Prevailing approaches to individual and group creativity have focused on personal factors that contribute to creative behavior (e.g., personality, intelligence, motivation), and the processes of behaving creatively and appreciating creativity are understood to be largely unrelated. This article uses social identity and self-categorization theories as the basis for a model of creativity that addresses these lacunae by emphasizing the role that groups play in stimulating and shaping creative acts and in determining the reception they are given. We argue that shared social identity (or lack of it) motivates individuals to rise to particular creative challenges and provides a basis for certain forms of creativity to be recognized (or disregarded). Empirical work informed by this approach supports eight novel hypotheses relating to individual, group, and systemic dimensions of the creativity process. These also provide an agenda for future creativity research.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 October 2021.
All research outputs
#785,098
of 28,129,839 outputs
Outputs from Personality and Social Psychology Review
#103
of 432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,705
of 214,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Personality and Social Psychology Review
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,129,839 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 432 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 60.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 214,911 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
