Login
Register
Submit a Paper
Propose a Special lssue
Open Access
ARTICLE
The Link between Social Exclusion and Tendencies of Malevolent Creativity Behavior: The Chain Mediation Model of Ruminative Thinking and Depression
School of Nursing, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, China
* Corresponding Author: Huiyue Jiang. Email:
(This article belongs to the Special Issue: Family and School Environments and Mental Health)
International Journal of Mental Health Promotion 2026, 28(4), 14 https://doi.org/10.32604/ijmhp.2026.075797
Received 08 November 2025; Accepted 23 December 2025; Issue published 28 April 2026
View Full Text
Download PDFAbstract
Background: Experiences of social exclusion can significantly affect individuals’ cognitive and emotional well-being, potentially resulting in maladaptive coping strategies or harmful behaviors. College students are at a critical stage of personal development, exhibiting distinctive psychological and behavioral patterns. Therefore, exploring the underlying mechanisms connecting social exclusion and malevolent creativity among college students is particularly important. This study aims to reveal the relationship between social exclusion and malevolent creative behavior among undergraduates and its potential mechanisms. Methods: This cross-sectional study collected data from 500 undergraduates across three universities in Guangxi via convenience sampling. Participants completed the Ruminative Responses Scale (RRS), the Malevolent Creativity Behavior Scale (MCBS), the Social Exclusion Questionnaire for Undergraduates (SEQU), and the Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS). Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlations, and a structural equation model (SEM) were used to analyze the data. Results: A strong correlation was found among social exclusion, depression, ruminative thinking, and malevolent creativity, with correlation coefficients ranging from r = 0.49 to 0.58 (p < 0.001). The results of the mediation analysis showed that ruminative thinking and depression each independently mediated the relationship between social exclusion and malevolent creativity, accounting for 15.25% and 18.38% of the total effect, respectively. Additionally, ruminative thinking and depression played a role of chain mediation between social exclusion and malicious creativity, contributing 11.73% to the total effect. Conclusion: Social exclusion significantly impacted malevolent creativity directly. Additionally, it had an indirect effect through ruminative thinking and depression, which included a chain mediation involving both factors. This study uncovers the mechanisms that connect social exclusion to malevolent creativity in university students.Keywords
Creative motivations can be both positive and harmful, as pointed out by cultural anthropologist Rogers as early as 1954 [1]. Clark and James subsequently established the notion of “negative creativity,” whereby creative outcomes may possess negative traits, although the creativity itself does not cause harm to individuals or society [2]. Later, malevolent creativity was originally defined by Cropley et al., who characterized it as the capacity of an individual to purposefully produce ideas or products that are harmful and successful, which can also be interpreted as destructive activities that an individual consciously engages in with the intention of causing harm to others or themselves [3,4]. Malevolent creativity can manifest in various contexts, exhibiting intricate and wide-ranging effects [5]. Notably, everyone in daily life has the potential to come up with malicious creative ideas to varying degrees, indicating it is not solely a trait of terrorists or criminals [6,7]. Specifically, in everyday situations, this phenomenon can be observed in small but destructive ways, such as playing pranks, manipulating others, spreading misleading information, and engaging in cyber shaming. Furthermore, in more extreme circumstances, it can be leveraged to commit serious crimes, including drug production, smuggling, and fraud [8,9,10,11].
Both personal traits and the outside surroundings have an impact on malevolent creativity [12,13]. We can have a more thorough grasp of the intricate elements influencing malevolent creativity by utilizing the 4P model [14], which takes into account the multifaceted interaction of person, product, process, and press. Recent studies have further examined the mechanisms and consequences of malevolent creativity, underscoring its unique psychological and social impacts [15,16]. Against this backdrop, the present study explores how social exclusion relates to malevolent creativity and examines ruminative thinking and depression as potential chain mediators. Therefore, this study systematically explores the formation and occurrence of malevolent creativity, treating social exclusion as a social environmental variable and ruminative thinking and depression as individual-level variables.
2 Theoretical Foundations and Hypotheses
The 4P model states that creativity evolves from the intricate interplay between individual traits, cognitive processes, external circumstances, and creative outputs [14]. Accordingly, this study considers social exclusion as an external environmental stress, while rumination and depression can be considered cognitive processes and emotional traits that individuals exhibit while coping with negative situations. These characteristics collectively influence an individual’s destructive creativity. Response Styles Theory indicates that persons experiencing unfavorable experiences may engage in rumination—repeatedly pondering on the reasons and implications of the event—which can generate negative emotions and is closely tied to potential negative coping techniques [17]. To sum up, this study adds ruminative thinking and depression to the study of the relationship between social exclusion and malevolent creativity in college students and creates a chain mediation model (Fig. 1).
