¹ School of Economics and Management, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China
² Business School, Hunan University, Changsha 410082, China
³ School of Artificial Intelligence, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing 100876, China
⁴ School of Economics and Management, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China

Abstract:

Previous findings regarding the impact of supervisor negative feedback on employee creativity have seemingly been inconsistent. Researchers have reported positive, negative, and nonsignificant relationships between supervisor negative feedback and employee creativity. The present study aims to explore the possibility that supervisor negative feedback has short-lived impacts on employee creativity. Drawing from feedback intervention theory, we propose that proving goal orientation moderates the indirect effect of daily supervisor negative feedback on employee next-day creativity through problem-solving pondering at night such that this effect is stronger for individuals with higher levels of proving goal orientation. In addition, we suggest that avoiding goal orientation moderates the indirect effect of daily supervisor negative feedback on employee next-day creativity through affective rumination at night such that this effect is stronger for individuals with higher levels of avoiding goal orientation.

We conducted a field study using experience sampling methodology to collect data from employees of a design institute in northern China. The questionnaire survey process included an initial one-time entry survey and daily surveys administered over a period of two weeks. One week before the start of the daily surveys, participants reported their proving goal orientation, avoiding goal orientation, and demographic information. During the two-week daily survey period, participants assessed daily supervisor negative feedback and daily creativity at 5:30 p.m. and rated problem-solving pondering and affective rumination at 8:30 p.m. each evening. The final sample included 716 usable observations collected from 95 employees. To test the proposed hypotheses, we conducted two-level path-analyses using Mplus 8.0 and performed a Monte Carlo simulation procedure using R software.

As hypothesized, employees with different goal orientations reacted differently to daily supervisor negative feedback. The results showed that the relationship between daily supervisor negative feedback and problem- solving pondering at night was positive when proving goal orientation was high. We also found that the relationship between daily supervisor negative feedback and affective rumination at night was positive when avoiding goal orientation was high. Furthermore, for employees with high levels of proving goal orientation, daily supervisor negative feedback promoted their creativity the next day by activating their problem-solving pondering at night. However, for employees with low levels of proving goal orientation, this indirect effect was not significant. In addition, for employees with high levels of avoiding goal orientation, daily supervisor negative feedback inhibited their creativity the next day by eliciting their affective rumination at night. However, for employees with low levels of avoiding goal orientation, this indirect effect was not significant.

The current study makes several theoretical contributions. First, we adopt a dynamic perspective to capture the within-person variance in creativity resulting from daily fluctuations in supervisor negative feedback. Second, this study enriches feedback intervention theory by exploring the mediating roles of problem-solving pondering and affective rumination in the link of supervisor negative feedback with employee creativity. Third, the present study reconciles the conflicting findings of previous research by demonstrating the differential effects of daily supervisor negative feedback on employees with different goal orientations.

Key words: supervisor negative feedback, goal orientation, problem-solving pondering, affective rumination, creativity

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
1. 领导每日积极反馈	(0.91)	0.07	0.40 **	−0.02	0.48 **	0.44 **	0.20 *	0.06	−0.04	−0.06	0.11	−0.05
2. 领导每日消极反馈	−0.16 **	(0.92)	0.29 **	0.27 **	0.23 *	0.22 *	0.09	0.08	0.13	0.02	0.05	0.01
3. 每晚问题解决反思	0.05	0.08 *	(0.79)	0.13	0.75 **	0.77 **	0.13	0.08	0.21 *	−0.09	0.12	0.16
4. 每晚情感反刍	0.07 *	0.07	0.07	(0.82)	0.10	0.10	0.16	0.33 **	−0.10	0.04	0.01	0.06
5. 每天创造力	0.20 **	0.00	0.19 **	0.01	(0.91)	0.98 **	0.19	0.15	0.12	−0.04	0.27 **	0.19
6. 第二天创造力	0.07	0.04	0.18 **	−0.09 *	0.20 **	(0.91)	0.18	0.14	0.15	−0.01	0.23 *	0.17
7. 证明目标导向	—	—	—	—	—	—	(0.65)	0.42 **	0.16	0.05	0.12	0.09
8. 回避目标导向	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	(0.66)	−0.12	−0.03	0.17	0.17
9. 学习目标导向	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	(0.85)	0.10	0.01	0.07
10. 性别	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	−0.11	−0.05
11. 年龄	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.50 **
12. 组织任期	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
M	3.28	2.02	3.45	2.50	3.18	3.17	3.20	2.62	3.84	0.61	30.62	2.98
SD 个体内	0.88	0.80	0.75	0.88	0.90	0.92	—	—	—	—	—	—
SD 个体间	0.72	0.55	0.60	0.66	0.76	0.78	0.67	0.65	0.64	0.49	6.40	3.86

