- Email: [email protected]
Self-construal and creativity: The moderator effect of self-esteem
Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Self-construal and creativity: The moderator effect of self-esteem☆ Yan Wang, Ling Wang ⁎ Beijing Key Laboratory of Learning and Cognition, Department of Psychology, Capital Normal University, China
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 18 January 2016 Received in revised form 23 April 2016 Accepted 25 April 2016 Available online xxxx Keywords: Self-construal Creativity Self-esteem
a b s t r a c t The study examined the effects of self-esteem and self-construal on creativity in a collectivist culture. Junior school students (n = 316) completed the Self-Construal Scale, Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, and Test of Divergent Feeling. Correlation and regression analyses showed that both interdependent and independent selfconstruals are beneficial to creativity, although independent self-construal is more conducive to creativity than interdependent self-construal; self-esteem is also beneficial to creativity; and, moreover, self-esteem has a moderator role between self-construal and creativity and can strengthen the positive impact of interdependent selfconstrual on creativity. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Creativity is the ability to produce work that is both novel (i.e., original) and appropriate (i.e., meets task constraints; Stemberg & Lubart, 1996). Individuals who are highly creative have common personality traits. For example, they have higher self-acceptance, little concern for others' opinions (Barron & Harrington, 1981; Kelly, 2006), and high autonomy (Liu et al., 2013; Xiao, Wang, Chen, Zheng, & Chen, 2015). The relationship between self-esteem, which is a core personality variable, and creativity has also been examined. Much research has demonstrated the positive correlation between self-esteem and creativity (Cantero, Alfonso-Benlliure, & Melero, 2016; Deng & Zhang, 2011; Kemple, David, & Wang, 1996). The reason why self-esteem is beneficial to creativity may lie in the positive functions of self-esteem. High self-esteem individuals tend to believe themselves to be capable and worthy, so they are more likely to express ideas that differ from others, and are more willing to share creative ideas (Thatcher & Brown, 2010). Moreover, high self-esteem could maintain high internal motivation and reduce external motivation, which have been proposed to be crucial to creativity (Amabile & Pillemer, 2012; Eisenberger & Aselage, 2009). Since self-esteem is an important psychological resource that acts as a buffer against a stressful environment (Cast & Burke, 2002), high self-esteem reduces the possibility of creativity decreasing as a result of evaluation stress (Amabile, 1996; Amabile, Goldfarb, & Brackfield, 1990; Silvia & Phillips, 2004).
☆ This work was supported by a grant from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 31100757). ⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, College of Education, Capital Normal University, Beijing 100048, China. E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Wang).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.086 0191-8869/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Creativity is also sensitive to environmental variables (Hennessey & Amabile, 1998). Culture is an important environmental variable, and its relationship with creativity has been of interest to researchers. For example, Chiu and Kwan (2010) argued that culture could affect the outcomes of creative processing through its effects on social and psychological processes. Self-construal, which is a variable that is correlated with culture and self, refers to an individual's awareness of the relationship between the self and the surrounding environment (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Markus and Kitayama (1991) argued that selfconstrual can be divided into independent self-construal and interdependent self-construal. More specifically, in an individualistic society, people are more likely to accept individualistic cultural values, place emphasis on their inner thoughts and feelings, and portray themselves in terms of their inherent characteristics and goals, which is known as independent self-construal. By the same token, people living in a collectivist society always accept group cultural values, and attach importance to others' opinions or the relationship between the self and others, which is known as interdependent self-construal. Recent research studies into the relationship between self-esteem and self-construal show that low self-esteem may encourage behaviors that increase interdependence (Baker & McNulty, 2013; Nakashima, Yanagisawa, & Ura, 2013). Individuals with low self-esteem are more likely to conform to social norms and less likely to express disagreement with others (Murray et al., 2009). The previous literature has shown that independent self-construal has a positive impact on creativity while interdependent self-construal is negatively linked with creativity. For example, in Ng's (2003) study, the self-construal and creativity of 158 white undergraduates from Australia (an individualistic culture) and 186 Chinese undergraduates from Singapore (a collectivist culture) were measured, and structural equation modeling showed that independent self-construal had a positive impact on creative behavior, while interdependent self-construal
Y. Wang, L. Wang / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189
had a positive impact on conforming behavior. Wiekens and Stapel (2008) investigated the impact of situational self-construal on creativity. In their study, 61 undergraduate students were randomly assigned to one of three self-construal priming conditions (I-priming, we-priming, and a control condition) during a word search task, and then completed divergent thinking tasks. The results showed that participants in the Ipriming condition produced more creative and unusual answers, whereas those in the we-priming condition produced more standard answers. In summary, regardless of dispositional self-construal or situational self-construal, interdependent self-construal impedes creativity, whereas independent self-construal enhances creativity. 1.1. The present study Previous research has shown that independent self-construal has a positive impact on creative behavior while interdependent selfconstrual is negatively linked with creative behavior (Ng, 2003; Wiekens & Stapel, 2008). However, based on the person–environment model (Phillips, Cheng, Yeh, & Siu, 2010), the effect of self-construal might depend on other variables, such as self-esteem. The literature shows that self-esteem is an important psychological resource that acts as a buffer against a stressful environment (Cast & Burke, 2002) and is beneficial to creativity (Cantero et al., 2016; Deng & Zhang, 2011; Kemple et al., 1996). Thus, we proposed that self-esteem might be a moderator between self-construal and creativity. In addition, to the best of our knowledge, no research has been conducted among Chinese participants regarding the relationship between self-construal and creativity. The previous research (Ng, 2003) was conducted in Singapore. Although Singapore is an Eastern collectivist country, there are still differences between China and Singapore (Zhang, Soh, & Wong, 2011). Thus, it is unclear whether the findings based on Singapore participants can be generalized to Chinese participants. In summary, the present study attempted to examine the effect of self-construal on creativity, in combination with self-esteem, among Chinese participants. Our hypotheses were as follows: independent self-construal is more beneficial to creativity than interdependent selfconstrual (H1); self-esteem is beneficial to creativity (H2); and selfesteem plays a moderator role between self-construal and creativity, strengthening the positive effect of independent self-construal on creativity, and decreasing the possible negative effect of interdependent self-construal on creativity (H3). 2. Method 2.1. Participants Three hundred and sixteen junior high school students in Beijing, China, took part in this study (53% male; rangeage = 12–14 years). Of the participants, 49% were in Grade 7 (n = 155), and 51% were in Grade 8 (n = 161). All students were given the option to not participate in the study. 2.2. Procedure Participants were asked to complete the Self-Construal Scale (Singelis, 1994), Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965), and Test of Divergent Feeling (Williams, 1980). After completing the questionnaires, each of the participants was thanked and given a gift valued at about ¥10. 2.3. Materials 2.3.1. Self-Construal Scale The Self-Construal Scale (Singelis, 1994) consists of an independent subscale (12 items; e.g., “I am the same person at home as I am at school”) and interdependent subscale (12 items; e.g., “My happiness