2.1 Association between Social Exclusion and Malevolent Creativity
Social exclusion, a process where individuals are rejected by others or groups, strongly affects mental health and behavior [18]. According to well-established research, unfavorable external situational factors frequently inspire malevolent creativity [19]. Ostracism and racial discrimination are only a few examples of the many ways that social exclusion manifests itself in people’s daily lives [20,21,22]. Empirical research has demonstrated that social exclusion causes negative emotional reactions in addition to impairing cognitive ability [23,24,25]. Additionally, a study by Ren et al. discovered that malevolent creativity tended to increase in contexts involving social exclusion [26]. Social exclusion often occurs alongside violent behaviors, which create conditions that are more conducive to the emergence of malevolent creativity [27]. Besides, Perchtold-Stefan et al. discovered that excluded people’s performance on malevolent creativity was noticeably better than that of the social inclusion group [28].
Social exclusion is linked to destructive acts ranging from cheating and bullying to terrorism and crime [29]. It weakens an individual’s fundamental need for belonging, which is correlated with malevolent creativity, according to the Temporal Need-Threat Model [25,30]. When people feel their resources are insufficient, they often turn to negative coping strategies [31]. Moreover, negative coping patterns are often accompanied by higher levels of malevolent creativity [16]. Thus, we put forth Hypothesis 1 (H1): Social exclusion is positively associated with malevolent creativity.
2.2 Ruminative Thinking’s Mediating Function
Rumination is characterized by a persistent focus on negative emotions and thoughts about the causes, course, and consequences of unpleasant feelings [32]. According to Response Styles Theory, individuals use rumination as an adaptive response to distressing situations [17]. Social exclusion, a form of bullying, can lead to various negative outcomes, including low self-esteem, an increased risk of internalizing and externalizing issues, and depressive states [23,24]. Lincoln et al. found that social exclusion dramatically raised paranoid ideation in those who were at high risk for mental illnesses, and this rise was partly explained by the use of rumination and other emotion regulation strategies [33]. According to a study among Chinese college students, social exclusion indirectly predicted NSSI through rumination [34]. College students who experienced social exclusion were more likely to experience unpleasant emotions and rumination. The psychological distress arising from social exclusion and subsequent rumination may ultimately lead to NSSI.
According to the General Aggression Model (GAM), individuals with sufficient cognitive resources may repeatedly revisit negative events, a process similar to rumination [35,36]. In such states, they are more likely to perceive others’ actions as hostile and react impulsively. Ceballos also found that early traumatic experiences increase reliance on maladaptive coping strategies such as rumination, which is linked to higher levels of malevolent creativity [37]. Individuals repeatedly reflect on the details of negative experiences, such as social exclusion. This sustained reflection can stimulate novel thinking, which may in turn positively influence the generation of creativity. Anger rumination is also associated with malevolent creativity [38,39]. In summary, social exclusion influences individuals’ mental health and behavior partly by increasing their tendency to engage in ruminative thinking. Thus, Hypothesis 2 (H2) is put out in this study: ruminative thinking mediates the relationship between social exclusion and malevolent creativity.
2.3 Depression’s Mediating Function
Depressive states involve low mood, apathy, pessimism, and disappointment, and are marked by diminished well-being, irritability, and loss of interest [40]. Jamison et al. elaborated in their study that a depressive state enhances self-introspection, making them more attentive to their feelings and thus more clearly and acutely perceiving their inner self, which helps to drive creativity [41]. Emotions not only affect social cognitive functions [42] but also affect creativity [19]. Cropley et al. emphasized that mood is an important factor influencing creativity [43]. Recent studies by Stefan et al. also report a positive link between depressive symptoms and malevolent creativity [44]. It suggests that individuals experiencing depressive emotions may be more likely to engage in a greater tendency towards malevolent creative behavior.
Slavich et al. raised the psycho-biological model of social rejection and depression [45]. They argued stress can stimulate brain changes linked to social exclusion. These govern negative emotions and may increase vulnerability to depression via a cascade of physiological changes. The study by Lincoln et al. also demonstrates that social exclusion is directly associated with individuals’ unpleasant emotions [46]. Further research has indicated that there is a positive association between social exclusion and depressive emotions [47,48]. Depressive mood during rumination may be associated with impulsivity and aggression tendencies, which could impair effective behavioral control [49,50]. This could lead to an increased likelihood of angry reactions to perceived injustices, thereby correlating with tendencies towards malevolent creative behavior. Therefore, this study offers Hypothesis 3 (H3): Depression may mediate the association between malevolent creativity and social exclusion.
