
==== Front
Sci Rep
Sci Rep
Scientific Reports
2045-2322
Nature Publishing Group UK London

39251654
69808
10.1038/s41598-024-69808-3
Article
Three-way interaction effect of hindrance research stressors, inclusive mentoring style, and academic resilience on research creativity among doctoral students from China
Liu Chunlei
Wu Min wuminmw@qq.com

Gao Xiaoqing
https://ror.org/053w1zy07 grid.411427.5 0000 0001 0089 3695 School of Educational Science, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, Hunan 410081 China
10 9 2024
10 9 2024
2024
14 1876114 1 2024
8 8 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
With the increasingly intense academic competition, the stressors faced by doctoral students are gradually escalating. Based on the Job Demands-Resources Model, this study proposed a moderated moderation to explore how hindrance research stressors affect doctoral students’ research creativity. Explicitly, the present study investigates whether the relationship between hindrance research stressors and research creativity is contingent on inclusive mentoring style and academic resilience. By analyzing the survey data from 538 valid questionnaire responses of doctoral students in China, this study has revealed that hindrance research stressors negatively relate to doctoral students’ research creativity, and inclusive mentoring style from academic supervisors can mitigate the negative impact of hindrance research stressors on the research creativity of doctoral students. Furthermore, academic resilience strengthens the moderating effect of inclusive mentoring style. Specifically, it buffers the negative impact of hindrance research stressors on research creativity among doctoral students who receive high inclusive mentoring, but not among those with low levels of inclusive mentoring. These findings emphasize that effective strategies to enhance the research creativity of doctoral students who encounter hindrance stressors may require the joint consideration of contextual and personal resources.

Subject terms

Human behaviour
Social anthropology
Hunan Provincial Education Science Planning Base Project of ChinaXJK23AJD045 Gao Xiaoqing issue-copyright-statement© Springer Nature Limited 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

As an integral part of the cadre of high-level innovative talents and the main reserve force for national scientific research, doctoral students play a crucial role in contributing to the country’s pursuit of advanced scientific and technological self-reliance and independent innovation. The cultivation of their innovation ability is of great significance for the implementation of the country's innovation-driven development strategy. In the past decade, the scale of enrollment in doctoral education in China has experienced significant development. However, behind the vigorous development of doctoral education, some problems have also emerged1, such as the overall low innovation ability of Chinese doctoral students, a lack of innovation consciousness and spirit, and a lack of high-level innovative achievements. According to Yuan et al., nearly one-third of doctoral students rated their creativity as 'average' or 'poor' in their three investigations on the quality of graduate education in China2. Particularly, the insufficient innovation ability in scientific research poses a challenge to meeting the needs of social development3. In this context, how to stimulate the research creativity of doctoral students is an urgent issue to be addressed in current doctoral education4–6. Thus, it is crucial to explore the factors influencing research creativity and its functioning mechanism.

Existing studies have primarily explored the factors related to the development of postgraduate students’ research creativity from the perspectives of supervisors7–9, organizational atmosphere10–12, and the students themselves10,13–15. While previous research provides a clear understanding of factors influencing scientific creativity, two main shortcomings persist. First, existing research mainly focused on the supportive research environment and its impact on the research creativity of doctoral students, but has overlooked certain adverse factors in the doctoral research environment, especially some hindrance research stressors such as uncertainty of the doctoral process, role conflicts, social isolation, interpersonal conflicts, uneven distribution of research resources, and vague evaluation criteria for research outcomes16. Whether these hindrance stressors will affect the research creativity of doctoral students remains to be studied. Second, existing research has mostly explored the influencing factors and mechanisms of doctoral students' research creativity from a single perspective, with few studies examining whether multiple perspectives, such as supervisor resources, personal resources, and external situational factors, interact to influence doctoral students' research creativity.

Building on these gaps, this study aims to explore the relationship between hindrance research stressors and the research creativity of doctoral students, who are facing more intense academic competition of “publish or perish” and employment competition of “promotion or leave” with the enrollment scale of doctoral students expanding in China17. In addition, this study also wants to explore whether inclusive mentoring style (supervisor resources) and academic resilience (personal resources) can mitigate the impact of hindrance research stressors on research creativity, that is, whether they can act as boundary conditions in the relationship of hindrance research stressors and research creativity.

The Job Demands-Resources Model (JD-R Model) offers a valuable theoretical perspective for this study. It categorizes job characteristics into two components: job demands and job resources18. Specifically, in the field of doctoral education, job demands refer to the requirements that necessitate doctoral students to exert effort or cost in order to complete their research, including physical, psychological, and academic aspects. Job resources, on the other hand, encompass physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of the research job that can assist doctoral students in achieving research objectives, minimizing psychological and physiological costs, and promoting personal growth and development19. A balance between job demands and resources is necessary to yield favorable outcomes20. Particularly when facing high job demands, individuals supported by abundant job resources are more likely to demonstrate higher work motivation and enthusiasm, exhibit greater willingness to embrace novelty, and generate more innovative and creative ideas, thereby initiating the “motivation activation process”21 Conversely, individuals lacking external resources such as social support and feedback are more susceptible to experiencing burnout or anxiety, which detrimentally affects their ability to foster creative ideas and engage in innovative behaviors19. That is, research resources serve as a significant buffer in mitigating the negative impact of hindrance research stressors on doctoral students22. Based on this, this study aims to identify “resources” that can moderate the relationship between hindrance research stressors and the research creativity of doctoral students at both contextual and individual levels. Regarding contextual resources, supervisors, as the primary individuals responsible for the training of doctoral students, play multiple roles such as managers, supporters, and collaborators in doctoral students’ research work23. Supervisors’ support and mentoring are important resources to help doctoral students cope with hindrance research stressors, especially when supervisors demonstrate inclusiveness such as openness, accessibility, and availability in their academic interactions with doctoral students24. Inclusive mentoring from supervisors has also been found to enhance doctoral students’ cognitive flexibility, thereby promoting the development of their research creativity25. Thus, supervisors’ inclusive mentoring style may act as a moderator for the relationship between hindrance research stressors and doctoral students’ research creativity. Meanwhile, according to the JD-R model, individual resources such as self-efficacy, organizational self-esteem, optimism, and psychological capital, are believed to moderate the relationship between job demands and outcome variables26,27. Previous studies have reached a consensus that positive psychological state has a positive impact on individual creativity28. Based on this, this study selected academic resilience, a positive personal resource, as another moderator to investigate its impact on the relationship between hindrance research stressors and doctoral students’ research creativity. Furthermore, considering the combined impact of contextual factors and individual traits on the research creativity of doctoral students, this study adopts an interactionist perspective to assess how inclusive mentorship guidance (a contextual resource) and academic resilience (a personal resource) act as boundary conditions to mitigate the negative impact of hindrance research stressors on the research creativity of doctoral students.

Thus, this research endeavors to explore and understand the complex dynamics between stressors, creativity, and resources in the context of doctoral education. That is, to explore the impact of hindrance research stressors on the research creativity among doctoral students and the boundary conditions in this relationship from the perspective of contextual resources and personal resources. The findings of this study will contribute to enhancing the quality of doctoral student training in China and fostering the research and innovation abilities of doctoral students.

Literature review and hypotheses development

Hindrance research stressors and doctoral students’ research creativity

Creativity is characterized by an individual’s capacity to produce original and valuable concepts, products, procedures, services, or approaches for an organization29. In the context of this study, research creativity pertains to the application of creativity in the realm of academia. Drawing on existing research, research creativity in this study encompasses the holistic traits and competencies of doctoral students to systematically employ theoretical knowledge, devise innovative solutions to problems, and generate novel insights. It emphasizes the novelty of research questions, methodologies, procedures, and perspectives, as well as the pragmatic application of the research findings10.

Hindrance research stressors refer to stressors that have a negative impact on individuals’ research activities, such as role conflicts, role ambiguities, unfair research evaluation criteria, tense interpersonal relationships, and unequal distribution of resources from supervisors30. Existing research has shown that hindrance research stressors often interfere with the research work of doctoral students, typically impede their academic progress or personal goals, and have direct impact on the potential research achievements of doctoral students31. On one hand, hindrance research stressors tend to bring about negative emotions in doctoral students32,33, leading to emotional exhaustion and depletion of cognitive resources33. As a result, doctoral students may resort to simplistic cognitive strategies, thereby resulting in mediocre ideas and hindering the development of their research creativity. On the other hand, Several studies have highlighted that hindrance research stressors tend to undermine graduate students' innovative self-efficacy32,34. Thus, when faced with hindrance stressors in research, doctoral students may experience a decline in their sense of self-efficacy, hindering their ability to generate innovative ideas and concepts35,36. Additionally, previous research involving 1095 Chinese graduate students has shown that hindrance stressors directly impede their belief in the effectiveness of their efforts to enhance academic performance, consequently undermining their motivation to achievement36. Moreover, doctoral students may need to invest additional workload and navigate bureaucratic procedures to cope with hindrance research stressors, which will consume their time and make it more difficult to fulfill their daily research obligations37. That is, achieving the expected research milestones becomes challenging for doctoral students under hindrance research stressors, for the uncontrollability of hindrance stressors may lead to a sense of helplessness and loss of confidence, further inhibiting the development of research creativity38. Thus, doctoral students may even perceive these hindrance research stressors as a threat to their academic growth, leading to insufficient investment of time and energy in seeking innovative ideas, approaches, or methods, ultimately impeding the generation of creative thinking. Based on the above analysis, we propose the following hypothesis:H1: Hindrance research stressors negatively correlate with the research creativity of doctoral students.

