REPOZYTORIUM UNIWERSYTETU
W BIAŁYMSTOKU
UwB

  1. Repozytorium Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
  2. Czasopisma naukowe / Journals
  3. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications
  4. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 2022, Vol. 9, Issue 2

Szukanie zaawansowane
  • Zespoły i Kolekcje


  • Zaloguj się
  • Zarejestruj się
  • Mój RUB
  • FAQ
  • Polityka
  • Regulamin
  • DOI
  • Instrukcja
  • Aspekty prawne
  • Open Access
  • Archiwum


  • Kontakt
  • O Dspace
  • Strona Biblioteki
  • Strona Uczelni



    • Proszę używać tego identyfikatora do cytowań lub wstaw link do tej pozycji: http://hdl.handle.net/11320/20132
    Pełny rekord metadanych
    Pole DCWartośćJęzyk
    dc.contributor.authorPuente-Díaz, Rogelio-
    dc.contributor.authorCavazos-Arroyo, Judith-
    dc.date.accessioned2026-04-21T10:01:00Z-
    dc.date.available2026-04-21T10:01:00Z-
    dc.date.issued2022-
    dc.identifier.citationCreativity. Theories – Research – Applications, Vol. 9, Issue 2, 2022, pp. 29-42pl
    dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11320/20132-
    dc.description.abstractIn two studies, we examined the creativity of ideas generated, as rated by judges, and metacognitive feelings as antecedents of evaluative self-efficacy and relevance of strengths and weaknesses of the idea generated and accurate idea selection as consequences within the creative process. Participants in both studies completed a measure of metacognitive feelings, evaluative self-effiicacy, and a divergent thinking task. In addition, participants rated their ideas and either identified strengths and weaknesses or selected their most creative idea. Two independent judges evaluated all ideas and either assessed the relevance of the strengths and weaknesses identified by participants or selected the most creative idea. Results showed a positive relationship between judges-evaluations and evaluative self-efficacy in one study and a positive relationship between metacognitive feelings and evaluative self-efficacy in both studies. Regarding consequences, results showed a positive re lationship between evaluative self-efficacy and the relevance of strengths and weaknesses and a non-significant relationship between evaluative self-efficacy and accurate idea selection. The implications of our results for metacognition and creative beliefs were explained.pl
    dc.language.isoenpl
    dc.publisherUniversity of Białystokpl
    dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Licensepl
    dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/pl
    dc.subjectmetacognitionpl
    dc.subjectidea selectionpl
    dc.subjectidea evaluationpl
    dc.subjectevaluative self-efficacypl
    dc.titleEvaluative Self-efficacy and its Potential Role in the Evaluation and Selection of Ideas: A Metacognitive Perspectivepl
    dc.typeArticlepl
    dc.rights.holder© 2023 Rogelio Puente-Díaz, Judith Cavazos-Arroyo, published by University of Białystokpl
    dc.rights.holderThis work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Licensepl
    dc.identifier.doi10.2478/ctra-2022-0010-
    dc.description.EmailRogelio Puente-Díaz: rogelio.puente@anahuac.mxpl
    dc.description.AffiliationRogelio Puente-Díaz - School of Business and Economics, Universidad Anáhuac México, Mexico City, Méxicopl
    dc.description.AffiliationJudith Cavazos-Arroyo - Interdisciplinary Postgraduate Center, Popular Autonomous University of the State of Puebla, Puebla, Méxicopl
    dc.description.referencesAckerman, R., & Thompson, V.A. (2017). Meta-Reasoning: Monitoring and control of thinking and reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21, 607–-617. doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.05.004pl
    dc.description.referencesBeaty, R.E., & Silvia, P.J. (2012). Why do ideas get more creative across time? An executive interpretation of the serial order effect in divergent thinking tasks. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 309–319. doi.org/10.1037/a0029171pl
    dc.description.referencesBeghetto, R.A., & Karwowski, M. (2017). Toward untangling creative self-beliefs. In M. Karwowski & J.C. Kaufman (Eds.), The creative self: Effect of beliefs, self-efficacy, mindset, and identity (pp. 4–19). Academic Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesBerg, J.M. (2016). Balancing on the creative highwire: Forecasting the success of novel ideas in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(3), 433–468. doi.org/10.1177/0001839216642211pl
    dc.description.referencesBrown, T.A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Guilford Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesCorazza, G.E., (2016). Potential originality and effectiveness: The dynamic definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 28(3), 258–267. doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2016.1195627pl
    dc.description.referencesDunning, D. (2003). Self-insight: Roadblocks and detours on the path to knowing thyself. Psychology Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesDunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(3), 83–87. doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.01235pl
    dc.description.referencesGuo, Y., Lin, S., Acar, S., Jin, S., Xu, X., Feng, Y. and Zeng, Y. (2022), Divergent thinking and evaluative skill: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Creative Behavior. doi.org/10.1002/jocb.539pl
    dc.description.referencesIyengar, S.S., & Lepper, M. (2006). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? In S. Lichtenstein & P. Slovic (Eds.), The construction of preference (pp. 300–322). Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesKarwowski, M., Han, M.H., & Beghetto, R.A. (2019a). Toward dynamizing the measurement of creative confidence beliefs. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 13, 193–202. doi.org/10.1037/aca0000229pl
