Augmented Learning for Joint Creativity in Human-GenAI Co-Creation

References

• Aguinis H, Vandenberg RJ (2014) An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure: Improving research quality before data collection. Ann. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 1(1):569–595. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Althuizen N, Reichel A (2016) The effects of IT-enabled cognitive stimulation tools on creative problem solving: A dual pathway to creativity. J. Management Inform. Systems 33(1):11–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amabile TM (1983) The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 45(2):357–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amabile TM (2020) Creativity, artificial intelligence, and a world of surprises. Acad. Management Discoveries 6(3):351–354.Google Scholar
• Amabile T, Pratt MG (2016) The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Res. Organ. Behav. 36:157–183.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson N, Potočnik K, Zhou J (2014) Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. J. Management 40(5):1297–1333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anthony C, Bechky BA, Fayard AL (2023) “Collaborating” with AI: Taking a system view to explore the future of work. Organ. Sci. 34(5):1672–1694.Link, Google Scholar
• Argote L, Guo JM (2016) Routines and transactive memory systems: Creating, coordinating, retaining, and transferring knowledge in organizations. Res. Organ. Behav. 36:65–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashford SJ, Blatt R, VandeWalle D (2003) Reflections on the looking glass: A review of research on feedback-seeking behavior in organizations. J. Management 29(6):773–799.Google Scholar
• Baird A, Maruping LM (2021) The next generation of research on IS use: A theoretical framework of delegation to and from agentic IS artifacts. MIS Quart. 45(1):315–341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bankins S, Ocampo AC, Marrone M, Restubog SLD, Woo SE (2024) A multilevel review of artificial intelligence in organizations: Implications for organizational behavior research and practice. J. Organ. Behav. 45(2):159–182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Statist. Software 67(1):1–48.Google Scholar
• Behfar K, Okhuysen GA (2018) Perspective—Discovery within validation logic: Deliberately surfacing, complementing, and substituting abductive reasoning in hypothetico-deductive inquiry. Organ. Sci. 29(2):323–340.Link, Google Scholar
• Berg JM (2019) When silver is gold: Forecasting the potential creativity of initial ideas. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processing 154:96–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bigman YE, Gray K (2018) People are averse to machines making moral decisions. Cognition 181:21–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bogert E, Schecter A, Watson RT (2021) Humans rely more on algorithms than social influence as a task becomes more difficult. Sci. Rep. 11(1):8028.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boussioux L, Lane JN, Zhang M, Jacimovic V, Lakhani KR (2024) The crowdless future? Generative AI and creative problem-solving. Organ. Sci. 35(5):1589–1607.Link, Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson E, McAfee A (2016) The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies, reprint ed. (W. W. Norton & Company, New York).Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson E, Mitchell T (2017) What can machine learning do? Workforce implications. Science 358(6370):1530–1534.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cadario R, Longoni C, Morewedge CK (2021) Understanding, explaining, and utilizing medical artificial intelligence. Natural Human Behav. 5(12):1636–1642.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Calabretta G, Gemser G, Wijnberg NM (2017) The interplay between intuition and rationality in strategic decision making: A paradox perspective. Organ. Stud. 38(3–4):365–401.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen Z, Chan J (2024) Large language model in creative work: The role of collaboration modality and user expertise. Management Sci. 70(12):9101–9117.Link, Google Scholar
• Chua RYJ, Iyengar SS (2008) Creativity as a matter of choice: Prior experience and task instruction as boundary conditions for the positive effect of choice on creativity. J. Creative Behav. 42(3):164–180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Corbin J, Strauss A (2008) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 3rd ed. (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cropley A (2006) In praise of convergent thinking. Creative Res. J. 18(3):391–404.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi M (1997) Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention (HarperCollins Publishers, New York).Google Scholar