The moderating role of inclusive mentoring style

Supervisors, as guides, supporters, and collaborators in doctoral students’ research activities, play a crucial role in their academic socialization39. Thus, the mentoring style of supervisors, as observed through their daily behavior, constitutes a crucial contextual factor that influences the cognitive and behavioral outcomes of doctoral students40. Inclusive mentoring style, derived from the concept of inclusive leadership in organizational management, involves supervisors exhibiting openness, accessibility, and availability in the interactions with students41. Inclusive supervisors are eager to listen to students' new ideas and provide timely feedback on their reports42. At the same time, they respect each student's personality, treat each student fairly, and appreciate each student's academic achievements43. It has been shown that an inclusive mentoring style can enhance graduate students’ cognitive flexibility in research and promote their innovative behaviors25. Therefore, this study posits that an inclusive mentoring style from academic supervisors may moderate the relationship between hindrance research stressors and doctoral students’ research creativity. Firstly, the openness of inclusive supervisors means their willingness to accept new ideas and thoughts from doctoral students and give sufficient autonomy to doctoral students in research, which helps satisfy doctoral students’ basic psychological need for autonomy44. It has been shown that an autonomy-supportive environment can not only alleviate the negative effects of stressors but also enable individuals to have stronger adaptability and proactiveness in creative activities45. In particular, if doctoral students have the autonomy to independently choose research topics of interest and try different research methods in their research, it would be likely to motivate them to generate more creative ideas. Secondly, the availability of inclusive supervisors suggests that supervisors are available to listen to and address the research difficulties faced by doctoral students, as well as provide them with professional advice and feedback25. Thus, doctoral students have the access to gain important academic resources and relevant skills and knowledge. Field-specific knowledge and skills are vital precursors in stimulating individuals’ creativity46. It has been shown that instrumental support from supervisors helps reduce negative perceptions of stress among graduate students and enhance their self-efficacy in research47, which is a significant antecedent for predicting doctoral students’ research creativity48. In addition, the accessibility of an inclusive supervisor indicates that the supervisor is good at creating an equal and harmonious interactive environment, where doctoral students can freely communicate and interact with supervisors, share their research results and ideas, learn from each other, and improve together. Such an environment alleviates the interpersonal communication stress on doctoral students and fulfill their basic psychological need for relatedness49, thus strengthening their sense of psychological safety and sense of belonging to the academic community50. According to the self-determination theory, the fulfillment of basic psychological needs in work is a prerequisite for strengthening an individual’s intrinsic motivation, while intrinsic motivation is a key psychological mechanism to stimulate individuals’ creativity51. Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:H2: Inclusive mentoring style negatively moderates the relationship between hindrance research stressors and research creativity of doctoral students. The more inclusive mentoring there is, the weaker the negative correlation between hindrance research stressors and research creativity, and vice versa.

The moderating role of academic resilience on the conditional influence of inclusive mentoring style in hindrance research stressors-research creativity relationship

Resilience refers to an individual’s toughness and positive adaptability when facing pressure, adversity, or challenges, as well as the ability to bounce back from adversity52. It is a positive psychological ability, and also a personal trait that is important for maintaining individuals’ physical and mental health and promoting positive behavioral outcomes53. Academic resilience, as the specific embodiment of resilience in the field of academic research, refers to the individual’s ability to adapt in the face of academic difficulties, failures, or other significant academic challenges. Existing research has found that individuals with high resilience typically have self-esteem and confidence in their own abilities54, and that psychological resilience can moderate the impact of stressful events on individuals’ academic outcomes55.

But given the conceptual framework of stressors outcome as a product of individual-environment interaction56, doctoral students’ research creativity is also influenced by both organizational contextual factors and individual traits. Addressed in the preceding section, the inclusive mentoring style serves as an important contextual resource for doctoral students, may buffer the negative effects of hindrance research stressors on their research creativity. Expanding on this, the presence of academic resilience, as a crucial individual trait, may further shape this moderating effect of inclusive mentoring style on the relationship between hindrance research stressors and research creativity.

Previous research has found that individuals with high level of psychological resilience are curious and open-minded57, and often see stressors or challenges as opportunities for growth, displaying more flexibility, proactiveness, innovativeness, and independence in their work58,59. Therefore, individuals with academic resilience tend to reassess hindrance stressors and try to identify opportunities for resource acquisition in the “threats”60. Specifically, with high level of academic resilience, doctoral students may exhibit high levels of cognitive flexibility in the face of hindrance research stressors under the inclusive mentoring of their academic supervisors 61,62, which in turn leads to new ideas, perspectives, and methods. In other words, doctoral students with strong academic resilience are more likely to actively seek out resources to manage the stressors they face during their research63. Therefore, when doctoral students have access to supportive external resources, their academic resilience serves as a protective mechanism, enabling them to effectively cope with hindrance research stressors encountered during their research journey, ultimately leading to better academic outcomes64. In addition, according to the Job Demands-Resources Model, both external environmental resources and internal personal resources can mitigate the negative effects of hindrance stressors65. This combination of external support and personal resilience not only minimizes the negative effects of hindrance stressors but also equips students with the necessary skills to thrive in their academic creativity. Based on this, there may be a three-way interaction effect of hindrance research stressors, inclusive mentoring style, and academic resilience on the research creativity of doctoral students. That is, doctoral students with high levels of academic resilience may view hindrance research stressors as opportunities for growth and improvement rather than threats, especially when supervisors adopt an inclusive mentoring with openness, availability, and accessibility. In such a supportive environment, doctoral students feel supported, encouraged, tolerated, and cared for in their research endeavors, which enhances their intrinsic motivation to creatively complete their research tasks. As a result, their research creativity is effectively nurtured and developed. On the contrary, doctoral students with lower levels of academic resilience demonstrate weaker self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, and positive emotions. They may lack eagerness to achieve research goals and struggle to overcome hindrance research stressors required for pursuing higher achievement needs. Hence, they may fail to initiate active motivation and may not receive timely external support through inclusive mentoring from their supervisors, which is essential for stimulating their research creativity. Therefore, we propose that doctoral students' capacity to effectively utilize the buffering effect of an inclusive mentoring style depends significantly on their level of academic resilience. In other words, academic resilience would strengthen the mitigating effect of inclusive mentoring style on the relationship between hindrance research stressors and research creativity. Given this, the following hypothesis was proposed :H3: Academic resilience moderates the influence of inclusive mentoring style on the relationship between hindrance research stressors and the research creativity of doctoral students. When doctoral students have higher levels of academic resilience, the negative impact of hindrance research stressors on their research creativity will become weaker with the higher level of inclusive mentoring style.

In light of the reviewed literature, a hypothetical model was developed (Fig. 1), in which we propose that hindrance research stressors would be negatively associated with the research creativity of doctoral students. In addition, we hypothesize that inclusive mentoring style would moderate the association between hindrance research stressors and research creativity. Furthermore, we inquire whether academic resilience would moderate the moderated relationship.Figure 1 Proposed model.

Materials and methods

Participants and procedure

This study is a cross-sectional study and utilizes a sample of doctoral students who are currently studying in a PhD program of universities or research institutions located in mainland China. Graduated doctoral students or master's students who have not yet started their doctoral studies are not the target of this study. First, to enhance questionnaire accuracy and standardization, we conducted a small-scale pre-survey among suitable survey subjects. Based on pre-survey feedback, we refined the questionnaire. Subsequently, we distributed the revised electronic questionnaire widely from September 2022 to October 2022 using convenient and snowball sampling methods through social platforms like WeChat or QQ learning Groups. A total of 605 doctoral students from 25 universities voluntarily completed the electronic questionnaire. These participants were from 8 provinces in mainland China, including Hunan, Hubei, Jiangsu, Guangdong, and Guangxi. After excluding responses with missing or contradictory information, we retained 538 valid questionnaires, achieving an effective response rate of 88.9%.

Regarding the demographics of the valid sample, male participants accounted for 45.7%, while the female participants accounted for 54.3%. In terms of age, 189 participants (35.1%) were aged 27 or below, 222 participants (41.3%) were between aged 28 and 33, and 127 participants (23.6%) were aged 34 or above. In terms of academic disciplines, 183 participants (34.1%) belong to humanities, 132 participants (24.5%) belong to social sciences, and 223 participants (41.4%) belong to science, technology, agriculture, and medical science. In terms of university level, 349 participants (64.9%) were from “Double First-Class” universities (refers to those universities that have been selected as world-class universities or have world-class disciplines), while 189 participants (35.1%) were from “Non-Double First-Class” universities. With respect to the characteristics of supervisors, 70.1% of supervisors were male, whereas the remaining 29.9% were female. Concerning the academic titles of supervisors, associate professor and below constituted 19.4% of the sample, while the majority, specifically 80.6%, were professors.

Measures

In this study, all measurement items were scored on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), except for the control variables, i.e., the larger the number, the higher the degree of compliance. The scales used in this study are mature scales widely adopted by scholars worldwide, with proven reliability reliability and validity in Chinese contexts. The details are as follows.

Research creativity was measured using a scale derived from Meng et al.’s study66, with minor adjustments made to align with the specific contexts of doctoral education. The final scale comprised six items, including “I can propose original and practically significant research questions” and “I can interpret the research questions from a new perspective”. The internal consistency coefficient of this scale in this study is 0.920.

Hindrance research stressors were measured using a scale developed by Cavanaugh et al.67 and revised by Li et al.68, with minor adjustments made to account for the specific research context of doctoral students. The final scale includes 5 items. Sample items include “I lack a clear understanding of my research responsibilities and tasks” and “I cannot maintain good relationships with other members of my research group, and conflicts often occur”. The internal consistency coefficient of the hindrance research stressors scale in this study is 0.819.