表1 均值、标准差和相关系数矩阵

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
1. 领导每日积极反馈	(0.91)	0.07	0.40 **	−0.02	0.48 **	0.44 **	0.20 *	0.06	−0.04	−0.06	0.11	−0.05
2. 领导每日消极反馈	−0.16 **	(0.92)	0.29 **	0.27 **	0.23 *	0.22 *	0.09	0.08	0.13	0.02	0.05	0.01
3. 每晚问题解决反思	0.05	0.08 *	(0.79)	0.13	0.75 **	0.77 **	0.13	0.08	0.21 *	−0.09	0.12	0.16
4. 每晚情感反刍	0.07 *	0.07	0.07	(0.82)	0.10	0.10	0.16	0.33 **	−0.10	0.04	0.01	0.06
5. 每天创造力	0.20 **	0.00	0.19 **	0.01	(0.91)	0.98 **	0.19	0.15	0.12	−0.04	0.27 **	0.19
6. 第二天创造力	0.07	0.04	0.18 **	−0.09 *	0.20 **	(0.91)	0.18	0.14	0.15	−0.01	0.23 *	0.17
7. 证明目标导向	—	—	—	—	—	—	(0.65)	0.42 **	0.16	0.05	0.12	0.09
8. 回避目标导向	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	(0.66)	−0.12	−0.03	0.17	0.17
9. 学习目标导向	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	(0.85)	0.10	0.01	0.07
10. 性别	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	−0.11	−0.05
11. 年龄	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.50 **
12. 组织任期	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
M	3.28	2.02	3.45	2.50	3.18	3.17	3.20	2.62	3.84	0.61	30.62	2.98
SD 个体内	0.88	0.80	0.75	0.88	0.90	0.92	—	—	—	—	—	—
SD 个体间	0.72	0.55	0.60	0.66	0.76	0.78	0.67	0.65	0.64	0.49	6.40	3.86

模型	因子	χ 2	df	χ 2 /df	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	SRMR 个体内	SRMR 个体间
六因子模型	每个变量对应一个因子	404.21	233	1.73	0.95	0.93	0.03	0.04	0.07
五因子模型1	领导消极反馈与问题解决反思并入一个因子	768.34	241	3.19	0.83	0.80	0.06	0.11	0.18
五因子模型2	领导消极反馈与情感反刍并入一个因子	938.13	241	3.89	0.78	0.73	0.06	0.09	0.12
五因子模型3	问题解决反思与情感反刍并入一个因子	796.52	241	3.31	0.82	0.79	0.06	0.09	0.14
五因子模型4	问题解决反思和第二天创造力并入一个因子	651.52	241	2.70	0.87	0.84	0.05	0.07	0.07
四因子模型1	证明目标导向与回避目标导向并入一个因子, 领导消极反馈与问题解决反思并入一个因子	795.49	245	3.25	0.82	0.79	0.06	0.11	0.19
四因子模型2	证明目标导向与回避目标导向并入一个因子, 领导消极反馈与情感反刍并入一个因子	975.13	245	3.98	0.76	0.72	0.07	0.09	0.12
四因子模型3	证明目标导向与回避目标导向并入一个因子, 问题解决反思与情感反刍并入一个因子	831.83	245	3.40	0.81	0.78	0.06	0.09	0.14
四因子模型4	证明目标导向与回避目标导向并入一个因子, 问题解决反思与第二天创造力并入一个因子	680.41	245	2.78	0.86	0.84	0.05	0.07	0.08

