{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02443280977312391, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0034904013961605585, 'mean_word_length': 5.517045454545454, '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}}
Evaluative Aspects of Creative Thought: Errors in Appraising the Implications of New Ideas

ABSTRACT: When deciding whether to pursue a new idea, people must predict the resources needed for, and consequences of, idea implementation. The intent of this study was to examine how accurate people are in predicting the resources needed for, and consequences of, creative ideas. Accordingly, 158 undergraduates were presented with case studies describing 3 new ideas drawn from either the education or public policy domains. They were asked to evaluate these ideas with respect to resource requirements (e.g., time, finances) and likely consequences (e.g., positive benefits, organizational disruption). The accuracy of these appraisals was assessed in terms of actual case events. It was found that people were more accurate in predicting resources and outcomes under conditions likely to engender implementation intentions, but that people overestimated outcomes and underestimated resource requirements when they had some familiarity with the issue. The implications of these observations for understanding errors in idea evaluation are discussed.