Inclusive mentoring style was measured using the scale of inclusive leadership developed by Carmeli et al.41, which is revised based on the specific context of this study, consisting of three sub-dimensions and a total of nine items. For example, “My supervisor is very willing to listen to new research ideas or viewpoints” (openness); “When I consult my supervisor on relevant professional issues, he/she always provides assistance” (availability); “I have the opportunity to discuss newly emerging research issues with my supervisor” (accessibility). The internal consistency coefficient of this scale in this study is 0.941.

Academic resilience was assessed using the sub-scale of resilience in the Psychological Capital Scale developed by Luthans et al.63, with minor modifications to align with the characteristics of doctoral students. The final scale consisted of six items, such as “When I have a setback in my research work, I can recover from it and keep going” and “I usually take stressful things at research work in stride”. The internal consistency coefficient of this scale in this study is 0.896.

Control variables: Previous studies have shown that the personal characteristics of doctoral students, such as gender, age, discipline, and degree type, as well as the university level, may affect their research creativity. Therefore, they are also included in this study as control variables.

Data analysis

Data analysis for this study was conducted using SPSS 26.0 and Amos 26.0 software. Initially, the data were analyzed using SPSS software to carry out reliability and validity tests, common method bias tests, descriptive statistics, and regression analysis. Subsequently, confirmatory factor analysis was performed using Amos 26.0 software. This involved estimating the standardized factor loadings of each item, assessing convergent validity and discriminant validity of the five variables, and evaluating the fit of the hypothetical model. Finally, a simple slope analysis was employed to clearly illustrate the moderating effect of the moderator variables.

Ethics statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and was reviewed and approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Hunan Normal University (protocol code: 353 and date of approval: September 29, 2022). Besides, all surveyed doctoral students voluntarily participated in the questionnaire survey, and written informed consent was obtained from all individual participants in this study.

Results

Common method biases testing and confirmatory factor analysis

Because all the data in this study are obtained from doctoral students’ self-reports, there may be potential risks of common method bias. To mitigate this issue, several measures have been taken: Firstly, procedural control is implemented by emphasizing anonymity, confidentiality, and restricting data solely for academic research purposes. Secondly, an exploratory factor analysis was conducted on all scale questions using the Harman single-factor test. The analysis showed that there were four factors with eigenvalues exceeding 1 when not rotated. Furthermore, the first common factor explained only 35.28% of the total variance, falling short of the critical threshold of 40%. Additionally, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed on the single-factor model. The results demonstrated a poor fit (X2/DF = 15.819; RMSEA = 0.166; GFI = 0.431; IFI = 0.511; CFI = 0.509; TLI = 0.467), as shown in Table 1. Consequently, based on these comprehensive analyses, it can be concluded that common method bias was not a significant concern in the current study. Table 1 Results of confirmatory factor analysis of hypothetical and competing models.

Measurement	X2	DF	X2 /DF	RMSEA	GFI	IFI	CFI	TLI	
Four-factor model (HRS; IMS; AR ; RC)	393.9	293	1.345	0.025	0.946	0.989	0.989	0.988	
Three-factor model (HRS; IMS + AR ; RC)	2077.8	296	7.019	0.106	0.675	0.803	0.803	0.783	
Two-factor model (HRS + IMS + AR ; RC)	2957.9	298	9.926	0.129	0.599	0.706	0.705	0.679	
One-factor model (HRS + RC + IMS + AR)	4729.9	299	15.819	0.166	0.431	0.511	0.509	0.467	

Reliability and validity testing

Firstly, to examine the compatibility of the data with the theoretical model and assess the discriminant validity between variables, confirmatory factor analysis was conducted in this study. As shown in Table 1, the fit index of the proposed four-factor model (X2/DF = 1.345; RMSEA = 0.025; GFI = 0.946; IFI = 0.989; TLI = 0.988; CFI = 0.989) significantly outperformed those of the other three alternative models, indicating a good fit of the hypothesized model with the data and good discriminant validity among the four variables.

Furthermore, as demonstrated in Table 2, the variables displayed satisfactory reliability with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients exceeding 0.70 and composite reliability (CR) surpassing 0.7. The results of the standard factor loadings for each scale ranged from 0.562 to 0.957, all surpassing the threshold of 0.50. Moreover, the average variance extracted (AVE) for each variable, ranging from 0.50 to 0.66, exceeded the threshold of 0.50, indicating a good convergent validity for each scale. In addition, the square root of AVE for each variable was greater than the Pearson correlation coefficient between variables (see Table 3). This further provides evidence for good discriminant validity among the four variables. Table 2 Results of reliability and validity test.

Variables	Factor loadings	CR	AVE	Cronbach’s α	KMO	
Hindrance research stressors	HRS1	0.825	0.83	0.50	0.819	0.841	
HRS2	0.747	
HRS3	0.666	
HRS4	0.562	
HRS5	0.721	
Research creativity	RC1	0.957	0.92	0.66	0.920	0.913	
RC2	0.790	
RC3	0.778	
RC4	0.805	
RC5	0.764	
RC6	0.779	
Inclusive mentoring style	IMS1	0.946	0.94	0.64	0.941	0.960	
IMS2	0.796	
IMS3	0.790	
IMS4	0.780	
IMS5	0.760	
IMS6	0.775	
IMS7	0.792	
IMS8	0.794	
IMS9	0.786	
Academic resilience	AR1	0.911	0.90	0.60	0.896	0.904	
AR2	0.775	
AR3	0.775	
AR4	0.751	
AR5	0.748	
AR6	0.654	
N = 538. CR, composite reliability; AVE, average variance extracted.

Table 3 Descriptive statistics and inter-correlations.

Variables	Means	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	
Gender	1.54	0.50											
Age	1.88	0.76	− 0.076										
Discipline	2.07	0.87	− 0.236***	− 0.066									
Level of university	1.65	0.48	− 0.081	− 0.019	0.243								
Gender of supervisor	1.30	0.46	0.119**	0.008	-0.155**	-0.140**							
Title of supervisor	2.85	1.38	0.027	− 0.012	− 0.001	− 0.043	0.053						
HRS	2.79	0.77	− 0.046	0.012	− 0.054	− 0.011	− 0.044	− 0.006	0.71				
RC	3.56	0.92	− 0.094*	0.078	0.003	− 0.058	0.007	0.018	− 0.205***	0.81			
IMS	3.88	0.88	0.023	0.056	-0.152**	0.027	0.037	-0.034	-0.211***	0.417***	0.80		
AR	3.54	0.84	− 0.096*	0.085	0.011	− 0.071	0.035	− 0.004	− 0.148**	0.526***	0.319***	0.77	
N = 538. *** indicates P < 0.001, ** indicates P < 0.01, * indicates P < 0.05 (two-tailed test). HRS, hindrance research stressors; RC, research creativity; IMS, inclusive mentoring style; AR, academic resilience. Dummy coding: gender (1 = male, 2 = female), age (1 = 27 years and below, 2 = 28 years to 33 years, 3 = 34 years and above), discipline (1 = humanities, 2 = social sciences, 3 = natural sciences), level of university (1 = Non-Double First-Class universities, 2 = Double First-Class universities), gender of supervisor (1 = male, 2 = female), title of supervisor (1 = lecturer, 2 = associate professor, 3 = professor). The bold number is the square root of AVE.

Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis

Table 3 provides a summary of the means, standard deviations, and correlation coefficients between the variables under investigation. The results indicate that research creativity was negatively related to hindrance research stressors (r = − 0.205, p < 0.001) and positively related to inclusive mentoring style and academic resilience (r = 0.417, p < 0.001; r = 0.526, p < 0.001). In addition, a positive relationship between inclusive mentoring style and academic resilience was identified. These initial findings offer preliminary data support for subsequent tests on potential moderating effects.

Hypotheses testing

In this study, the hypotheses were tested using the hierarchical regression analysis, a widely employed method by scholars both domestically and internationally. To avoid the interference of multicollinearity on the regression results, hindrance research pressure, inclusive mentoring style, and academic resilience were decentralized according to the suggestions of Montani et al.69,70. Initially, control variables such as age and gender were included in Model 1. Subsequently, hindrance research stressors, inclusive mentoring style, and academic resilience were added to Model 1 to establish Model 2. Following this, three second-order interaction terms were incorporated into Model 2 to create Model 3. Lastly, a third-order interaction term "hindrance research stressors × inclusive mentoring style × academic resilience" was introduced to develop Model 4. The results can be seen in Table 4. Table 4 Hierarchical regression analysis results.

Variables	Research creativity	
Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	
Gender	− 0.096*	− 0.058	− 0.066	− 0.062	
Age	0.070	0.026	0.030	0.034	
Discipline	0.001	0.033	0.053	− 0.013	
University level	− 0.063	− 0.050	− 0.051	− 0.025	
Gender of supervisor	0.008	− 0.018	− 0.013	− 0.011	
Academic title of supervisor	0.019	0.029	0.025	0.000	
Hindrance research stressors		− 0.088*	− 0.047	− 0.074*	
Inclusive mentoring style		0.274***	0.220***	0.203	
Academic resilience		0.414***	0.402***	0.420***	
Hindrance research stressors × Inclusive mentoring style			0.183***	0.211***	
Hindrance research stressors × Academic resilience			0.027	0.112*	
Inclusive mentoring style × Academic resilience			− 0.014	− 0.064	
Hindrance research stressors × Inclusive mentoring style × Academic resilience				0.185***	
R2	0.019	0.362	0.394	0.409	
Adjusted R2	0.007	0.351	0.380	0.395	
△R2	0.019	0.343	0.032	0.015	
F	1.673	33.225***	28.420***	27.918***	
N = 538. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

First, as illustrated in Model 2, hindrance research stressors were found to have significantly negative impact on the research creativity of doctoral students (β= − 0.088, p < 0.05), supporting Hypothesis 1.

