心情與創意思考關係的多成份模式：調整焦點、向性、激發心情對創意思考的影響暨中介變項之探討

The Multi-Component Model of Mood and Creative Thinking (MCMC): Impact of Regulatory Focus, Valence and Activation Components of Mood on the Creative Thinking, and Mediating Effects

徐芝君

指導教授 ： 陳學志

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/教育心理與輔導學系/博士(2010年)

摘要

本研究主要在探討不同心情對創意思考的影響暨其之間的中介變項，因此建構「心情與創意思考關係的多成份模式」（MCMC）。在模式裡主張不同調整焦點、向性及激發向度的心情，會對創意思考表現造成不同的影響，而且，個體的認知彈性、處理速度及整體處理會中介心情與創意思考間的關係。為了驗證MCMC模式，進行了預備性研究和四個實驗。在預備性研究裡，編製一擴散性思考測驗－「報紙的不尋常用途」，以利後續實驗使用。在實驗一先確立不同向度心情對創意思考表現的影響，結果發現快樂（正向、激發、促進焦點）、憤怒（負向、激發、促進焦點）可以提升創意思考表現的假設獲得部份支持，難過（負向、去激發、預防焦點（結果階段））會損害創意思考表現也獲得部份支持，放鬆（正向、去激發、預防焦點）對創意思考表現沒有影響獲得支持；不過，在害怕（負向、激發、預防焦點）則未獲支持。由於實驗二到實驗四主要在探究中介變項的效果，且實驗一在快樂和難過心情與快樂和中性心情比較差異較明顯，因此，後續實驗僅誘發快樂、難過及中性心情。實驗二使用叫色作業為中介作業，探究認知彈性和處理速度是否中介心情和創意思考間的關係，結果發現兩個指標皆未產生中介效果，推究原因，可能是叫色作業的效度問題。因此，實驗三改採轉換作業，再次探究認知彈性和處理速度的中介效果，結果發現處理速度中介心情和流暢力，及心情和變通力關係達趨近顯著，大致支持處理速度具有中介效果。實驗四使用形狀偵測作業作為中介作業，探究整體處理是否中介心情和創意思考間的關係，結果發現整體處理中介心情和流暢力的關係。最後依據研究結果討論本研究意義和價值，並對未來研究及教育實務提出建議。

關鍵字

心情 ； 創意思考 ； 認知彈性 ； 處理速度 ； 整體處理

並列摘要

The purposes of this study were to investigate the relation between mood and creativity thinking, and the mediating effects. “The Multiple Components Model of Mood and Creative Thinking (MCMC)” indicates: (a) specific moods (varied with different regulatory focus, valence and activation components concurrently) make distinct impacts on creative thinking; (b) mood-creative thinking relationship should be mediated by cognitive flexibility, processing speed or global processing. In order to examine the MCMC model, a pilot study and four experiments were conducted in this research. In the pilot study, “alternative uses of newspaper task” (one divergent thinking test) was constructed and used in the follow-up experiments. Experiment 1 was conducted to test the effects of regulatory focus, valence and activation components on the mood-creative thinking link. The results show these hypotheses were supported: (a) happiness (positive, activation, and promotion focus) and anger (negative, activation, and prevention focus) enhanced participants’ performances of creative thinking; (b) sadness (negative, deactivation, and prevention focus) impaired participants’ performances of creative thinking; (c) relaxation (positive, deactivation, and prevention focus) did not affect participants’ performances of creative thinking. However, the hypothesis that fear (negative, activation, and prevention focus) impaired participants’ performances of creative thinking was not supported. Experiments 2 to 4 were to examine the effects of mediating variables. The effects of happy-sad and happy-neutral contrasts were found significant; therefore, happiness, sadness and neutral became the target variables in the follow-up experiments.) In Experiment 2, the Stroop Task was utilized to examine whether cognitive flexibility and processing speed intervened the relation between mood and creative thinking. The results showed that these two indictors had no effects; accordingly, the validity of the Stroop Task was taken into consideration. Hence, the task in Experiment 3 was changed into the Task Switching, which was used to reexamine the inverting effects of cognitive flexibility and processing speed. The results suggested that processing speed mediates the mood-fluency link and mood-flexibility link; while it was indicated that processing speed played as a mediator in the relation between mood and creative thinking. Experiment 4 used the Shape Detection Task (one mediating task) to examine whether global processing mediated the relationship between mood and creative thinking. The result supported that global processing as a mediator of mood-creative thinking link. In the end, theoretical and educational implications, as well as the highlight avenues for future research on moods, creative thinking, and their relationships were discussed.

並列關鍵字

mood ； creative thinking ； cognitive flexibility ； processing speed ； global processing

參考文獻

Torrance, E. P. (1966). Torrance tests of creativity. Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press.

邱發忠、陳學志、徐芝君、吳相儀、卓淑玲 （2008）。內隱與外顯因素對創造作業表現的影響。中華心理學刊，50，125-145。

林緯倫、連韻文、與任純慧（2005）。想得多是想得好的前提嗎？探討發散性思考能力在創意問題解決的角色。中華心理學刊，47，211-227。

邱發忠、姚妃宴（2010）。調整焦點、目標時間距離對創造力表現的影響。教育心理學報，41，497-520。

邱發忠（2005）。創造力認知運作機制之探究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系博士論文。