Product creativity evaluation with the perspective discovery process: From static to dynamic evaluation

Translated Abstract

This review paper proposes to include the process of discovering new perspectives as part of the sequence of creativity evaluation processes. First, it reviews the existing knowledge on creativity evaluation, pointing out that creativity evaluation of products has traditionally been discussed as a static process that convergently determines whether the necessary requirements for creativity are met based on specific evaluation criteria. Next, it discusses evidence that the perspective discovery process, which involves the reconstruction of perspectives, plays a role in creativity evaluation, highlighting the importance of viewing creativity evaluation as a dynamically changing process. Finally, the paper suggests that understanding this perspective discovery process as a form of creative problem solving could lead to a more refined explanation of the creativity evaluation process and the development of effective intervention methods for evaluation.

References

•  Abdulla , A. M., &  Cramond,  B. (2018). The creative problem finding hierarchy: A suggested model for understanding problem finding. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 5 (2), 197–229. https://doi.org/10.1515/ctra-2018-0019
•  Acar,  S.,  Burnett,  C., &  Cabra , J. F. (2017). Ingredients of creativity: Originality and more. Creativity Research Journal, 29 (2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2017.1302776
•  Alipour,  L.,  Faizi,  M.,  Moradi , A. M., &  Akrami,  G. (2018). A review of design fixation: Research directions and
• key factors. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 6 (1–2), 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2017.1320232
•  Amabile , T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43 (5), 997–1013. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997
•  Amabile , T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429501234
•  Ansburg , P. I., &  Dominowski , R. I. (2000). Promoting insightful problem solving. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 34 (1), 30–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2000.tb01201.x
•  Baer,  J. (1994). Performance assessments of creativity: Do they have long-term stability? Roeper Review, 17 (1), 7–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199409553609
•  Baer,  J.,  Kaufman , J. C., &  Gentile , C. A. (2004). Extension of the consensual assessment technique to nonparallel creative products. Creativity Research Journal, 16 (1), 113–117. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1601_11
•  Barron,  F. (1955). The disposition toward originality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51 (3), 478–485. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048073
•  Barth,  P., &  Stadtmann,  G. (2021). Creativity assessment over time: Examining the reliability of CAT ratings. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 55 (2), 396–409. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.462
•  Basadur,  M.,  Graen , G. B., &  Green , S. G. (1982). Training in creative problem solving: Effects on ideation and problem finding and solving in an industrial research organization. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30 (1), 41–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(82)90233-1
•  Benedek,  M.,  Beaty , R. E.,  Schacter , D. L., &  Kenett , Y. N. (2023). The role of memory in creative ideation. Nature Reviews Psychology, 2 (4), 246–257. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-023-00158-z
•  Benedek,  M.,  Nordtvedt,  N.,  Jauk,  E.,  Koschmieder,  C.,  Pretsch,  J.,  Krammer,  G., &  Neubauer , A. C. (2016). Assessment of creativity evaluation skills: A psychometric investigation in prospective teachers. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.007
•  Bilalić,  M.,  McLeod,  P., &  Gobet,  F. (2008a). Inflexibility of experts—reality or myth? Quantifying the Einstellung effect in chess masters. Cognitive Psychology, 56 (2), 73–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2007.02.001
•  Bilalić,  M.,  McLeod,  P., &  Gobet,  F. (2008b). Why good thoughts block better ones: The mechanism of the pernicious Einstellung (set) effect. Cognition, 108 (3), 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.05.005
•  Bilalić,  M.,  McLeod,  P., &  Gobet,  F. (2010). The mechanism of the einstellung (set) effect: A pervasive source of cognitive bias. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19 (2), 111–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410363571
•  Boudreau , K. J.,  Guinan , E. C.,  Lakhani , K. R., &  Riedl,  C. (2016). Looking across and looking beyond the knowledge frontier: Intellectual distance, novelty, and resource allocation in science. Management Science, 62 (10), 2765–2783. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2285
