Person–Environment Fit and Creative Behavior: Differential Impacts of Supplies–Values and Demands–Abilities Versions of Fit
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerous studies that have demonstrated interaction effects between individual and contextual factors suggest the potential positive effect of congruent personal and environmental characteristics on creativity. None of the prior studies, however, has explicitly and systematically tested the formal theory of person–environment fit in the context of creativity. This study examined the effects of two versions of person–environment fit (supplies–values and demands–abilities fit) on creative behavior and context satisfaction. The results, based on longitudinal data collected from management students and their instructors, showed that creative behavior was almost exclusively predicted by personal characteristics (desire for creative climate, actual creative abilities), whereas context satisfaction was strongly influenced by environmental characteristics (current creative climate, required creative abilities). The present results indicate a potential division of roles between personal and environmental characteristics with respect to affective and behavioral outcomes. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it