• Davenport TH, Kirby J (2016) Only Humans Need Apply: Winners and Losers in the Age of Smart Machines, 1st ed. (Harper Business, New York).Google Scholar
• Dell’Acqua F, McFowland E, Mollick ER, Lifshitz-Assaf H, Kellogg K, Rajendran S, Krayer L, et al. (2023) Navigating the jagged technological frontier: Field experimental evidence of the effects of AI on knowledge worker productivity and quality. Working Paper No. 24-013, Harvard Business School, Boston.Google Scholar
• de Rooij A, Biskjaer MM (2025) Has AI surpassed humans in creative idea generation? A meta-analysis. Proc. 36th Annual Conf. Eur. Assoc. Cognitive Ergonomics (ACM, New York).Google Scholar
• Dietvorst BJ, Simmons JP, Massey C (2015) Algorithm aversion: People erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err. J. Experiment. Psych. General 144(1):114–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DigitalDefynd T (2025) 20 ways netflix Is using artificial intelligence [In Depth Analysis][2025], https://digitaldefynd.com/IQ/ways-netflix-uses-ai/.Google Scholar
• Doshi AR, Hauser OP (2024) Generative AI enhances individual creativity but reduces the collective diversity of novel content. Sci. Adv. 10(28):eadn5290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elam JJ, Mead M (1990) Can software influence creativity? Inform. Systems Res. 1(1):1–22.Link, Google Scholar
• Endsley MR (2017) From here to autonomy: Lessons learned from human–automation research. Human Factors 59(1):5–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Engelbart DC (1962) Augmenting human intellect: A conceptual framework. Summary report AFOSR‐3223 under contract AF 49(638)-1024, SRI Project 3578 for Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.Google Scholar
• Epley N, Waytz A, Cacioppo JT (2007) On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psych. Rev. 114(4):864–886.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Epstein Z, Hertzmann A (2023) Art and the science of generative AI. Science 380(6650):1110–1111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• FeldmanHall O, Shenhav A (2019) Resolving uncertainty in a social world. Natural Human Behav. 3(5):426–435.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fügener A, Grahl J, Gupta A, Ketter W (2022) Cognitive challenges in human–artificial intelligence collaboration: Investigating the path toward productive delegation. Inform. Systems Res. 33(2):678–696.Link, Google Scholar
• Gao Z, Jiang J (2021) Evaluating human-AI hybrid conversational systems with chatbot message suggestions. Proc. 30th ACM Internat. Conf. Inform. Knowledge Management (ACM, New York), 534–544.Google Scholar
• Gnewuch U, Morana S, Hinz O, Kellner R, Maedche A (2023) More than a bot? The impact of disclosing human involvement on customer interactions with hybrid service agents. Inform. Systems Res. 35(3):936–955.Link, Google Scholar
• Goddard K, Roudsari A, Wyatt JC (2012) Automation bias: A systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators. J. Amer. Medical. Inform. Assoc. 19(1):121–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Golden-Biddle K (2020) Discovery as an abductive mechanism for reorienting habits within organizational change. Acad. Management J. 63(6):1951–1975.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grant AM (2008) Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. J. Appl. Psych. 93(1):48–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grimes M, von Krogh G, Feuerriegel S, Rink F, Gruber M (2023) From scarcity to abundance: Scholars and scholarship in an age of generative artificial intelligence. Acad. Management J. 66(6):1617–1624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grønsund T, Aanestad M (2020) Augmenting the algorithm: Emerging human-in-the-loop work configurations. J. Strategic Inform. Systems 29(2):101614.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guilford JP (1967) Creativity: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. J. Creative Behav. 1(1):3–14.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guzik EE, Byrge C, Gilde C (2023) The originality of machines: AI takes the Torrance Test. J. Creativity 33(3):100065.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haase J, Hanel PHP (2023) Artificial muses: Generative artificial intelligence chatbots have risen to human-level creativity. J. Creativity 33(3):100066.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hargadon AB, Bechky BA (2006) When collections of creatives become a creative collectives: A field study of problem solving at work. Organ. Sci. 17(4):484–500.Link, Google Scholar