185
depends on the happiness of those around me”). Participants indicated their agreement or disagreement on a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The self-construal measure had a total alpha of .80 in this study. 2.3.2. Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965) consists of 10 items (e.g., “I take a positive view of myself”). Participants indicated their agreement or disagreement on a 4-point scale, ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 3 (strongly agree). The alpha was .78 in this study. 2.3.3. Test of Divergent Feeling The Test of Divergent Feeling (Williams, 1980) was used to measure participants' creativity. It includes four subscales: risk-taking (12 items; e.g., “Trying a new game or activity is an interesting thing”), curiosity (13 items; e.g., “I would like to know what other people think”), imagination (13 items; e.g., “If the final page of a storybook is missing, I will make up the story's ending myself”), and complexity (12 items; e.g., “I like unusual things”). The items are scored on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). The total alpha was .86 in this study. 3. Results 3.1. Descriptive statistics and correlation matrix The means, standard deviations, and correlations among the research variables are presented in Table 1. Both independent and interdependent self-construals were positively correlated with all of the five creativity indexes, including risk-taking, curiosity, imagination, complexity, and total creativity (independent self-construal: r from 0.22 to 0.41, p b .01; interdependent self-construal: r from 0.14 to 0.28, p b .05). Self-esteem was positively correlated with all of the creativity indexes (r from 0.19 to 0.22, p b .01), except imagination (r = − .002, ns). Independent self-construal was positively correlated with interdependent self-construal (r = .46, p b .01), and a paired sample t-test showed that there was no difference between independent selfconstrual and interdependent self-construal (t = .542, p = .588). 3.2. The influence of self-construal and self-esteem on creativity Hierarchical regression analyses were used to analyze the effects of self-construal and self-esteem on the five creativity indexes, especially the moderating role of self-esteem between self-construal and creativity. Before the regression analysis, the independent variables (independent self-construal, interdependent self-construal, and self-esteem) were centered, and the interactions between self-construal and selfesteem were then calculated. The regression involved two steps: all of the independent variables were introduced into the regression equation to test the main effects (step 1), and the interaction terms were introduced into the regression equation to test the moderating effects (step 2). First, as shown in Table 2, the main effects of independent selfconstrual were significant for all of the five creativity indexes in both the first and second steps. However, the main effects of interdependent self-construal were significant only for risk-taking in both steps and significant only for curiosity in the second step. In addition, in every model, the β of independent self-construal was higher than the β of interdependent self-construal. Second, the main effects of self-esteem were significant or marginally significant for almost all of the creativity indexes, except imagination. All of the aforementioned significant main effects were positive. Furthermore, the interactions between interdependent self-construal and self-esteem were significant for all of the creativity indexes, except risk-taking (marginally significant for complexity). Simple slope analyses were conducted to further examine the two-way interactions for the four creativity indexes.
Y. Wang, L. Wang / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189
As shown in Fig. 1, among high self-esteem participants (higher than + 1 SD), interdependent self-construal positively predicted creativity (curiosity: b = 0.12, t = 4.71, p b .001; imagination: b = 0.09, t = 3.46, p b .001; complexity: b = 0.08, t = 3.52, p b .001; total creativity: b = 0.09, t = 4.78, p b .001). However, among low self-esteem participants (lower than − 1 SD), interdependent self-construal showed no prediction for creativity (curiosity: b = 0.03, t = 1.64, p N .05; imagination: b = 0.02, t = 0.78, p N .05; complexity: b = 0.03, t = 1.45, p N .05; total creativity: b = 0.03, t = 1.94, p N .05). Thus, high self-esteem could strengthen the positive prediction of interdependent self-construal on creativity. In other words, for participants with high self-esteem, the higher their interdependent self-construal, the higher their creativity. In general, the results of the hierarchical regressions showed that independent self-construal positively predicted all of the creativity indexes whereas interdependent self-construal positively predicted a few creativity indexes (e.g., risk-taking and curiosity). Furthermore, in every model, the prediction of independent self-construal was higher than that of interdependent self-construal. Thus, H1 was supported. As self-esteem showed a positive prediction for most creative indexes, H2 was also supported. More importantly, self-esteem played a moderating role between self-construal and creativity. Specifically, selfesteem strengthened the positive influence of interdependent selfconstrual on creativity. Therefore, H3 was partially supported.
5
– .46⁎⁎ .67⁎⁎ .86⁎⁎
4
– .65⁎⁎ .51⁎⁎ .61⁎⁎ .84⁎⁎
6
– .43⁎⁎ .75⁎⁎
7
– .82⁎⁎
186
– .22⁎⁎ .19⁎⁎
−.002 .20⁎⁎ .20⁎⁎ ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.
2
– .10 .28⁎⁎ .24⁎⁎ .14⁎ .20⁎⁎ .25⁎⁎
4.2. The relationship between self-construal and creativity
– .46⁎⁎ .34⁎⁎ .41⁎⁎ .33⁎⁎ .22⁎⁎ .35⁎⁎ .40⁎⁎
1
In the present study, there was no significant difference between independent self-construal and interdependent self-construal, and independent self-construal was significantly positively correlated with interdependent self-construal. Thus, the two types of self-construal coexist and are positively correlated with each other in Chinese junior middle school students. This finding is consistent with previous findings. For example, Singelis (1994) reported that independent and interdependent images of the self could, and do, coexist in individuals. Yubo and Meng (2009) argued that there are two self-orientations in the current Chinese population: social orientation and personal orientation.
0.70 0.86 0.46 0.29 0.32 0.32 0.28 0.25
SD
4.1. The relationship between independent and interdependent selfconstrual
5.39 5.40 1.98 2.28 2.37 2.18 2.45 2.32
Mean
Table 1 All variables'means, standard deviations, and correlation matrix.