2.4 The Chain Mediation Model of Ruminative Thinking and Depression
In recent years, studies have become more numerous on the association between ruminative thinking and depression. According to response style theory, individuals with elevated levels of rumination are more prone to continuously ruminate about unfavorable occurrences, which can elicit negative emotions such as depression and anxiety [51]. Research indicates that the interaction between stressful life events and ruminative thinking increases an individual’s risk of developing depressive symptoms, with rumination serving as a key susceptibility factor influencing depression [52]. Individuals with higher levels of rumination experience more intense negative emotions, thereby increasing their risk of experiencing a depressive mood [53]. As a passive and negative cognitive evaluation process, rumination triggers greater negative emotions, fostering pessimistic attitudes towards external circumstances and consequently exacerbating depression. Several investigations have also revealed that ruminative thinking is directly associated with depressive mood [54,55]. Specifically, ruminating prolongs the length of negative emotional experiences [32,56]. Rumination is regarded as an essential cognitive risk factor for depressive feelings, not only activating depressive emotions but also increasing their severity [57,58]. A longitudinal investigation by Zou et al. [59] indicated that ruminative thinking can unidirectionally predict subsequent depressive symptoms over six months, while the link between ruminative thinking and depression is bidirectional over a one-year time frame.
Social cognitive theory posits that behavior arises from the dynamic interaction between individual, environmental, and behavioral factors. Based on this theory, Wood and Bandura proposed the concept of triadic reciprocal determinism, which states that environmental factors influence individual psychology, and in turn, individual psychology influences behavioral performance [60]. Within this model, social exclusion is a variable in the environment that disrupts an individual’s cognitive processing (e.g., rumination) first. Rumination, in turn, further induces and intensifies negative emotional responses (e.g., depression). These internal psychological processes ultimately shape tendencies toward malicious creativity, offering a theoretical framework for understanding how social exclusion affects this type of creativity. In summary, this study suggests Hypothesis 4 (H4): Ruminative thinking and depression perform the role of chain mediators between malevolent creativity and social exclusion.
Figure 1: Chain mediation hypothesis model.
This study employed convenience sampling at three undergraduate colleges in Guangxi, distributing a total of 520 questionnaires via an online link. Inclusion criteria: (1) Full-time undergraduates who are currently enrolled at the school; (2) Aged 18 years or over; (3) Informed consent from research subjects, who are willing to participate in the survey. Exclusion criteria: (1) Students who have graduated, taken a leave of absence, withdrawn, or accumulated over one month of absence; (2) Students diagnosed with severe mental illness; (3) Students who have recently experienced major traumatic events. According to the Kendall criterion [61], the number of respondents is roughly 5-10 times the number of scale items. This study comprised 74 items. Therefore, considering the 20% loss rate, the investigation needed at least 463 participants. After eliminating invalid questions, 500 acceptable questionnaires were received, generating an effective response rate of 96.15%. The average age was 21 years. Among the respondents, 299 were male (59.80%), and 201 were female (40.20%); 117 were first-year students (23.40%), 112 were second-year students (22.40%), 212 were third-year students (42.40%), and 59 were fourth-year students (11.80%). The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Guangxi Medical University (No. KY20250026). Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by all participants.
3.2.1 Social Exclusion Questionnaire for Undergraduates (SEQU)
This questionnaire was devised by Chinese researchers Wu et al. based on theoretical explanations of social exclusion. It has strong reliability and validity, comprising two dimensions—direct exclusion and indirect exclusion—with a total of 19 items. Larger scores suggest a larger degree of social exclusion [62]. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha for this questionnaire was 0.92.
3.2.2 Ruminative Responses Scale (RRS)
The Ruminative Responses Scale [63], designed by Professor Nolen-Hoeksema of Yale University in the United States and translated and modified by Han et al., was utilized. The measure consists of 22 items spanning three dimensions: depression-related factors, reflective factors, and compulsive meditation factors. The scale uses a 4-point Likert scale, with higher scores indicating higher degrees of ruminative thinking. The Cronbach’s alpha of this questionnaire in this study was 0.89.
3.2.3 Malevolent Creativity Behavior Scale (MCBS)
This scale was developed by Hao et al. and includes three dimensions: trickery, lying, and hurting others. The scale comprises a total of 13 items and employs a 5-point Likert scale. The greater the score, the higher the tendency to malevolent creativity behaviors [64]. The Cronbach’s alpha of this questionnaire in this study was 0.81. It is worth noting that the malevolent creativity measurement tool utilized in this study is the MCBS scale. This scale measures components that concentrate mostly on individuals’ subjective self-evaluations of their trait-based tendency for malevolent creativity, rather than objective manifestations of this creativity.
