創意自我效能與預期評量對內在動機、創造力之影響的實驗研究

Abstract

中文摘要 過去實徵研究多發現「預期外界評量」訊息會挫傷個人進行創造活動的內在動機與作品的創意程度，本研究欲由創意自我效能之概念出發，探討高創意效能者是否能夠因其對自我創意產品的信心，調節「預期評量」對內在動機與創造力的負面影響。 本研究採實驗研究法，為創意自我效能(高/低)*預期評量(有/無)之二因子獨立樣本前測後測之實驗設計，研究對象為69位大專生，依變項為沈浸經驗、內在動機與創造力。創造力的評定採產品取向，以專家共識評量法評定創意作品之分數。第一個自變項是創意效能高低之分組，研究者以給予成功或失敗的創作經驗與正負創意能力回饋為實驗處理，成功經驗之控制方式為設定任務難度，以作業時間限制為實驗處理方式。一組受試者被限定在極短的時間內完成任務，並接收負面創意能力回饋；另一組則給予較充分的時間完成，並接收到正面創意回饋。由實驗處理後的創意自我效能後測結果發現，實驗處理不能成功提升創意自我效能、但能顯著降低創意自我效能，且接受低任務難度與正面創意能力回饋者之創意產品自我效能較接受高難度與負面創意能力回饋者為高。故預期任務難度低/接收正面回饋組進入高創意自我效能組，任務難度高/負面能力回饋組進入低創意自我效能組。 第二個因子自變項是為操弄預期評估的有與無，預期評量組在進行任務活動之前，將會收到將有專業評審評量其作品的訊息，無預期評量組則會收到此任務目的純為探討其活動情緒，無關作品表現之訊息。實驗結果歸納如下: 一、在沈浸經驗上: (1) 高低創意自我效能與有無預期評量之交互作用有顯著差異。 (2) 高創意自我效能組之沈浸經驗在有無預期評量之下無顯著差異，而低創意效能組在無預期評量時之沈浸感受較有預期評量時更深。 二、在內在動機上: (1) 高低創意自我效能與有無預期評量之交互作用未達顯著差異。 (2) 經過進一步檢驗，發現有預期評量之下，高創意效能組在玩興感受與對活動的滿意程度上顯著較低創意效能組高，但在無預期評量之下，兩組無顯著差異。 三、在創意成績上: (1) 高低創意自我效能與有無預期評量在作品的「明晰」、「創新」與「和諧細緻」三向度之交互作用未達顯著差異。 (2) 檢驗預期評量對高低創意效能兩組之影響，發現在低創意效能組中，有預期評量者在構想創意、作品之意境複雜程度、受人喜愛程度與文風協調等創意相關規準之表現較無預期評量者差，且在高創意效能組中，有無預期評量在上述四規準上之得分無顯著差異。 本研究根據上述研究成果，提出一個以Amabile之創造力組成模式為架構，並結合任務覺察與內在心理歷程的整合模式，並對教學實務與未來研究提出具體之討論與建議。

From the previous researches, “expected evaluation” has been recognized as one of the detrimental factors which would impair individuals’ creativity and intrinsic motivation. This study intends to test if individuals’ creative self-efficacy could serve as a moderating mechanism to immunize against the damaging effect of expected evaluation. Therefore, an experiment with 2(creative self-efficacy: high/low) × 2(expected evaluation: present/absent) factorial design, was held to clarify this effect. The dependent measures were intrinsic interest measure, flow experience scale and creative performance obtained by experts’ consensual assessment on creative product – i.e., creative article writing. According to Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy, the study conducted two kinds of efficacy messages together to increase or decrease subjects’ creative self-efficacy. In the pre-experimental phase, one messages was to give failing or successful experiences, and the manipulation was to control the task difficulty by setting time limits - the task with longer time was considered as an easier one and that with shorter time as a more difficult one. The other manipulation was creativity-related feedback: negative or positive. Sixty-five subjects were randomly assigned to two settings. The first group was given easy task/positive feedback treatment and the other group was given difficult task/negative feedback treatment. The manipulation check showed the creative self-efficacy of two groups were significantly different after the efficacy treatments. Creative efficacy of the easy task/ positive feedback group didn’t show much improvement, while difficult task/negative feedback group significantly declined. In the formal experimental phase, the first group was taken as the higher creative efficacy group and the second group the lower creative efficacy group. Then the two groups received the treatment of expected evaluation (present or absent). The results are as the following. 1. The interaction of creative self-efficacy and expected evaluation on flow experience are statistically significant. The higher creative efficacy group shows no difference whether the expected evaluation is present or not, while in lower creative efficacy groups, the flowing feeling is less strong when the evaluation is present than absent, which supports the hypothesis. 2. The interactions of creative self-efficacy and expected evaluation on intrinsic interest measures are not significant. However, by comparing separately the effect of expected evaluation in the two groups of different creative-efficacy levels, in the higher creative efficacy group, the effect of expected evaluation doesn’t show difference on the measure of playfulness and satisfaction, but in the lower creative-self efficacy group, those who expected evaluation significantly report less playfulness and less satisfaction than those who expected no evaluation. 3. The interaction of creative self-efficacy and expected evaluation on three dimensions of creative product, novelty, resolution and elaboration, are not significant. A similar finding is that the effect of expected evaluation is significant when the two creative efficacy groups are compared separately. On the criteria of originality, complexity, liking and style, the higher creative efficacy group shows no difference with or without evaluation, while the lower efficacy group scores less on those criteria when evaluation is present than absent. The study also provides a synthesizing model with Amabile’s componential framework of creativity, task awareness and motivational process with detailed discussion and further implication.