1 Independent 2 Interdependent 3 Self-esteem 4 Risk-taking 5 Curiosity 6 Imagination 7 Complexity 8 Total creativity
3
4. Discussion
In the present study, independent self-construal could positively predict creativity. This finding is consistent with the previous literature (Ng, 2003; Wiekens & Stapel, 2008). Wiekens and Stapel (2008) argued that independent self-construal increases the motivation to be different, and therefore increases divergent thinking. Ng (2003) explained the relationship between self-construal and creativity from the perspective of cultural differences. He proposed that as individualistic values encourage independence and uniqueness, the atmosphere is suitable for individual creativity, while collectivist values promote cooperation and harmony, which stifle people's creative and individual behavior. Furthermore, people are not encouraged to stand out from their group by competitive acts of achievement (Goncalo & Staw, 2006). Thus, it is more difficult for individuals in a collectivist society to produce creative ideas (Rudowicz, 2003). However, both the correlation analysis and regression analysis suggested that interdependent self-construal is not harmful to creativity, and is even beneficial to some creativity indexes. This result is inconsistent with previous findings that emphasized the negative relationship between interdependent self-construal and creativity (Ng, 2003; Wiekens & Stapel, 2008). Nevertheless, the current finding is in line with some research. For example, Hannover, Birkner, and Pöhlmann (2009) argued that interdependent self-construal individuals have harmonious interpersonal relationships and good social status; consequently, their self-esteem level is high, which in turn results in high
Y. Wang, L. Wang / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189
187
Table 2 Results of the hierarchical regression analyses for predicting creativity indexes (n = 316). Model 1 B Risk-taking
Step1
Step2
Curiosity
Adjust R2 F Step1
Step2
Imagination
Adjust R2 F Step1
Step2
Complexity
Adjust R2 F Step1
Step2
Total creativity
Adjust R2 F Step1
Step2
Independent Interdependent Self-esteem Independent × self-esteem Interdependent × self-esteem
Independent Interdependent Self-esteem Independent × self-esteem Interdependent × self-esteem
Independent Interdependent Self-esteem Independent × self-esteem Interdependent × self-esteem
Independent Interdependent Self-esteem Independent × self-esteem Interdependent × self-esteem
Independent Interdependent Self-esteem Independent × self-esteem Interdependent × self-esteem
Adjust R2 F
β
Model 2 t
p
4.884 1.996 2.313
0.000 0.047 0.021
0.310 0.137 0.140 0.000 0.083
4.810 2.224 2.390 −0.001 1.322
0.000 0.027 0.018 0.999 0.187
0.186 22.360⁎⁎⁎ 0.234 0.110 0.101
0.309 0.136 0.141 0.000 0.066 0.186 13.875⁎⁎⁎
0.239 0.112 0.102
3.609 1.783 1.709
0.000 0.076 0.089
0.245 0.138 0.128 0.062 0.128
3.695 2.190 2.124 0.937 2.006
0.000 0.029 0.035 0.350 0.046
0.115 13.261⁎⁎⁎ 0.226 0.049 −0.084
0.239 0.136 0.127 0.049 0.101 0.135 9.853⁎⁎⁎
0.223 0.049 −0.083
3.257 0.752 −1.333
0.001 0.453 0.184
0.222 0.077 −0.073 −0.005 0.144
3.220 1.184 −1.145 −0.072 2.152
0.001 0.238 0.253 0.943 0.032
0.044 5.340⁎⁎⁎ 0.288 0.041 0.112
0.224 0.079 −0.074 −0.004 0.117 0.056 4.389⁎⁎⁎
0.292 0.041 0.112
4.422 0.659 1.897
0.000 0.511 0.059
0.283 0.067 0.112 −0.049 0.124
4.245 1.046 1.854 −0.735 1.923
0.000 0.296 0.065 0.463 0.056
0.126 14.606⁎⁎⁎ 0.314 0.090 0.096
0.278 0.066 0.112 −0.039 0.099 0.131 9.565⁎⁎⁎
0.318 0.092 0.097
4.784 1.460 1.619
0.000 0.145 0.107
0.311 0.122 0.106 −0.001 0.117 0.174 12.271⁎⁎⁎
0.315 0.124 0.107 −0.002 0.150
4.733 1.947 1.763 −0.028 2.317
0.000 0.053 0.079 0.978 0.021
0.159 17.866⁎⁎⁎
p
B
β
0.311 0.121 0.132
0.311 0.120 0.133
t
⁎⁎⁎ p b 0.001.
creativity. Du and Wang (2009) proposed that some environmental factors, such as an individual's reliance on interpersonal relationships, are also important for creativity in those who hold a high collectivist value. In addition, both the creativity system model (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996) and investment theory of creativity (Sternberg, 1996) highlight the interaction between individual factors and environmental factors. Furthermore, the cultural fit proposition (Ward & Chang, 1997) emphasizes the fit between individual variables and the local culture group; for example, extraversion was found to be a major predictor of psychological well-being in Malaysian students in Singapore (Searle & Ward, 1990), but it was related to higher levels of depression and frustration in native English-speaking expatriates in Singapore (Armes & Ward, 2001). As such, the effect of self-construal on creativity should be investigated in combination with cultural differences, while interdependent self-construal is harmful to creativity in Western participants, it might be beneficial to creativity among Eastern participants. 4.3. The relationship between self-esteem and creativity The present study supports that self-esteem is beneficial to creativity. This result is consistent with previous research (Cantero et al., 2016; Deng & Zhang, 2011; Kemple et al., 1996). The positive effect of selfesteem on creativity could be explained as follows: self-esteem can enhance self-regulation (Carver, Scheier, & Fulford, 2008), reduce the perception of threat and anxiety (Gass & Chang, 1989), and induce approach goals rather than avoidance goals (Crocker & Park, 2004; Gutierres & Reich, 1988). High self-esteem could maintain high internal motivation, which has been proposed to be crucial to creativity (Amabile & Pillemer, 2012; Eisenberger & Aselage, 2009). In contrast, people with low self-esteem might be more externally motivated
(Shen, 2007; Wood, Giordano-Beech, Taylor, Michela, & Gaus, 1994). In addition, self-esteem is an important psychological resource that acts as a buffer against stressful or negative events (Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, & Vohs, 2003; Cast & Burke, 2002; Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszcynski, 1988); thus, high self-esteem might reduce the possibility of creativity decreasing as a result of environmental variables such as feedback of failure or evaluation stress (Amabile et al., 1990; Silvia & Phillips, 2004). 4.4. The moderator role of self-esteem between self-construal and creativity The present study reveals the moderator role of self-esteem between self-construal and creativity. Specifically, high self-esteem can strengthen the positive prediction of interdependent self-construal on creativity. In other words, among individuals with high self-esteem, interdependent self-construal has a beneficial effect on creativity. Considering the previous literature supporting the negative correlation between interdependent self-construal and creativity (Ng, 2003; Wiekens & Stapel, 2008), this finding is somewhat surprising. However, we argue that it is understandable and illuminating. Since one of the possible mechanisms underlying the negative relationship between interdependent self-construal and creativity may be high external motivation under evaluative stress (Amabile, 1996; Hennessey, 2003; Hennessey & Amabile, 1998), the possible mechanism underlying the positive relationship between interdependent self-construal and creativity among participants with high self-esteem may rest on selfesteem affecting an individual's ongoing transactions with the surrounding environment (Kernis, 2003). When facing negative or stressful events, high self-esteem could protect against the negative effect of negative feedback (Williams, 2002). Thus, it is understandable that
188
Y. Wang, L. Wang / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189
Fig. 1. The moderating function of self-esteem on the relationship between interdependent self-construal and creativity indexes.
high self-esteem individuals' creativity would not be inhibited, or would even be promoted, because they have enough mental resources to resist the stress from the environment. In contrast, people with low selfesteem need more cognitive resources to compensate or buffer against negative information (Nakashima et al., 2013; Zhang & Tian, 2005). Alternatively, high self-esteem individuals need not resist any stress because their confidence is strong enough to buffer the stress (Baumeister et al., 2003). 4.5. Implications The present study investigated the relationship between selfconstrual and creativity in combination with self-esteem. The result of the positive relationship between interdependent self-construal and creativity among high self-esteem individuals extends prior work about the relationship between self-construal and creativity, and contributes to rethinking about the effect of cultural background on this relationship. Moreover, our study provides direct support for the positive functions of self-esteem. This study has some practical implications for education and enterprise management in collectivist cultures. In particular, in order to increase creativity, it is important to cultivate high self-esteem, not only because of the positive main effect of self-esteem on creativity but also because of the moderating role of self-esteem between interdependent self-construal and creativity. Some limitations and future directions must be considered. Firstly, as the sample was composed of participants belonging to the same cultural background, future studies should explore the reliability of these findings with a multicultural sample. Secondly, the conclusion about the moderating role of self-esteem between self-construal and creativity should be treated with caution because the findings are based on correlational data, and not on experimental data. The present study
investigated the moderator role of self-esteem on the relationship between self-construal and creativity, however, there is an alternative model in which self-construal might be viewed as the moderator between self-esteem and creativity. Thirdly, since gender differences have been found in self-construal (Cross, Hardin, & Gercek-Swing, 2011), and the relationship between self-esteem and creativity is stronger for females (Goldsmith & Matherly, 1988), further studies should explore the gender difference in the relationship between selfconstrual, self-esteem, and creativity. Finally, partially in line with Ng's (2003) study, a measure of creative personality was used in our study as the index of creativity; thus, future studies should further explore whether these findings can be replicated through the use of the divergent thinking measures.