•  Burke,  M. (2006). Wrap star. Forbes. Retrieved December 13, 2024, from https://www.forbes.com/global/2006/0508/026.html
•  Caprioli,  S.,  Fuchs,  C., &  Van den   Bergh,  B. (2023). On breaking functional fixedness: How the Aha! Moment enhances perceived product creativity and product appeal. Journal of Consumer Research, 50 (1), 48–69. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad010
•  Caroff,  X., &  Besançon,  M. (2008). Variability of creativity judgments. Learning and Individual Differences, 18 (4), 367–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.04.001
•  Ceh , S. M.,  Edelmann,  C.,  Hofer,  G., &  Benedek,  M. (2022). Assessing raters: What factors predict discernment in novice creativity raters? The Journal of Creative Behavior, 56 (1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.515
•  Corazza , G. E., &  Agnoli,  S. (2022). The DA VINCI model for the creative thinking process. In T. Lubart, M. Botella, S. Bourgeois-Bougrine, X. Caroff, J. Guegan, C. Mouchiroud, J. Nelson, & F. Zenasni (Eds.), Homo creatives: Creativity in the twenty first century (pp.49–67). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99674-1_4
•  Crilly,  N. (2015). Fixation and creativity in concept development: The attitudes and practices of expert designers. Design Studies, 38, 54–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.01.002
•  Cropley,  A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18 (3), 391–404. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1803_13
•  Danek , A. H.,  Williams,  J., &  Wiley,  J. (2020). Closing the gap: Connecting sudden representational change to the subjective Aha! experience in insightful problem solving. Psychological Research, 84 (1), 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-0977-8
•  Denson , T. F., & Fabiansson  Tan , E. C. (2023). Anger, hostility, and anger management. In H. S. Friedman, & C. H. Markey (Eds.), Encyclopedia of mental health (3rd ed., pp.77–83). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-91497-0.00139-9
•  Diedrich,  J.,  Benedek,  M.,  Jauk,  E., &  Neubauer , A. C. (2015). Are creative ideas novel and useful? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9 (1), 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038688
•  Finke , R. A. (1996). Imagery, creativity, and emergent structure. Consciousness and Cognition, 5 (3), 381–393. https://doi.org/10.1006/CCOG.1996.0024
•  Grohman,  M.,  Wodniecka,  Z., &  KŁsak,  M. (2006). Divergent thinking and evaluation skills: Do they always go together? The Journal of Creative Behavior, 40 (2), 125–145. https://doi.org/10.1002/J.2162-6057.2006.TB01269.X
•  Guenther,  A.,  Eisenbart,  B., &  Dong,  A. (2021). Creativity and successful product concept selection for innovation. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 9 (1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2020.1858970
•  Guo,  J.,  Ge,  Y., &  Pang,  W. (2019). The underlying cognitive mechanisms of the rater effect in creativity assessment: The mediating role of perceived semantic distance. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33, 100572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100572
•  Guo,  Y.,  Lin,  S.,  Acar,  S.,  Jin,  S.,  Xu,  X.,  Feng,  Y., &  Zeng,  Y. (2022). Divergent thinking and evaluative skill: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 56 (3), 432–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.539
• 服部 エリーン 彩矢・山川 真由・三輪 和久 (2023). 創造性評価における実用性考慮：評価者の新奇性追求傾向と教示の交互作用　認知科学, 30 (3), 245–254. https://doi.org/10.11225/CS.2023.029
•  Hattori , E. A.,  Yamakawa,  M., &  Miwa,  K. (2024). Human bias in evaluating AI product creativity. Journal of Creativity, 34 (2), 100087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjoc.2024.100087
• 林 勇吾・三輪 和久・森田 純哉 (2007). 異なる視点に基づく協同問題解決に関する実験的検討　認知科学, 14 (4), 604–619. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.14.604
•  Hélie,  S., &  Sun,  R. (2010). Incubation, insight, and creative problem solving: A unified theory and a connectionist model. Psychological Review, 117 (3), 994–1024. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019532
• 開 一夫・鈴木 宏昭 (1998). 表象変化の動的緩和理論：洞察メカニズムの解明に向けて　認知科学, 5 (2), 69–79. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.5.2_69
•  Jackson , P. W., &  Messick,  S. (1965). The person, the product, and the response: Conceptual problems in the assessment of creativity. Journal of Personality, 33 (3), 309–329. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1965.tb01389.x
•  Jansson , D. G., &  Smith , S. M. (1991). Design fixation. Design Studies, 12 (1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(91)90003-F
• Japan Furoshiki Association. (2015). Let’s start! The Furoshiki. Japan Froshiki Association.
