Different ponds for different fish: A contrasting perspective on team innovation

Applied Psychology

Volumn 51, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 394-399

  Paulus, Paul B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036661391     PISSN: 0269994X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1464-0597.00973     Document Type: Note

References (24)

1. Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
2. Amabile, T.M., Hill, K.G., Hennessey, B.A., & Tighe, E.M. (1994). The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 950-967.
3. Bartis, S., Szymanski, K., & Harkins, S.G. (1988). Evaluation and performance: A two-edged knife. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 242-251.
4. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Sawyer, K. (1995). Creative insight: The social dimension of a solitary moment. In R.J. Sternberg & J.E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 329-363). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497-509.
6. Janis, I., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.
7. Kelly, J.R., & McGrath, J.E. (1985). Effects of time limits and task types on performance in interaction in four person groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 395-407.
8. Kerr, N.L., MacCoun, R.J., & Kramer, G.P. (1996). Bias in judgment: Comparing individuals and groups. Psychological Review, 103, 687-719.
9. Kruglanski, A., & Freund, T. (1983). The freezing and unfreezing of lay-inferences: Effects on impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping and numerical anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 448-468.
10. Larey, T.S., & Paulus, P.B. (1999). Group preference and convergent tendencies in small groups: A content analysis of group brainstorming performance. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 175-184.
11. Locke, E.A., Tirnauer, D., Roberson, Q., Goldman, B., Latham, M.E., & Weldon, E. (2001). The importance of the individual in an age of groupism. In M. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Advances in theory and research (pp. 501-528). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12. Ochse, R. (1990). Before the gates of excellence: The determinants of creative genius. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Osborn, A.F. (1957). Applied imagination. New York: Scribner.
14. Paulus, P.B. (1998). Developing consensus about groupthink after all these years. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 362-374.
15. Paulus, P.B. (2000). Groups, teams and creativity: The creative potential of idea generating groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49, 237-262.
16. Paulus, P.B., Dugosh, K.L., Dzindolet, M.T., Coskun, H., & Putman, V.L. (in press). Social and cognitive influences in group brainstorming. Predicting production gains and losses. European Review of Social Psychology.
17. Paulus, P.B., & Dzindolet, M.T. (1993). Social influence processes in group brain-storming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 575-586.
18. Paulus, P.B., Larey, T.S., & Dzindolet, M.T. (2001). Creativity in groups and teams. In M. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Advances in theory and research (pp. 319-338). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19. rffrt Plato (1966). Plato's Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Snyder, C.R. (1990). Self-handicapping processes and sequelae. In R.L. Higgins, C.R. Snyder, & S. Berglas (Eds.), Self-handicapping: The paradox that isn't (pp. 107-150). New York: Plenum.
21. Stasser, G. (1999). The uncertain role of unshared information in collective choice. In L. Thompson, J, Levine, & D. Messick (Eds.), Shared knowledge in organizations (pp. 49-69). Mahweh, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. Staw, B., Sandelands, L., & Dutton, J. (1981). Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multi-level analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 501-524.
23. Turner, M.E., & Horvitz, T. (2001). The dilemma of threat: Group effectiveness and ineffectiveness under adversity. In M. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Advances in theory and research (pp. 445-470). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24. Ward, T.B., Smith, S.M., & Finke, R.A. (1999). Creative cognition. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.