The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 84 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 44 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culture
Open accessAbstract
Teams represent a dominant approach to getting work done in a business environment. Creativity enables teams to solve problems and leverage opportunities through the integration of divergent thoughts and perspectives. Prior research indicates that a collaborative culture, which affects how team members interact and work together, is a critical antecedent of team creativity. This study explores other antecedents of team creativity, namely, team emotional intelligence and team trust, and investigates the relationships among these precursors to creative effort. Using a survey of 82 student teams at a large university in the northeast United States, our findings suggest that team emotional intelligence promotes team trust. Trust, in turn, fosters a collaborative culture which enhances the creativity of the team. Cognitive trust also moderates the relationship between collaborative culture and team creativity. Implications of these results for managers and academics are discussed.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
23 Own result · 22 No full text of the sources · 13 Own interpretation · 5 Own method · 3 Not checked yet · 2 No basis given · 1 Sources not found
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The lack of evidence to support a direct relationship between team emotional intelligence and a collaborative culture suggests that awareness and management of emotions is not necessary for team members to collaborate.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Discussion and Implications
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“only the two dimensions of trust had positive and significant regression coefficients”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Collaborative Culture
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Regression coefficients for awareness of own emotions and awareness of others' emotions were not significant.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Emotional Intelligence and Team Trust
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Team trust, in turn, helps build a collaborative culture which leads to higher levels of team creativity.”
- Also stated in: § Discussion and Implications · boosted
“results of this study support prior research indicating that collaborative culture is a strong predictor of creativity”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Discussion and Implications
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites DeCusatis, 2008 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Collaborative teams possess qualities (openness to others' suggestions, risk-taking, and consideration of diverse viewpoints) that are necessary for creative efforts.
- Also stated in: § Discussion and Implications · boosted
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“cognitive trust and collaborative culture are significant predictors of creativity”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Creativity
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This process resulted in three items each for affective and cognitive dimensions that explained 83.2 per cent of the variance of the trust construct.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“while the coefficients for management of own emotions and awareness of others' emotions were not significant.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Emotional Intelligence and Team Trust
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“while the coefficients for management of own emotions and awareness of others' emotions were not significant.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Emotional Intelligence and Team Trust
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Regression coefficients for awareness of own emotions and awareness of others' emotions were not significant.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Emotional Intelligence and Team Trust
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“management of own emotions and management of others' emotions were significant in explaining cognitive trust among members”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Emotional Intelligence and Team Trust
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 14
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
- Probably not a substantial claim. 17
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our results indicate that emotionally intelligent teams create both cognitive and affective team trust.”
- Also stated in: § Discussion and Implications · hedged
“The positive influence of particular elements of team emotional intelligence on both cognitive and affective trust highlights the importance of team emotional intelligence in creating team trust.”
- Also stated in: § Discussion and Implications · plain
“team emotional intelligence creates trust, both affective and cognitive, among team members”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Discussion and Implications
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Discussion and Implications · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“only the two dimensions of trust had positive and significant regression coefficients”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Collaborative Culture
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Correlations among the constructs were significant and in the right direction providing support for the hypotheses.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both collaborative culture and creativity scales were one-dimensional.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Supporting the third hypothesis, Evans and Wolf (2005) state that when employees trust each other, they create a collaborative culture and thus are more likely to collaborate together in a productive manner.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Trust and Collaborative Culture
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Evans and Wolf, 2005 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Thus, the decision to trust reflects two dimensions, affect-based and cognitive, prevalent in the literature and supported by ample empirical evidence in organizational research (Jeffries & Reed, 2000).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Trust
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Jeffries & Reed, 2000 source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Team emotional intelligence has been shown to lead to stronger relationships with co-workers (Jordan & Troth, 2004), better information exchange and decision making (Pelled, Eisenhardt & Xin, 1999), and decreased team conflict (Jehn & Mannix, 2001;Jordan & Troth, 2004).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Given that team trust is a critical antecedent of both of these constructs (Hattori & Lapidus, 2004;Evans & Wolf, 2005;DeCusatis, 2008)”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Trust, Collaborative Culture and Team Creativity