•  Kaplan , C. A., &  Simon , H. A. (1990). In search of insight. Cognitive Psychology, 22 (3), 374–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(90)90008-R
•  Kaufman ,  J. C., &  Baer, J. (2012). Beyond new and appropriate: Who decides what is creative? Creativity Research Journal, 24 (1), 83–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.649237
•  Kaufman ,  J. C.,  Baer, J., &  Cole , J. C. (2009). Expertise, domains, and the consensual assessment technique. Journal of Creative Behavior, 43 (4), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1002/J.2162-6057.2009.TB01316.X
•  Kaufman ,  J. C.,  Baer, J.,  Cole , J. C., &  Sexton , J. D. (2008). A comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the consensual assessment technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20 (2), 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410802059929
•  Kaufman ,  J. C.,  Lee,  J.,  Baer, J., &  Lee,  S. (2007). Captions, consistency, creativity, and the consensual assessment technique: New evidence of reliability. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2 (2), 96–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2007.04.002
•  Kharkhurin , A. V. (2014). Creativity.4in1: Four-criterion construct of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 26 (3), 338–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2014.929424
• 清河 幸子 (2002). 表象変化を促進する相互依存構造：課題レベル–メタレベルの分業による協同の有効性の検討　認知科学, 9 (3), 450–458. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.9.450
•  Kleinmintz , O. M.,  Ivancovsky,  T., &  Shamay-Tsoory , S. G. (2019). The two-fold model of creativity: The neural underpinnings of the generation and evaluation of creative ideas. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 27, 131–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.11.004
• Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., & Raney, G. E. (2001). An eye movement study of insight problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 29 (7), 1000–1009. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195762
•  Koslow,  S.,  Sasser , S. L., &  Riordan , E. A. (2003). What is creative to whom and why? Journal of Advertising Research, 43 (1), 96–110. https://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-43-1-96-110
• 小寺 礼香・清河 幸子・足利 純・植田 一博 (2011). 協同問題解決における観察の効果とその意味：観察対象の動作主体に対する認識が洞察問題解決に及ぼす影響　認知科学, 18 (1), 114–126. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.18.114
•  Kozbelt,  A. (2004). Originality and technical skill as components of artistic quality. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22 (2), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.2190/NDR5-G09N-X7RE-34H7
•  Kozbelt,  A., &  Durmysheva,  Y. (2007). Understanding creativity judgments of invented alien creatures: The roles of invariants and other predictors. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 41 (4), 223–248. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2007.tb01072.x
•  Kühnapfel,  C.,  Fingerhut,  J.,  Brinkmann,  H.,  Ganster,  V.,  Tanaka,  T.,  Specker,  E.,  Mikuni,  J.,  Güldenpfennig,  F.,  Gartus,  A.,  Rosenberg,  R., &  Pelowski,  M. (2024). How do we move in front of art? How does this relate to art experience? Linking movement, eye tracking, emotion, and evaluations in a gallery-like setting. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 42 (1), 86–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374231160000
•  Lee,  H., &  Cho,  Y. (2007). Factors affecting problem finding depending on degree of structure of problem situation. The Journal of Educational Research, 101 (2), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.101.2.113-125
