{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021450459652706845, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0040858018386108275, 'mean_word_length': 5.853146853146853, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Manipulations that disrupt generative processes decrease conformity to examples: Evidence from two paradigms

Participants in six experiments viewed experimenter‐provided examples of space creatures (Experiments 1–3) or nonwords (Experiments 4–5b) and then created their own novel space creatures or nonwords. Consistent with previous research, people borrowed many of the features found in the examples despite instructions to avoid using any aspects of the experimenter's examples. However, requiring people to include a designated shape in their space creatures or a designated letter in their nonwords attenuated this effect. Additionally, the type of shape or letter (conventional versus unconventional) also affected conformity. These results suggest that the strategies that people use to create novel products can affect the level of conformity and also highlight the importance of adopting unconventional, or at the very least, new strategies when creating new products.