    dc.description.referencesKarwowski, M., Lebuda, I., & Beghetto, R.A. (2019b). Creative self-beliefs. In J.C. Kaufman & R.J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity (2nd Ed.). Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesKoriat, A. (2006). Are we frightened because we run away? Some evidence from metacognitive feelings. In B. Uttl, N. Ohta, & A.L. Siegenthaler (Eds.), Memory and emotion: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 83–103). Blackwell.pl
    dc.description.referencesKoriat, A. (2012). The self-consistency model of subjective confidence. Psychological Review, 119, 80–113. doi: 10.1037/a0025648pl
    dc.description.referencesMedeiros, K.E., Steele, L.M., Watts, L.L., & Mumford, M.D. (2018). Timing is everything: Examining the role of constraints throughout the creative process. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(4), 471–488. doi.org/10.1037/aca0000148pl
    dc.description.referencesMumford, M.D., & McIntosh, T. (2017). Creative thinking processes: The past and the future. Journal of Creative Behavior, 51, 317–322. doi.org/10.1002/jocb.197pl
    dc.description.referencesPuente-Díaz, R., & Cavazos-Arroyo, J. (2020). Creative metacognitive feelings as a source of information for creative self-efficacy, creativity potential, intrapersonal idea selection, and task enjoyment. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 54, 499–507. doi.org/10.1002/jocb.384pl
    dc.description.referencesPuente-Díaz, R., & Cavazos-Arroyo, J. (2021). Creative personal identity and creative mindsets and their implications for creative potential and metacognition: A latent variable and a latent class approach. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 8, 20–31. doi.org/10.2478/ctra-2021-0015pl
    dc.description.referencesPuente-Díaz, R., Cavazos-Arroyo, J., & Puerta-Sierra, L. (2021). Idea generation, selection, and evaluation: A metacognitive approach. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(4), 1015–1027. doi.org/10.1002/jocb.505pl
    dc.description.referencesPuente-Díaz, R., Cavazos-Arroyo, J., & Vargas-Barrera, F. (2021). Metacognitive feelings as a source of information in the evaluation and selection of creative ideas. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39, 100767. doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100767pl
    dc.description.referencesPuente-Díaz, R., Cavazos-Arroyo, J., & Puerta-Sierra, L., & Vargas-Barrera, F. (2021). The contribution Openness to Experience and its two aspects to the explanation of idea generation, evaluation and selection: A metacognitive perspective. Personality and Individual Differences, 185, 111240. doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111240pl
    dc.description.referencesRietzschel, E.F., & Ritter, S. (2018). Moving from creativity to innovation. In R. Reiter-Palmon, V.L. Kennel, & J.C. Kaufman (Eds.), Individual creativity in the workplace (pp. 3–34). Academic Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesRunco, M.A., & Smith, W.R. (1992). Interpersonal and intrapersonal evaluations of creative ideas. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(3), 295–302. doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90105-Xpl
    dc.description.referencesSidi, Y., Torgovitsky, I., Soibelman, D., Miron-Spektor, E., & Ackerman, R. (2020). You may be more original than you think: Predictable biases in self-assessment of originality. Acta Psychologica, 203, 103002. doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.103002pl
    dc.description.referencesSilvia, P.J. (2008). Discernment and creativity: How well can people identify their most creative ideas? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(3), 139–146. doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.3.139pl
    dc.description.referencesSteele, L.M., Johnson, G., & Medeiros, K.E. (2018). Looking beyond the generation of creative ideas: Confidence in evaluating ideas predicts creative outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences, 125, 21–29. doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.12.028pl
    dc.description.referencesTerwiesch, C., & Ulrich, K.T. (2009). Innovation Tournaments: Creating and Selecting Exceptional Opportunities. Harvard Business School Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesvan Broekhoven, K., Belfi, B., Borghans, L., & Seegers, P. (2022). Creative idea forecasting: The effect of task exposure on idea evaluation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 16(3), 519–528. doi.org/10.1037/aca0000426pl
    dc.description.referencesWatts, L.L., McIntosh, T.J., Gibson, C., Mulhearn, T.J., Medeiros, K.E., Mecca, J.T., & Cohen-Charash, Y. (2020). Mild affective shifts and creativity: Effects on idea generation, evaluation, and implementation planning. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 54(4), 985–1001. doi.org/10.1002/jocb.427pl
    dc.description.referencesWest, S.G., Taylor, A.B., & Wu, W. (2012). Model fit and model selection in structural equation modeling. In R.H. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 209–231). Guilford Press.pl
    dc.identifier.eissn2354-0036-
    dc.description.volume9pl
    dc.description.issue2pl
    dc.description.firstpage29pl
    dc.description.lastpage42pl
    dc.identifier.citation2Creativity. Theories – Research – Applicationspl
    Występuje w kolekcji(ach):Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 2022, Vol. 9, Issue 2

    Pliki w tej pozycji:
    Plik Opis RozmiarFormat 
    Creativity_9_2_2022_R_Puente_Díaz_J_Cavazos_Arroyo_Evaluative_Self_efficacy_and_its_Potential_Role_in_the_Evaluation.pdf240,43 kBAdobe PDFOtwórz
    Pokaż uproszczony widok rekordu Zobacz statystyki


    Pozycja ta dostępna jest na podstawie licencji Licencja Creative Commons CCL Creative Commons