Next, the moderating effect of inclusive mentoring style was tested. As shown in Table 4, the interaction term “hindrance research stressors × inclusive mentoring style” significantly predicts the research creativity of doctoral students (Model 3, β = 0.183, p < 0.001), indicating that inclusive mentoring style significantly moderates the negative impact of hindrance research stressors on the research creativity of doctoral students, thereby supporting Hypothesis 2. To elucidate the moderating effect of inclusive mentoring style more intuitively on the relationship between hindrance research stressors and doctoral students’ research creativity, a simple slope analysis was conducted and graphed. Inclusive mentoring style was dichotomized into two groups with high and low levels based on one standard deviation above and below the mean, following the approach recommended by Preacher et al.71. As illustrated in Fig. 2, when doctoral students receive low levels of inclusive mentoring from their supervisors, hindrance research stressors have a significant negative impact on their research creativity (simple slope = − 0.257, t = − 4.314, p = 0.000), but when doctoral students receive high levels of inclusive mentoring from their supervisors, the impact of hindrance research stressors on research creativity changes from negative to positive, but not significant (simple slope = 0.095, t = 1.595, p = 0.111). This finding indicates that inclusive mentoring style negatively moderates the relationship between hindrance research stressors and doctoral students’ research creativity, providing further support for Hypothesis 2.Figure 2 Two-way interaction of hindrance research stressors and inclusive mentoring style on research creativity.

Lastly, the three-way interaction effect of hindrance research stressors, inclusive mentoring style and academic resilience on the research creativity of doctoral students was tested. We included hindrance research stressors, inclusive mentoring style, and academic resilience along with all second-order interaction terms in the regression equation, and then added the "hindrance research stressors x inclusive mentoring style x academic resilience" third-order interaction term. According to the Model 4 in Table 4, the interaction term “hindrance research stressors × inclusive mentoring style × academic resilience” has a significant positive effect on doctoral students’ research creativity (β = 0.185, p < 0.001). This result suggests that, when faced with hindrance research stressors, doctoral students with high levels of academic resilience exhibit higher research creativity when they receive high levels of inclusive mentoring from their supervisors. To further test hypothesis 3, following the suggestion by Dawson and Richter69, the combination of inclusive mentoring style and academic resilience was divided into four categories: low inclusive mentoring style-low academic resilience, low inclusive mentoring style-high academic resilience, high inclusive mentoring style-low academic resilience, and high inclusive mentoring style-high academic resilience. A three-way interaction plot was created based on these categories. As shown in Fig. 3, when both inclusive mentoring style and academic resilience are at a high level, the hindrance research stressors do not have a negative impact on doctoral students’ research creativity but have a significant positive impact (simple slope = 0.344, t = 3.984, p = 0.000), while in the other three categories, hindrance research stressors had a negative impact on doctoral students’ research creativity. Additionally, as illustrated in Table 5, the slope is significantly positive in the case of high inclusive mentoring style and high academic resilience, while it is negative in the other three cases, and there is a significant difference between groups, with 95% confidence intervals not including 0. Hypothesis 3 was validated.Figure 3 Three-way interaction between hindrance research stressors, inclusive mentoring style, and academic resilience on research creativity.

Table 5 Comparison of simple slopes for three-way interaction.

	Research creativity		
	Slopes	T-value	P-value		
high inclusive mentoring style, high academic resilience	0.344	3.984***	0.000		
high inclusive mentoring style, low academic resilience	− 0.121	− 1.400	0.162		
low inclusive mentoring style, high academic resilience	− 0.304	− 4.314***	0.000		
low inclusive mentoring style, low academic resilience	− 0.219	− 3.106**	0.002		
Pair of slopes	Slope difference	T-value	P-value	95% Confidence intervals	
(1) and (2)	0.465	3.719***	0.000	[0.220, 0.710]	
(1) and (3)	0.648	7.079***	0.000	[0.469, 0.828]	
(1) and (4)	0.563	4.649***	0.000	[0.326, 0.800]	
(2) and (3)	0.183	1.514	0.131	[-0.054, 0.421]	
(2) and (4)	0.098	1.072	0.284	[-0.081, 0.278]	
(3) and (4)	− 0.085	− 1.129	0.259	[-0.233, 0.063]	
* < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

Discussion

The empirical results indicate that hindrance research stressors have a negative impact on research creativity (β = − 0.215, p < 0.05). These results are consistent with previous studies70. According to the Cognitive Appraisal Theory of Stress, an individual’s evaluation of environmental demands and coping resources plays a vital role in the stress generation process. These evaluations are essential psychological mechanisms linking stressors with emotional and behavioral outcomes72. When doctoral students are confronted with hindrance research stressors, such as limited access to research resources, tense relationships with supervisors, and roles conflicts, their lack of control over these stressors significantly undermines their research self-efficacy36. Subsequently, negative emotions such as research anxiety, tension, helplessness, and loneliness may arise, which will inhibit their passion and desire for academic innovation73. Furthermore, coping with hindrance research stressors depletes individuals’ emotional and cognitive resources, leading doctoral students to enter a state of emotional exhaustion and with insufficient time and energy that should be allocated to creative thinking and generating novel ideas74,75, as doctoral students may feel that it is difficult to overcome this type of stressors no matter how much effort they put in76. In addition, hindrance stressors diminish individuals' sense of control77, leading them to adopt avoidance and emotion-focused coping strategies78, which may hinder doctoral students from fully engaging in research innovation activities.

Then, the findings indicate that supervisors’ inclusive mentoring style can mitigate the negative effect of hindrance research stressors on the research creativity of doctoral students. In face of hindrance research stressors, supervisors’ inclusive mentoring style, as a supportive contextual resource, significantly influences the emotional, cognitive, and motivational development of doctoral students. This is similar to the subtle influence of leadership behavior on employee creativity in the workplace42. Inclusive supervisors excel in cultivating an open, inclusive, and fair research atmosphere and building a supervisor-student relationship based on trust, which further enhances doctoral students’ sense of belonging within the academic community and strengthens their psychological resilience when coping with obstacles and pressure79. Consequently, doctoral students may view hindrance research stressors as less menacing, leading to a reduction in negative research emotions and increased motivation to partake in innovative research endeavors. Furthermore, supportive mentoring from supervisors who are open to new ideas and offer timely feedback can contribute to the development of doctoral students' identity and cognitive flexibility, essential qualities for fostering creativity in research13,25. Additionally, when doctoral students faced with hindrance stressors in their research, the humanistic care and autonomy support provided by inclusive supervisors play a crucial role in boosting their self-assurance and determination to overcome stressors, ultimately leading to a higher level of commitment towards the academic innovation process. This heightened commitment, in turn, facilitates the cultivation of research creativity.

In addition, this study also found that in the face of hindrance research stressors, doctoral students with high academic resilience were found to have higher levels of research creativity when their supervisors provided inclusive mentoring. This finding aligns with previous research indicating that individual creativity is shaped by a complex interplay of task characteristics, situational resources, and individual traits80. Meanwhile, this finding supports the Job Demands-Resources Model, which posits that resources (both external resource and personal resource) can alleviate the negative impact of job demands on individual outcomes20. This moderation effect is particularly pronounced when a combination of resources is available81. Therefore, when faced with hindrance research stressors, doctoral students with high academic resilience, supported by inclusive supervisors' humanistic care and autonomy, demonstrate higher levels of adaptability and perseverance82, and a more positive, optimistic mindset compared to those with low academic resilience83. These positive emotions enhance cognitive flexibility, enabling doctoral students to continuously generate new ideas84, thereby increasing their motivation and confidence to explore the unknown further85, ultimately leading to the development of research creativity. This explains why the effect of hindrance research stressors on research creativity shifts from negative to positive when both situational and personal resources are abundant. On the contrary, the negative effect of hindrance research stressors on research creativity is most pronounced when both inclusive mentoring style and academic resilience are low.

Theoretical contributions

The presence of hindrance research stressors in scientific research has a significant impact on the psychological and behavioral aspects of doctoral students’ research. However, there is limited research specifically exploring the boundary conditions on which these hindrance research stressors affect research creativity. This study aims to address this gap by drawing upon the JD-R model and examine the moderating roles of inclusive mentoring style and academic resilience between the relationship. By doing so, this study will provide important theoretical contributions:

First, this study makes a valuable contribution to the current research on the factors that influence research creativity among doctoral students. It expands upon existing literature by examining the hindrance stressors that doctoral students encounter in their research environment as independent variables. This investigation highlights that the research creativity of doctoral students is not only influenced by mentorship and personal cognition but also by the research environment they are immersed in. Specifically, organizational politics, tense interpersonal relationships, bureaucratic procedures, role ambiguity, unfair treatment, and lack of research resources are identified as obstacles that negatively impact the research creativity of doctoral students. While previous studies have primarily focused on the influence of supervisor behaviors on doctoral students’ research performance, there has been a marked dearth of research on the characteristics of the research environment, especially the hindrance research demands. To address this gap, this study introduces the hindrance research stressors as an antecedent variable of research creativity, which presents a novel perspective and further broadened the theoretical model of creativity.

Second, in the field of organizational research, there has been a predominant focus on investigating the direct relationship between inclusive leadership and creativity. However, this study extends the research by examining inclusive mentoring style as an important contextual resource based on the JD-R theory, and finds that inclusive mentoring from academic supervisors plays a crucial moderating role in mitigating the negative effect of hindrance research stressors on doctoral students’ research creativity. This not only confirms previous studies on the positive influence of supervisors’ inclusive mentoring during the doctoral training process, but also deepens our understanding of the link between hindrance research stressors and research creativity. That is, it is not always the case that hindrance research stressors have a negative impact on research creativity. In a supportive context, this negative effect can be effectively alleviated.

