Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40672842›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Field dependent-independent cognitive style as a predictor of malevolent creativity: a multifaceted approach.

Pierpaolo Zivi, Marco Giancola, Raffaella Nori, Laura Piccardi, Simonetta D'Amico, Massimiliano Palmiero

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Pierpaolo ZiviDepartment of Communication Sciences, University of Teramo, Teramo, Italy.
Marco GiancolaDepartment of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy.
Raffaella NoriDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Laura PiccardiDepartment of Psychology, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Simonetta D'AmicoDepartment of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy.
Massimiliano PalmieroDepartment of Communication Sciences, University of Teramo, Teramo, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Research interest in the intentionally harmful use of creativity, also known as malevolent creativity, is growing rapidly. However, the cognitive and individual underpinnings of malevolent creativity are still unclear. By employing a multifaceted approach, field dependent-independent cognitive style (FDI) was investigated as a potential individual component that may predict the likelihood of generating malevolent ideas (i.e., creative process), products (i.e., creative production), and engaging in original but malicious acts (i.e., creative behavior). Methods: Based on the literature associating FDI with general creativity, the hypothesis that field-independent individuals were more prone to the three facets of malevolent creativity was tested after controlling for demographic factors, social desirability, state mood, and ethical positions (idealism and relativism). Malevolent creativity was assessed through a divergent thinking task (process), a solicitation to produce black humor by a cartoon captions task (product), and a self-reported questionnaire concerning everyday creative acts (behavior). Results: The results showed that higher levels of field independence predicted malevolent creative process and product, whereas no differences emerged in creative behavior. Discussion: By partially replicating the evidence connecting FDI and creativity, the present study suggests that general and malevolent creativity share common grounds. Future studies are needed to overcome the current limitations in assessing malevolent creativity in everyday settings and to investigate further commonalities and differences between the two uses of creativity.

Indexed as

black humorcreative behaviorcreative processcreative productdivergent thinkingethicsfield dependent-independent cognitive styles

Identifiers

PMID40672842
PMCPMC12263601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.