3.2.4 Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS)
The self-rating depression scale (SDS) was established by Zung and was re-examined by Dunstan and Scott [65]. This scale has 20 items and employs a 4-point Likert scale, with some items requiring reverse scoring. A higher score indicates a more serious case of depression. This study’s questionnaire had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.85.
The Harman single-factor method was utilized to analyze the potential common method bias. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the demographic characteristics of the research subjects. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was employed to examine the correlation between variables. Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis for each variable were conducted using the SPSS 26.0 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). To test our hypothesized mediation model, we assessed it using a chain mediation model with the SPSS macro PROCESS (v4.1; Model 6), based on 5,000 bootstrap samples and a 95% bias-corrected confidence interval (CI) [66]. The effect is considered significant if the 95% CI does not include zero. The significance level for all statistical tests is 0.05.
Because this study relies on a questionnaire survey, it might be susceptible to common method bias. To dampen the influence of common method bias in the investigation, all questionnaires were completed anonymously and showed good validity and reliability. Furthermore, Harman’s single-factor test was utilized to examine common method bias. The results of the unrotated factor analysis indicated that 10 components had eigenvalues greater than 1. The first factor accounted for 30.26% of the total variance, which is less than the critical threshold of 40% [67], which indicates that there were no significant common method bias effects in the study.
4.2 Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis for Each Variable
Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients for the parameters. The correlation study demonstrates that the four variables of social exclusion, ruminative thinking, depression, and malevolent creativity are significantly and positively associated with one another.
Table 1: Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis of each variable (n = 500).
| Variable | Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. depression | 2.66 | 0.60 | 1 | |||
| 2. ruminative thinking | 2.87 | 0.77 | 0.58*** | 1 | ||
| 3. malevolent creativity | 2.15 | 1.03 | 0.56*** | 0.49*** | 1 | |
| 4. social exclusion | 1.81 | 0.56 | 0.56*** | 0.57*** | 0.56*** | 1 |
4.3 Testing the Chain Mediation Effect of Ruminative Thinking and Depression
Fig. 2 and Table 2 and Table 3 display the consequences of evaluating the chain mediation effect. The covariates are gender and age; the independent variable is social exclusion; the dependent variable is malevolent creativity; and the mediating variables are depression and ruminative thinking. The regression analysis results demonstrate that social exclusion (β = 0.559, p < 0.001), ruminative thinking (β = 0.202, p < 0.01), and depression (β = 0.504, p < 0.001) are positively related to malevolent creativity.
Figure 2: The chain mediating effect of ruminative thinking and depression. Note: ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01.
Table 2: Regression analysis results (n = 500).
| Outcome variable | Predictor variable | R2 | F | β | t | Boot 95%CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Y | X | 0.313 | 75.386*** | 1.023 | 15.012*** | 0.889, 1.156 |
| M1 | X | 0.328 | 80.547*** | 0.771 | 15.341*** | 0.672, 0.870 |
| M2 | X | 0.428 | 92.763*** | 0.373 | 8.404*** | 0.286, 0.460 |
| M1 | 0.307 | 9.410*** | 0.243, 0.375 | |||
| Y | X | 0.411 | 68.9763*** | 0.559 | 6.814*** | 0.398, 0.720 |
| M1 | 0.202 | 3.292** | 0.081, 0.322 | |||
| M2 | 0.504 | 6.496*** | 0.352, 0.657 |
The results of the chain mediation effect of social exclusion and malevolent creativity show that the direct effect is 0.559, accounting for 54.64% of the total effect (effect value = 1.023); the total indirect effect is 0.464, accounting for 45.36% of the total effect. Specifically, the total indirect effect includes three different paths: Path 1: social exclusion → ruminative thinking → malevolent creativity (effect value = 0.156), accounting for 15.25% of the total effect; Path 2: social exclusion → depression → malevolent creativity (effect value = 0.188), accounting for 18.38% of the total effect; Path 3: social exclusion → ruminative thinking → depression → malevolent creativity (effect value = 0.120), accounting for 11.73% of the total effect. Since none of the three mediating paths’ 95% CI included 0, all of the mediating effects were considered significant.