表3 多层次验证性因子分析结果

模型	因子	χ 2	df	χ 2 /df	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	SRMR 个体内	SRMR 个体间
六因子模型	每个变量对应一个因子	404.21	233	1.73	0.95	0.93	0.03	0.04	0.07
五因子模型1	领导消极反馈与问题解决反思并入一个因子	768.34	241	3.19	0.83	0.80	0.06	0.11	0.18
五因子模型2	领导消极反馈与情感反刍并入一个因子	938.13	241	3.89	0.78	0.73	0.06	0.09	0.12
五因子模型3	问题解决反思与情感反刍并入一个因子	796.52	241	3.31	0.82	0.79	0.06	0.09	0.14
五因子模型4	问题解决反思和第二天创造力并入一个因子	651.52	241	2.70	0.87	0.84	0.05	0.07	0.07
四因子模型1	证明目标导向与回避目标导向并入一个因子, 领导消极反馈与问题解决反思并入一个因子	795.49	245	3.25	0.82	0.79	0.06	0.11	0.19
四因子模型2	证明目标导向与回避目标导向并入一个因子, 领导消极反馈与情感反刍并入一个因子	975.13	245	3.98	0.76	0.72	0.07	0.09	0.12
四因子模型3	证明目标导向与回避目标导向并入一个因子, 问题解决反思与情感反刍并入一个因子	831.83	245	3.40	0.81	0.78	0.06	0.09	0.14
四因子模型4	证明目标导向与回避目标导向并入一个因子, 问题解决反思与第二天创造力并入一个因子	680.41	245	2.78	0.86	0.84	0.05	0.07	0.08

变量	每晚问题解决反思		每晚情感反刍		第二天创造力
	Model 1		Model 1		Model 1		Model 2
	Estimate	S.E.	Estimate	S.E.	Estimate	S.E.	Estimate	S.E.
个体内变量
领导积极反馈	0.06	0.05	0.11	0.07	0.05	0.05	0.04	0.05
领导消极反馈	0.03	0.04	0.07	0.05	0.02	0.05	0.01	0.05
问题解决反思					0.16 ***	0.04
情感反刍					−0.10 *	0.05
当天创造力					0.09 +	0.05	0.13 *	0.06
个体间变量
证明目标导向	0.06	0.09	0.05	0.13	0.13	0.13	0.13	0.13
回避目标导向	0.07	0.12	0.31 *	0.12	0.14	0.15	0.13	0.14
学习目标导向	0.19 *	0.10	−0.08	0.09	0.18	0.14	0.18	0.14
跨层交互项
领导消极反馈×证明目标导向	0.16 **	0.06	0.01	0.07	−0.04	0.08	0.02	0.08
领导消极反馈×回避目标导向	−0.06	0.05	0.14 +	0.08	0.05	0.06	0.04	0.06
领导消极反馈×学习目标导向	0.05	0.06	−0.06	0.07	−0.07	0.06	−0.05	0.06

表4 多层次回归分析结果

变量	每晚问题解决反思		每晚情感反刍		第二天创造力
	Model 1		Model 1		Model 1		Model 2
	Estimate	S.E.	Estimate	S.E.	Estimate	S.E.	Estimate	S.E.
个体内变量
领导积极反馈	0.06	0.05	0.11	0.07	0.05	0.05	0.04	0.05
领导消极反馈	0.03	0.04	0.07	0.05	0.02	0.05	0.01	0.05
问题解决反思					0.16 ***	0.04
情感反刍					−0.10 *	0.05
当天创造力					0.09 +	0.05	0.13 *	0.06
个体间变量
证明目标导向	0.06	0.09	0.05	0.13	0.13	0.13	0.13	0.13
回避目标导向	0.07	0.12	0.31 *	0.12	0.14	0.15	0.13	0.14
学习目标导向	0.19 *	0.10	−0.08	0.09	0.18	0.14	0.18	0.14
跨层交互项
领导消极反馈×证明目标导向	0.16 **	0.06	0.01	0.07	−0.04	0.08	0.02	0.08
领导消极反馈×回避目标导向	−0.06	0.05	0.14 +	0.08	0.05	0.06	0.04	0.06
领导消极反馈×学习目标导向	0.05	0.06	−0.06	0.07	−0.07	0.06	−0.05	0.06

