MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967719167 · doi:10.1108/cms-09-2018-0683

Self-reflection and employee creativity

2019· article· en· W2967719167 on OpenAlexaff
Zhining Wang, Dandan Liu, Shaohan Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Management Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCreativity in Education and Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityModerationPsychologyOriginalityStructural equation modelingReflection (computer programming)Social psychologyValue (mathematics)Affect (linguistics)Sample (material)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to examine the effect of self-reflection on employee creativity in China. The authors identify individual intellectual capital (IIC) as a mediator and concerns for face as a moderator for this relationship. Design/methodology/approach A sample of 351 dyads of full-time employees and their immediate supervisors from various Chinese companies were surveyed. Regression analysis and structural equation modeling were used to test the research model. Findings Three dimensions of self-reflection significantly affect IIC and subsequently lead to employee creativity; IIC mediates the relationship between three dimensions of self-reflection and employee creativity; concern for face negatively moderates the effect of IIC on employee creativity. Practical implications Managers can facilitate employees’ creativity by motivating them to conduct self-reflection and develop IIC, and by nurturing a safe atmosphere that allows individuals to take risks without losing face. Originality/value This is one of the first empirical studies to investigate the mediating effects of IIC and the moderating effects of concerns for face on the relationship between self-reflection and creativity.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.363 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Management StudiesSame topicCreativity in Education and NeuroscienceFrench-language works237,207