酸味与创造力的关系研究

doi:10.12139/j.1672-0628.2023.06.013

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本研究从创造性人格和创造性思维两方面探讨酸味与创造力的关系。研究1探讨味觉偏好标签对创造性人格判断的影响。研究2和研究3探讨个体自身的酸味偏好程度及饮用酸味饮品与创造性思维的关系。结果发现：(1)被贴上酸味偏好标签的人被认为冒险特质和创造性人格特质更高；(2)酸味偏好程度可以显著正向预测创造性思维的流畅性、灵活性和独创性，冒险倾向在其中发挥中介作用；(3)饮用酸味饮品可以促进创造性思维的独创性。结果表明酸味与创造力存在密切关系。

关键词: 酸味, 冒险倾向, 创造力, 创造性人格, 创造性思维

Abstract: The purpose of studies was to examine the relationship between sour taste and creativity from the aspects of creative personality and creative thinking. Study 1 used the zero-acquaintance personality judgment task to explore the effect of taste preference on creative personality judgment through behavioral experiment method. Study 2 used questionnaires to explore the relationship between liking sour taste and creative thinking, as well as the mediating role of risk-taking tendency between the two. Study 3 explored the effect of drinking sour water on creative thinking through behavioral experiment method. The results showed that: 1) people who stated a preference for sour taste, were considered to be the individuals with high scores on risk-taking tendency and creative personality; 2) liking sour taste positively predicted creative thinking, between which risk-taking tendency played the mediating role; 3) drinking sour water promoted the originality of creative thinking. These results suggest a strong relationship between sour taste and creativity.

Key words: sour taste, risk-taking tendency, creativity, creative personality, creative thinking

中图分类号:

B849

张克, 杜秀敏, 李立言, 张雪寒, 赵海霞. 酸味与创造力的关系研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2023, 21(6): 815-823.

Ke ZHANG, Xiumin DU, Liyan LI, Xuehan ZHANG, Haixia ZHAO. Studies on the Relationship Between Sour Taste and Creativity[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2023, 21(6): 815-823.