5. Conclusions The current study found that independent self-construal is more beneficial to creativity than interdependent self-construal, that selfesteem is beneficial to creativity, that self-esteem plays a moderator role between self-construal and creativity, and that high self-esteem can strengthen the positive prediction of interdependent selfconstrual on creativity.
References Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, Colo: West view Press. Amabile, T. M., & Pillemer, J. (2012). Perspectives on the social psychology of creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 3–15. Amabile, T. M., Goldfarb, P., & Brackfield, S. C. (1990). Social influences on creativity: Evaluation, coaction, and surveillance. Creativity Research Journal, 3, 6–21. Armes, K., & Ward, C. (2001). Cross-cultural transitions and sojourner adjustment in Singapore. The Journal of Social Psychology, 129(2), 273–275.
Y. Wang, L. Wang / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189 Baker, L. R., & McNulty, J. K. (2013). When low self-esteem encourages behaviors that risk rejection to increase interdependence: The role of relational self-construal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(6), 995–1018. Barron, F., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32(1), 439–476. Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1–44. Cantero, M. J., Alfonso-Benlliure, V., & Melero, R. (2016). Creativity in middle childhood: Influence of perceived maternal sensitivity, self-esteem, and shyness. Creativity Research Journal, 28(1), 105–113. Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Fulford, D. (2008). Self-regulatory processes, stress, and coping. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed.). New York, NY US: Guilford Press. Cast, A. D., & Burke, P. J. (2002). A theory of self-esteem. Social Forces, 80(3), 1041–1068. Chiu, C. Y., & Kwan, L. Y. Y. (2010). Culture and creativity: A process model. Management and Organization Review, 6(3), 447–461. Crocker, J., & Park, L. E. (2004). The costly pursuit of self-esteem. Psychological Bulletin, 130(3), 392–414. Cross, S. E., Hardin, E. E., & Gercek-Swing, B. (2011). The what, how, why, and where of self-construal. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(2), 142–179. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity. New York: Harper Collins. Deng, X. P., & Zhang, X. K. (2011). Understanding the relationship between self-esteem and creativity: A meta-analysis. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(5), 645–651. Du, J., & Wang, D. N. (2009). Person-environment fit and creativity: The moderating role of collectivism. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 41(10), 980–988. Eisenberger, R., & Aselage, J. (2009). Incremental effects of reward on experienced performance pressure: Positive outcomes for intrinsic interest and creativity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(1), 95–117. Gass, K. A., & Chang, A. S. (1989). Appraisals of bereavement, coping, resources, and psychosocial health dysfunction in widows and widowers. Nursing Research, 38(1), 31–36. Goldsmith, R. E., & Matherly, T. A. (1988). Creativity and self-esteem: A multiple operationalization validity study. The Journal of Psychology, 122(1), 47–56. Goncalo, J. A., & Staw, B. M. (2006). Individualism–collectivism and group creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100(1), 96–109. Gutierres, S. E., & Reich, J. W. (1988). Attributional analysis of drug abuse and gender: Effects of treatment and relationship to rehabilitation. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 7(2), 176. Hannover, B., Birkner, N., & Pöhlmann, C. (2009). Ideal selves and self-esteem in people with independent or interdependent self-construal. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(1), 119–133. Hennessey, B. A. (2003). The social psychology of creativity. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47, 253–271. Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1998). Reward, intrinsic motivation, and creativity. American Psychologist, 53, 674–675. Kelly, K. E. (2006). Relationship between the five-factor model of personality and the scale of creative attributes and behavior: A validational study. Individual Differences Research, 4, 299–305. Kemple, K. M., David, G. M., & Wang, Y. (1996). Preschoolers' creativity, shyness, and selfesteem. Creativity Research Journal, 9(4), 317–326. Kernis, M. H. (2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological Inquiry, 14(1), 1–26. Liu, G., Zhang, S., Zhang, J., Lee, C., Wang, Y., & Brownell, M. (2013). Autonomous motivation and Chinese adolescents' creative thinking: The moderating role of parental involvement. Creativity Research Journal, 25(4), 446–456.
189
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. Murray, S. L., Aloni, M., Holmes, J. G., Derrick, J. L., Stinson, D. A., & Leder, S. (2009). Fostering partner dependence as trust insurance: The implicit contingencies of the exchange script in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 324–348. Nakashima, K. I., Yanagisawa, K., & Ura, M. (2013). Dissimilar effects of task-relevant and interpersonal threat on independent-interdependent self-construal in individuals with high self-esteem. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 16(1), 50–59. Ng, A. K. (2003). Cultural model of creative and conforming behavior. Creativity Research Journal, 15(2&3), 223–233. Phillips, D. R., Cheng, K. H., Yeh, A. G., & Siu, O. L. (2010). Person–environment (PE) fit models and psychological well-being among older persons in Hong Kong. Environment and Behavior, 42(2), 221–242. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rudowicz, E. (2003). Creativity and culture: A two way interaction. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(3), 273–290. Searle, W., & Ward, C. (1990). The prediction of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-cultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14(4), 449–464. Shen, Z. (2007). Psychological research on low self-esteem individuals. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 15(6), 634. Silvia, P. J., & Phillips, A. G. (2004). Self-awareness, self-evaluation, and creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(8), 1009–1017. Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent selfconstruals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580–591. Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (1988). Terror management theory of selfesteem. Academic Press, 22, 261–302. Stemberg, R., & Lubart, T. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51, 677–688. Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Successful intelligence. New York: Simon & Schuster. Thatcher, S. M. B., & Brown, S. A. (2010). Individual creativity in teams: The importance of communication media mix. Decision Support Systems, 49(3), 290–300. Ward, C., & Chang, W. C. (1997). “Cultural fit”: A new perspective on personality and sojourner adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 21(4), 525–533. Wiekens, C. J., & Stapel, D. A. (2008). I versus we: The effects of self-construal level on diversity. Social Cognition, 26, 368–377. Williams, F. E. (1980). Creativity assessment packet (CAP): Manual. Buffalo: D.O.K. Publishers, Inc. Williams, S. D. (2002). Self-esteem and the self-censorship of creative ideas. Personnel Review, 31, 495–503. Wood, J. V., Giordano-Beech, M., Taylor, K. L., Michela, J. L., & Gaus, V. (1994). Strategies of social comparison among people with low self-esteem: Self-protection and selfenhancement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 713. Xiao, F., Wang, L., Chen, Y., Zheng, Z., & Chen, W. (2015). Dispositional and situational autonomy as moderators of mood and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 27(1), 76–86. Yubo, H., & Meng, Z. (2009). A theoretic analysis of Chinese people's self-constructs. Psychological Science, 1, 226–229. Zhang, X. K., & Tian, L. M. (2005). The buffering effect of self-esteem on the depressive and anxious reactions to induced failure. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 37(2), 240–245. Zhang, J., Soh, P. H., & Wong, P. K. (2011). Direct ties, prior knowledge, and entrepreneurial resource acquisitions in China and Singapore. International Small Business Journal, 29(2), 170–189.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Self-construal and creativity: The moderator effect of self-esteem☆ Yan Wang, Ling Wang ⁎ Beijing Key Laboratory of Learning and Cognition, Department of Psychology, Capital Normal University, China
