Constraints to malevolent innovation in terrorist attacks.

Logan, Michael K.; Damadzic, Adam; Medeiros, Kelsey E.; Ligon, Gina Scott; Derrick, Douglas C.

doi:10.1037/aca0000385

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This created a potential limit on how successful an attack might be (Logan et al, 2021) and an interaction between weapon availability and attractiveness. How far the context of violence is its own distinct domain or whether it is a subset of attractiveness requires further examination.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The meaning and use of weapons in English prisons

Pieri,

Brennan

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Weapon use is as risky in prison as it is in the community, but the type, use and meaning of weapons differs between these settings. Consequently, knowledge about community-based weapon violence may not generalise to prison contexts. Using a framework for understanding weapon selection and use in the community, six prisoners with a history of weapon possession and use in prison discussed their selection and use of weapons.They viewed prison as a warlike environment where weapons were essential to reducing uncertainty and managing identity and where the advantages of weapon possession greatly outweighed the official consequences. The study also suggests that a framework developed for understanding weapon use in the community can be applied effectively in a prison context.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The meaning and use of weapons in English prisons

Pieri,

Brennan

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, an organization's creative outputs are not always benevolent and can be malevolent. Although research has typically examined malevolent creativity in the context of terrorist and extremist organizations (Hunter et al, 2021; Logan et al, 2021), prototypical organizations can also produce creative outputs that are harmful (e.g., fake news, marketing campaigns to downplay dangers of products). Future scholarship should explore the various outcomes of malevolent or negative creativity in different organizational settings (Cropley et al, 2008; James et al, 1999).…”

Section: Agenda For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multilevel outcomes of creativity in organizations: An integrative review and agenda for future research

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryEmployee creativity is critical for an organization's innovativeness and survival in today's competitive business environment. As such, scholars have devoted significant attention to the predictors of employee creativity, seeking to understand how to best increase employees' creative output. However, employee creativity may not always translate into organizational innovation and performance. In fact, employee creativity may result in various outcomes for creative individuals, their coworkers, teams, and organizations. While there have been several integrative reviews on the antecedents of creativity, an in‐depth review of the outcomes of creativity is still needed to gain a holistic understanding of the benefits and costs of employee creativity and identify fruitful areas for future research. Thus, we aim to provide a comprehensive multilevel examination of the theories, methods, and creativity‐related constructs used to examine the outcomes of creativity. We also provide several theoretical and empirical opportunities for future research. This review may provide managers with knowledge of the pros and cons of employee creativity, enabling them to make informed decisions on how to better manage employee creativity.

show abstract

Criminal Genius or Everyday Villain? A Comparison of Malevolent Creativity Among Prisoners, Police Officers, and the General Population

Perchtold‐Stefan,

Szabó,

Rominger

et al. 2024

Journal of Creative Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Criminals allegedly use effective novelty to intentionally exploit and harm others (creative fraud, theft, and murder). However, empirical evidence that criminals possess higher malevolent creativity than individuals without criminal backgrounds is lacking. We compared a male sample of prisoners in a maximum‐security penitentiary (n = 140), police officers (n = 122), and the general population (n = 106) on three different aspects of malevolent creativity: self‐reported malevolent creativity behavior (MCBS), willingness to engage in malevolent creativity on a test (MCT), and malevolent creativity potential on that test (reduced n = 285). Group comparisons (ANOVAs) differed for different malevolent creativity aspects: Prisoners reported more malevolent creativity behavior in daily life (MCBS) than nonprisoners, which may reflect their alleged criminal personality or the effects of confinement on creative coping with threat. However, prisoners also performed worse than police officers in generating creative ideas for taking revenge on others (MCT). No differences in initial willingness to engage in malevolent creativity (MCT) emerged. This discrepancy of self‐report and ability is discussed from several angles, including suitability of the applied measures and heterogeneity of prison populations. This study constitutes the first empirical insights into the often hypothesized but rarely tested malevolent creativity expression in the criminal mind.

show abstract

Constraints to malevolent innovation in terrorist attacks.

Cited by 5 publications

References 83 publications

The meaning and use of weapons in English prisons

The meaning and use of weapons in English prisons

Multilevel outcomes of creativity in organizations: An integrative review and agenda for future research

Criminal Genius or Everyday Villain? A Comparison of Malevolent Creativity Among Prisoners, Police Officers, and the General Population

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About