Search

Individuals and organizations frequently tout creative ideas as a desirable goal, and yet, creative ideas are frequently rejected. Creativity researchers have often suggested that creative ideas are rejected because they are perceived as riskier due to their inherent novelty or originality. Although this assumption is prevalent, we are unaware of any empirical research directly examining the relations between perceptions of novelty and risk. We provide an empirical test of this assumption in two studies in which participants rate the novelty, usefulness, and riskiness of ideas. Across both studies, we find consistent support for the idea that usefulness, rather than novelty, has the strongest relation with risk perceptions. We also find some evidence that novelty and usefulness interact to predict perceptions of risk. Additionally, in Study 2, we find that usefulness has the strongest relation with willingness to invest and buy a product. The findings of this study suggest that the bias against creativity may be driven by the perceived usefulness of an idea, rather than its novelty, such that ideas with lower usefulness are perceived to be riskier. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to Webb and Tangney (2022) we call into question the conclusion that data collected on Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) was "at best-only 2.6% valid" (p. 1). We suggest that Webb and Tangney made certain choices during the study-design and data-collection process that adversely affected the quality of the data collected. As a result, the anecdotal experience of these authors provides weak evidence that MTurk provides low-quality data as implied. In our commentary we highlight best practice recommendations and make suggestions for more effectively collecting and screening online panel data.