图/表 10

参考文献

	陈银芳, 谢家全, 杨文登. 味觉对判断与决策的影响及其机制. 心理科学进展, 2020, 28 (10): 1678- 1687.
	方杰, 温忠麟, 张敏强. 类别变量的中介效应分析. 心理科学, 2017, 40 (2): 471- 477. DOI
	龚栩, 黄宇霞, 王妍, 罗跃嘉. 中国面孔表情图片系统的修订. 中国心理卫生杂志, 2011, 25 (1): 40- 46. DOI
	黄丽, 杨廷忠, 季忠民. 正性负性情绪量表的中国人群适用性研究. 中国心理卫生杂志, 2003, 17 (1): 54- 56. DOI
	李婷婷, 付秋芳, 傅小兰. 大学生发散性思维与创造力倾向的相关研究. 中华行为医学与脑科学杂志, 2015, 24 (2): 166- 168. DOI
	林幸台, 王木荣. (1994). 威廉斯创造力测验. 台北: 心理出版社.
	张景焕, 张木子, 张舜, 任菲菲. 多巴胺、5-羟色胺通路相关基因及家庭环境对创造力的影响及其作用机制. 心理科学进展, 2015, 23 (9): 1489- 1498.
	Bornovalova, M. A., Gwadz, M. A., Kahler, C., Aklin, W. M., & Lejuez, C.. Sensation seeking and risk-taking propensity as mediators in the relationship between childhood abuse and HIV-related risk behavior. Child Abuse & Neglect, 2008, 32 (1): 99- 109.
	Chen, Q. L., Beaty, R. E., Cui, Z. X., Sun, J. Z., He, H., Zhuang, K. X., ... Qiu, J.. Brain hemispheric involvement in visuospatial and verbal divergent thinking. NeuroImage, 2019, 202, 116065. DOI
	Dewett, T.. Linking intrinsic motivation, risk taking, and employee creativity in an R&D environment. R&D Management, 2007, 37 (3): 197- 208.
	Duan, H. J., Wang, X. W., Wang, Z. J., Xue, W. L., Kan, Y. C., Hu, W. P., & Zhang, F. Q.. Acute stress shapes creative cognition in trait anxiety. Frontiers in Psychology, 2019, 10, 1517. DOI
	Eisenman, R.. Creativity, birth order, and risk taking. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1987, 25 (2): 87- 88. DOI
	Eskine, K. J., Kacinik, N. A., & Prinz, J. J.. A bad taste in the mouth: Gustatory disgust influences moral judgment. Psychological Science, 2011, 22 (3): 295- 299. DOI
	Glendinning, J. I. (2021). What does the taste system tell us about the nutritional composition and toxicity of foods? In R. K. Palmer & G. Servant (Eds.), The pharmacology of taste (pp. 321–351). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
	Glover, J. A., & Sautter, F.. Relation of four components of creativity to risk-taking preferences. Psychological Reports, 1977, 41 (1): 227- 230. DOI
	Gu, X. J., Ritter, S. M., Koksma, J., & Dijksterhuis, A.. The influence of school type and perceived teaching style on students’ creativity. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 2021, 71, 101084. DOI
	Guilford, J. P.. Creativity: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 1967, 1 (1): 3- 14. DOI
	Harada, T.. Mood and risk-taking as momentum for creativity. Frontiers in Psychology, 2021, 11, 4037.
	Hellmann, J. H., Thoben, D. F., & Echterhoff, G.. The sweet taste of revenge: Gustatory experience induces metaphor-consistent judgments of a harmful act. Social Cognition, 2013, 31 (5): 531- 542. DOI
	Ji, T. T., Ding, Y., Deng, H., Jing, M., & Jiang, Q.. Does “Spicy Girl” have a peppery temper? The metaphorical link between spicy tastes and anger. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 2013, 41 (8): 1379- 1385. DOI
	Liem, D. G., Westerbeek, A., Wolterink, S., Kok, F. J., & De Graaf, C.. Sour taste preferences of children relate to preference for novel and intense stimuli. Chemical Senses, 2004, 29 (8): 713- 720. DOI
	Meier, B. P., Moeller, S. K., Riemer-Peltz, M., & Robinson, M. D.. Sweet taste preferences and experiences predict prosocial inferences, personalities, and behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2012, 102 (1): 163- 174. DOI
	Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J.. The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 2012, 24 (1): 92- 96. DOI
	Sagioglou, C., & Greitemeyer, T.. Individual differences in bitter taste preferences are associated with antisocial personality traits. Appetite, 2016, 96, 299- 308. DOI
	Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I.. Buy low and sell high: An investment approach to creativity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1992, 1 (1): 1- 5.
	Sun, J. Z., Chen, Q. L., Zhang, Q. L., Li, Y. D., Li, H. J., Wei, D. T., ... Qiu, J.. Training your brain to be more creative: Brain functional and structural changes induced by divergent thinking training. Human Brain Mapping, 2016, 37 (10): 3375- 3387. DOI
	Törnwall, O., Silventoinen, K., Hiekkalinna, T., Perola, M., Tuorila, H., & Kaprio, J.. Identifying flavor preference subgroups. Genetic basis and related eating behavior traits. Appetite, 2014, 75, 1- 10. DOI
	Tyagi, V., Hanoch, Y., Hall, S. D., Runco, M., & Denham, S. L.. The risky side of creativity: Domain specific risk taking in creative individuals. Frontiers in Psychology, 2017, 8, 145.
	Vi, C. T., & Obrist, M.. Sour promotes risk-taking: An investigation into the effect of taste on risk-taking behaviour in humans. Scientific Reports, 2018, 8 (1): 7987. DOI
	Wang, X., Geng, L. N., Qin, J. W., & Yao, S. X.. The potential relationship between spicy taste and risk seeking. Judgment and Decision Making, 2016, 11 (6): 547- 553. DOI
	Wang, X. Y., He, Y. Y., Lu, K. L., Deng, C. L., Qiao, X. N., & Hao, N. (2019). How does the embodied metaphor affect creative thinking? NeuroImage, 202, 116114.
	Wang, X. Y., Lu, K. L., Runco, M. A., & Hao, N.. Break the “wall” and become creative: Enacting embodied metaphors in virtual reality. Consciousness and Cognition, 2018, 62, 102- 109. DOI
	Xu, J. L., Wan, F., & Schwarz, N. (2020). “That's bitter!”: Culture-specific effects of gustatory experience on judgments of fairness and advancement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. Advance online publication. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33119358/
	Xu, L. D., Mehta, R., & Hoegg, J.. Sweet ideas: How the sensory experience of sweetness impacts creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2022, 172, 104169. DOI
	Zhang, J., Jin, H., Zhang, W. Y., Ding, C., O’Keeffe, S., Ye, M. Y., & Zuker, C. S.. Sour sensing from the tongue to the brain. Cell, 2019, 179 (2): 392- 402. DOI

