The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Performance evaluation and creativity: Balancing originality and usefulness
Open accessAbstract
Innovation requires creative ideas, which are both original and useful. Usefulness is crucial for ideas to be implemented and turn into innovation. We examine how performance evaluation helps balance both dimensions. In a laboratory experiment, creators generate words, which users and jurors rate for creativity. Users use the words to write texts, whereas jurors do not use them. Creators’ pay depends either on user or juror ratings. Creators take their evaluators’ perspective and accommodate their preferences. Our findings highlight the instrumental role of the evaluator in motivating creativity. It suggests that firms involve users in performance evaluation to facilitate innovation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Creativity fundamentally requires both novelty and usefulness [61, 63, 73, 88].”
From Decoupling of Usefulness and Novelty: Evaluating the Impact of Generative AI on Design Outputs and Novice Designers' Creative Thinking (2026) · cites this paper as [73]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists are queued
They are fetched later and appear here then.
References 34 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Ostermaier, A., & Uhl, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Southern Denmark (DK)
- Technical University of Munich (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Uhl, Matthias
- Venue
- Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-06
- Volume
- 86
- Pages
- 101552
- ISSN
- 2214-8043 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3021889917
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 2.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (publishedVersion)
- University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Technische Universität München
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Open Source Software Innovations
- Keywords
- performance evaluation (human resources), creativity, originality, usefulness, innovation, evaluator perspective, user participation, performance-based pay, word production, user ratings
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Performance evaluation and creativity: Balancing originality and usefulness. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.socec.2020.101552
- The paper
- Ostermaier, A., & Uhl, M. (2020). Performance evaluation and creativity: Balancing originality and usefulness. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2020.101552
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