Alder, G. S., & Ambrose, M. L. ( 2005 ). Towards understanding fairness judgments associated with computer performance monitoring: An integration of the feedback, justice, and monitoring research. Human Resource Management Review , 15 (1), 43-67. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2005.01.001 Alliger, G. M., & Williams, K. J. ( 1993 ). Using signal‐contingent experience sampling methodology to study work in the field: A discussion and illustration examining task perceptions and mood. Personnel Psychology , 46 (3), 525-549. doi: 10.1111/peps.1993.46.issue-3 Amabile, T. M. ( 1983 ). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 45 (2), 357-376. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357 Baer, M., & Oldham, G. R. ( 2006 ). The curvilinear relation between experienced creative time pressure and creativity: Moderating effects of openness to experience and support for creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology , 91 (4), 963-970. pmid: 16834519 Bai, X. W., Qi, S. T., Ming, X. D., Zhou, Y. Y., & Huang, M. Q. ( 2019 ). Pearls are everywhere but not the eyes: The mechanism and boundary conditions of the influences of decision maker's mental models on idea recognition. Advances in Psychological Science , 27 (4), 571-586. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.00571 [白新文, 齐舒婷, 明晓东, 周意勇, 黄明权. ( 2019 ). 骏马易见, 伯乐难寻: 决策者心智模式影响创意识别的机制及边界条件. 心理科学进展 , 27 (4), 571-586.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.00571 Bakker, A. B., Petrou, P., Op den Kamp, E. M., & Tims, M. ( 2020 ). Proactive vitality management, work engagement, and creativity: The role of goal orientation. Applied Psychology , 69 (2), 351-378. doi: 10.1111/apps.v69.2 Beghetto, R. A. ( 2014 ). Creative mortification: An initial exploration. Psychology of Aesthetics , Creativity, and the Arts, 8 ( 3), 266-276. Bledow, R., Rosing, K., & Frese, M. ( 2013 ). A dynamic perspective on affect and creativity. Academy of Management Journal , 56 (2), 432-450. doi: 10.5465/amj.2010.0894 Bonett, D. G. ( 2002 ). Sample size requirements for testing and estimating coefficient alpha. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics , 27 (4), 335-340. Briggs, S. R., & Cheek, J. M. ( 1986 ). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality , 54 (1), 106-148. doi: 10.1111/jopy.1986.54.issue-1 Brislin, R. W. ( 1980 ). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C.Triandis & J. W.Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 389-444). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Creed, P. A., King, V., Hood, M., & McKenzie, R. ( 2009 ). Goal orientation, self-regulation strategies, and job-seeking intensity in unemployed adults. Journal of Applied Psychology , 94 (3), 806-813. doi: 10.1037/a0015518 pmid: 19450016 Cron, W. L., Slocum, Jr, J. W., VandeWalle, D., & Fu, Q. ( 2005 ). The role of goal orientation on negative emotions and goal setting when initial performance falls short of one’s performance goal. Human Performance , 18 (1), 55-80. doi: 10.1207/s15327043hup1801_3 Cropley, M., Michalianou, G., Pravettoni, G., & Millward, L. J. ( 2012 ). The relation of post‐work ruminative thinking with eating behaviour. Stress and Health , 28 (1), 23-30. doi: 10.1002/smi.1397 pmid: 22259155 Cropley, M., Zijlstra, F. R., Querstret, D., & Beck, S. ( 2016 ). Is work-related rumination associated with deficits in executive functioning? Frontiers in Psychology , 7 , 1524. pmid: 27746759 Dahling, J. J., Taylor, S. R., Chau, S. L., & Dwight, S. A. ( 2016 ). Does coaching matter? A multilevel model linking managerial coaching skill and frequency to sales goal attainment. Personnel Psychology , 69 (4), 863-894. doi: 10.1111/peps.2016.69.issue-4 De Dreu, C. K., Baas, M., & Nijstad, B. A. ( 2008 ). Hedonic tone and activation level in the mood-creativity link: Toward a dual pathway to creativity model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 94 (5), 739-756. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.739 pmid: 18444736 DeVellis, R. F. ( 1991 ). Scale Development Theory and Applications . London: Sage. Gabriel, A. S., Lanaj, K., & Jennings, R. E. ( 2021 ). Is one the loneliest number? A within-person examination of the adaptive and maladaptive consequences of leader loneliness at work. Journal of Applied Psychology , 106 (10), 1517-1538. doi: 10.1037/apl0000838 pmid: 33030923 Gabriel, A. S., Podsakoff, N. P., Beal, D. J., Scott, B. A., Sonnentag, S., Trougakos, J. P., & Butts, M. M. ( 2019 ). Experience sampling methods: A discussion of critical trends and considerations for scholarly advancement. Organizational Research Methods , 22 (4), 969-1006. doi: 10.1177/1094428118802626 George, J. M., & Zhou, J. ( 2001 ). When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach. Journal of Applied Psychology , 86 (3), 513-524. pmid: 11419810 Gong, Y., Wang, M., Huang, J.-C., & Cheung, S. Y. ( 2017 ). Toward a goal orientation-based feedback-seeking typology: Implications for employee performance outcomes. Journal of Management , 43 (4), 1234-1260. doi: 10.1177/0149206314551797 He, Y., Yao, X., Wang, S., & Caughron, J. ( 2016 ). Linking failure feedback to individual creativity: The moderation role of goal orientation. Creativity Research Journal , 28 (1), 52-59. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2016.1125248 Heimbeck, D., Frese, M., Sonnentag, S., & Keith, N. ( 2003 ). Integrating errors into the training process: The function of error management instructions and the role of goal orientation. Personnel Psychology , 56 (2), 333-361. doi: 10.1111/peps.2003.56.issue-2 Hoever, I. J., Zhou, J., & van Knippenberg, D. ( 2018 ). Different strokes for different teams: The contingent effects of positive and negative feedback on the creativity of informationally homogeneous and diverse teams. Academy of Management Journal , 61 (6), 2159-2181. doi: 10.5465/amj.2016.0642 Hon, A. H., Chan, W. W., & Lu, L. ( 2013 ). Overcoming work-related stress and promoting employee creativity in hotel industry: The role of task feedback from supervisor. International Journal of Hospitality Management , 33 , 416-424. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.11.001 Junker, N. M., Baumeister, R. F., Straub, K., & Greenhaus, J. H. ( 2021 ). When forgetting what happened at work matters: The role of affective rumination, problem-solving pondering, and self-control in work-family conflict and enrichment. Journal of Applied Psychology , 106 (11), 1750-1766. doi: 10.1037/apl0000847 pmid: 33090861 Kang, Y. J., & Peng, J. ( 2019 ). Benefits and costs of servant leadership behavior: A work-home resource model perspective. Acta Psychologica Sinica , 51 (2), 227-237. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00227 Karlin, B., Zinger, J. F., & Ford, R. ( 2015 ). The effects of feedback on energy conservation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin , 141 (6), 1205-1277. doi: 10.1037/a0039650 pmid: 26390265 Kim, Y. J., & Kim, J. ( 2020 ). Does negative feedback benefit (or harm) recipient creativity? The role of the direction of feedback flow. Academy of Management Journal , 63 (2), 584-612. doi: 10.5465/amj.2016.1196 Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. ( 1996 ). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta- analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin , 119 (2), 254-284. