Middle Ground Approach to Paradox: Within-and between-culture examination of the creative benefits of paradoxical frames

Angela K.Y. Leung, Shyh-Nan Liou, Ella Miron-Spektor, Brandon Koh, David Chan, Roni Eisenberg, Iris Schneider

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Thriving in increasingly complex and ambiguous environments requires creativity and the capability to reconcile conflicting demands. Recent evidence with Western samples has suggested that paradoxical frames, or mental templates that encourage individuals to recognize and embrace contradictions, could produce creative benefits. We extended the timely, but understudied, topic by studying the nuances of for whom and why creative advantages of paradoxical frames emerge. We suggest that people endorsing a middle ground approach are less likely to scrutinize conflict and reconcile with integrative solutions, thus receiving less creative benefits of paradoxical frames. Five studies that examined individual and cultural differences in middle ground endorsement support our theory. Study 1 found that paradoxical frames increased creativity, but failed to replicate that experienced conflict mediated the relationship in a Taiwanese sample. In both within-and between-culture analysis, we showed that the creative advantages of thinking paradoxically and experiencing conflict emerged among individuals who endorse lower (vs. higher) levels of middle ground (Study 2) and among Israelis whose culture predominantly endorses middle ground strategy less, but not among Singaporeans whose culture predominantly endorses middle ground more (Study 3). Study 4 further demonstrated the causal role of middle ground in the paradox-conflict-creativity link. To answer "why," Study 5 situationally induced integrative complex thinking that sets distinctions and forms syntheses among contradictory elements, and found that low endorsers of middle ground performed more creatively when they engaged integrative complex thinking to cope with paradoxes. This program of studies offers important insights on harnessing paradoxical experiences to catalyze creativity.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)443-464
Number of pages22
JournalJournal of Personality and Social Psychology
Volume114
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018 Mar 1

Fingerprint

Creativity
creativity
examination
program of study
cultural difference
Israeli
Individuality
Conflict (Psychology)
evidence
experience

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Leung, Angela K.Y. ; Liou, Shyh-Nan ; Miron-Spektor, Ella ; Koh, Brandon ; Chan, David ; Eisenberg, Roni ; Schneider, Iris. / Middle Ground Approach to Paradox : Within-and between-culture examination of the creative benefits of paradoxical frames. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2018 ; Vol. 114, No. 3. pp. 443-464.
@article{6c50b97a1a5446d888576c20ab62ef6a,
title = "Middle Ground Approach to Paradox: Within-and between-culture examination of the creative benefits of paradoxical frames",
abstract = "Thriving in increasingly complex and ambiguous environments requires creativity and the capability to reconcile conflicting demands. Recent evidence with Western samples has suggested that paradoxical frames, or mental templates that encourage individuals to recognize and embrace contradictions, could produce creative benefits. We extended the timely, but understudied, topic by studying the nuances of for whom and why creative advantages of paradoxical frames emerge. We suggest that people endorsing a middle ground approach are less likely to scrutinize conflict and reconcile with integrative solutions, thus receiving less creative benefits of paradoxical frames. Five studies that examined individual and cultural differences in middle ground endorsement support our theory. Study 1 found that paradoxical frames increased creativity, but failed to replicate that experienced conflict mediated the relationship in a Taiwanese sample. In both within-and between-culture analysis, we showed that the creative advantages of thinking paradoxically and experiencing conflict emerged among individuals who endorse lower (vs. higher) levels of middle ground (Study 2) and among Israelis whose culture predominantly endorses middle ground strategy less, but not among Singaporeans whose culture predominantly endorses middle ground more (Study 3). Study 4 further demonstrated the causal role of middle ground in the paradox-conflict-creativity link. To answer {"}why,{"} Study 5 situationally induced integrative complex thinking that sets distinctions and forms syntheses among contradictory elements, and found that low endorsers of middle ground performed more creatively when they engaged integrative complex thinking to cope with paradoxes. This program of studies offers important insights on harnessing paradoxical experiences to catalyze creativity.",
author = "Leung, {Angela K.Y.} and Shyh-Nan Liou and Ella Miron-Spektor and Brandon Koh and David Chan and Roni Eisenberg and Iris Schneider",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/pspp0000160",
language = "English",
volume = "114",
pages = "443--464",
journal = "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology",
issn = "0022-3514",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "3",

}

Middle Ground Approach to Paradox : Within-and between-culture examination of the creative benefits of paradoxical frames. / Leung, Angela K.Y.; Liou, Shyh-Nan; Miron-Spektor, Ella; Koh, Brandon; Chan, David; Eisenberg, Roni; Schneider, Iris.

