4.6 Article

Curiosity may have killed the cat but it has the power to improve employee creativity

期刊

CURRENT PSYCHOLOGY
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12144-022-04171-y

关键词

Work curiosity; Employee creativity; Linking ideas; Mindfulness; SDT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Curiosity motivates human inquisitiveness, teaches us new things, and encourages us to be open to new forms of creativity. The probing nature of a curious mind is believed to enhance an individual's ability to generate new ideas and enhance creativity. This study examines the effect of work curiosity on employee creativity based on the Self-determination theory, and further explores the mediating role of linking ideas. Mindfulness is also investigated as a moderating variable. The results show a positive association between work curiosity and employee creativity, with linking ideas mediating this relation. Mindfulness was found to moderate the relationship between work curiosity and employee creativity. The implications for future research are discussed.
Curiosity motivates human inquisitiveness, teaches us new things, and encourages us to be open to new forms of creativity. The probing nature of a curious mind is often believed to enhance an individual's ability to generate new ideas and enhance creativity. Based on Self-determination theory, we examine the effect of work curiosity on employee creativity. Further, we studied the mediating role of linking ideas between work curiosity and employee creativity. In this study, mindfulness acts as a moderating variable between work curiosity and employee creativity. To examine the direct effect and the mediation purpose was used model 4 and for moderation we used model 1 from Process Hayes. The results shows that there is positive association between work curiosity and employee creativity and linking ideas mediates the relation. Mindfulness moderates the relation between work curiosity and employee creativity. Future research implications are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据