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 Lee, K., Duffy, M. K., Scott, K. L., & Schippers, M. C. ( 2018 ). The experience of being envied at work: How being envied shapes employee feelings and motivation. Personnel Psychology , 71 (2), 181-200. doi: 10.1111/peps.2018.71.issue-2 Liao, Z., Lee, H. W., Johnson, R. E., Song, Z., & Liu, Y. ( 2021 ). Seeing from a short-term perspective: When and why daily abusive supervisor behavior yields functional and dysfunctional consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology , 106 (3), 377-398. doi: 10.1037/apl0000508 Liu, D., Zhang, Z., Wang, M. ( 2018 ). Single level and multilevel moderated mediation and mediated moderation:Theoretical construction and modeling testing. In Chen, X. P., & Shen, W (Eds)., Empirical Methods in Organization and Management Research (3 ^rd edition, pp.663-694). Beijing: Peking University Press. Liu, Y., Wang, M., Chang, C.-H., Shi, J., Zhou, L., & Shao, R. ( 2015 ). Work-family conflict, emotional exhaustion, and displaced aggression toward others: The moderating roles of workplace interpersonal conflict and perceived managerial family support. Journal of Applied Psychology , 100 (3), 793-808. doi: 10.1037/a0038387 pmid: 25528246 Luo, S. Q, & Jiang, Y. ( 2014 ). Management Survey Research Methodology. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press. Ma, J., Peng, Y., & Wu, B. ( 2021 ). Challenging or hindering? The roles of goal orientation and cognitive appraisal in stressor-performance relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 42 (3), 388-406. doi: 10.1002/job.v42.3 Ma, L., Xie, P., Wei, Y. Y., & Qiao, X. T. ( 2021 ). Is negative feedback from leaders really harm for employee innovation behavior? The role of positive attribution and job crafting. Science & Technology Process and Policy , 38 (12), 144-150. Miron-Spektor, E., Vashdi, D. R., & Gopher, H. ( 2022 ). Bright sparks and enquiring minds: Differential effects of goal orientation on the creativity trajectory. Journal of Applied Psychology , 107 (2), 310-318. doi: 10.1037/apl0000888 Ng, T. W., & Feldman, D. C. ( 2012 ). A comparison of self-ratings and non-self-report measures of employee creativity. Human Relations , 65 (8), 1021-1047. doi: 10.1177/0018726712446015 Payne, S. C., Youngcourt, S. S., & Beaubien, J. M. ( 2007 ). A meta-analytic examination of the goal orientation nomological net. Journal of Applied Psychology , 92 (1), 128-150. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.128 pmid: 17227156 Petrou, P., Bakker, A. B., & Bezemer, K. ( 2019 ). Creativity under task conflict: The role of proactively increasing job resources. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 92 (2), 305-329. doi: 10.1111/joop.2019.92.issue-2 Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. ( 2003 ). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology , 88 (5), 879-903. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 pmid: 14516251 Porath, C. L., & Bateman, T. S. ( 2006 ). Self-regulation: From goal orientation to job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology , 91 (1), 185-192. pmid: 16435948 Pravettoni, G., Cropley, M., Leotta, S. N., & Bagnara, S. ( 2007 ). The differential role of mental rumination among industrial and knowledge workers. Ergonomics , 50 (11), 1931-1940. pmid: 17972210 Preacher, K. J., & Selig, J. P. ( 2012 ). Advantages of Monte Carlo confidence intervals for indirect effects. Communication Methods and Measures , 6 (2), 77-98. doi: 10.1080/19312458.2012.679848 Seijts, G. H., Latham, G. P., Tasa, K., & Latham, B. W. ( 2004 ). Goal setting and goal orientation: An integration of two different yet related literatures. Academy of Management Journal , 47 (2), 227-239. doi: 10.2307/20159574 Shen, Y. M., Ma, C. L., Bai, X. W., Zhu, Y. H., Lu, Y. L., Zhang, Q. L., & Liu, J. ( 2019 ). Linking abusive supervision with employee creativity: The roles of psychological contract breach and Zhongyong thinking style. Acta Psychologica Sinica , 51 (2), 238-247. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00238 [沈伊默, 马晨露, 白新文, 诸彦含, 鲁云林, 张庆林, 刘军. ( 2019 ). 