•  Lloyd-Cox,  J.,  Pickering,  A., &  Bhattacharya,  J. (2022). Evaluating creativity: How idea context and rater personality affect considerations of novelty and usefulness. Creativity Research Journal, 34 (4), 373–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2022.2125721
•  Loewenstein,  J., &  Mueller,  J. (2016). Implicit theories of creative ideas: How culture guides creativity assessments. Academy of Management Discoveries, 2 (4), 320–348. https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2014.0147
•  Long,  H. (2014). More than appropriateness and novelty: Judges’ criteria of assessing creative products in science tasks. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 13, 183–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.05.002
•  Magni,  F.,  Park,  J., &  Chao , M. M. (2023). Humans as creativity gatekeepers: Are we biased against ai creativity? Journal of Business and Psychology, 39 (3), 643–656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-023-09910-x
•  Mastria,  S.,  Agnoli,  S., &  Corazza , G. E. (2019). How does emotion influence the creativity evaluation of exogenous alternative ideas? PLoS ONE, 14 (7), e0219298. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219298
•  Moreau , C. P.,  Markman , A. B., &  Lehmann , D. R. (2001). “What is it?” Categorization flexibility and consumers’ responses to really new products. Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (4), 489–498. https://doi.org/10.1086/319623
•  Mueller , J.  S.,  Melwani, S., &  Goncalo , J. A. (2012). The bias against creativity: Why people desire but reject creative ideas. Psychological Science, 23 (1), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611421018
•  Mueller , J. S.,  Wakslak , C. J., &  Krishnan,  V. (2014). Construing creativity: The how and why of recognizing creative ideas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 51, 81–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.11.007
•  Muth,  C., &  Carbon,  C.-C. (2013). The aesthetic Aha: On the pleasure of having insights into Gestalt. Acta Psychologica, 144 (1), 25–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.05.001
• 二宮 由樹・岩田 知之・寺井 仁・三輪 和久 (2023). 成功状況におけるより良い代替解法の発見と意図的探索の関係：マウストラッキングに基づく検討　認知科学, 30 (3), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.11225/cs.2023.011
• Ninomiya, Y., Iwata, T., Terai, H., & Miwa, K. (2024). Effect of cognitive load and working memory capacity on the efficiency of discovering better alternatives: A survival analysis. Memory & Cognition, 52 (1), 115–131. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-023-01448-w
•  Ninomiya,  Y.,  Terai,  H., &  Miwa,  K. (2022). Differences in the distribution of attention to trained procedure between finders and non-finders of the alternative better procedure. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 934029. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.934029
• 小田切 史士・鈴木 宏昭 (2023). 洞察問題における動的情報と静的情報の閾下呈示の比較　認知科学, 30 (3), 352–357. https://doi.org/10.11225/cs.2023.009
•  Ohlsson,  S. (1992). Information-processing explanations of insight and related phenomena. In M. T. Keane, & K. J. Gilhooly (Eds.), Advances in the psychology of thinking (pp. 1–44). Harvester Wheatsheaf.
•  Orwig,  W.,  Beaty , R. E.,  Benedek,  M., &  Schacter , D. L. (2024). Creative evaluation: The role of memory in novelty & effectiveness judgements. Creativity Research Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2024.2322856
•  Pelowski,  M.,  Cabbai,  G.,  Brinkmann,  H.,  Mikuni,  J.,  Hegelmaier , L.  M.,  Forster, M.,  Rosenberg,  R., &  Leder,  H.