Third, in this study, we also explored the interaction effect of hindrance research stressors, inclusive mentoring style, and academic resilience on the research creativity of doctoral students. This finding highlights the dual moderation of contextual resources and personal traits on individual creativity. While previous studies have acknowledged the moderating role of situational resources or individual traits between stressors and individuals’ cognition and behavior4,5, they don’t take into account the interactive effect of situational resources and personal resources on individuals’ creativity. However, our study aims to address this significant gap by examining how external resource, specifically inclusive mentoring from academic supervisor, and personal resource, such as academic resilience, co-moderate the relationship between hindrance research stressors and doctoral students’ research creativity. In doing so, not only does our study enrich and expand our understanding of the boundary conditions between hindrance stressors and creativity, but it also enriches and expands the application of the JD-R model in the field of higher education.

Practice implications

Based on the aforementioned discussions, this study puts forward the following recommendations for practical application. First, the findings from this study indicate that hindrance research stressors have a detrimental impact on doctoral students’ research creativity. In view of this, it is imperative for doctoral training institutions and supervisors to make concerted efforts in eliminating hindrance research stressors. For instance, internal regulations within research teams should be designed to minimize the occurrence of organizational politics, excessive red tape, role ambiguity or conflicts, and bureaucratic tendencies. By establishing a clear division of research tasks, the perceived hindrance stressors for doctoral students can be eliminated. This not only boosts their confidence in completing research tasks, but also enhances their interest and engagement in research, thereby ultimately leading to an improvement in their overall creativity. Additionally, training institutes should establish a reasonable evaluation system for research achievements, increase the availability of resources for scientific research, and actively establish research teams to promote research cooperation and academic exchanges among doctoral students. This is particularly crucial in addressing the issue of research isolation faced by doctoral students from humanities and social sciences. By encouraging in-depth communication among peers and supervisors, a supportive community can be constructed for doctoral students to foster collaboration and promote excellence in research.

Second, the result of this study suggests that an inclusive mentoring style serve as a crucial contextual resource for doctoral students to maintain their research motivation and passion for innovation. Therefore, it is imperative for supervisors to adopt an inclusive mentoring style as a foundation for fostering a relaxed and autonomous research atmosphere, where doctoral students are encouraged to freely express new views and novel ideas, while also igniting their intrinsic motivation. Specifically, supervisors should encourage doctoral students to initiate and engage in academic discussions and exchanges, as well as share their latest research results, which will relieving the anxiety from hindrance research stressors. Additionally, supervisors should provide timely evaluation and feedback to enhance doctoral students’ sense of self-efficacy in creativity and passion for innovation. Furthermore, supervisors should cultivate a research atmosphere that embraces and learns from mistakes, rather than excluding or fearing them. It is also essential for supervisors to provide emotional support and autonomy support to doctoral students, nurturing a sense of security and self-confidence in their scientific research. By doing so, doctoral students can overcome their fear of making mistakes or experiencing failure, ultimately empowering them to embrace the spirit of innovation.

Finally, the results of this study also highlight the significance of academic resilience as a positive psychological resource. Therefore, it is necessary for universities and supervisors to strengthen the diversified and systematic academic training system, which is a key factor to help doctoral students boost their research self-efficacy and enhance their academic resilience. Specifically, training institutions should provide systematic research training for doctoral students, allowing them to enhance their research skills and increase their research efficacy. Research efficacy is a crucial predictor of doctoral students’ academic resilience59. Moreover, it is crucial for training institutions to establish platforms that foster academic communication and collaboration among doctoral students. This can be achieved by actively encouraging the formation of academic communities and organizing regular academic forums or conferences. Such initiatives will help create a collaborative research environment that fosters mutual support among doctoral students. Furthermore, it is essential for doctoral students to gradually construct their professional identity through interactions with their supervisors, peers, and other scholars. Research indicates a positive correlation between professional identity and psychological resilience. Finally, for doctoral students, they should not consider hindrance stressors as insurmountable challenges, but should instead face various difficulties and stressors in the research context with a positive and optimistic attitude in order to alleviate their negative impact on individuals.

Limitations and future direction

This study contributes to the existing research on the link between research stressors and doctoral students’ research creativity. However, there are several limitations to be addressed. First, all variables in this study are self-assessed by the doctoral students themselves, which may introduce potential biases such as social desirability bias and common method bias. To enhance the rigor and validity of the findings, future research can incorporate more objective measures, such as having supervisors evaluate doctoral students’ research creativity. Second, this study uses a cross-sectional design and data, limiting its ability to establish causality. To further explore the topic, future research can employ longitudinal methods to examine the causal relationship between research stressors and research creativity. Third, this study primarily focuses on investigating the boundary conditions that influence the relationship between hindrance research stressors and the research creativity of doctoral students, but fails to consider the mediating mechanisms between the two. Future research can delve into identifying and exploring the potential mediating variables that exist between hindrance research stressors and research creativity. Overall, by addressing these limitations and incorporating the suggested improvements, future research can offer a more comprehensive understanding of the complex relationship between hindrance research stressors and doctoral students’ research creativity.

Conclusions

Based on the Job Demands-Resources Model, this study investigates the relationship between hindrance research stressors and research creativity among doctoral students in the field of higher education, as well as examines the moderating roles of inclusive mentoring style and academic resilience in the relationship. The results indicate that hindrance research stressors have a negative impact on the research creativity of doctoral students. Moreover, inclusive mentoring style from academic supervisors can significantly mitigate the negative effect of hindrance research stressors on research creativity. Furthermore, this study provides empirical support for the three-way interaction effect of hindrance research stressors, inclusive mentoring style, and academic resilience on doctoral students’ research creativity. These results highlight that doctoral students’ creativity is influenced by the characteristics of the research environment, leadership styles, individual traits, and the interactions among them. Additionally, the findings of this study further validate the value of the Job Demands-Resources Model within the realm of doctoral education. This not only contributes to a better understanding of the intricate relationship between research stressors and research creativity among doctoral students, but also offers valuable theoretical and practical insights for academic researchers and educators.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge all the editors and reviewers for their invaluable contributions to this manuscript. Their constructive feedback and insightful comments have significantly strengthened the quality of this paper.

Author contributions

CL: conceptualization, theoretical direction, interpretation of the statistical analyses and results, and original draft preparation. MW: methodology, validation, writing—review & editing. XG: theoretical direction and supervision. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Funding

Funding was provided by Hunan Provincial Education Science Planning Base Project of China (Grant no. XJK23AJD045).

