123 Creating A Creative State of Mind TABLE 3 Descriptive Statistics and Within-Person Correlations, Study 2 Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 1. PVM 4.49 1.18 - 2. Mindful attention 5.37 1.39 .21** - 3. Creative work performance (supervisor) 4.95 1.04 .16* .22** - 4. Workload (control) 4.48 1.84 .32 .13* .11 - 5. Job autonomy (control) 5.20 1.36 .31** .23** .06 -.07 - Note. PVM = proactive vitality management. *p < .05, **p < .01 Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analyses Similar to Study 1, we conducted MCFAs to examine the measurement model and check for construct validity and independence of our variables, as well as to test thoroughly whether we could empirically distinguish the predictor in our model (proactive vitality management) from the mediator (mindfulness). We modeled both the within- and between-person covariance matrices simultaneously and included latent factors for proactive vitality management (eight items), mindfulness (five items), and creative work performance (five items). The fit of the multilevel model in which all items of the variables in our model loaded on their respective latent factors was reasonable (CFI = .91, TLI = .89, RMSEA = .05, SRMR within = .08, SRMR between = .13). Furthermore, all factors had significant factor loadings (p < .001). In addition, this model fit the data significantly better than an alternative model in which the items of proactive vitality management and mindfulness loaded on one factor (Δχ² = 153.56, Δdf = 4, p < .001). Overall, these results show that besides theoretically, proactive vitality management can also be distinguished from daily mindfulness empirically. Hypotheses Testing Hypothesis 1 stated that daily proactive vitality management is positively related to daily states of mindfulness. Results of the multilevel analysis were in support of this hypothesis (γ = .42, SE = .08, p < .01). Hypothesis 2 stated that daily mindfulness is positively related to daily creative work performance. In support of this hypothesis, the multilevel results showed a positive relationship between daily mindfulness and creative work performance as assessed by supervisors (γ = .17, SE = .08, p < .05; Table 4). 5
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw