This article is a report of two experiments that were conducted to investigate the creative performance of groups during idea-generation sessions. The hypothesis was that groups in which higher levels of both member diversity and similarity of thought categories were combined would show greater gains in creative performance. In Study 1, the participants (n = 168) were assigned to 56 three-person groups and performed an inventive creativity task. The results supported the hypothesis. Forty-one three-person groups, which consisted solely of female participants (n = 123) performed an ameliorative creativity task in Study 2. The hypothesis was again confirmed. These results suggest that a form of synergy between diversity and similarity operates in group creativity.
Baer, J. (1993). Creativity and divergent thinking: A task-specific approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2.
Basadur (1993). Impacts and outcomes of creativity in organizational settings. In S. G. Isaksen, M. C. Murdock, R. L. Firestien, & D. J. Treffinger (Eds.), Nurturing and developing creativity: The emergence of a discipline(pp. 278-313). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
3.
Buchanan, L. J., Jr., & Lindgren, H. C. (1973). Brainstorming in large groups as a facilitator of children’s creative responses. Journal of Psychology, 83, 117-122.
4.
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.
5.
Diehl, M.,& Stroebe, W. (1991). Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 392-403.
6.
Gallupe, R. B., Cooper, W. H., Grise, M. L.,& Bastianutti, L. M. (1994). Blocking electronic brainstorms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 77-86.
7.
Gerstenfeld, A. (1970). Organizational climate for creativity. In A. Gerstenfeld (Ed.), Effective management of research and development(pp. 55-67). Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley.
8.
Ghiselli, E.,& Lodahl, T. (1958). Patterns of managerial traits and group effectiveness. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 57, 61-66.
9.
Gigone, D., & Hastie, R. (1993). The common knowledge effect: Information sharing and group judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 959-974.
10.
Graham, W. K. (1977). Acceptance of ideas generated through individual and group brainstorming. Journal of Social Psychology, 101, 231-234.
11.
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
12.
Hoffman, L. R. (1959). Homogeneity of member personality and its effects on group problem-solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 27-32.
13.
Hoffman, L. R. (1979). Applying experimental research on group problem solving to organizations. Journal of Applied Behavior, 15, 375-391.
14.
Hoffman, L. R., Harburg, E.,& Maier, N. R. F. (1962). Differences and disagreement as factors in creative group problem solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 64, 206-214.
15.
Hoffman, L., & Maier, N. (1961). Quality and acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 401-407.
16.
Isaksen S. G. & Murdock, M. C. (1993). The emergence of a discipline: Issues and approaches to the study of creativity. In S. G. Isaksen, M. C. Murdock, R. L. Firestien,& D. J. Treffinger (Eds.), Nurturing and developing creativity: The emergence of a discipline(pp. 145-168). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
17.
Jackson, S. E., May, K. E.,& Whitney, K. (1995). Understanding the dynamics of diversity in decision-making teams. In R.A. Guzzo, E. Salas, et al. (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision-making in organizations(pp. 204-261). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18.
Kasperson, K. J. (1978). Scientific creativity: Arelationship with information channels. Psychological Reports, 42, 691-694.
19.
Kerr, N. L., & Bruun, S. (1983). The dispensability of member effort and group motivation losses: Free rider effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 78-94.
20.
Kurtzberg, T. R.,& Amabile, T. M. (2000/2001). From Guilford to creative synergy: Opening the black box of team-level creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 285-294.
21.
Latané, B., Williams, K.,& Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light thework: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 822-832.
22.
Maginn, B. K., & Harris, R. J. (1980). Effects of anticipated evaluation on individual brainstorming performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 120-123.
23.
Moreland, R. L., Levine, J. M.,& Wingert, M. L. (1996). Creating the ideal group: Composition effects atwork. In E. Witte& J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: Vol. 2. Small group processes and interpersonal relations(pp. 11-35). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24.
Mullen, B., Johnson, C., & Salas, E. (1991). Process loss in brainstorming groups: A metaanalytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 3-23.
25.
Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied Imagination. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
26.
Paulus, P. B. (2000). Groups, teams, and creativity: The creative potential of idea-generating groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49, 237-262.
27.
Paulus, P. B., Dzindolet, M. T., Poletes, G., & Camacho, L. M. (1993). Perception of performance in group brainstorming: The illusion of group productivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 78-89.
28.
Pelz (1956). Some social factors related to performance in a research organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1, 310-325.
29.
Price, K. H. (1993). Working hard to get people to loaf. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 14, 329-344.
30.
Purser, R. E.,& Montuori, A. (1995). Varieties of knowledgework experience: Acritical systems inquiry into epistemologies and mindscapes of knowledge production. In M. Beyerlein& D. Johnson (Eds.), Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams: Vol. 1. Knowledge teams: The creative edge(pp. 117-162). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
31.
Slabbert, J. A. (1994). Creativity in education revisited: Reflection in aid progression. Journal of Creative Behavior, 27, 60-69.
32.
Stasson, M. F.,& Bradshaw, S. D. (1995). Explanation of individual-group performance differences: What sort of “bonus” can be gained through group interaction?Small Group Research, 26, 296-308.
33.
Stewart, D., & Stasser, G. (1995). Expert role assignment and information sampling during collective recall and decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 619-628.
34.
Stroebe, W.,& Diehl, M. (1994). Why groups are less effective than their members: On productivity losses in idea-generating groups. European Review of Social Psychology, 5, 271-304.
35.
Szymanski, K., & Harkins, S. (1992). Self-evaluation and creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 259-265.
36.
Theirauff (1978). An introductory approach to operations research. New York: John Wiley.
37.
Thompson, E. P., Chaiken, S., & Hazlewood, J. D. (1993). Need for cognition and desire for control as moderators of extrinsic reward effects: A person · situation approach to the study of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 987-999.
38.
Thornburg, T. H. (1991). Group size and member diversity influence on creative performance. Journal of Creative Behavior, 25, 324-333.
39.
Triandis, H. C., Hall, E. R.,& Ewen, R. B. (1965).Member heterogeneity and dyadic creativity. Human Relations, 18, 33-55.
40.
Vroom, V. H., Grant, L. D.,& Cotton, T. S. (1969). The consequences of social interaction in group problem solving. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 77-95.
41.
Yamaguchi, H. (1997a). Size effects on creative idea production by means of group discussion. Journal of the Faculty of Letters, Okayama University, 27, 87-98.
42.
Yamaguchi, H. (1997b). The influences of member diversity upon group creativity. Research Bulletin of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Education, Kyusyu University, 42, 9-19.