Data availability

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Liu F Qu S Fan Y Chen F He B Scientific creativity and innovation ability and its determinants among medical postgraduate students in fujian province of china: A cross sectional study Bmc Med. Educ. 2023 23 444 456 10.1186/s12909-023-04408-9 37328847
Liu, F., Qu, S., Fan, Y., Chen, F. & He, B. Scientific creativity and innovation ability and its determinants among medical postgraduate students in fujian province of china: A cross sectional study. Bmc Med. Educ. 23, 444–456 (2023).37328847 10.1186/s12909-023-04408-9
2. Yuan B Yan J Analyses of present condition of the graduates' innovative capability and its influencing factors: Based on three large-scale quaity surveys of graduate education in China Peking Univ. Educ. Rev. 2009 7 12 20
Yuan, B. & Yan, J. Analyses of present condition of the graduates’ innovative capability and its influencing factors: Based on three large-scale quaity surveys of graduate education in China. Peking Univ. Educ. Rev. 7, 12–20 (2009).
3. Su H Bai L Zhang J On the influence of supervisors' paternalistic guidance style on postgraduates' creative behaviors Acad. Degrees Grad. Educ. 2021 38 57 66
Su, H., Bai, L. & Zhang, J. On the influence of supervisors’ paternalistic guidance style on postgraduates’ creative behaviors. Acad. Degrees Grad. Educ. 38, 57–66 (2021).
4. Breslin D Group creativity and the time of the day Stud. Higher Educ. 2019 44 1103 1118 10.1080/03075079.2017.1413082
Breslin, D. Group creativity and the time of the day. Stud. Higher Educ. 44, 1103–1118 (2019).10.1080/03075079.2017.1413082
5. Brodin EM The stifling silence around scholarly creativity in doctoral education: Experiences of students and supervisors in four disciplines Higher Educ. 2018 75 655 673 10.1007/s10734-017-0168-3
Brodin, E. M. The stifling silence around scholarly creativity in doctoral education: Experiences of students and supervisors in four disciplines. Higher Educ. 75, 655–673 (2018).10.1007/s10734-017-0168-3
6. Whitelock D Faulkner D Miell D Promoting creativity in PhD supervision: Tensions and dilemmas Think. Skills Creat. 2008 3 143 153 10.1016/j.tsc.2008.04.001
Whitelock, D., Faulkner, D. & Miell, D. Promoting creativity in PhD supervision: Tensions and dilemmas. Think. Skills Creat. 3, 143–153 (2008).10.1016/j.tsc.2008.04.001
7. Zhang S Sun Y Li W Influence of supportive guiding style on innovation ability of college graduate students: The chain mediating effect of team atmosphere and learning engagement China J. Health Psychol. 2022 30 448 452
Zhang, S., Sun, Y. & Li, W. Influence of supportive guiding style on innovation ability of college graduate students: The chain mediating effect of team atmosphere and learning engagement. China J. Health Psychol. 30, 448–452 (2022).
8. Zhang B Li X Zhang Q A study on the impact of paternalistic tutor style on postgraduate' scientific research creativity: The role of academic passion and scientific research self-efficacy J. Technol. Econ. 2021 40 177 188
Zhang, B., Li, X. & Zhang, Q. A study on the impact of paternalistic tutor style on postgraduate’ scientific research creativity: The role of academic passion and scientific research self-efficacy. J. Technol. Econ. 40, 177–188 (2021).
9. Zhao D Wu J Gu J Can high leader–member exchange spark low creativity among graduate students? The role of stress and personal initiative Current Psychol. 2021 40 4488 4499 10.1007/s12144-019-00389-5
Zhao, D., Wu, J. & Gu, J. Can high leader–member exchange spark low creativity among graduate students? The role of stress and personal initiative. Current Psychol. 40, 4488–4499 (2021).10.1007/s12144-019-00389-5
10. Yin K Xu Y Song H Xing L Research experiences, error management climate and enhancement of research creativity Sci. Res. Manag. 2018 39 169 176
Yin, K., Xu, Y., Song, H. & Xing, L. Research experiences, error management climate and enhancement of research creativity. Sci. Res. Manag. 39, 169–176 (2018).
11. Wu D Ma Y Yang Y The influnce of supervisor-student relationship and peer learning community on doctoral students' creativity Acad. Degrees Grad. Educ. 2019 35 55 60
Wu, D., Ma, Y. & Yang, Y. The influnce of supervisor-student relationship and peer learning community on doctoral students’ creativity. Acad. Degrees Grad. Educ. 35, 55–60 (2019).
12. Lv H Luo Y The impact of innovative environment and features on PhD students' creativity: Based on the empirical analysis of twelve universities in Jiangsu J. Ntl. Acad. Educ. Adm. 2013 14 78 85
Lv, H. & Luo, Y. The impact of innovative environment and features on PhD students’ creativity: Based on the empirical analysis of twelve universities in Jiangsu. J. Ntl. Acad. Educ. Adm. 14, 78–85 (2013).
13. Yin K Sun J Xing L Yang X The effect of graduate students' research role identification on research creavitity: Role of mentor's inlcusive leadership and error management culture Psychol. Dev. Educ. 2016 32 557 564
Yin, K., Sun, J., Xing, L. & Yang, X. The effect of graduate students’ research role identification on research creavitity: Role of mentor’s inlcusive leadership and error management culture. Psychol. Dev. Educ. 32, 557–564 (2016).
14. Wu Y Wei Y Shi Y Li M The influence of tutor's guidance style on the innovative ability of graduate students with different levels of initiaitve: An investigation of nine universities Fudan Educ. Forum. 2018 16 74 79
Wu, Y., Wei, Y., Shi, Y. & Li, M. The influence of tutor’s guidance style on the innovative ability of graduate students with different levels of initiaitve: An investigation of nine universities. Fudan Educ. Forum. 16, 74–79 (2018).
15. Kang S Choi SB Ullah SME Proactive personality and creative performance: Mediating roles of creative self-efficacy and moderated mediation role of psychological safety Sustainability. 2021 13 12517 12531 10.3390/su132212517
Kang, S., Choi, S. B. & Ullah, S. M. E. Proactive personality and creative performance: Mediating roles of creative self-efficacy and moderated mediation role of psychological safety. Sustainability. 13, 12517–12531 (2021).10.3390/su132212517
16. McCauley KD Hinojosa AS Applying the challenge-hindrance stressor framework to doctoral education J. Manag. Educ. 2020 44 490 507
McCauley, K. D. & Hinojosa, A. S. Applying the challenge-hindrance stressor framework to doctoral education. J. Manag. Educ. 44, 490–507 (2020).
17. He P Gong F Yan S Doctoral students' knowledge anxiety in multidimensional perspective and resolution srategy J. Grad. Educ. 2020 34 22 26
He, P., Gong, F. & Yan, S. Doctoral students’ knowledge anxiety in multidimensional perspective and resolution srategy. J. Grad. Educ. 34, 22–26 (2020).
18. Schaufeli WB Bakker AB Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study J. Organ. Behav. 2004 25 293 315 10.1002/job.248
Schaufeli, W. B. & Bakker, A. B. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. J. Organ. Behav. 25, 293–315 (2004).10.1002/job.248
19. Bakker AB Demerouti E The job demands-resources model: State of the art J. Manag. Psychol. 2007 22 309 328 10.1108/02683940710733115
Bakker, A. B. & Demerouti, E. The job demands-resources model: State of the art. J. Manag. Psychol. 22, 309–328 (2007).10.1108/02683940710733115
20. Bakker AB Hakanen JJ Demerouti E Xanthopoulou D Job resources boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high J. Educ. Psychol. 2007 99 274 284 10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.274
Bakker, A. B., Hakanen, J. J., Demerouti, E. & Xanthopoulou, D. Job resources boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. J. Educ. Psychol. 99, 274–284 (2007).10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.274
21. Bakker AB Demerouti E Verbeke W Using the job demands-resources model to predict burnout and performance Hum. Resour. Manag. 2004 43 83 104 10.1002/hrm.20004
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E. & Verbeke, W. Using the job demands-resources model to predict burnout and performance. Hum. Resour. Manag. 43, 83–104 (2004).10.1002/hrm.20004
22. Bakker AB Demerouti E Euwema MC Job resources buffer the impact of job demands on burnout J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2005 10 170 180 10.1037/1076-8998.10.2.170 15826226
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E. & Euwema, M. C. Job resources buffer the impact of job demands on burnout. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 10, 170–180 (2005).15826226 10.1037/1076-8998.10.2.170
23. Sun C Exploring the effect of perceived teacher support on multiple creativity tasks: Based on the expectancy–Value model of achievement motivation J. Creat. Behav. 2021 55 15 24 10.1002/jocb.430
Sun, C. et al. Exploring the effect of perceived teacher support on multiple creativity tasks: Based on the expectancy–Value model of achievement motivation. J. Creat. Behav. 55, 15–24 (2021).10.1002/jocb.430
24. Schneijderberg C Supervision practices of doctoral education and training Aliss Q. 2021 46 1285 1295
Schneijderberg, C. Supervision practices of doctoral education and training. Aliss Q. 46, 1285–1295 (2021).
25. Zhang J Tang J Xie K Zhang Y The influence of inclusive supervisor on graduate students' research creativity: The mediating effect of cognitive flexibility and the moderating effect of openness to experience Psychol. Res. 2023 16 354 363
Zhang, J., Tang, J., Xie, K. & Zhang, Y. The influence of inclusive supervisor on graduate students’ research creativity: The mediating effect of cognitive flexibility and the moderating effect of openness to experience. Psychol. Res. 16, 354–363 (2023).
26. Grover SL Roche M Pick D Teo STT Newton CJ Psychological capital as a personal resource in the JD-R model Pers. Rev. 2018 47 968 984 10.1108/PR-08-2016-0213
Grover, S. L., Roche, M., Pick, D., Teo, S. T. T. & Newton, C. J. Psychological capital as a personal resource in the JD-R model. Pers. Rev. 47, 968–984 (2018).10.1108/PR-08-2016-0213
27. Demerouti E Schaufeli W Bakker A Xanthopoulou D The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model Int. J. Stress Manag. 2007 14 121 141 10.1037/1072-5245.14.2.121
Demerouti, E., Schaufeli, W., Bakker, A. & Xanthopoulou, D. The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model. Int. J. Stress Manag. 14, 121–141 (2007).10.1037/1072-5245.14.2.121
28. Hon AHY Enhancing employee creativity in the Chinese context the mediating role of employee self-concordance Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2011 30 375 384 10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.06.002
Hon, A. H. Y. Enhancing employee creativity in the Chinese context the mediating role of employee self-concordance. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 30, 375–384 (2011).10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.06.002
29. Amabile TM Conti R Coon H Lazenby J Herron M Assessing the work environment for creativity Acad. Manag. J. 1996 39 1154 1184 10.2307/256995
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J. & Herron, M. Assessing the work environment for creativity. Acad. Manag. J. 39, 1154–1184 (1996).10.2307/256995