Table 3: Bootstrap analysis of the mediation effect test (n = 500).
| Path | Effect | BootSE | Boot 95% CI | Percent (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direct effect | X-Y | 0.559 | 0.082 | 0.398, 0.720 | 54.64 |
| Indirect effect | X-M1-Y | 0.156 | 0.050 | 0.055, 0.255 | 15.25 |
| X-M2-Y | 0.188 | 0.037 | 0.121, 0.267 | 18.38 | |
| X-M1-M2-Y | 0.120 | 0.025 | 0.074, 0.173 | 11.73 | |
| Total indirect effect | 0.464 | 0.060 | 0.345, 0.580 | 45.36 | |
| Total effect | 1.023 | 0.068 | 0.889, 1.156 | 100 | |
The current results reveal a positive association between social exclusion and malevolent creativity among college students, which is in line with earlier studies. One possible reason is that social exclusion challenges individuals’ fundamental desire to belong, which may provoke unpleasant emotions and retaliatory tendencies that can show in damaging ideas. Moreover, the results suggest that ruminative thinking and depression serve as pathways linking social exclusion and malevolent creativity. Students who focus on exclusion experiences on a regular basis may feel increased unpleasant emotions and cognitive fixation, which may provide fertile ground for malevolent creativity. These findings not only deepen our understanding of the intricate connection between social exclusion and malevolent creativity among college students but also give vital recommendations for the prevention and intervention of malevolent creativity.
Consistent with Hypothesis 1, this study found a positive correlation between social exclusion and malevolent creativity among college students, which is consistent with earlier studies [27,28,29]. In addition to being sensitive to uncomfortable social experiences, college students are also more vulnerable to the risk of social exclusion because they frequently are highly motivated to develop harmonious relationships with their peers and achieve social acceptance and a sense of belonging [68,69]. Social exclusion is a common and often threatening experience that can impact how students feel and behave. When university students perceive themselves as excluded, drops in self-esteem frequently follow, and these emotional strains are sometimes accompanied by more negative coping responses—conditions that have been linked to higher levels of malevolent creativity [23,24,70]. The current study’s findings provide support for the idea that malevolent creativity is positively related to social exclusion. The inclusion of mediating variables revealed notable direct and indirect effects, suggesting that social exclusion may be linked to malevolent creativity in college students both directly and indirectly through depression and ruminative thinking.
Building on this, the results also supported Hypothesis 2, indicating that ruminative thinking plays a mediation function between social exclusion and malevolent creativity. Social exclusion is often associated with ruminative thinking, in which individuals repeatedly revisit the experience of exclusion, a process that may be linked to intensified negative emotions. Individuals who think negatively and regularly may develop a negative psychological state, which could increase their emotional and psychological stress [32,34]. Ruminative thinking, on the other hand, may involve excessive analysis of one’s behaviors and thoughts, which is associated with greater susceptibility to malevolent thoughts and behaviors [37,38,39]. People are more likely to exhibit malevolent creativity in the face of social exclusion due to the detrimental effects of ruminative thinking. The results of this research support those of related surveys. Students who frequently engage in excessive ruminating may misinterpret equivocal social cues and become more susceptible to perceived exclusion. Similarly, adolescents who frequently engage in malevolent deceit and lying may face peer rejection. In order to separate these bidirectional processes in the future, longitudinal or cross-lagged strategies will be required.
In line with Hypothesis 3, the results reveal that depression had a significant role in mediating the association between malevolent creativity and social exclusion. Experiences of social exclusion are often linked to intense negative emotions, and the psychological stress that follows may be associated with depressive symptoms like low mood, lack of interest, and low self-esteem. If these negative emotions are not adequately regulated, they may be associated with mood disorders like anxiety, depression, and fear [45,71,72]. Emotions have a significant impact on creativity. In certain circumstances, a depressive state characterized by persistent negative emotions and recurrent rumination may facilitate the generation of malevolent creativity [43,44]. These depressive symptoms may also increase psychological vulnerability, making individuals more susceptible to negative emotions. When experiencing social exclusion, individuals with depressed moods may show a greater tendency toward malevolent behavior, potentially related to negative cognitive processes and difficulties in emotion regulation.
Finally, the evidence supports Hypothesis 4, demonstrating depression and ruminative thinking played a chain mediation role in the relationship between social exclusion and malevolent creativity. People who are socially excluded are more likely to engage in ruminative thinking, which is characterized by recurrent negative thoughts [33]. This ruminative thinking further aggravates people’s psychological stress and emotional pain and is associated with the emergence of depressive symptoms [59]. According to the Social Signal Transduction Theory of Depression, social exclusion may contribute to depressive symptoms via neurophysiological pathways, which can change a person’s thought and behavior patterns [73]. This notion was further supported by Shields et al. [74], who discovered that female teenagers who were in danger of social exclusion showed increased brain activity and functional connectivity responses. Individuals who experience depressive symptoms while ruminating exhibit impaired emotional regulation and cognitive flexibility. This can trap them in negative thought patterns and increase their likelihood of engaging in harmful malevolent creativity [49,50]. This series of mediating mechanisms suggests that depression and ruminative thinking may play important roles in the relationship between social exclusion and malevolent creativity, potentially interacting to influence its occurrence. According to the study’s findings, social exclusion may be indirectly associated with malevolent creativity via a series of mediating effects involving depression and ruminative thinking. This supports the potential role of this mediating pathway. It is vital for higher education institutions to strengthen their peer support systems within campus mental health services. They should also carry out early screening of students who are socially excluded or prone to rumination. Furthermore, they need to implement timely interventions to prevent malevolent creative behavior tendencies from developing.