变量	方程1(效标：创造性人格特质)		方程2(效标：冒险人格特质)		方程3(效标：创造性人格特质)
变量	β	t	β	t	β	t
酸味偏好标签	1.21	5.40***	1.38	6.33***	0.24	1.30
苦味偏好标签	0.27	1.21	0.61	2.78**	−0.16	−0.93
辣味偏好标签	1.70	7.61***	2.33	10.70***	0.06	0.30
冒险人格特质					0.70	11.71***
R²	0.33		0.45		0.64
F	25.34***		42.75***		69.85***

变量	方程1(效标：创造性人格特质)		方程2(效标：冒险人格特质)		方程3(效标：创造性人格特质)
变量	β	t	β	t	β	t
酸味偏好标签	1.21	5.40***	1.38	6.33***	0.24	1.30
苦味偏好标签	0.27	1.21	0.61	2.78**	−0.16	−0.93
辣味偏好标签	1.70	7.61***	2.33	10.70***	0.06	0.30
冒险人格特质					0.70	11.71***
R²	0.33		0.45		0.64
F	25.34***		42.75***		69.85***

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1.酸味偏好程度	3.48	0.85
2.甜味偏好程度	3.53	0.90	0.19**
3.苦味偏好程度	1.89	0.85	−0.03	−0.17*
4.辣味偏好程度	3.56	1.06	0.05	0.05	0.03
5.流畅性	3.69	2.42	0.23**	0.14*	0.03	−0.01
6.灵活性	3.53	2.30	0.24**	0.15*	0.02	−0.01	0.98**
7.独创性	1.85	0.53	0.18**	0.14*	0.07	−0.04	0.56**	0.59**
8.冒险倾向	23.88	2.66	0.21**	0.03	−0.01	0.05	0.25**	0.25**	0.27**

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1.酸味偏好程度	3.48	0.85
2.甜味偏好程度	3.53	0.90	0.19**
3.苦味偏好程度	1.89	0.85	−0.03	−0.17*
4.辣味偏好程度	3.56	1.06	0.05	0.05	0.03
5.流畅性	3.69	2.42	0.23**	0.14*	0.03	−0.01
6.灵活性	3.53	2.30	0.24**	0.15*	0.02	−0.01	0.98**
7.独创性	1.85	0.53	0.18**	0.14*	0.07	−0.04	0.56**	0.59**
8.冒险倾向	23.88	2.66	0.21**	0.03	−0.01	0.05	0.25**	0.25**	0.27**

变量	方程1		方程2		方程3
变量	β	t	β	t	β	t
模型a	效标：流畅性		效标：冒险倾向		效标：流畅性
酸味偏好程度	0.66	3.42**	0.65	3.05**	0.54	2.77**
冒险倾向					0.19	3.06**
R²	0.05		0.04		0.10
F	11.67***		9.31**		10.76***
模型b	效标：灵活性		效标：冒险倾向		效标：灵活性
酸味偏好程度	0.65	3.51**	0.65	3.05**	0.53	2.87**
冒险倾向					0.18	3.01**
R²	0.06		0.04		0.10
F	12.29***		9.31**		10.92***
模型c	效标：独创性		效标：冒险倾向		效标：独创性
酸味偏好程度	0.11	2.65**	0.65	3.05**	0.08	1.92
冒险倾向					0.05	3.59***
R²	0.03		0.04		0.09
F	7.02**		9.31**		10.14***