• Harvey S, Berry J (2022) Toward a meta-theory of creativity forms: How novelty and usefulness shape creativity. Acad. Management Rev. 48(3):504–529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hayes AF (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Hitsuwari J, Ueda Y, Yun W, Nomura M (2023) Does human–AI collaboration lead to more creative art? Aesthetic evaluation of human-made and AI-generated haiku poetry. Comput. Human Behav. 139:107502.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Horton CB Jr, White MW, Iyengar SS (2023) Bias against AI art can enhance perceptions of human creativity. Sci Rep. 13(1):19001.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hubert KF, Awa KN, Zabelina DL (2024) The current state of artificial intelligence generative language models is more creative than humans on divergent thinking tasks. Sci. Rep. 14(1):3440.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jia N, Luo X, Fang Z, Liao C (2024) When and how artificial intelligence augments employee creativity. Acad. Management J. 67(1):5–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jussupow E, Spohrer K, Heinzl A, Gawlitza J (2021) Augmenting medical diagnosis decisions? An investigation into physicians’ decision-making process with artificial intelligence. Inform. Systems Res. 32(3):713–735.Link, Google Scholar
• Kaufman JC, Baer J, Cole JC (2009) Expertise, domains, and the consensual assessment technique. J. Creative Behav. 43(4):223–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kemp A, Bramwell M, Evans R, Rizk N, Rugeroni L, Sabherwal N, Townley M (2024) AI-powered employee experience: How organisations can unlock higher engagement and productivity. Delloitte Perspective (June 17), https://www.deloitte.com/uk/en/services/consulting/blogs/2024/ai-powered-employee-experience.html.Google Scholar
• Kim YJ, Kim J (2020) Does negative feedback benefit (or harm) recipient creativity? The role of the direction of feedback flow. Acad. Management J. 63(2):584–612.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Köbis N, Bonnefon JF, Rahwan I (2021) Bad machines corrupt good morals. Natural Human Behav. 5(6):679–685.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koivisto M, Grassini S (2023) Best humans still outperform artificial intelligence in a creative divergent thinking task. Sci. Rep. 13(1):13601.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff PB, Christensen RHB (2017) lmertest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. J. Statist. Software 82(13):1–26.Google Scholar
• LeBreton JM, Senter JL (2008) Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organ. Res. Methods 11(4):815–852.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lewis K, Herndon B (2011) Transactive memory systems: Current issues and future research directions. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1254–1265.Link, Google Scholar
• Liu B (2021) In AI we trust? Effects of agency locus and transparency on uncertainty reduction in human–AI interaction. J. Comput.-Mediated Comm. 26(6):384–402.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Locke EA (2007) The case for inductive theory building. J. Management 33(6):867–890.Google Scholar
• Lubart T (2005) How can computers be partners in the creative process: Classification and commentary on the Special Issue. Internat. J. Human-Comput. Stud. 63(4):365–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lucas BJ, Nordgren LF (2015) People underestimate the value of persistence for creative performance. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 109(2):232–243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Magni F, Park J, Chao MM (2023) Humans as creativity gatekeepers: Are we biased against AI creativity? J. Bus. Psych. 39(3):643–656.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGuire J, De Cremer D, Van de Cruys T (2024) Establishing the importance of co-creation and self-efficacy in creative collaboration with artificial intelligence. Sci. Rep. 14(1):18525.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McMahon K, Ruggeri A, Kämmer JE, Katsikopoulos KV (2016) Beyond idea generation: The power of groups in developing ideas. Creative Res. J. 28(3):247–257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Messer U (2024) Co-creating art with generative artificial intelligence: Implications for artworks and artists. Comput. Human Behav. Artificial Humans 2(1):100056.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Noy S, Zhang W (2023) Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence. Science 381(6654):187–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• OpenAI (2024) ChatGPT [Large language model]. https://chatgpt.com.Google Scholar
• Otis NG, Haas B, Cranney K, Koning R (2024) Global Evidence on Gender Gaps and Generative AI (Harvard Business School, Boston).Google Scholar