The following are the limitations of this study. From the beginning, due to its cross-sectional design, it has failed to determine the causal interaction between factors. Future research could adopt longitudinal or experimental designs, as well as multi-informant approaches, to more rigorously examine causal relationships and reduce potential biases. Another limitation is the reliance on self-reported data, which suggests the possibility of common method variance issues. To minimize common method bias and enhance measurement validity, future work should integrate multiple assessment methods, including behavioral tasks, experimental paradigms, and objective indicators. This study did not consider the impact of other possible influencing variables on the results. Factors such as the Dark Triad, academic stress, and familial circumstances may all have a negative impact on one’s emotions. Future research should include more control variables to analyze the robustness of the estimated interactions more effectively. The MCBS has been criticized for failing to assess the uniqueness of malevolent behavior, as only a few items directly address the novelty and originality of ideas [11,75]. Future research could explore the relationship between social exclusion and the various dimensions of malevolent creativity. In addition, developing task-based measures that better capture the originality aspect of malevolent creativity, or creating new self-report tools tailored to everyday contexts, would help improve its assessment [76]. While negative emotions and personality traits form the basis of the current framework, other psychological mechanisms may also play a role in malevolent creativity. Future work should therefore explore these additional pathways, such as cognitive flexibility, moral disengagement, and stress response styles, to construct a more comprehensive theoretical model. Future studies should broaden the sample size to include more diverse populations, such as working adults, adolescents, clinical groups, individuals with personality disorders, and those involved with the criminal justice system, to determine whether the findings generalize across different contexts.
Ultimately, the study was conducted in Guangxi, a region characterized by distinctive cultural traditions and a large ethnic minority population. However, our analyses did not explicitly consider cultural and regional factors. Future research should incorporate cross-regional or cross-cultural comparative designs to better understand how sociocultural contexts shape the relationship between social exclusion and malevolent creativity.
The findings of this investigation are as follows: Firstly, there is a significant correlation between depression, malevolent creativity, social exclusion, and ruminative thinking. Secondly, the results show a positive correlation between malevolent creativity and social exclusion among college students. Thirdly, ruminative thinking and depression independently mediate the relationship between social exclusion and malevolent creativity, and the two factors have a chain-mediated effect.
Acknowledgement:
Funding Statement: The authors received no specific funding for this study.
Author Contributions: The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: conceptualization, Huiyue Jiang; data curation, Zhenlian Luo; formal analysis, Rongning Luo, Zhenlian Luo; methodology, Zhenzhu Cao, Zhenlian Luo; writing—original draft, Zhenlian Luo; writing—review & editing, Zhenlian Luo, Rongning Luo, Zhenzhu Cao. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Availability of Data and Materials: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the Corresponding Author, Huiyue Jiang, upon reasonable request.
Ethics Approval: The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Guangxi Medical University (No. KY20250026).
Informed Consent: Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by all participants.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest to report regarding the present study.
