In a study investigating motivational factors in group brainstorming, we investigated the impact on performance of regulatory fit/nonfit (based on the group’s focus and task strategy). All members of three-person groups were placed in either a promotion focus or a prevention focus and then were all given either an eager strategy or a vigilant strategy for performing a brainstorming task (with an expectancy stop rule). As predicted, groups experiencing nonfit (promotion/vigilant, prevention/eager) spent more time working on the task and generated more nonredundant ideas than did groups experiencing fit (promotion/eager, prevention/vigilant). Also as predicted, task persistence mediated the joint impact of regulatory focus and task strategy on idea generation. Parallel results for idea diversity and quality were accounted for by number of ideas generated. These findings shed light on motivational aspects of group brainstorming and demonstrate the utility of regulatory fit theory for explaining small group phenomena.
AppeltK. C.ZouX.AroraP.HigginsE. T. (2009). Regulatory fit in negotiation: Effects of “prevention-buyer” and “promotion-seller” fit. Social Cognition, 27, 365–384. doi:10.1521/soco.2009.27.3.365
2.
BaasM.De DreuC. K. W.NijstadB. A. (2008). A meta-analysis of 25 years of mood-creativity research: Hedonic tone, activation, or regulatory focus?Psychological Bulletin, 134, 779–806. doi:10.1037/a0012815
3.
BaasM.De DreuC. K. W.NijstadB. A. (2011). When prevention promotes creativity: The role of mood, regulatory focus, and regulatory closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 794–809. doi:10.1037/a0022981
4.
BaasM.RoskesM.SligteD.NijstadB. A.De DreuC. K. W. (2013). Personality and creativity: The dual pathway to creativity model and a research agenda. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 732–748. doi:10.1111/spc3.12062
5.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1192. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.51.6.1173
6.
BechtoldtM. N.De DreuC. K. W.NijstadB. A.ChoiH. S. (2010). Motivated information processing, social tuning, and group creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 622–637. doi:10.1037/a0019386
7.
CesarioJ.GrantH.HigginsE. T. (2004). Regulatory fit and persuasion: Transfer from “feeling right.”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 388–404. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.86.3.388
8.
CesarioJ.HigginsE. T. (2008). Making message recipients “feel right”: How nonverbal cues can increase persuasion. Psychological Science, 19, 415–420. doi:10.1111/j.1467–9280.2008.02102.x
9.
CroweE.HigginsE. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 117–132. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.2675
10.
De DreuC. K. W.BaasM.NijstadB. A. (2008). Hedonic tone and activation level in the mood–creativity link: Toward a dual pathway to creativity model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 739–756. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.94.5.739
11.
De DreuC. K. W.NijstadB. A.BechtoldtM. N.BaasM. (2011). Group creativity and innovation: A motivated information processing perspective. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 81–89. doi:10.1037/a0017986
12.
De DreuC. K. WNijstadB. A.van KnippenbergD. (2008). Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 22–49. doi:10.1177/1088868307304092
13.
DiehlM.StroebeW. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.53.3.497
14.
DimotakisN.DavisonR. G.HollenbeckJ. R. (2012). Team structure and regulatory focus: The impact of regulatory fit on team dynamics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 421–434. doi:10.1037/a0026701
15.
FaddegonK.EllemersN.ScheepersD. (2009). Eager to be the best, or vigilant not to be the worst: The emergence of regulatory focus in disjunctive and conjunctive group tasks. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12, 653–671. doi:10.1177/1368430209339922
16.
FaddegonK.ScheepersD.EllemersN. (2008). If we have the will, there will be a way: Regulatory focus as a group identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 880–895. doi:10.1002/ejsp.483
17.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.MugnyG.GabarrotF.QuiamzadeA. (2011). A regulatory fit perspective in majority versus minority support to attitudes toward homosexuals. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14, 45–62. doi:10.1177/1368430210376077
18.
FreitasA. L.HigginsE. T. (2002). Enjoying goal-directed action: The role of regulatory fit. Psychological Science, 13, 1–6. doi:10.1111/1467–9280.00401
19.
FreitasA. L.LibermanN.HigginsE. T. (2002). Regulatory fit and resisting temptation during goal pursuit. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 291–298. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1504
20.
FriedmanR. S.ForsterJ. (2001). The effects of promotion and prevention cues on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 1001–1013. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.81.6.1001
21.
GrimmL. R.MarkmanA. B.MaddoxW. T.BaldwinG. C. (2009). Stereotype threat reinterpreted as a regulatory mismatch. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 288–304. doi:10.1037/a0013463
22.
HamstraM. R. W.BolderdijkJ. W.VeldstraJ. L. (2011). Everyday risk taking as a function of regulatory focus. Journal of Research in Personality, 45, 134–137. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2010.11.017
23.
HamstraM. R. W.SassenbergK.van YperenN. W.WisseB. (2014). Followers feel valued—When leaders’ regulatory focus makes leaders exhibit behavior that fits followers’ regulatory focus. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 51, 34–40. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.11.003
24.
HigginsE. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300. doi:10.1037/0003–066X.52.12.1280
25.
