Parental phubbing behavior is a significant predictor of adolescent smartphone dependence. However, previous research has mainly focused on the child and adolescent’s perspective, overlooking potential differences in how parents and their children perceive parental phubbing. Therefore, this study investigates whether disparities exist in how parents and adolescents perceive parental phubbing and how these perceptual differences impact adolescent smartphone dependence. We also explore the role of the parent–child relationship in this context. In this study, 728 families from a middle school in Wuhan were selected and surveys were administered to both children and parents. The findings are as follows: (1) Significant perceptual differences were found between parents and adolescents regarding parental phubbing. (2) These perceptual discrepancies positively predict adolescent smartphone dependence and negatively impact parent–child relationships. Additionally, parent–child relationships have a negative influence on adolescent smartphone dependence. (3) The parent–child relationship serves as a mediator between perceptual differences in parental phubbing behavior and adolescent smartphone dependence. In summary, this research highlights the importance of considering both parent and adolescent perspectives on parental phubbing and emphasizes the role of the parent–child relationship in influencing adolescent smartphone dependence.

The leader is considered to play key roles such as organization or management in promoting group creativity. Previous studies focused more on the psychological and behavioral characteristics rather than on the dynamic behaviors of leaders in group activity. In this study, two experiments were conducted to respectively explore the effects of emergent and elected leaders’ problem-solving related utterances and turn-taking in conversation on group creativity. The results of Experiment 1 showed that, for emergent leaders, none of the utterances about problem solving of leaders was different from that of followers and leaders’ utterances about retrospective summary were positively related to the appropriateness of group creativity; meanwhile, the frequency of turns of leaders was higher than that of followers and was positively related with the appropriateness of group creativity. The results of Experiment 2 showed that, for elected leaders, the utterances about problem analysis, strategy planning, control and reflection, and retrospective summary of leaders were more than that of followers and leaders’ utterances about viewpoint generation were positively related to both novelty and appropriateness, while the frequency of turns of leaders was neither different from followers nor related to the novelty and appropriateness. This study focused on the dynamic behaviors of leaders in interpersonal interaction and revealed the role of leaders in group creativity.

Media multitasking is widespread, yet its relationship with creativity remains unclear. This study employs a combination of measures, including the media multitasking questionnaire, alternative uses task (AUT) for divergent thinking, Chinese compound remote association task (CCRAT) for convergent thinking, and a creative problem-solving task, to examine the relationship between media multitasking and creativity. Extreme values grouping [one standard deviation above or below the mean of the media multitasking index (MMI)], median value grouping, and regression analysis were used to explore the relationship between media multitasking and creativity. The results revealed the following findings: (1) across the three analysis methods, there was no significant relationship between media multitasking and performance on the AUT task. However, within the range of one standard deviation above or below the mean of the MMI, media multitasking showed a significant positive correlation with fluency, flexibility, and total scores on the AUT task. (2) Media multitasking significantly predicted the accuracy of responses on the CCRAT task positively. (3) Media multitasking significantly predicted lower scores on the applicability of creative problem-solving tasks.

When humans are confronted with an epidemic situation or a continuous natural disaster, success depends largely on how critical information is conveyed to as many people as possible, how individuals' emotional experiences of the crisis are elicited, and how their behaviors are directed going forward. Efficient publicity is key to successful epidemic prevention and control. This study explores the role of creative publicity by comparing the influence of creative publicity and general publicity in different periods of the COVID-19 outbreak in China. The effects of creative and general publicity differed across varying periods of the COVID-19 outbreak. Specifically, compared to general publicity, creative publicity had a significant impact on individuals' emotional arousal in the early period of the COVID-19 outbreak while it significantly promoted individuals' emotional arousal, behavioral regulation, and willingness to actively disseminate information in the middle period. In the stable period of the COVID-19 outbreak, creative publicity performed better than general publicity in regulating individuals' behavior. On the other hand, general publicity was more effective than creative publicity in regulating individuals' behavior and actively disseminating information about the epidemic in the early period of the COVID-19 outbreak. In conclusion, creative and general publicity had differing effects in different periods of the COVID-19 outbreak, which may relate to the characteristics of the publicity format and people's psychological conditions in different periods of the COVID-19 outbreak.

Background: Previous studies have shown that two core subregions of the prefrontal cortex – the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and the inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) – are both closely related to cognitive control in creativity; however, the similarities and differences in their cognitive control mechanisms during creativity remain to be further clarified. Methods: This study employed a within-subject design, using transcranial direct current stimulation to manipulate the activity of left DLPFC and IFG separately. Participants completed divergent and convergent thinking tasks under three conditions: anodal stimulation of the left DLPFC, cathodal stimulation of the left IFG, and sham stimulation. The novelty and appropriateness of generated answers during idea generation, as well as those selected during idea selection, were compared across conditions. Results: (a) Anodal stimulation of the left DLPFC significantly enhanced the novelty of answers generated during idea generation in both the alternate uses task (AUT) and the product improvement task and helped to select the more appropriate answer during idea selection in AUT. (b) Cathodal stimulation of the left IFG significantly improved the novelty of ideas generated in the AUT but had no significant effect on performance during idea selection. Conclusion: The cognitive control mechanisms of the left DLPFC and IFG differ during the creative process. Anodal stimulation of the left DLPFC enhances goal-directed cognitive control, thereby promoting creativity, whereas cathodal stimulation of the left IFG facilitates the generation of creative ideas by releasing inhibitory control over semantic retrieval.

A key objective in artificial intelligence (AI) development is to create systems that match or surpass human creativity. Although current AI models perform well across diverse creative tasks, it remains unclear whether these achievements reflect genuine creative thinking. This study examined whether AI models (GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4, and GPT-4o) engage in creative thinking by comparing their performance with humans across various creative tasks and core cognitive processes. Results showed that AI models outperformed humans in divergent thinking, convergent thinking, and insight problem-solving, but underperformed in creative writing. Compared to humans, AI generated lower forward flow values in both free and chain association tasks and showed lower accuracy in the representational change task. In creative evaluation, AI exhibited no significant correlation between the weights of novelty and appropriateness when predicting creative ratings, suggesting the absence of a human-like trade-off strategy. AI also had higher decision error scores in creative selection, suggesting difficulty identifying the most creative ideas. These findings suggest that while AI can mimic human creativity, its strong performance in creative tasks is likely driven by non-creative mechanisms rather than genuine creative thinking.