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 18 January 2016 Received in revised form 23 April 2016 Accepted 25 April 2016 Available online xxxx Keywords: Self-construal Creativity Self-esteem
a b s t r a c t The study examined the effects of self-esteem and self-construal on creativity in a collectivist culture. Junior school students (n = 316) completed the Self-Construal Scale, Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, and Test of Divergent Feeling. Correlation and regression analyses showed that both interdependent and independent selfconstruals are beneficial to creativity, although independent self-construal is more conducive to creativity than interdependent self-construal; self-esteem is also beneficial to creativity; and, moreover, self-esteem has a moderator role between self-construal and creativity and can strengthen the positive impact of interdependent selfconstrual on creativity. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Creativity is the ability to produce work that is both novel (i.e., original) and appropriate (i.e., meets task constraints; Stemberg & Lubart, 1996). Individuals who are highly creative have common personality traits. For example, they have higher self-acceptance, little concern for others' opinions (Barron & Harrington, 1981; Kelly, 2006), and high autonomy (Liu et al., 2013; Xiao, Wang, Chen, Zheng, & Chen, 2015). The relationship between self-esteem, which is a core personality variable, and creativity has also been examined. Much research has demonstrated the positive correlation between self-esteem and creativity (Cantero, Alfonso-Benlliure, & Melero, 2016; Deng & Zhang, 2011; Kemple, David, & Wang, 1996). The reason why self-esteem is beneficial to creativity may lie in the positive functions of self-esteem. High self-esteem individuals tend to believe themselves to be capable and worthy, so they are more likely to express ideas that differ from others, and are more willing to share creative ideas (Thatcher & Brown, 2010). Moreover, high self-esteem could maintain high internal motivation and reduce external motivation, which have been proposed to be crucial to creativity (Amabile & Pillemer, 2012; Eisenberger & Aselage, 2009). Since self-esteem is an important psychological resource that acts as a buffer against a stressful environment (Cast & Burke, 2002), high self-esteem reduces the possibility of creativity decreasing as a result of evaluation stress (Amabile, 1996; Amabile, Goldfarb, & Brackfield, 1990; Silvia & Phillips, 2004).
☆ This work was supported by a grant from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 31100757). ⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, College of Education, Capital Normal University, Beijing 100048, China. E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Wang).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.086 0191-8869/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Creativity is also sensitive to environmental variables (Hennessey & Amabile, 1998). Culture is an important environmental variable, and its relationship with creativity has been of interest to researchers. For example, Chiu and Kwan (2010) argued that culture could affect the outcomes of creative processing through its effects on social and psychological processes. Self-construal, which is a variable that is correlated with culture and self, refers to an individual's awareness of the relationship between the self and the surrounding environment (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Markus and Kitayama (1991) argued that selfconstrual can be divided into independent self-construal and interdependent self-construal. More specifically, in an individualistic society, people are more likely to accept individualistic cultural values, place emphasis on their inner thoughts and feelings, and portray themselves in terms of their inherent characteristics and goals, which is known as independent self-construal. By the same token, people living in a collectivist society always accept group cultural values, and attach importance to others' opinions or the relationship between the self and others, which is known as interdependent self-construal. Recent research studies into the relationship between self-esteem and self-construal show that low self-esteem may encourage behaviors that increase interdependence (Baker & McNulty, 2013; Nakashima, Yanagisawa, & Ura, 2013). Individuals with low self-esteem are more likely to conform to social norms and less likely to express disagreement with others (Murray et al., 2009). The previous literature has shown that independent self-construal has a positive impact on creativity while interdependent self-construal is negatively linked with creativity. For example, in Ng's (2003) study, the self-construal and creativity of 158 white undergraduates from Australia (an individualistic culture) and 186 Chinese undergraduates from Singapore (a collectivist culture) were measured, and structural equation modeling showed that independent self-construal had a positive impact on creative behavior, while interdependent self-construal
Y. Wang, L. Wang / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189
had a positive impact on conforming behavior. Wiekens and Stapel (2008) investigated the impact of situational self-construal on creativity. In their study, 61 undergraduate students were randomly assigned to one of three self-construal priming conditions (I-priming, we-priming, and a control condition) during a word search task, and then completed divergent thinking tasks. The results showed that participants in the Ipriming condition produced more creative and unusual answers, whereas those in the we-priming condition produced more standard answers. In summary, regardless of dispositional self-construal or situational self-construal, interdependent self-construal impedes creativity, whereas independent self-construal enhances creativity. 1.1. The present study Previous research has shown that independent self-construal has a positive impact on creative behavior while interdependent selfconstrual is negatively linked with creative behavior (Ng, 2003; Wiekens & Stapel, 2008). However, based on the person–environment model (Phillips, Cheng, Yeh, & Siu, 2010), the effect of self-construal might depend on other variables, such as self-esteem. The literature shows that self-esteem is an important psychological resource that acts as a buffer against a stressful environment (Cast & Burke, 2002) and is beneficial to creativity (Cantero et al., 2016; Deng & Zhang, 2011; Kemple et al., 1996). Thus, we proposed that self-esteem might be a moderator between self-construal and creativity. In addition, to the best of our knowledge, no research has been conducted among Chinese participants regarding the relationship between self-construal and creativity. The previous research (Ng, 2003) was conducted in Singapore. Although Singapore is an Eastern collectivist country, there are still differences between China and Singapore (Zhang, Soh, & Wong, 2011). Thus, it is unclear whether the findings based on Singapore participants can be generalized to Chinese participants. In summary, the present study attempted to examine the effect of self-construal on creativity, in combination with self-esteem, among Chinese participants. Our hypotheses were as follows: independent self-construal is more beneficial to creativity than interdependent selfconstrual (H1); self-esteem is beneficial to creativity (H2); and selfesteem plays a moderator role between self-construal and creativity, strengthening the positive effect of independent self-construal on creativity, and decreasing the possible negative effect of interdependent self-construal on creativity (H3). 