HigginsE. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 1–46). New York, NY: Academic Press.
26.
HigginsE. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55, 1217–1230. doi:10.1037/0003–066X.55.11.1217
27.
HigginsE. T. (2005). Value from regulatory fit. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 208–213. doi:10.1111/j.0963–7214.2005.00366.x
28.
HigginsE. T. (2006). Value from hedonic experience and engagement. Psychological Review, 113, 439–460. doi:10.1037/0033–295X.113.3.439
29.
HigginsE. T. (2012). Beyond pleasure and pain: How motivation works. New York, NY: Oxford.
30.
KooM.FishbachA. (2008). Dynamics of self-regulation: How (un)accomplished goal actions affect motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 183–195. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.94.2183
31.
LarsonJ. R.Jr (2010). In search of synergy in small group performance. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
32.
LevineJ. M.HigginsE. T.ChoiH. S. (2000). Development of strategic norms in groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 88–101. doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2889
33.
LountR.JrPhillipsK. W. (2007). Working harder with the out-group: The impact of social category diversity on motivation gains. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103, 214–224. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.03.002
34.
MullenB.JohnsonC.SalasE. (1991). Productivity loss in brainstrorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 3–24. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp1201_1
35.
NijstadB. A.De DreuC. K. W.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, 34–77. doi:10.1080/10463281003765323
36.
NijstadB. A.StroebeW.LodewijkxH. F. M. (1999). Persistence of brainstorming groups: How do people know when to stop?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 165–185. doi:10.1006/jesp.1998.1374
37.
NijstadB. A.van VianenA. E. M.StroebeW.LodewijkxH. F. M. (2004). Persistence in brainstorming: Exploring stop rules in same-sex groups. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 7, 195–206. doi:10.1177/1368430204046107
38.
OsbornA. F. (1953). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking. New York, NY: Scribners.
39.
OsbornA. F. (1957). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking (Rev. ed.). New York, NY: Scribners.
40.
PaulusP. B.DzindoletM. T. (2008). Social influence, creativity, and innovation. Social Influence, 3, 228–247. doi:10.1080/15534510802341082
41.
PaulusP. B.DzindoletM. T.KohnN. (2011). Collaborative creativity: Group creativity and team innovation. In MumfordM. D. (Ed.), Handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 325–354). New York, NY: Elsevier.
42.
PhillipsK. W.LiljenquistK.NealeM. A. (2009). Is the pain worth the gain? The advantages and liabilities of agreeing with socially distinct newcomers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 336–350. doi:10.1177/0146167208328062
43.
RietzschelE. F. (2011). Collective regulatory focus predicts specific aspects of team innovation. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14, 337–345. doi:10.1177/1368430210392396
44.
RietzschelE. F.De DreuC. K. W.NijstadB. A. (2007). Personal need for structure and creative performance: The moderating influence of fear of invalidity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 855–866. doi:10.1177/0146167207301017
45.
RietzschelE. F.NijstadB. A.StroebeW. (2007). Relative accessibility of domain knowledge and creativity: The effects of knowledge activation on the quantity and quality of generated ideas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 933–946. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.10.014
46.
SacramentoC. A.FayD.WestM. A. (2013). Workplace duties or opportunities? Challenge stressors, regulatory focus, and creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 121, 141–157. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.01.008
47.
SassenbergK.JonasK. J.ShahJ. Y.BrazyP. C. (2007). Why some groups just feel better: The regulatory fit of group power.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 249–267. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.92.2.249
48.
SassenbergK.WoltinK.-A. (2008). Group-based self-regulation: The effects of regulatory focus. European Review of Social Psychology, 19, 126–164. doi:10.1080/10463280802201894
49.
ScholerA. A.ZouX.FujitaK.StroessnerS. J.HigginsE. T. (2010). When risk seeking becomes a motivational necessity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 215–231. doi:10.1037/a0019715
50.
ShroutP. E.BolgerN. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445. doi:10.1037/1082–989X.7.4.422
51.
StroebeW.NijstadB. A.RietzschelE. F. (2010). Beyond productivity loss in brainstorming groups: The evolution of a question. In ZannaM. P.OlsonJ. M. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 43, pp. 157–203). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
52.
SuttonR. I.HargadonA. (1996). Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 685–718. doi:10.2307/2393872
53.
VaughnL. A.MalikJ.SchwartzS.PetkovaZ.TrudeauL. (2006). Regulatory fit as input for stop rules. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 601–611. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.91.4.601
54.
WerthL.ForsterJ. (2007). The effects of regulatory focus on braking speed. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 2764–2787. doi:10.1111/j.1559–1816.2007.00280.x
55.
ZaalM. P.van LaarC.StahlT.EllemersN.DerksB. (2012). Social change as an important goal or likely outcome: How regulatory focus affects commitment to collective action. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 93–110. doi:10.1111/j.2044–8309.2010.02006.x
56.
ZhouQ.HirstG.ShiptonH. (2011). Context matters: Combined influence of participation and intellectual stimulation on the promotion focus–employee creativity relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 894–909. doi:10.1002/job.779
