Redefining creativity differences for art students who use and those who do not use GenAI
Evidence from network analysis
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 17831966 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Pu Song (0000-0003-2295-0528, Yili Normal University), Wei-Mun Chin (SEGi University, corresponding author), Xin-Chun Nie (Nanchang Institute of Technology), Lin-Ying Li (Srinakharinwirot University), Yu-Jia Yang (Luoyang Normal University), Liang Zhang (0000-0001-9041-1150, Southwest University), Mengmeng Zhong (Guangxi University of Science and Technology) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Publication date | 2026-03-13 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Humanities and Social Sciences Communications (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2662-9992 • E-ISSN: 2662-9992 |
| Publisher | Palgrave Macmillan (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1057/s41599-026-06897-7 |
| OpenAlex | W7135173281 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 92 |
This study employs network analysis to investigate differences in the core features of creativity between individuals using generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and those who rely on individual effort without it. This nationwide study employed a stratified random sampling method across six universities, involving a total of 617 university students enrolled in art programs. The results indicate that the core features of creativity among students using GenAI involve generating unique solutions. Conversely, students who do not use GenAI exhibit core features such as flow experiences and active thinking. These differences can be explained from three aspects: the source of creativity, the methods of creativity, and the expressions of creativity. The findings of this study may provide insights for educators and policymakers by illuminating the potential benefits and drawbacks of GenAI in enhancing creativity among university students, thereby guiding the development of more effective educational tools and curricula
Creativity · Data collection · Network analysis · Social network analysis · Art Education and Development · Creativity in Education and Neuroscience · Cultural Industries and Urban Development
The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity
Cognition in the Wild
Network analysis of multivariate data in psychological science
Comparing network structures on three aspects
Association of Symptom Network Structure With the Course of Depression
Students’ voices on generative AI
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author
Identifying highly influential nodes in the complicated grief network.
Opening up Openness to Experience
Extended Bayesian information criteria for model selection with large model spaces
Algorithm appreciation
Estimating psychological networks and their accuracy
Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective
Deep learning
Network Analysis
The Standard Definition of Creativity
From Active Learning to Innovative Thinking
Reflection in the creative process of early adolescents
Making the Case for shadow creativity
Creativity in higher education
Does an emotional connection to art really require a human artist? Emotion and intentionality responses to AI- versus human-created art and impact on aesthetic experience
Three types of integrated course designs for using mobile technologies to support creativity in higher education
Investigating students’ cognitive processes in generative AI-assisted digital multimodal composing and traditional writing
Getting to the heart of it
From aura to semi-aura
Being There
Art
Bayesian Estimation for Gaussian Graphical Models
Effects of a Theatrical Improvisation programme on students’ motor creativity
Assessing a Chinese Version of the Runco Ideational Behavior Scale
AI and the Learning Experience Design
Challenge in artistic flow experiences
Artificial intelligence and sustainable development during urbanization
A Study of Psychological Features Related to Creative Thinking Styles of University Students
The social psychology of creativity
Creativity in the age of generative AI
| Highly cited | No |
|---|