Workspace Disorder Does Not Influence Creativity and Executive Functions.

Recent research by Vohs et al. (2013) garnered media attention after reporting that disordered environments increase creativity. The present research was designed to conceptually replicate and extend this finding by exploring the effect of workspace disorder on creativity. Participants were randomly assigned to work at a neatly organized (Order condition) or a messy desk (Disorder condition), where they completed several paper-and-pencil and computerized tasks, including two validated creativity measures (Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults; ATTA; Goff and Torrance, 2002; Alternative Uses Task; adapted from Guilford, 1967). We also included several executive control measures from the NIH EXAMINER (Kramer, 2011), to explore the role of reduced top-down control in explaining a possible creativity-disorder connection. Independent-samples t-tests failed to replicate any significant difference in creativity between the Order and Disorder conditions. Furthermore, the conditions did not differentially affect executive control. Despite implementing an experimental setup similar to the one in Vohs et al. (2013), including a larger sample size, and adopting multiple measures of the constructs of interest, we did not find any effect of workspace clutter on cognitive performance. At this stage, the relationship between disorder and cognition seems elusive and does not warrant the claims it generated in the popular press.

Videotaped interrogations and confessions: does a dual-camera approach yield unbiased and accurate evaluations?

Although an equal-focus camera perspective-suspect and interrogator each displayed in profile-produces relatively unbiased assessments of videotaped interrogations-confessions, many in law enforcement may consider it less than satisfactory because a full-face view of the suspect is precluded and thus potentially important information revealed in his or her expressions may be unavailable for fact finders' consideration. The present research investigated whether a dual-camera approach, wherein the full faces of both the suspect and interrogator are presented in a split-screen format simultaneously, is a viable alternative to an equal-focus format. Experiment 1 in fact demonstrated that the dual-camera approach does produce relatively unbiased assessments of voluntariness and guilt. However, Experiment 2 revealed that the dual-camera approach was one of the poorest presentation formats in terms of its impact on the ability to accurately distinguish between true and false confessions. Policy recommendations based on the present and previous research are presented.