2. Method 2.1. Participants Three hundred and sixteen junior high school students in Beijing, China, took part in this study (53% male; rangeage = 12–14 years). Of the participants, 49% were in Grade 7 (n = 155), and 51% were in Grade 8 (n = 161). All students were given the option to not participate in the study. 2.2. Procedure Participants were asked to complete the Self-Construal Scale (Singelis, 1994), Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965), and Test of Divergent Feeling (Williams, 1980). After completing the questionnaires, each of the participants was thanked and given a gift valued at about ¥10. 2.3. Materials 2.3.1. Self-Construal Scale The Self-Construal Scale (Singelis, 1994) consists of an independent subscale (12 items; e.g., “I am the same person at home as I am at school”) and interdependent subscale (12 items; e.g., “My happiness
185
depends on the happiness of those around me”). Participants indicated their agreement or disagreement on a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The self-construal measure had a total alpha of .80 in this study. 2.3.2. Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965) consists of 10 items (e.g., “I take a positive view of myself”). Participants indicated their agreement or disagreement on a 4-point scale, ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 3 (strongly agree). The alpha was .78 in this study. 2.3.3. Test of Divergent Feeling The Test of Divergent Feeling (Williams, 1980) was used to measure participants' creativity. It includes four subscales: risk-taking (12 items; e.g., “Trying a new game or activity is an interesting thing”), curiosity (13 items; e.g., “I would like to know what other people think”), imagination (13 items; e.g., “If the final page of a storybook is missing, I will make up the story's ending myself”), and complexity (12 items; e.g., “I like unusual things”). The items are scored on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). The total alpha was .86 in this study. 3. Results 3.1. Descriptive statistics and correlation matrix The means, standard deviations, and correlations among the research variables are presented in Table 1. Both independent and interdependent self-construals were positively correlated with all of the five creativity indexes, including risk-taking, curiosity, imagination, complexity, and total creativity (independent self-construal: r from 0.22 to 0.41, p b .01; interdependent self-construal: r from 0.14 to 0.28, p b .05). Self-esteem was positively correlated with all of the creativity indexes (r from 0.19 to 0.22, p b .01), except imagination (r = − .002, ns). Independent self-construal was positively correlated with interdependent self-construal (r = .46, p b .01), and a paired sample t-test showed that there was no difference between independent selfconstrual and interdependent self-construal (t = .542, p = .588). 3.2. The influence of self-construal and self-esteem on creativity Hierarchical regression analyses were used to analyze the effects of self-construal and self-esteem on the five creativity indexes, especially the moderating role of self-esteem between self-construal and creativity. Before the regression analysis, the independent variables (independent self-construal, interdependent self-construal, and self-esteem) were centered, and the interactions between self-construal and selfesteem were then calculated. The regression involved two steps: all of the independent variables were introduced into the regression equation to test the main effects (step 1), and the interaction terms were introduced into the regression equation to test the moderating effects (step 2). First, as shown in Table 2, the main effects of independent selfconstrual were significant for all of the five creativity indexes in both the first and second steps. However, the main effects of interdependent self-construal were significant only for risk-taking in both steps and significant only for curiosity in the second step. In addition, in every model, the β of independent self-construal was higher than the β of interdependent self-construal. Second, the main effects of self-esteem were significant or marginally significant for almost all of the creativity indexes, except imagination. All of the aforementioned significant main effects were positive. Furthermore, the interactions between interdependent self-construal and self-esteem were significant for all of the creativity indexes, except risk-taking (marginally significant for complexity). Simple slope analyses were conducted to further examine the two-way interactions for the four creativity indexes.
Y. Wang, L. Wang / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189
As shown in Fig. 1, among high self-esteem participants (higher than + 1 SD), interdependent self-construal positively predicted creativity (curiosity: b = 0.12, t = 4.71, p b .001; imagination: b = 0.09, t = 3.46, p b .001; complexity: b = 0.08, t = 3.52, p b .001; total creativity: b = 0.09, t = 4.78, p b .001). However, among low self-esteem participants (lower than − 1 SD), interdependent self-construal showed no prediction for creativity (curiosity: b = 0.03, t = 1.64, p N .05; imagination: b = 0.02, t = 0.78, p N .05; complexity: b = 0.03, t = 1.45, p N .05; total creativity: b = 0.03, t = 1.94, p N .05). Thus, high self-esteem could strengthen the positive prediction of interdependent self-construal on creativity. In other words, for participants with high self-esteem, the higher their interdependent self-construal, the higher their creativity. In general, the results of the hierarchical regressions showed that independent self-construal positively predicted all of the creativity indexes whereas interdependent self-construal positively predicted a few creativity indexes (e.g., risk-taking and curiosity). Furthermore, in every model, the prediction of independent self-construal was higher than that of interdependent self-construal. Thus, H1 was supported. As self-esteem showed a positive prediction for most creative indexes, H2 was also supported. More importantly, self-esteem played a moderating role between self-construal and creativity. Specifically, selfesteem strengthened the positive influence of interdependent selfconstrual on creativity. Therefore, H3 was partially supported.
5
– .46⁎⁎ .67⁎⁎ .86⁎⁎
4
– .65⁎⁎ .51⁎⁎ .61⁎⁎ .84⁎⁎
6
– .43⁎⁎ .75⁎⁎
7
– .82⁎⁎
186
– .22⁎⁎ .19⁎⁎
−.002 .20⁎⁎ .20⁎⁎ ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.
2
– .10 .28⁎⁎ .24⁎⁎ .14⁎ .20⁎⁎ .25⁎⁎
4.2. The relationship between self-construal and creativity
– .46⁎⁎ .34⁎⁎ .41⁎⁎ .33⁎⁎ .22⁎⁎ .35⁎⁎ .40⁎⁎
1
In the present study, there was no significant difference between independent self-construal and interdependent self-construal, and independent self-construal was significantly positively correlated with interdependent self-construal. Thus, the two types of self-construal coexist and are positively correlated with each other in Chinese junior middle school students. This finding is consistent with previous findings. For example, Singelis (1994) reported that independent and interdependent images of the self could, and do, coexist in individuals. Yubo and Meng (2009) argued that there are two self-orientations in the current Chinese population: social orientation and personal orientation.
0.70 0.86 0.46 0.29 0.32 0.32 0.28 0.25
SD
4.1. The relationship between independent and interdependent selfconstrual
5.39 5.40 1.98 2.28 2.37 2.18 2.45 2.32
Mean
Table 1 All variables'means, standard deviations, and correlation matrix.