References
1. Rogers CR . Toward a theory of creativity. ETC A Rev Gen Semant. 1954; 11: 249– 60. [Google Scholar]
2. Clark K , James K . Justice and positive and negative creativity. Creat Res J. 1999; 12( 4): 311– 20. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1204_9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Cropley DH , Kaufman JC , Cropley AJ . Malevolent creativity: a functional model of creativity in terrorism and crime. Creat Res J. 2008; 20( 2): 105– 15. doi:10.1080/10400410802059424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
4. Dou X , Dou X , Jia L . Interactive association of negative creative thinking and malevolent creative thinking. Front Psychol. 2022; 13: 939672. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.939672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
5. Tadik H , Bahar AK , Runco MA . The social context of malevolent creativity. Behav Sci. 2025; 15( 5): 630. doi:10.3390/bs15050630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. Hao N , Qiao X , Cheng R , Lu K , Tang M , Runco M . Approach motivational orientation enhances malevolent creativity. Acta Psychologica. 2020: 203: 102985. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
7. Xu X , Zhao J , Xia M , Pang W . I can, but I won’t: authentic people generate more malevolently creative ideas, but are less likely to implement them in daily life. Personal Individ Differ. 2021; 170: 110431. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2020.110431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
8. Gill P , Horgan J , Hunter ST , Cushenbery LD . Malevolent creativity in terrorist organizations. J Creat Behav. 2013; 47( 2): 125– 51. doi:10.1002/jocb.28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
9. Brewer G , Parkinson M , Pickles A , Anson J , Mulinder G . Dark triad traits and relationship dissolution. Personal Individ Differ. 2023; 204: 112045. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2022.112045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
10. Liu C , Li L , Gong Z . Development and testing of the cyber malevolent creativity behavior scale. J Creat Behav. 2024; 58( 3): 478– 90. doi:10.1002/jocb.669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
11. Perchtold-Stefan CM , Rominger C , Papousek I , Fink A . Antisocial schizotypy is linked to malevolent creativity. Creat Res J. 2022; 34( 3): 355– 67. doi:10.1080/10400419.2021.2012633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
12. Baas M , Roskes M , Koch S , Cheng Y , De Dreu CKW . Why Social Threat motivates malevolent creativity. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 2019; 45( 11): 1590– 602. doi:10.1177/0146167219838551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
13. Fu H , Zhang Z . The relationship between honesty-humility and malevolent creativity: Sequential mediation models with prosocial moral emotional traits and prosocial tendencies. Curr Psychol. 2024; 43( 8): 7424– 36. doi:10.1007/s12144-023-04941-2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
14. Rhodes M . An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan. 1961; 42( 7): 305– 10. [Google Scholar]
15. Chen F , Xiao Y , Wang Y , Huang Y , Yang W , Cao G . The link between family support and malevolent creativity: the mediating roles of reflective rumination and brooding rumination. Psychol Rep. 2025: 00332941251363462. doi:10.1177/00332941251363462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
16. Zhang J , Lu J , Ge J , Li S , Liang X . Managing malice in negative environments: the mediating effect of coping styles on the relationship between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity among Chinese high school students. BMC Psychol. 2025; 13( 1): 35. doi:10.1186/s40359-024-02333-0. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Liu L , Zhang T , Xie X . Negative life events and procrastination among adolescents: the roles of negative emotions and rumination, as well as the potential gender differences. Behav Sci. 2023; 13( 2): 176. doi:10.3390/bs13020176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. DeWall CN , Maner JK , Rouby DA . Social exclusion and early-stage interpersonal perception: selective attention to signs of acceptance. J Personal Soc Psychol. 2009; 96( 4): 729– 41. doi:10.1037/a0014634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
19. He WJ . Positive and negative affect facilitate creativity motivation: findings on the effects of habitual mood and experimentally induced emotion. Front Psychol. 2023; 14: 1014612. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1014612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
20. Buckley KE , Winkel RE , Leary MR . Reactions to acceptance and rejection: effects of level and sequence of relational evaluation. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2004; 40( 1): 14– 28. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00064-7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
21. Kiefer M , Sim EJ , Heil S , Brown R , Herrnberger B , Spitzer M , et al. Neural signatures of bullying experience and social rejection in teenagers. PLOS ONE. 2021; 16( 8): 14. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0255681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
22. Ussher JM , Hawkey A , Perz J , Liamputtong P , Sekar J , Marjadi B , et al. Gender affirmation and social exclusion amongst trans women of color in Australia. Int J Transgender Health. 2021; 23( 1–2): 79– 96. doi:10.1080/26895269.2021.1947432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
23. Osborne A , Yillah RM , Bash-Taqi A , Conteh O . A study of vulnerable student populations, exclusion and marginalization in sierra leonean secondary schools: a social justice theory analysis. BMC Psychol. 2025; 13( 1): 263. doi:10.1186/s40359-025-02554-x. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
24. Weinreich L , Moll K , Sperl MFJ , Schulte-Körne G , Timmermans B . Experimental investigations of social exclusion among adolescents with psychiatric disorders: A systematic review. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2025; 34( 9): 2631– 48. doi:10.1007/s00787-025-02687-9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
