——_ Figure 1: Interactions and outcomes framework - adapted from (Schneck, 2011) Based on their analysis, Said-Metwaly et al. (2017) suggested that creativity is mostly defined and measured through four approaches: process, person, product, and press (environment or climate). These turn out to be part of the interactions and outcomes framework developed by Schneck (2011)’s while researching creativity and leadership in an organisational setting. Figure 1 represents a modified model for this research. This research assessed how students use smartphones to enhance their creativity from various points of view. Students can use their smartphones to interact with each other, and access and disseminate information. The wide access to information exposes them to a range of creative possibilities illustrated rate by the model in Figure 1. The questionnaire predominantly comprised close-ended questions supplemented by two open- ended questions to limit the respondent to the available options while open-ended questions allowed the respondents to express their views without being limited to a range of options. The responses were rated on the Likert scale: (1) Strongly agree, (2) Agree, (3) Somewhat agree, (4) Neither agree nor disagree, (5) Somewhat disagree (6) Disagree (7) Strongly disagree. The This study targeted university students to collect primary data to study the phenomena under investigation. The sample was randomly selected among students at one South African university. The researcher used an online questionnaire, designed using Qualtrics software. As a prerequisite of any quantitative analysis, validity and reliability tests were performed. The KMO and Bartler’s tests were used to determine if the data collected was sufficient as shown in Table 4. In addition to this, Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity reflected a chi-square of 2631.553 at df = 1275 and a significance level of 0.000 which is less than 0.001 (p < .001). Table 4 indicates that Table 4. KMO and Bartlett's Test Before hypothesis testing, dependent variables should be tested to see if they are correlated to confirm that they are moderately correlated. If r is 0, it reflects no relationship at all among the data sets making it unnecessary to proceed with the MANOVA. Output in Table 5 from the results reflects r=-0.013, r=-0.109 and r=0.319 for product evaluation, product creation and product assessment respectively. These are ideal results to proceed with hypothesis testing through MANOVA tests. the correlations are not near zero laying the foundation for confidence in the final factor analysis outcomes (Leech et al., 2015). This was visualised in the scree plot in Figure 2, which graphs the eigenvalues on the y-axis and the 51 components on the x-axis. Components above the “elbow” portion are those that are selected (Aldrich, 2018). In the case of this research, Components 1 to 15 are above the “elbow, accounting for 70.914 of variance in all 51 variables. The scree plot provides extra evidence supporting the 15 components solution for this factor analysis problem. This means that the first 15 components can explain 70% of the relationships in the interaction and dependant variable, outcomes part of the model. Table 7. Smartphone facilitated processes Multivariate Tests LRAveletercet ata Tats’ Table 9. Person to smartphone multivariate tests Multivariate Tests? Table 12. Smartphone-enabled climate multivariate tests Multivariate Tests* Table 6. Box's Test of Covariance Matrices Box's Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices* Tests the null hypothesis that the observed covariance matrices of the dependent variables are equal across groups." a. Design: Intercept + processQ20And26 facilitated processes influence creativity/product. The associated null hypothesis (Hoi) which states that Smartphone facilitated processes do not influence product/creativity is rejected. Tests the null hypothesis that the observed covariance matrices of the dependent variables are equal across groups." a. Design: Intercept + personQ8And9 5. Discussion Therefore, the smartphone-enabled climate has no significant effect on the dependent variables (product evaluation, product creation, and product observation). Thus smartphone-enables climate does not significantly influence creativity/ product. Therefore, the null hypothesis (Hos) which states. that Smartphone — enabled environment/climate does not influence creativity/product is supported. Table 13 summarise the hypothesis testing activities. Based on the interactions and outcome theory, this study assumed that students’ use of smartphones could enhance their creativity from various points of view. Students could use their smartphones to interact with each other and access and disseminate information. The wide access to information exposes them to a range of creative possibilities.
