Photo credit: MBI/Alamy Stock Photo
Apparently, researchers have found that Zoom can stifle pairs' creativity. Here's how an empirical study on this topic was introduced by journalists writing for The Guardian:
While the benefits of Zoom and other videoconferencing tools made them indispensable in the pandemic, the research suggests that heavy reliance on the technology comes at a cost to creative thinking.
a) Before moving on, how might you design an experiment to test which type of meeting would be better for creativity? What would your study's independent variable (IV) be? What would the dependent variable (DV) be?
Let's see how the researchers did it. According to the journalist,
... the researchers recruited more than 600 volunteers who were paired up to tackle a creativity task either together in the same room, or virtually over Zoom.
The pairs had five minutes to come up with creative uses for a Frisbee or bubble wrap and a minute to select their best idea. Independent judges ruled that turning a Frisbee into a plate was less creative than using it to knock fruit from a tree, while using bubble wrap to send morse code messages was more creative than using it to protect a baby. Overall, those who worked over Zoom had 20% fewer ideas than those who met face to face.
b) In the study above, what was the IV and what were its levels?
c) Was the IV manipulated as between groups or within-groups?
d) What was the DV and what were its possible levels?
e) What simple experiment is this: Posttest-only? Pretest-posttest? Repeated measures? Concurrent measures?
Now here's a second experiment:
The same effect was apparent in the real world. In a field study, the researchers analysed ideas for new products generated by 1,490 engineers for a multinational company. The engineers, who were in Finland, Hungary, India, Israel and Portugal, were randomly paired up and given an hour or so to brainstorm products either in person or over Webex videoconferencing. They then selected their best idea.
...the researchers report that the engineers produced more ideas, and more innovative ideas, when working face to face. “They are not only generating a larger number of creative ideas, but their best idea is better,”
f) This experiment was billed as a "field study." What does that mean?
g) In the study above, what was the IV and what were its levels?
h) Was the IV manipulated as between groups or within-groups?
i) What were the two DVs in this study?
j) What simple experiment is this: Posttest-only? Pretest-posttest? Repeated measures? Concurrent measures?
k) The second study is a replication of the first one. What role does replication play in the scientific process? If you've studied Chapter 14, you could identify whether this was a direct replication, a replication-plus-extension, or a conceptual replication.
Interestingly, the journalist notes, "it is unclear whether the impact on creativity holds for larger teams." This statement is a good example of external validity as it applies to situations (rather than the most common focus of external validity, which is on a study's generalizability to participants).
l) What other situations might we wonder about as we consider the external validity of this research?
The original empirical study was published in Nature. The original study contains a number of interesting additional DVs, including potential mediators for the overall effect on creativity.