Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 411

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The selection of creative ideas after individual idea generation: Choosing between creativity and impact

Open access
Rietzschel, Eric F., Nijstad, Bernard A., Stroebe, Wolfgang·2010·British Journal of Psychology
DOI 10.1348/000712609x414204
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

It is commonly assumed that successful innovation depends on creative idea generation: the more ideas are generated, the higher the probability of selecting a very good idea should be. However, research has shown that people do not perform optimally at idea selection and that ideational output may not contribute much to creative idea selection. The present studies aim to explain this phenomenon. We identified the strong tendency of our participants to select feasible and desirable ideas, at the cost of originality, as the main reason for their poor selection performance. Two manipulations of participants' processing of the available ideas (exclusion instructions and quality ratings) had no effect on selection effectiveness. In contrast, explicitly instructing participants to select creative or original ideas did improve selection effectiveness with regard to idea originality, but at the same time decreased participants' satisfaction and the rated effectiveness of chosen ideas. Results are discussed in relation to an effectiveness‐originality trade off.

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 · 10.1348/000712609x414204

Cites

32 of 32 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

Show all 32 references

Cited by

See all 411

Metadata

Authors
Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W.
Venue
British Journal of Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-02
Volume
101
Issue
1
Pages
47-68
ISSN
  • 0007-1269 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8295
DOI
10.1348/000712609x414204
OpenAlex
W2121656285
Cited by
411
References
32
FWCI
11.65
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The selection of creative ideas after individual idea generation: Choosing between creativity and impact. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1348/000712609x414204
The paper
Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2010). The selection of creative ideas after individual idea generation: Choosing between creativity and impact. British Journal of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712609x414204

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.