Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 555

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 83 of the 83 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Factors for radical creativity, incremental creativity, and routine, noncreative performance.

Open access
Madjar, Nora, Greenberg, Ellen, Chen, Zheng·2011·Journal of Applied Psychology
DOI 10.1037/a0022416
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study extends theory and research by differentiating between routine, noncreative performance and 2 distinct types of creativity: radical and incremental. We also use a sensemaking perspective to examine the interplay of social and personal factors that may influence a person's engagement in a certain level of creative action versus routine, noncreative work. Results demonstrate that willingness to take risks, resources for creativity, and career commitment are associated primarily with radical creativity; that the presence of creative coworkers and organizational identification are associated with incremental creativity; and that conformity and organizational identification are linked with routine performance. Theoretical and managerial implications are discussed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0022416

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

1 retracted

Cited by

See all 555

Metadata

Authors
Madjar, N., Greenberg, E., & Chen, Z.
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2011-07
Volume
96
Issue
4
Pages
730-743
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
DOI
10.1037/a0022416
OpenAlex
W2093941394
Cited by
555
References
83
FWCI
23.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.