• (2020)  . The kitsch switch—or (when) do experts dislike Thomas Kinkade art? A study of time-based evaluation changes in top-down versus bottom-up assessment. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000302
•  Ritter , S. M., &  Rietzschel , E. F. (2017). Lay theories of creativity. In C. M. Zedelius, B. C. N. Müller, & J. W. Schooler (Eds.), The science of lay theories: How beliefs shape our cognition, behavior, and health (pp. 95–126). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57306-9_5
•  Runco , M. A. (1991). The evaluative, valuative, and divergent thinking of children. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 25 (4), 311–319. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1991.tb01143.x
•  Runco , M. A. (2023). Updating the standard definition of creativity to account for the artificial creativity of AI. Creativity Research Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2023.2257977
•  Runco , M. A., &  Charles , R. E. (1993). Judgments of originality and appropriateness as predictors of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 15 (5), 537–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(93)90337-3
•  Runco , M. A.,  Illies , J. J., &  Eisenman,  R. (2005). Creativity, originality, and appropriateness: What do explicit instructions tell us about their relationships? The Journal of Creative Behavior, 39 (2), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/J.2162-6057.2005.TB01255.X
•  Runco , M. A., &  Jaeger , G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24 (1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
•  Runco , M. A., &  Smith , W. R. (1992). Interpersonal and intrapersonal evaluations of creative ideas. Personality and Individual Differences, 13 (3), 295–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90105-X
•  Sadler-Smith,  E. (2015). Wallas’ four-stage model of the creative process: More than meets the eye? Creativity Research Journal, 27 (4), 342–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2015.1087277
•  Silvia , P. J. (2008). Discernment and creativity: How well can people identify their most creative ideas? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2 (3), 139–146. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.3.139
•  Simonton , D. K. (2012). Taking the U.S. patent office criteria seriously: A quantitative three-criterion creativity definition and its implications. Creativity Research Journal, 24 (2–3), 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.676974
•  Sio , U. N., &  Ormerod , T. C. (2009). Does incubation enhance problem solving? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135 (1), 94–120. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014212
•  Stein , M. I. (1953). Creativity and culture. The Journal of Psychology, 36 (2), 311–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1953.9712897
•  Stemler , S. E., &  Kaufman , J. C. (2020). Are creative people better than others at recognizing creative work? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 38, 100727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100727
•  Storme,  M., &  Lubart,  T. (2012). Conceptions of creativity and relations with judges’ intelligence and personality. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46 (2), 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.10
• 鈴木 宏昭・福田 玄明 (2013). 洞察問題解決の無意識的性質：連続フラッシュ抑制による閾下プライミングを用いた検討　認知科学, 20 (3), 353–367. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.20.353
•  Terai,  H.,  Miwa,  K., &  Mizuno,  S. (2024). Stability of assessment using creativity-related indices. Japanese Psychological Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/JPR.12519
•  Thagard,  P., &  Stewart , T. C. (2011). The Aha! experience: Creativity through emergent binding in neural networks. Cognitive Science, 35 (1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01142.x
•  Van de Cruys,  S.,  Damiano,  C.,  Boddez,  Y.,  Król,  M.,  Goetschalckx,  L., &  Wagemans,  J. (2021). Visual affects: Linking curiosity, Aha-Erlebnis, and memory through information gain. Cognition, 212, 104698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104698
•  Walia,  C. (2019). A dynamic definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 31 (3), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2019.1641787
•  Wallas,  G. (1926). The art of thought. Jonathan Cape.
•  Ward , T. B. (1994). Structured imagination: The role of category structure in exemplar generation. Cognitive Psychology, 27 (1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1006/COGP.1994.1010
•  Weisberg , R. W. (2015). On the usefulness of “value” in the definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 27 (2), 111–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2015.1030320
•  Wiley,  J., &  Danek , A. H. (2023). Restructuring processes and Aha! experiences in insight problem solving. Nature Reviews Psychology, 3 (1), 42–55. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-023-00257-x
•  Wu,  X.,  Guo,  T.,  Tan,  T.,  Zhang,  W.,  Qin,  S.,  Fan,  J., &  Luo,  J. (2019). Superior emotional regulating effects of creative cognitive reappraisal. NeuroImage, 200, 540–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.NEUROIMAGE.2019.06.061
•  Yang,  S.,  Loewenstein,  J., &  Mueller,  J. (2023). Finding creativity by changing perspectives: How the evaluation process contributes to creative idea recognition. Creativity Research Journal, 35 (3), 481–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2023.2191900
•  Zhou,  J.,  Wang , X. M.,  Bavato,  D.,  Tasselli,  S., &  Wu,  J. (2019). Understanding the receiving side of creativity: A multidisciplinary review and implications for management research. Journal of Management, 45 (6), 2570–2595. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319827088
•  Zhou,  J.,  Wang , X. M.,  Song , L.  J., &  Wu, J. (2017). Is it new? Personal and contextual influences on perceptions of novelty and creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102 (2), 180–202. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000166