1 Independent 2 Interdependent 3 Self-esteem 4 Risk-taking 5 Curiosity 6 Imagination 7 Complexity 8 Total creativity
3
4. Discussion
In the present study, independent self-construal could positively predict creativity. This finding is consistent with the previous literature (Ng, 2003; Wiekens & Stapel, 2008). Wiekens and Stapel (2008) argued that independent self-construal increases the motivation to be different, and therefore increases divergent thinking. Ng (2003) explained the relationship between self-construal and creativity from the perspective of cultural differences. He proposed that as individualistic values encourage independence and uniqueness, the atmosphere is suitable for individual creativity, while collectivist values promote cooperation and harmony, which stifle people's creative and individual behavior. Furthermore, people are not encouraged to stand out from their group by competitive acts of achievement (Goncalo & Staw, 2006). Thus, it is more difficult for individuals in a collectivist society to produce creative ideas (Rudowicz, 2003). However, both the correlation analysis and regression analysis suggested that interdependent self-construal is not harmful to creativity, and is even beneficial to some creativity indexes. This result is inconsistent with previous findings that emphasized the negative relationship between interdependent self-construal and creativity (Ng, 2003; Wiekens & Stapel, 2008). Nevertheless, the current finding is in line with some research. For example, Hannover, Birkner, and Pöhlmann (2009) argued that interdependent self-construal individuals have harmonious interpersonal relationships and good social status; consequently, their self-esteem level is high, which in turn results in high
Y. Wang, L. Wang / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189
187
Table 2 Results of the hierarchical regression analyses for predicting creativity indexes (n = 316). Model 1 B Risk-taking
Step1
Step2
Curiosity
Adjust R2 F Step1
Step2
Imagination
Adjust R2 F Step1
Step2
Complexity
Adjust R2 F Step1
Step2
Total creativity
Adjust R2 F Step1
Step2
Independent Interdependent Self-esteem Independent × self-esteem Interdependent × self-esteem
Independent Interdependent Self-esteem Independent × self-esteem Interdependent × self-esteem
Independent Interdependent Self-esteem Independent × self-esteem Interdependent × self-esteem
Independent Interdependent Self-esteem Independent × self-esteem Interdependent × self-esteem
Independent Interdependent Self-esteem Independent × self-esteem Interdependent × self-esteem
Adjust R2 F
β
Model 2 t
p
4.884 1.996 2.313
0.000 0.047 0.021
0.310 0.137 0.140 0.000 0.083
4.810 2.224 2.390 −0.001 1.322
0.000 0.027 0.018 0.999 0.187
0.186 22.360⁎⁎⁎ 0.234 0.110 0.101
0.309 0.136 0.141 0.000 0.066 0.186 13.875⁎⁎⁎
0.239 0.112 0.102
3.609 1.783 1.709
0.000 0.076 0.089
0.245 0.138 0.128 0.062 0.128
3.695 2.190 2.124 0.937 2.006
0.000 0.029 0.035 0.350 0.046
0.115 13.261⁎⁎⁎ 0.226 0.049 −0.084
0.239 0.136 0.127 0.049 0.101 0.135 9.853⁎⁎⁎
0.223 0.049 −0.083
3.257 0.752 −1.333
0.001 0.453 0.184
0.222 0.077 −0.073 −0.005 0.144
3.220 1.184 −1.145 −0.072 2.152
0.001 0.238 0.253 0.943 0.032
0.044 5.340⁎⁎⁎ 0.288 0.041 0.112
0.224 0.079 −0.074 −0.004 0.117 0.056 4.389⁎⁎⁎
0.292 0.041 0.112
4.422 0.659 1.897
0.000 0.511 0.059
0.283 0.067 0.112 −0.049 0.124
4.245 1.046 1.854 −0.735 1.923
0.000 0.296 0.065 0.463 0.056
0.126 14.606⁎⁎⁎ 0.314 0.090 0.096
0.278 0.066 0.112 −0.039 0.099 0.131 9.565⁎⁎⁎
0.318 0.092 0.097
4.784 1.460 1.619
0.000 0.145 0.107
0.311 0.122 0.106 −0.001 0.117 0.174 12.271⁎⁎⁎
0.315 0.124 0.107 −0.002 0.150
4.733 1.947 1.763 −0.028 2.317
0.000 0.053 0.079 0.978 0.021
0.159 17.866⁎⁎⁎
p
B
β
0.311 0.121 0.132
0.311 0.120 0.133
t
⁎⁎⁎ p b 0.001.
creativity. Du and Wang (2009) proposed that some environmental factors, such as an individual's reliance on interpersonal relationships, are also important for creativity in those who hold a high collectivist value. In addition, both the creativity system model (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996) and investment theory of creativity (Sternberg, 1996) highlight the interaction between individual factors and environmental factors. Furthermore, the cultural fit proposition (Ward & Chang, 1997) emphasizes the fit between individual variables and the local culture group; for example, extraversion was found to be a major predictor of psychological well-being in Malaysian students in Singapore (Searle & Ward, 1990), but it was related to higher levels of depression and frustration in native English-speaking expatriates in Singapore (Armes & Ward, 2001). As such, the effect of self-construal on creativity should be investigated in combination with cultural differences, while interdependent self-construal is harmful to creativity in Western participants, it might be beneficial to creativity among Eastern participants. 4.3. The relationship between self-esteem and creativity The present study supports that self-esteem is beneficial to creativity. This result is consistent with previous research (Cantero et al., 2016; Deng & Zhang, 2011; Kemple et al., 1996). The positive effect of selfesteem on creativity could be explained as follows: self-esteem can enhance self-regulation (Carver, Scheier, & Fulford, 2008), reduce the perception of threat and anxiety (Gass & Chang, 1989), and induce approach goals rather than avoidance goals (Crocker & Park, 2004; Gutierres & Reich, 1988). High self-esteem could maintain high internal motivation, which has been proposed to be crucial to creativity (Amabile & Pillemer, 2012; Eisenberger & Aselage, 2009). In contrast, people with low self-esteem might be more externally motivated
(Shen, 2007; Wood, Giordano-Beech, Taylor, Michela, & Gaus, 1994). In addition, self-esteem is an important psychological resource that acts as a buffer against stressful or negative events (Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, & Vohs, 2003; Cast & Burke, 2002; Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszcynski, 1988); thus, high self-esteem might reduce the possibility of creativity decreasing as a result of environmental variables such as feedback of failure or evaluation stress (Amabile et al., 1990; Silvia & Phillips, 2004). 4.4. The moderator role of self-esteem between self-construal and creativity The present study reveals the moderator role of self-esteem between self-construal and creativity. Specifically, high self-esteem can strengthen the positive prediction of interdependent self-construal on creativity. In other words, among individuals with high self-esteem, interdependent self-construal has a beneficial effect on creativity. Considering the previous literature supporting the negative correlation between interdependent self-construal and creativity (Ng, 2003; Wiekens & Stapel, 2008), this finding is somewhat surprising. However, we argue that it is understandable and illuminating. Since one of the possible mechanisms underlying the negative relationship between interdependent self-construal and creativity may be high external motivation under evaluative stress (Amabile, 1996; Hennessey, 2003; Hennessey & Amabile, 1998), the possible mechanism underlying the positive relationship between interdependent self-construal and creativity among participants with high self-esteem may rest on selfesteem affecting an individual's ongoing transactions with the surrounding environment (Kernis, 2003). When facing negative or stressful events, high self-esteem could protect against the negative effect of negative feedback (Williams, 2002). Thus, it is understandable that
188
Y. Wang, L. Wang / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189
Fig. 1. The moderating function of self-esteem on the relationship between interdependent self-construal and creativity indexes.
high self-esteem individuals' creativity would not be inhibited, or would even be promoted, because they have enough mental resources to resist the stress from the environment. In contrast, people with low selfesteem need more cognitive resources to compensate or buffer against negative information (Nakashima et al., 2013; Zhang & Tian, 2005). Alternatively, high self-esteem individuals need not resist any stress because their confidence is strong enough to buffer the stress (Baumeister et al., 2003). 4.5. Implications The present study investigated the relationship between selfconstrual and creativity in combination with self-esteem. The result of the positive relationship between interdependent self-construal and creativity among high self-esteem individuals extends prior work about the relationship between self-construal and creativity, and contributes to rethinking about the effect of cultural background on this relationship. Moreover, our study provides direct support for the positive functions of self-esteem. This study has some practical implications for education and enterprise management in collectivist cultures. In particular, in order to increase creativity, it is important to cultivate high self-esteem, not only because of the positive main effect of self-esteem on creativity but also because of the moderating role of self-esteem between interdependent self-construal and creativity. Some limitations and future directions must be considered. Firstly, as the sample was composed of participants belonging to the same cultural background, future studies should explore the reliability of these findings with a multicultural sample. Secondly, the conclusion about the moderating role of self-esteem between self-construal and creativity should be treated with caution because the findings are based on correlational data, and not on experimental data. The present study
investigated the moderator role of self-esteem on the relationship between self-construal and creativity, however, there is an alternative model in which self-construal might be viewed as the moderator between self-esteem and creativity. Thirdly, since gender differences have been found in self-construal (Cross, Hardin, & Gercek-Swing, 2011), and the relationship between self-esteem and creativity is stronger for females (Goldsmith & Matherly, 1988), further studies should explore the gender difference in the relationship between selfconstrual, self-esteem, and creativity. Finally, partially in line with Ng's (2003) study, a measure of creative personality was used in our study as the index of creativity; thus, future studies should further explore whether these findings can be replicated through the use of the divergent thinking measures.