In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 114, No. 3, 01.03.2018, p. 443-464.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Middle Ground Approach to Paradox

T2 - Within-and between-culture examination of the creative benefits of paradoxical frames

AU - Leung, Angela K.Y.

AU - Liou, Shyh-Nan

AU - Miron-Spektor, Ella

AU - Koh, Brandon

AU - Chan, David

AU - Eisenberg, Roni

AU - Schneider, Iris

PY - 2018/3/1

Y1 - 2018/3/1

N2 - Thriving in increasingly complex and ambiguous environments requires creativity and the capability to reconcile conflicting demands. Recent evidence with Western samples has suggested that paradoxical frames, or mental templates that encourage individuals to recognize and embrace contradictions, could produce creative benefits. We extended the timely, but understudied, topic by studying the nuances of for whom and why creative advantages of paradoxical frames emerge. We suggest that people endorsing a middle ground approach are less likely to scrutinize conflict and reconcile with integrative solutions, thus receiving less creative benefits of paradoxical frames. Five studies that examined individual and cultural differences in middle ground endorsement support our theory. Study 1 found that paradoxical frames increased creativity, but failed to replicate that experienced conflict mediated the relationship in a Taiwanese sample. In both within-and between-culture analysis, we showed that the creative advantages of thinking paradoxically and experiencing conflict emerged among individuals who endorse lower (vs. higher) levels of middle ground (Study 2) and among Israelis whose culture predominantly endorses middle ground strategy less, but not among Singaporeans whose culture predominantly endorses middle ground more (Study 3). Study 4 further demonstrated the causal role of middle ground in the paradox-conflict-creativity link. To answer "why," Study 5 situationally induced integrative complex thinking that sets distinctions and forms syntheses among contradictory elements, and found that low endorsers of middle ground performed more creatively when they engaged integrative complex thinking to cope with paradoxes. This program of studies offers important insights on harnessing paradoxical experiences to catalyze creativity.

AB - Thriving in increasingly complex and ambiguous environments requires creativity and the capability to reconcile conflicting demands. Recent evidence with Western samples has suggested that paradoxical frames, or mental templates that encourage individuals to recognize and embrace contradictions, could produce creative benefits. We extended the timely, but understudied, topic by studying the nuances of for whom and why creative advantages of paradoxical frames emerge. We suggest that people endorsing a middle ground approach are less likely to scrutinize conflict and reconcile with integrative solutions, thus receiving less creative benefits of paradoxical frames. Five studies that examined individual and cultural differences in middle ground endorsement support our theory. Study 1 found that paradoxical frames increased creativity, but failed to replicate that experienced conflict mediated the relationship in a Taiwanese sample. In both within-and between-culture analysis, we showed that the creative advantages of thinking paradoxically and experiencing conflict emerged among individuals who endorse lower (vs. higher) levels of middle ground (Study 2) and among Israelis whose culture predominantly endorses middle ground strategy less, but not among Singaporeans whose culture predominantly endorses middle ground more (Study 3). Study 4 further demonstrated the causal role of middle ground in the paradox-conflict-creativity link. To answer "why," Study 5 situationally induced integrative complex thinking that sets distinctions and forms syntheses among contradictory elements, and found that low endorsers of middle ground performed more creatively when they engaged integrative complex thinking to cope with paradoxes. This program of studies offers important insights on harnessing paradoxical experiences to catalyze creativity.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027314847&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85027314847&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/pspp0000160

DO - 10.1037/pspp0000160

M3 - Article

C2 - 28805402

AN - SCOPUS:85027314847

VL - 114

SP - 443

EP - 464

JO - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

JF - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

SN - 0022-3514

IS - 3

ER -