辱虐管理与员工创造力: 心理契约破坏和中庸思维的不同作用. 心理学报 , 51 (2), 238-247.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00238 Szalma, J. L., Hancock, P. A., Dember, W. N., & Warm, J. S. ( 2006 ). Training for vigilance: The effect of knowledge of results format and dispositional optimism and pessimism on performance and stress. British Journal of Psychology , 97 (1), 115-135. doi: 10.1348/000712605X62768 To, M. L., Fisher, C. D., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Rowe, P. A. ( 2012 ). Within-person relationships between mood and creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology , 97 (3), 599-612. doi: 10.1037/a0026097 pmid: 22040262 Vahle-Hinz, T., Mauno, S., de Bloom, J., & Kinnunen, U. ( 2017 ). Rumination for innovation? Analysing the longitudinal effects of work-related rumination on creativity at work and off-job recovery. Work & Stress , 31 (4), 315-337. doi: 10.1080/02678373.2017.1303761 Vandewalle, D. ( 1997 ). Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement , 57 (6), 995-1015. doi: 10.1177/0013164497057006009 Verhaeghen, P., Joormann, J., & Aikman, S. N. ( 2014 ). Creativity, mood, and the examined life: Self-reflective rumination boosts creativity, brooding breeds dysphoria. Psychology of Aesthetics , Creativity, and the Arts, 8 ( 2), 211-218. Wen, Z. L., Huang, B. B., & Tang, D. D. ( 2018 ). Preliminary work for modeling questionnaire data. Journal of Psychological Science , 41 (1), 204-210. Xing, L., Sun, J.-M., & Jepsen, D. ( 2021 ). Feeling shame in the workplace: Examining negative feedback as an antecedent and performance and well-being as consequences. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 42 (9), 1244-1260. doi: 10.1002/job.v42.9 Zhang, Y., Long, L. R., & He, W. ( 2014 ). The effect of pay for performance on radical creativity and incremental creativity. Acta Psychologica Sinica , 46 (12), 1880-1896. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2014.01880 周详, 张婧婧, 白博仁, 翟宏堃, 崔虞馨, 祖冲. “三心二意”胜过“一心一意”: 媒体多任务提升低工作记忆容量者创造力 [J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(8): 1031-1046. 晏渝, 冯明, 张勇. 职场“佛系”：中国组织情境下的理论构建与实证检验 [J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(5): 594-611. 王雅婷, 陈志俊, 李锐, 周明建. 掌舵者力有余, 撑船者齐创新?领导资质过剩感对团队创造力的促进机制 [J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(3): 326-338. 张建卫, 周愉凡, 李林英, 李海红, 滑卫军. 教导何以有方?教师辩证反馈对大学生团队创造力的作用机制 [J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(8): 1301-1316. 徐敏亚, 刘贝妮, 徐振宇. 失却锋芒：父母性别偏见对女性职场表现的负面影响 [J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(7): 1148-1159. 宋琪, 张璐, 高莉芳, 程豹, 陈扬. “行高人非”还是“见贤思齐”?职场上行比较对员工行为的双刃剑效应 [J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(4): 658-670. 成童, 程南华, 王美芳, 王争艳. 学步期焦虑影响5岁幼儿创造力：一般认知和掌握动机的链式中介作用 [J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(7): 799-812. 王丹, 王典慧, 陈文锋. 青少年心理韧性与恶意创造性行为倾向的关系 [J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(2): 154-167. 程瑞, 卢克龙, 郝宁. 愤怒情绪对恶意创造力的影响及调节策略 [J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(8): 847-860. 张景焕, 付萌萌, 辛于雯, 陈佩佩, 沙莎. 小学高年级学生创造力的发展：性别差异及学校支持的作用 [J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(9): 1057-1070. 胡巧婷, 王海江, 龙立荣. 新员工工作重塑会带来积极的结果吗?领导成员交换与个体传统性的作用 [J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(5): 659-668. 朱金强, 徐世勇, 周金毅, 张柏楠, 许昉昉, 宗博强. 跨界行为对创造力影响的跨层次双刃剑效应 [J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(11): 1340-1351. 栾墨, 吴霜, 李虹. 预期交流与创造力的关系:解释水平的调节作用 [J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(10): 1178-1188. 罗萍, 施俊琦, 朱燕妮, 房俨然. 个性化工作协议对员工主动性职业行为和创造力的影响 [J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(1): 81-92. 卫利华, 刘智强, 廖书迪, 龙立荣, 廖建桥. 集体心理所有权、地位晋升标准与团队创造力 [J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(6): 677-687. 地址：北京市朝阳区林萃路16号院
邮编：100101
电话：010-64850861
E-mail： xuebao@psych.ac.cn
备案编号： 京ICP备10049795号-1 京公网安备110402500018号
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发