5. Conclusions The current study found that independent self-construal is more beneficial to creativity than interdependent self-construal, that selfesteem is beneficial to creativity, that self-esteem plays a moderator role between self-construal and creativity, and that high self-esteem can strengthen the positive prediction of interdependent selfconstrual on creativity.
References Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, Colo: West view Press. Amabile, T. M., & Pillemer, J. (2012). Perspectives on the social psychology of creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 3–15. Amabile, T. M., Goldfarb, P., & Brackfield, S. C. (1990). Social influences on creativity: Evaluation, coaction, and surveillance. Creativity Research Journal, 3, 6–21. Armes, K., & Ward, C. (2001). Cross-cultural transitions and sojourner adjustment in Singapore. The Journal of Social Psychology, 129(2), 273–275.
Y. Wang, L. Wang / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 184–189 Baker, L. R., & McNulty, J. K. (2013). When low self-esteem encourages behaviors that risk rejection to increase interdependence: The role of relational self-construal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(6), 995–1018. Barron, F., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32(1), 439–476. Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1–44. Cantero, M. J., Alfonso-Benlliure, V., & Melero, R. (2016). Creativity in middle childhood: Influence of perceived maternal sensitivity, self-esteem, and shyness. Creativity Research Journal, 28(1), 105–113. Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Fulford, D. (2008). Self-regulatory processes, stress, and coping. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed.). New York, NY US: Guilford Press. Cast, A. D., & Burke, P. J. (2002). A theory of self-esteem. Social Forces, 80(3), 1041–1068. Chiu, C. Y., & Kwan, L. Y. Y. (2010). Culture and creativity: A process model. Management and Organization Review, 6(3), 447–461. Crocker, J., & Park, L. E. (2004). The costly pursuit of self-esteem. Psychological Bulletin, 130(3), 392–414. Cross, S. E., Hardin, E. E., & Gercek-Swing, B. (2011). The what, how, why, and where of self-construal. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(2), 142–179. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity. New York: Harper Collins. Deng, X. P., & Zhang, X. K. (2011). Understanding the relationship between self-esteem and creativity: A meta-analysis. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(5), 645–651. Du, J., & Wang, D. N. (2009). Person-environment fit and creativity: The moderating role of collectivism. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 41(10), 980–988. Eisenberger, R., & Aselage, J. (2009). Incremental effects of reward on experienced performance pressure: Positive outcomes for intrinsic interest and creativity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(1), 95–117. Gass, K. A., & Chang, A. S. (1989). Appraisals of bereavement, coping, resources, and psychosocial health dysfunction in widows and widowers. Nursing Research, 38(1), 31–36. Goldsmith, R. E., & Matherly, T. A. (1988). Creativity and self-esteem: A multiple operationalization validity study. The Journal of Psychology, 122(1), 47–56. Goncalo, J. A., & Staw, B. M. (2006). Individualism–collectivism and group creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100(1), 96–109. Gutierres, S. E., & Reich, J. W. (1988). Attributional analysis of drug abuse and gender: Effects of treatment and relationship to rehabilitation. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 7(2), 176. Hannover, B., Birkner, N., & Pöhlmann, C. (2009). Ideal selves and self-esteem in people with independent or interdependent self-construal. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(1), 119–133. Hennessey, B. A. (2003). The social psychology of creativity. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47, 253–271. Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1998). Reward, intrinsic motivation, and creativity. American Psychologist, 53, 674–675. Kelly, K. E. (2006). Relationship between the five-factor model of personality and the scale of creative attributes and behavior: A validational study. Individual Differences Research, 4, 299–305. Kemple, K. M., David, G. M., & Wang, Y. (1996). Preschoolers' creativity, shyness, and selfesteem. Creativity Research Journal, 9(4), 317–326. Kernis, M. H. (2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological Inquiry, 14(1), 1–26. Liu, G., Zhang, S., Zhang, J., Lee, C., Wang, Y., & Brownell, M. (2013). Autonomous motivation and Chinese adolescents' creative thinking: The moderating role of parental involvement. Creativity Research Journal, 25(4), 446–456.
189
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. Murray, S. L., Aloni, M., Holmes, J. G., Derrick, J. L., Stinson, D. A., & Leder, S. (2009). Fostering partner dependence as trust insurance: The implicit contingencies of the exchange script in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 324–348. Nakashima, K. I., Yanagisawa, K., & Ura, M. (2013). Dissimilar effects of task-relevant and interpersonal threat on independent-interdependent self-construal in individuals with high self-esteem. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 16(1), 50–59. Ng, A. K. (2003). Cultural model of creative and conforming behavior. Creativity Research Journal, 15(2&3), 223–233. Phillips, D. R., Cheng, K. H., Yeh, A. G., & Siu, O. L. (2010). Person–environment (PE) fit models and psychological well-being among older persons in Hong Kong. Environment and Behavior, 42(2), 221–242. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rudowicz, E. (2003). Creativity and culture: A two way interaction. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(3), 273–290. Searle, W., & Ward, C. (1990). The prediction of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-cultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14(4), 449–464. Shen, Z. (2007). Psychological research on low self-esteem individuals. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 15(6), 634. Silvia, P. J., & Phillips, A. G. (2004). Self-awareness, self-evaluation, and creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(8), 1009–1017. Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent selfconstruals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580–591. Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (1988). Terror management theory of selfesteem. Academic Press, 22, 261–302. Stemberg, R., & Lubart, T. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51, 677–688. Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Successful intelligence. New York: Simon & Schuster. Thatcher, S. M. B., & Brown, S. A. (2010). Individual creativity in teams: The importance of communication media mix. Decision Support Systems, 49(3), 290–300. Ward, C., & Chang, W. C. (1997). “Cultural fit”: A new perspective on personality and sojourner adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 21(4), 525–533. Wiekens, C. J., & Stapel, D. A. (2008). I versus we: The effects of self-construal level on diversity. Social Cognition, 26, 368–377. Williams, F. E. (1980). Creativity assessment packet (CAP): Manual. Buffalo: D.O.K. Publishers, Inc. Williams, S. D. (2002). Self-esteem and the self-censorship of creative ideas. Personnel Review, 31, 495–503. Wood, J. V., Giordano-Beech, M., Taylor, K. L., Michela, J. L., & Gaus, V. (1994). Strategies of social comparison among people with low self-esteem: Self-protection and selfenhancement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 713. Xiao, F., Wang, L., Chen, Y., Zheng, Z., & Chen, W. (2015). Dispositional and situational autonomy as moderators of mood and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 27(1), 76–86. Yubo, H., & Meng, Z. (2009). A theoretic analysis of Chinese people's self-constructs. Psychological Science, 1, 226–229. Zhang, X. K., & Tian, L. M. (2005). The buffering effect of self-esteem on the depressive and anxious reactions to induced failure. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 37(2), 240–245. Zhang, J., Soh, P. H., & Wong, P. K. (2011). Direct ties, prior knowledge, and entrepreneurial resource acquisitions in China and Singapore. International Small Business Journal, 29(2), 170–189.