30. Pearsall MJ Ellis APJ Stein JH Coping with challenge and hindrance stressors in teams: Behavioral, cognitive, and affective outcomes Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. Process. 2009 109 18 28 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.02.002
Pearsall, M. J., Ellis, A. P. J. & Stein, J. H. Coping with challenge and hindrance stressors in teams: Behavioral, cognitive, and affective outcomes. Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. Process. 109, 18–28 (2009).10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.02.002
31. Gu J Chang Q Research on the relationship between doctoral students' stressors and research performance High. Educ. Explor. 2021 36 40 46
Gu, J. & Chang, Q. Research on the relationship between doctoral students’ stressors and research performance. High. Educ. Explor. 36, 40–46 (2021).
32. Yang Y Li X The impact of challenge and hindrance stressors on thriving at work double mediation based on affect and motivation Front. Psychol. 2021 12 613871 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.613871 33584477
Yang, Y. & Li, X. The impact of challenge and hindrance stressors on thriving at work double mediation based on affect and motivation. Front. Psychol. 12, 613871 (2021).33584477 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.613871
33. Zainab B Jan JA Sharif I Anwar F Haq IU Hindrance stressors and job outcomes the moderating role of political skills J. Employ. Couns. 2021 58 98 118 10.1002/joec.12168
Zainab, B., Jan, J. A., Sharif, I., Anwar, F. & Haq, I. U. Hindrance stressors and job outcomes the moderating role of political skills. J. Employ. Couns. 58, 98–118 (2021).10.1002/joec.12168
34. Travis J Kaszycki A Geden M Bunde J Some stress is good stress: The challenge-hindrance framework, academic self-efficacy, and academic outcomes J. Educ. Psychol. 2020 112 1632 1643 10.1037/edu0000478
Travis, J., Kaszycki, A., Geden, M. & Bunde, J. Some stress is good stress: The challenge-hindrance framework, academic self-efficacy, and academic outcomes. J. Educ. Psychol. 112, 1632–1643 (2020).10.1037/edu0000478
35. Yao H Yu Q Graduate student challenge-hindrance scientific research stress and creativity mediating effect of creative self-efficacy J. Psychol. Afr. 2023 33 448 454 10.1080/14330237.2023.2246277
Yao, H. & Yu, Q. Graduate student challenge-hindrance scientific research stress and creativity mediating effect of creative self-efficacy. J. Psychol. Afr. 33, 448–454 (2023).10.1080/14330237.2023.2246277
36. Yao H Ma L The influence of challenge-obstacle scienfic research stress on postgraduate psychological anxiety: The mediating role of achievement motivation and self-efficacy China Higher Educ. Res. 2021 36 79 85
Yao, H. & Ma, L. The influence of challenge-obstacle scienfic research stress on postgraduate psychological anxiety: The mediating role of achievement motivation and self-efficacy. China Higher Educ. Res. 36, 79–85 (2021).
37. Peng Y Zhang W Xu X Matthews R Jex S When do work stressors lead to innovative performance an examination of the moderating effects of learning goal orientation and job autonomy Int. J. Stress Manag. 2019 26 250 260 10.1037/str0000109
Peng, Y., Zhang, W., Xu, X., Matthews, R. & Jex, S. When do work stressors lead to innovative performance an examination of the moderating effects of learning goal orientation and job autonomy. Int. J. Stress Manag. 26, 250–260 (2019).10.1037/str0000109
38. Teixeira D Cid L Monteiro D Lemelin E Rodrigues F Life satisfaction of paralympians: The role of needs satisfaction and passion Int. J. Sports Sci. Coach. 2022 17 510 518 10.1177/17479541211036224
Teixeira, D., Cid, L., Monteiro, D., Lemelin, E. & Rodrigues, F. Life satisfaction of paralympians: The role of needs satisfaction and passion. Int. J. Sports Sci. Coach. 17, 510–518 (2022).10.1177/17479541211036224
39. Wollast R Facing the dropout crisis among phd candidates: The role of supervisor support in emotional well-being and intended doctoral persistence among men and women Stud. Higher Educ. 2023 48 813 828 10.1080/03075079.2023.2172151
Wollast, R. et al. Facing the dropout crisis among phd candidates: The role of supervisor support in emotional well-being and intended doctoral persistence among men and women. Stud. Higher Educ. 48, 813–828 (2023).10.1080/03075079.2023.2172151
40. Zhang C Yu W Yao Q On the influence of supervisors' autonomous support on innovative behaviors of engineering postgraduates Acad. Degrees Grad. Educ. 2022 38 42 48
Zhang, C., Yu, W. & Yao, Q. On the influence of supervisors’ autonomous support on innovative behaviors of engineering postgraduates. Acad. Degrees Grad. Educ. 38, 42–48 (2022).
41. Carmeli A Reiter-Palmon R Ziv E Inclusive leadership and employee involvement in creative tasks in the workplace: The mediating role of psychological safety Creat. Res. J. 2010 22 250 260 10.1080/10400419.2010.504654
Carmeli, A., Reiter-Palmon, R. & Ziv, E. Inclusive leadership and employee involvement in creative tasks in the workplace: The mediating role of psychological safety. Creat. Res. J. 22, 250–260 (2010).10.1080/10400419.2010.504654
42. Ul Haque A Abdullah I Zaffar MA Javed B Rubab U Inclusive leadership and innovative work behavior: The role of psychological empowerment J. Manag. Organ. 2019 25 554 571
Ul Haque, A., Abdullah, I., Zaffar, M. A., Javed, B. & Rubab, U. Inclusive leadership and innovative work behavior: The role of psychological empowerment. J. Manag. Organ. 25, 554–571 (2019).
43. Yin K Sun J Xing L Yang X The effect of graduate students' research role identification on research creativity: Roles of mentor's inclusive leadership and error management culture Psychol. Dev. Educ. 2016 32 557 564
Yin, K., Sun, J., Xing, L. & Yang, X. The effect of graduate students’ research role identification on research creativity: Roles of mentor’s inclusive leadership and error management culture. Psychol. Dev. Educ. 32, 557–564 (2016).
44. Wang H Wang L Chen X The influence of inclusive mentor style on postgraduate students' innovation behavior Forum Contemp. Educ. 2021 19 66 74
Wang, H., Wang, L. & Chen, X. The influence of inclusive mentor style on postgraduate students’ innovation behavior. Forum Contemp. Educ. 19, 66–74 (2021).
45. De Spiegelaere S Van Gyes G Van Hootegem G Not all autonomy is the same. Different dimensions of job autonomy and their relation to work engagement and innovative work behavior Hum. Factor. Ergon. Man. 2016 26 515 527 10.1002/hfm.20666
De Spiegelaere, S., Van Gyes, G. & Van Hootegem, G. Not all autonomy is the same. Different dimensions of job autonomy and their relation to work engagement and innovative work behavior. Hum. Factor. Ergon. Man. 26, 515–527 (2016).10.1002/hfm.20666
46. Amabile TM A model of creativity and innovation in organizations Res. Organ. Behav. 1988 10 123 167
Amabile, T. M. A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Res. Organ. Behav. 10, 123–167 (1988).
47. Ma L Yao H Hou J Exploring the relationship between supervisor support and anxiety of graduate students in china: The mediating role of scientific research efficacy Asia-Pac. Educ. Res. 2023 32 1 9
Ma, L., Yao, H. & Hou, J. Exploring the relationship between supervisor support and anxiety of graduate students in china: The mediating role of scientific research efficacy. Asia-Pac. Educ. Res. 32, 1–9 (2023).
48. Xiao J Han X Xu Q Liu Z Academic atmosphere and graduate students' innovation ability: The role of scientific research self-efficacy and scientific engagement Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 2023 37 1 18
Xiao, J., Han, X., Xu, Q. & Liu, Z. Academic atmosphere and graduate students’ innovation ability: The role of scientific research self-efficacy and scientific engagement. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 37, 1–18 (2023).
49. Moriña A Inclusive education in higher education: Challenges and opportunities Eur. J. Spec. Needs Educ. 2017 32 3 17 10.1080/08856257.2016.1254964
Moriña, A. Inclusive education in higher education: Challenges and opportunities. Eur. J. Spec. Needs Educ. 32, 3–17 (2017).10.1080/08856257.2016.1254964
50. Randel AE Inclusive leadership: Realizing positive outcomes through belongingness and being valued for uniqueness Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2018 28 190 203
Randel, A. E. et al. Inclusive leadership: Realizing positive outcomes through belongingness and being valued for uniqueness. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 28, 190–203 (2018).
51. Vallerand RJ Deci and Ryan's self-determination theory: A view from the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation Psychol. Inq. 2000 11 312 318
Vallerand, R. J. Deci and Ryan’s self-determination theory: A view from the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Psychol. Inq. 11, 312–318 (2000).
52. Manyena SB The concept of resilience revisited Disasters. 2006 30 434 450 10.1111/j.0361-3666.2006.00331.x
Manyena, S. B. The concept of resilience revisited. Disasters. 30, 434–450 (2006).10.1111/j.0361-3666.2006.00331.x
53. Avey JB Norman SM Avolio BJ Luthans F Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction Per. Psychol. 2007 60 541 572 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00083.x
Avey, J. B., Norman, S. M., Avolio, B. J. & Luthans, F. Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Per. Psychol. 60, 541–572 (2007).10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00083.x
54. Rutter M Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms Am. J. Orthopsychiatr. 1987 57 316 331 10.1111/j.1939-0025.1987.tb03541.x
Rutter, M. Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. Am. J. Orthopsychiatr. 57, 316–331 (1987).10.1111/j.1939-0025.1987.tb03541.x
55. Kim C Choi S Yoo I Kim D Sung Y The moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between academic stress and school adjustment in Korean students Front. Psychol. 2023 13 8193 8205
Kim, C., Choi, S., Yoo, I., Kim, D. & Sung, Y. The moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between academic stress and school adjustment in Korean students. Front. Psychol. 13, 8193–8205 (2023).
56. Castro V Garcia EE Cavazos J Jr Castro AY The road to doctoral success and beyond Int. J. Dr. Stud. 2011 6 51 77
Castro, V., Garcia, E. E., Cavazos, J. Jr. & Castro, A. Y. The road to doctoral success and beyond. Int. J. Dr. Stud. 6, 51–77 (2011).
57. Fredrickson BL Barrett LF Tugade MM Psychological resilience and positive emotional granularity: Examining the benefits of positive emotions on coping and health J. Personal. 2004 72 1161 1190 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00294.x
Fredrickson, B. L., Barrett, L. F. & Tugade, M. M. Psychological resilience and positive emotional granularity: Examining the benefits of positive emotions on coping and health. J. Personal. 72, 1161–1190 (2004).10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00294.x
58. O'Malley P Resilient subjects: Uncertainty, warfare and liberalism Econ. Soc. 2010 39 488 509 10.1080/03085147.2010.510681
