking norms—technical manual figural (streamlined) forms A & B. Scholastic Testing Service.
63.
UzziB. (2023). Will AI kill human creativity?Forbes.
ZhaiC.WibowoS.LiL. D. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students’ cognitive abilities: A systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7
66.
ZhangY.YuZ. (2025). Emotional attachment as the key mediator: Expanding UTAUT2 to examine how perceived anthropomorphism in intelligent agents influences the sustained use of DouBao (Cici) among EFL learners. Education and Information Technologies, 1–23.
67.
ZhouJ.GeorgeJ. M. (2001). When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 682–696. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069410
68.
ZhouX.ZhangJ.ChanC. (2024). Unveiling students’ experiences and perceptions of artificial intelligence usage in higher education. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21(06). https://doi.org/10.53761/xzjprb23
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.