• Parasuraman R, Manzey DH (2010) Complacency and bias in human use of automation: An attentional integration. Human Factors 52(3):381–410.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parnes SJ (1961) Effects of extended effort in creative problem solving. J. Ed. Psych. 52(3):117–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paulus PB, Nijstad BA, eds. (2003) Group Creativity: Innovation through Collaboration (Oxford University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perry-Smith JE, Mannucci PV (2017) From creativity to innovation: The social network drivers of the four phases of the idea journey. Acad. Management Rev. 42(1):53–79.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pok MT, Koopman J, Mcclean ST, Zhang JH, Li CH, De Cremer D, Lu Y, et al. (2022) When conscientious employees meet intelligent machines: An integrative approach inspired by complementarity theory and role theory. Acad. Management J. 65(3):1019–1054.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raisch S, Fomina K (2025) Combining human and artificial intelligence: Hybrid problem-solving in organizations. Acad. Management Rev. 50(2):441–464.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raisch S, Krakowski S (2021) Artificial intelligence and management: The automation–augmentation paradox. Acad. Management Rev. 46(1):192–210.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ren Y, Argote L (2011) Transactive memory systems 1985–2010: An integrative framework of key dimensions, antecedents, and consequences. Ann. Management Rev. 5(1):189–229.Google Scholar
• Runco MA (2004) Creativity. Ann. Rev. Psych. 55(1):657–687.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwab K (2017) The Fourth Industrial Revolution (Crown Publishing Group, New York).Google Scholar
• Shalley CE (1991) Effects of productivity goals, creativity goals, and personal discretion on individual creativity. J. Appl. Psych. 76(2):179–185.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sun S, Li A, Foo M, Zhou J, Lu J (2025) How and for whom using generative AI affects creativity: A field experiment. J. Appl. Psych., ePub ahead of print June, https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001296.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thees M, Kapp S, Strzys MP, Beil F, Lukowicz P, Kuhn J (2020) Effects of augmented reality on learning and cognitive load in university physics laboratory courses. Comput. Human Behav. 108:106316.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thrash TM, Maruskin LA, Cassidy SE, Fryer JW, Ryan RM (2010) Mediating between the muse and the masses: Inspiration and the actualization of creative ideas. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 98(3):469–487.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Timmermans S, Tavory I (2012) Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociol. Theory 30(3):167–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tschang FT, Almirall E (2021) Artificial intelligence as augmenting automation: Implications for employment. Acad. Management Perspective 35(4):642–659.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Turel O, Kalhan S (2023) Prejudiced against the machine? Implicit associations and the transience of algorithm aversion. MIS Quart. 47(4):1369–1394.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vaccaro M, Almaatouq A, Malone T (2024) When combinations of humans and AI are useful: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Natural Human Behav. 8(12):2293–2303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van den Broek E, Sergeeva A, Huysman M (2021) When the machine meets the expert: An ethnography of developing AI for hiring. MIS Quart. 45(3):1557–1580.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vanneste BS, Puranam P (2024) Artificial intelligence, trust, and perceptions of agency. Acad. Management Rev. 50(4).Google Scholar
• van Tilburg WAP, Igou ER (2012) On boredom: Lack of challenge and meaning as distinct boredom experiences. Motiv. Emot. 36(2):181–194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wegner DM (1987) Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group Mind. Mullen B, Goethals GR, eds. Theories of Group Behavior (Springer, New York), 185–208.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ybarra O (2002) Naive causal understanding of valenced behaviors and its implications for social information processing. Psych. Bull. 128(3):421–441.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zanzotto FM (2019) Viewpoint: Human-in-the-loop artificial intelligence. J. Artificial Intelligence Res. 64:243–252.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Gosline R (2023) Human favoritism, not AI aversion: People’s perceptions (and bias) toward generative AI, human experts, and human–GAI collaboration in persuasive content generation. Judgment Decision Making 18:e41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhou J, Wang XM, Bavato D, Tasselli S, Wu J (2019) Understanding the receiving side of creativity: A multidisciplinary review and implications for management research. J. Management 45(6):2570–2595.Crossref, Google Scholar