O’Malley, P. Resilient subjects: Uncertainty, warfare and liberalism. Econ. Soc. 39, 488–509 (2010).10.1080/03085147.2010.510681
59. Hu W Liu C Yang Y Xiang S Li Y The influence of resilience on social creativity chain mediation effects of sense of humor and positive mood Psychol. Sch. 2022 59 1609 1622 10.1002/pits.22718
Hu, W., Liu, C., Yang, Y., Xiang, S. & Li, Y. The influence of resilience on social creativity chain mediation effects of sense of humor and positive mood. Psychol. Sch. 59, 1609–1622 (2022).10.1002/pits.22718
60. Bonanno G Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events? Am. Psychol. 2004 59 20 28 10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.20 14736317
Bonanno, G. Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events?. Am. Psychol. 59, 20–28 (2004).14736317 10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.20
61. Chen S Westman M Hobfoll SE The commerce and crossover of resources: Resource conservation in the service of resilience Stress Health. 2015 31 95 105 10.1002/smi.2574 25873421
Chen, S., Westman, M. & Hobfoll, S. E. The commerce and crossover of resources: Resource conservation in the service of resilience. Stress Health. 31, 95–105 (2015).25873421 10.1002/smi.2574
62. Li J Yang G Yan C Xu Y Zhang J Predictive effect of resilience on self-efficacy during the covid-19 pandemic: The moderating role of creativity Front. Psychiatry. 2022 13 1066759 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1066759 36620651
Li, J., Yang, G., Yan, C., Xu, Y. & Zhang, J. Predictive effect of resilience on self-efficacy during the covid-19 pandemic: The moderating role of creativity. Front. Psychiatry. 13, 1066759 (2022).36620651 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1066759
63. Luthans F Youssef CM Positive organizational behavior in the workplace: The impact of hope, optimism, and resilience J. Manag. 2007 33 774 800
Luthans, F. & Youssef, C. M. Positive organizational behavior in the workplace: The impact of hope, optimism, and resilience. J. Manag. 33, 774–800 (2007).
64. Cheng X Qi X Resilient response or escape: Academic dilemmas and responses of deferred PhD students Acad. Degrees Grad. Educ. 2023 39 54 62
Cheng, X. & Qi, X. Resilient response or escape: Academic dilemmas and responses of deferred PhD students. Acad. Degrees Grad. Educ. 39, 54–62 (2023).
65. Tadić M Bakker AB Oerlemans WGM Challenge versus hindrance job demands and well-being: A diary study on the moderating role of job resources J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2015 88 702 725 10.1111/joop.12094
Tadić, M., Bakker, A. B. & Oerlemans, W. G. M. Challenge versus hindrance job demands and well-being: A diary study on the moderating role of job resources. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 88, 702–725 (2015).10.1111/joop.12094
66. Meng Y Luo C The relationship between academic supervisor leadership and creativity of postgraduates: Linear or curvilinear? Fudan Educ. Forum. 2015 13 27 33
Meng, Y. & Luo, C. The relationship between academic supervisor leadership and creativity of postgraduates: Linear or curvilinear?. Fudan Educ. Forum. 13, 27–33 (2015).
67. Cavanaugh MA Boswell WR Roehling JW Boudreau JW An empirical examination of self-reported work stress among U.S. managers J. Appl. Psychol. 2000 85 65 74 10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.65 10740957
Cavanaugh, M. A., Boswell, W. R., Roehling, J. W. & Boudreau, J. W. An empirical examination of self-reported work stress among U.S. managers. J. Appl. Psychol. 85, 65–74 (2000).10740957 10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.65
68. Li Z Dai Y Han X Li R Impact of challenge-hindrance scientific stress on knowing sharing behavior Chin. J. Clin. Psychol.. 2018 26 363 366
Li, Z., Dai, Y., Han, X. & Li, R. Impact of challenge-hindrance scientific stress on knowing sharing behavior. Chin. J. Clin. Psychol.. 26, 363–366 (2018).
69. Dawson JF Richter AW Probing three-way interactions in moderated multiple regression: Development and application of a slope difference test J. Appl. Psychol. 2006 91 917 926 10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.917 16834514
Dawson, J. F. & Richter, A. W. Probing three-way interactions in moderated multiple regression: Development and application of a slope difference test. J. Appl. Psychol. 91, 917–926 (2006).16834514 10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.917
70. Montani F Courcy F Vandenberghe C Innovating under stress: The role of commitment and leader-member exchange J. Bus. Res. 2017 77 1 13 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.024
Montani, F., Courcy, F. & Vandenberghe, C. Innovating under stress: The role of commitment and leader-member exchange. J. Bus. Res. 77, 1–13 (2017).10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.024
71. Preacher KJ Curran PJ Bauer DJ Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis J. Educ. Behav. Stat. 2006 31 437 448 10.3102/10769986031004437
Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J. & Bauer, D. J. Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. J. Educ. Behav. Stat. 31, 437–448 (2006).10.3102/10769986031004437
72. Folkman S Lazarus RS Transactional theory and research on emotions and coping Eur. J. Personal. 1987 1 141 169 10.1002/per.2410010304
Folkman, S. & Lazarus, R. S. Transactional theory and research on emotions and coping. Eur. J. Personal. 1, 141–169 (1987).10.1002/per.2410010304
73. Liu W Li J Zhou Q Cognitive and social mechanisms: The role of emotions in creativity through work-based learning from a functionalist perspective Chin. Manag. Stud. 2022 16 334 355 10.1108/CMS-02-2020-0049
Liu, W., Li, J. & Zhou, Q. Cognitive and social mechanisms: The role of emotions in creativity through work-based learning from a functionalist perspective. Chin. Manag. Stud. 16, 334–355 (2022).10.1108/CMS-02-2020-0049
74. Liu B Yang J Dou G Yang L Yuan Y Where there is pressure, there is motivation? The impact of challenge-hindrance stressors on employees' innovation performance Front. Psychol. 2022 13 1020764 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1020764 36389571
Liu, B., Yang, J., Dou, G., Yang, L. & Yuan, Y. Where there is pressure, there is motivation? The impact of challenge-hindrance stressors on employees’ innovation performance. Front. Psychol. 13, 1020764 (2022).36389571 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1020764
75. Zhou B Li Y Hai M Wang W Niu B Challenge-hindrance stressors and cyberloafing: A perspective of resource conservation versus resource acquisition Current Psychol. 2023 42 1172 1181 10.1007/s12144-021-01505-0
Zhou, B., Li, Y., Hai, M., Wang, W. & Niu, B. Challenge-hindrance stressors and cyberloafing: A perspective of resource conservation versus resource acquisition. Current Psychol. 42, 1172–1181 (2023).10.1007/s12144-021-01505-0
76. Byron K Khazanchi S Nazarian D The relationship between stressors and creativity: A meta-analysis examining competing theoretical models J. Appl. Psychol. 2010 95 201 212 10.1037/a0017868 20085417
Byron, K., Khazanchi, S. & Nazarian, D. The relationship between stressors and creativity: A meta-analysis examining competing theoretical models. J. Appl. Psychol. 95, 201–212 (2010).20085417 10.1037/a0017868
77. Fugate M Kinicki AJ Prussia GE Employee coping with organizational change: An examination of alternative theoretical perspectives and models Pers. Psychol. 2008 61 1 36 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00104.x
Fugate, M., Kinicki, A. J. & Prussia, G. E. Employee coping with organizational change: An examination of alternative theoretical perspectives and models. Pers. Psychol. 61, 1–36 (2008).10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00104.x
78. Li F Chen T Lai X How does a reward for creativity program benefit or frustrate employee creative performance? The perspective of transactional model of stress and coping Group Organ. Manag. 2018 43 138 175 10.1177/1059601116688612
Li, F., Chen, T. & Lai, X. How does a reward for creativity program benefit or frustrate employee creative performance? The perspective of transactional model of stress and coping. Group Organ. Manag. 43, 138–175 (2018).10.1177/1059601116688612
79. Li X Peng P Does inclusive leadership foster employee psychological resilience? The role of perceived insider status and supportive organizational climate Front. Psychol. 2023 14 1127780 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1127780 37008881
Li, X. & Peng, P. Does inclusive leadership foster employee psychological resilience? The role of perceived insider status and supportive organizational climate. Front. Psychol. 14, 1127780 (2023).37008881 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1127780
80. Khazanchi S Nazarian D Byron K The relationship between stressors and creativity: A meta-analysis examining competing theoretical models J. Appl. Psychol. 2010 95 201 212 10.1037/a0017868 20085417
Khazanchi, S., Nazarian, D. & Byron, K. The relationship between stressors and creativity: A meta-analysis examining competing theoretical models. J. Appl. Psychol. 95, 201–212 (2010).20085417 10.1037/a0017868
81. Du Y Zhang L Zhang Z Resources matter: Combined influence of job demands and job control on creative process engagement J. Psychol. 2019 153 141 160 10.1080/00223980.2018.1503588 30625034
Du, Y., Zhang, L. & Zhang, Z. Resources matter: Combined influence of job demands and job control on creative process engagement. J. Psychol. 153, 141–160 (2019).30625034 10.1080/00223980.2018.1503588
82. Campbell-Sills L Cohan SL Stein MB Relationship of resilience to personality, coping, and psychiatric symptoms in young adults Behav. Res. Ther. 2006 44 585 599 10.1016/j.brat.2005.05.001 15998508
Campbell-Sills, L., Cohan, S. L. & Stein, M. B. Relationship of resilience to personality, coping, and psychiatric symptoms in young adults. Behav. Res. Ther. 44, 585–599 (2006).15998508 10.1016/j.brat.2005.05.001
83. Marsh HW Martin AJ Academic resilience and its psychological and educational correlates: A construct validity approach Psychol. Sch. 2006 43 267 281 10.1002/pits.20149
Marsh, H. W. & Martin, A. J. Academic resilience and its psychological and educational correlates: A construct validity approach. Psychol. Sch. 43, 267–281 (2006).10.1002/pits.20149
84. Liu W Effects of positive mood and job complexity on employee creativity and performance Soc. Behav. Personal. 2016 44 865 880 10.2224/sbp.2016.44.5.865
Liu, W. Effects of positive mood and job complexity on employee creativity and performance. Soc. Behav. Personal. 44, 865–880 (2016).10.2224/sbp.2016.44.5.865
85. Wang Y Wang Y Li Y Zhang M Song H The impact of resilience on anxiety and depression among grass-roots civil servants in China Bmc Public Health. 2021 21 1 10 33388037
Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Li, Y., Zhang, M. & Song, H. The impact of resilience on anxiety and depression among grass-roots civil servants in China. Bmc Public Health. 21, 1–10 (2021).33388037
