How Does Feedback Valence Improve Team Creativity by Influencing Team Relationship Conflict?

Figures & data

Figure 1 Research model.

Table 1 Results of Validation Factor Analysis

Measurement Model	χ^2	df	χ^2/df	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	SRMR	∆χ^2/∆df
CMV	815.44	353	2.31	0.94	0.93	0.06	0.07	/
Four Factor Model (PFG,RCF,CTP,TC)	793.16	371	2.14	0.94	0.94	0.06	0.05	1.24
Three Factor Model (PFG+RCF,CTP,TC)	1460.37	374	3.90	0.85	0.84	0.09	0.10	222.41
Two Factor Model (PFG+RCF+CTP,TC)	3998.51	376	10.63	0.51	0.47	0.16	0.22	1269.07
One Factor Model (PFG+RCF+CTP+TC)	5430.24	377	14.40	0.32	0.27	0.19	0.23	1431.73

Abbreviations: PFG, Feedback valence; RCF, Team relationship conflict; CTP, Creative time pressure; TC, Team Creativity.

Table 2 Results of Aggregation Tests for Team-Level Variables

Variables	Rwg Median	Rwg Mean	ICC1	ICC2
Perceived feedback valence	0.90	0.77	0.70	0.89
Team relationship conflict	0.92	0.87	0.26	0.56
Creative time pressure	0.94	0.90	0.37	0.68

Table 3 Results of Descriptive Statistical Analysis

Variables	M	SD	1	2	3	4
1. Creative time pressure	3.37	0.90
2. Feedback Valence	0.45	0.50	−0.06
3. Feedback valence manipulation check	3.80	1.70	−0.05	0.82**
4. Team relationship conflict	3.11	0.85	0.19	−0.33**	−0.25*
5. Team creativity	1.47	1.18	0.001	0.36**	0.39**	−0.42**

Notes: Feedback valence is a dummy variable (0=negative feedback); all correlations are reported at team level; *P<0.05,**P<0.01.

Table 4 Results of Mediating Effect Analysis

Variables	Team Creativity			Team Relationship Conflict			Team Creativity
	M1			M2			M3
	b	SE	Boot 95% CI	b	SE	Boot 95% CI	b	SE	Boot 95% CI
Control variables
Age of the team leader	0.28**	0.10	[0.0844, 0.4788]	−0.13	0.10	[−0.3280, 0.0778]	0.24*	0.10	[0.0535, 0.4317]
Gender of the team leader	−0.10	0.10	[−0.2934, 0.0988]	0.04	0.10	[−0.1666, 0.2371]	−0.09	0.09	[−0.2731, 0.1005]
Familiarity of the team leader with the members	−0.03	0.09	[−0.2135, 0.1493]	−0.13	0.09	[−0.3164, 0.0570]	−0.07	0.09	[−0.2467, 0.1019]
Independent variables
Feedback valence	0.33***	0.09	[0.1525, 0.5080]	−0.32***	0.09	[−0.5070, −0.1411]	0.23*	0.09	[0.0502, 0.4086]
Mediating variables
Team relationship conflict							−0.31**	0.09	[−0.4929, −0.1295]
F	6.07***			4.30**			7.66***
R2	0.19			0.14			0.28
Indirect effect	Mediating variables			Effect Value		SE			Boot 95% CI
	Team relationship conflict			0.10		0.04			[0.0411, 0.1994]

Notes: (1) The number of self-replicated sampling samples (bootstrap samples) used to estimate the bias-corrected confidence interval is 5000.(2) All correlations are reported at team level; *P<0.05,**P<0.01,***P<0.001.

Table 5 Regression Analysis of the Mediated Model with Moderation

	b	SE	t	Boot 95% CI	F	R2
M4: Team Relationship Conflict					4.94**	0.23
The age of the leader	−0.11	0.10	−1.10	[−0.3040, 0.0871]
Gender of the leader	0.09	0.10	0.86	[−0.1113, 0.2829]
Leader’s familiarity with employees	−0.07	0.09	−0.80	[−0.2574, 0.1101]
Feedback valence	−0.31***	0.09	−0.35	[−0.4872, −0.1357]
Creative time pressure	0.17	0.09	1.81	[−0.0159, 0.3528]
Feedback valence × Creative time pressure (High Level)	0.26**	0.09	2.94	[0.0858, 0.4430]
M5: Team creativity					10.62***	0.43
Age of the leader	0.26**	0.09	3.05	[0.0912, 0.4315]
Gender of the leader	−0.11	0.09	−1.31	[−0.2843, 0.0580]
Leader’s familiarity with employees	−0.08	0.08	−1.05	[−0.2434, 0.0755]
Feedback Valence	0.26**	0.08	3.21	[0.0994, 0.4217]
Creative time pressure	0.04	0.08	0.54	[−0.1177, 0.2064]
Feedback valence x Creative time pressure	−0.41***	0.08	−5.00	[−0.5664, −0.2444]
Relationship conflict	−0.21*	0.09	−2.37	[−0.3764, −0.0332]

Notes: Feedback valence is dummy coded (0=negative feedback); sample size n=107. *P<0.05,**P<0.01, ***P<0.00.

Figure 2 (A) Moderating effect of creative time pressure on feedback valence and team relationship conflict. (B) Moderating effect of creative time pressure on feedback valence and team creativity.

Notes: N=415. We standardized all focal variables to plot this graph. “High creative time pressure”, “Low creative time pressure”.