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Cognitive trust is based on one's willingness to rely on a team member's expertise and reliability (McAllister, 1995;Johnson & Grayson, 2005).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Trust
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites McAllister, 1995 source
- Not matchedcites Johnson & Grayson, 2005
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Affective trust is the confidence one places in a team member based on one's feelings of caring and concern illustrated by that co-worker (McAllister, 1995).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Trust
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites McAllister, 1995 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Prior research indicates that the quality of collaboration has a positive impact on creativity and team performance (Hoegl & Gemuenden, 2001;DeCusatis, 2008).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Introduction
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Trust acts as a facilitator and promotes interpersonal relationships prompting people to seek and give help leading to a more collaborative culture (Russ et al., 1998;Abrams et al., 2003;Middel, Boer & Fisscher, 2006).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Trust and Collaborative Culture
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Both team trust and a collaborative culture enable better communication, information sharing, focus and greater co-operation (Larson & LaFasto, 1989;Strutton, Pelton & Lumpkin, 1993;Calton & Lad, 1995;Littler, Leverick & Bruce, 1995;Whitener et al., 1998), thereby leading to greater creative efforts.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Trust, Collaborative Culture and Team Creativity
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, recent research has found that repeated collaboration may negatively affect a team's creativity (Skilton & Dooley, 2010).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Trust, Collaborative Culture and Team Creativity
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Skilton & Dooley, 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“emotional intelligence has been touted as essential to the performance of a team (Druskat & Wolff, 2001a;Goleman, Boyatzis & McKee, 2002;Rego et al., 2007).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Introduction
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Rousseau et al. (1998) propose that trust is a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behaviour of another.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Team Trust
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Rousseau et al., 1998 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“This concurs with research that shows that knowledge and skill about one's function is critical to creativity (Amabile, 1997;Taggar, 2002).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Discussion and Implications
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When team members trust each other to be competent and reliable, they are even more willing to exhibit those behaviours leading to an even more creative solution.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Discussion and Implications
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In relation, the study used team creativity as the dependent variable rather than a more practical measure of performance.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Limitations and Future Research
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Use of a convenience sample of students could be another limitation in terms of practical implications, even though student teams are known to provide useful insights into the dynamics of team work and creativity (Chiocchio & Essiembre, 2009;Qiu et al., 2009).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Limitations and Future Research
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study uses cross-sectional data and hence causality of the relationships between predictor and criterion variables should not be implied from results of this study.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Limitations and Future Research
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, both emotional intelligence and trust are critical for effective teamwork.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Discussion and Implications
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, a kick-off meeting at the beginning of a project can help team members to get to know each other and start to build relationships that can ultimately lead to a creative approach to the task.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Implications for Managers
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the impact of trust on a collaborative culture and cognitive trust on creativity reinforces that trust is a critical element of teams that managers need to pay attention to.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Implications for Managers
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“Individuals need to also possess skills such as working with others, being reliable and dependable, doing whatever is needed to accomplish the task, and being flexible (Barczak & Wilemon, 2003).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Implications for Managers
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Barczak & Wilemon, 2003 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In a trusting environment, individuals are more willing to take a risk by sharing information and co-operating with their team members (Mayer, Davis & Schoorman, 1995) thereby creating a sense of collaboration (Russ et al., 1998;Abrams et al., 2003;Hattori & Lapidus, 2004).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Discussion and Implications
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, to minimize social desirability bias, respondents were guaranteed anonymity and responses were collected by a student volunteer instead of their own instructor.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Limitations and Future Research
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“High cognitive trust teams are perceived to have members with strong functional as well as interpersonal capabilities which can create a feeling that the team can jointly make decisions, take risks and share ideas without fear of criticism (West, 1990) resulting in a creative solution to their task.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Discussion and Implications
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites West, 1990
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To aid these perceptions, it is obviously most useful to hire functionally competent individuals.”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Implications for Managers
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“To build and sustain trust, managers need to create situations for both formal and informal communication among team members (Jarvenpaa, Knoll & Leidner, 1998).”
§ Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culturec aim_574 332..345 > Implications for Managers
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Jarvenpaa, Knoll & Leidner, 1998 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
Student teams working on class projects are representative of organizational work teams for the relationships studied.
“A sample of undergraduate students of a major university in the northeastern United States was used for this study.Students formed teams and worked closely to complete a class project that represented a major portion of their course grade.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The team-level aggregation of individual survey responses is valid for measuring team constructs.
“The measures were aggregated by team.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The causal ordering in the proposed model (team emotional intelligence → team trust → collaborative culture → team creativity) is correct.
“our findings suggest that team emotional intelligence promotes team trust.Trust, in turn, fosters a collaborative culture which enhances the creativity of the team.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Collaborative teams possess qualities (openness to others' suggestions, risk-taking, and consideration of diverse viewpoints) that are necessary for creative efforts.
“Collaborative teams are known to be open to others' suggestions, allow team members to take risks and are willing to consider diverse viewpoints; all of the qualities necessary for creative efforts.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Team members' trust is based on individuals' confidence that the actions of the members will be beneficial and not detrimental.
“Team members' trust is based on individuals' confidence that the actions of the members will be beneficial and not detrimental.”
Citations
Cites
Social Identity Theory and the Organization
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. A. (1989) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258189 · Cited by 11,467
An integrative model of organizational trust
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258792 · Cited by 10,736
Not So Different After All: A Cross-Discipline View Of Trust
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1998.926617 · Cited by 10,274
Organizational Culture and Leadership
Tierney, W. G., & Schein, E. H. (1986) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258322 · Cited by 9,614
Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs
Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.114 · Cited by 8,490
Social Identity Theory and the Organization
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. A. (1989) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1989.4278999 · Cited by 7,978
Affect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations
McAllister, D. J. (1995) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256727 · Cited by 7,346
Working with Emotional Intelligence
Goleman, D. (1999) · ETC: A Review of General Semantics · doi:10.66774/etc_5601_103 · Cited by 6,254
Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A., & Werner, J. M. (1998) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1998.926624 · Cited by 4,971
Organizational culture and leadership
Tohidi, H., & Jabbari, M. M. (2012) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.156 · Cited by 4,328
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Amabile T.M., 1998, How to Kill Creativity: Keep Doing What You're Doing. Or If You Want to Spark Innovation, Rethink How You Motivate, Reward and Assign Work to People, Harvard Business Review, 76
- Druskat V.U., 2001, The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace, 132
- Kemper T.D., 1978, A Social Interaction Theory of Emotions
- Larson C., 1989, Teamwork
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chen, Y.-S., & Chang, C. (2012) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1452-x · Cited by 1,276
George, G., Merrill, R. K., & Schillebeeckx, S. J. D. (2021) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/1042258719899425 · Cited by 1,066
“Research has found that trust plays an important role in team, organizational, and collaborative innovation (Barczak et al., 2010; Dovey, 2009; Fawcett et al., 2012) and it is unlikely that “technological trust” can replace the same mechanisms.”
BackgroundSong, W., & Yu, H. (2017) · Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · doi:10.1002/csr.1445 · Cited by 861
Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review
Morrison-Smith, S., & Ruiz, J. (2020) · SN Applied Sciences · doi:10.1007/s42452-020-2801-5 · Cited by 633
Trust and team performance: A meta-analysis of main effects, moderators, and covariates.
De Jong, B. A., Dirks, K. T., & Gillespie, N. (2016) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/apl0000110 · Cited by 616
Metadata
- Authors
- Barczak, G., Lassk, F., & Mulki, J.
- Affiliations
- Northeastern University (US)
- Venue
- Creativity and Innovation Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-11-14
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 332-345
- ISSN
- 0963-1690 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8691
- OpenAlex
- W2101117239
- Cited by
- 479
- References
- 84
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 11.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Creativity and Innovation Management (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotional Intelligence and Performance
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
- Keywords
- team creativity, team emotional intelligence, team trust, collaborative culture, cognitive trust, student teams, antecedents of creativity
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
