Can Paternalistic Leadership Promote Chinese College Teachers’ Creativity? Understanding the Mediating Role of Creative Self-Efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the current study was to explore the effects of three dimensions of paternalistic leadership (i.e., authoritarian leadership, benevolent leadership, and moral leadership) on the creativity of Chinese college teachers. Based on social cognitive theory, the mediating role of creative self-efficacy in the relationship between the three dimensions of paternalistic leadership and creativity was also investigated. A questionnaire survey methodology was adopted with data collected from a sample of 775 college teachers as participants in the Shandong province of China. The results revealed college teachers’ perceived benevolent leadership and moral leadership had a significant positive impact on their creativity; perceived authoritarian leadership, however, demonstrated a significant negative effect on creativity; creativity self-efficacy was reported to partially or completely mediate between all three dimensions of perceived paternalistic leadership and creativity. These findings provided theoretical and practical insights for enhancing creativity among college teachers. College leaders are encouraged to exhibit benevolent and moral leadership behaviors while limiting authoritarian leadership behaviors. It is also recommended that colleges introduce management practices such as training and creative development tutorials to improve the creative self-efficacy of college teachers and enhance their 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".