25. Zhang Z , Mao J , Yuan J , Yang J . Unconscious and conscious acceptance downregulate aggressive behavior: Mediating role of anger regulation. Acta Psychol. 2023; 239: 104000. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.104000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
26. Ren D , Wesselmann ED , Loh WW , van Beest I , van Leeuwen F , Sleegers WWA . Do cues of infectious disease shape people’s affective responses to social exclusion? Emotion. 2023; 23( 4): 997– 1010. doi:10.1037/emo0001157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
27. Rudert SC , Möring JNR , Kenntemich C , Büttner CM . When and why we ostracize others: motivated social exclusion in group contexts. J Personal Soc Psychol. 2023; 125( 4): 803– 26. doi:10.1037/pspi0000423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
28. Perchtold-Stefan CM , Papousek I , Rominger C , Fink A . Creativity in an affective context: reappraisal inventiveness and malevolent creativity as extensions of creativity research toward more real-world creative behavior. Eur Psychol. 2022; 27( 3): 216– 26. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
29. Perchtold-Stefan CM , Fink A , Rominger C , Papousek I . Social Exclusion increases antisocial tendencies: evidence from retaliatory ideation in a malevolent creativity task. Psychol Aesthet Creat Arts. 2024; 18( 6): 1014– 25. doi:10.1037/aca0000500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
30. Cropley DH , Kaufman JC , White AE , Chiera BA . Layperson perceptions of malevolent creativity: the good, the bad, and the ambiguous. Psychol Aesthet Creat Arts. 2014; 8( 4): 400– 12. doi:10.1037/a0037792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
31. Li Y , Wan Z , Gong X , Wen L , Sun T , Liu J , et al. The association between child maltreatment, cognitive reappraisal, negative coping styles, and non-suicidal self-injury in adolescents with major depressive disorder. BMC Psychiatry. 2024; 24( 1): 592. doi:10.1186/s12888-024-06041-2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
32. Mattioni L , Nikčević AV , Ferri F , Spada MM , Sestieri C . An integrative model of perseverative thinking. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2025; 27( 1): 34– 54. doi:10.1080/19585969.2025.2481658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
33. Lincoln TM , Sundag J , Schlier B , Karow A . The relevance of emotion regulation in explaining why social exclusion triggers paranoia in individuals at clinical high risk of psychosis. Schizophr Bull. 2018; 44( 4): 757– 67. doi:10.1093/schbul/sbx135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
34. Wang H , Yu P , Sun H , Zhang Z , Zhu Y . The relationship between social exclusion and non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) of college students: The mediating effect of rumination. Curr Psychol. 2024; 43( 30): 24969– 76. doi:10.1007/s12144-024-06206-y. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
35. Anderson CA , Bushman BJ . Human aggression. Annu Rev Psychol. 2002; 53( 1): 27– 51. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
36. Lee SA , Dow GT . Malevolent creativity: does personality influence malicious divergent thinking? Creat Res J. 2011; 23( 2): 73– 82. doi:10.1080/10400419.2011.571179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
37. Ceballos NA , Watt TT . The influence of adverse childhood experiences on malevolent creativity in young adulthood. Behav Sci. 2023; 13( 12): 961. doi:10.3390/bs13120961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
38. Cohen DJ , Eckhardt CI , Schagat KD . Attention allocation and habituation to anger-related stimuli during a visual search task. Aggress Behav. 1998; 24( 6): 399– 409. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1998)24:6<399::AID-AB1>3.0.CO;2-I. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
39. Zhang MY , Guo H , Gong Z . The effect of anger rumination on malevolent creativity: the mediating role of aggression and the moderating role of mindfulness. Psychol Rep. 2025: 00332941251320279. doi:10.1177/00332941251320279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
40. American Psychiatric Association, DSM-5 Task Force. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5TM. 5th ed. Washington, DC, USA: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.; 2013. doi:10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
41. Jamison KR , Gerner RH , Hammen C , Padesky C . Clouds and silver linings: positive experiences associated with primary affective disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 1980; 137( 2): 198– 202. doi:10.1176/ajp.137.2.198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
42. Huang X , Lajoie SP . Social emotional interaction in collaborative learning: why it matters and how can we measure it? Soc Sci Humanit Open. 2023; 7( 1): 100447. doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
43. Cropley DH , Cropley AJ , Kaufman JC , Runco MA . The dark side of creativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2010. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511761225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
44. Perchtold-Stefan CM , Rominger C , Fink A . Depressive symptoms are positively linked to malevolent creativity: a novel perspective on the maladaptive nature of revenge ideation. J Creat Behav. 2023; 57( 2): 319– 30. doi:10.1002/jocb.580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
45. Slavich GM , O’Donovan A , Epel ES , Kemeny ME . Black sheep get the blues: a psychobiological model of social rejection and depression. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2010; 35( 1): 39– 45. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.01.003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
46. Lincoln SH , Johnson T , Winters A , Laquidara J . Social exclusion and rejection across the psychosis spectrum: A systematic review of empirical research. Schizophr Res. 2021; 228: 43– 50. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2020.11.056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
47. Niu GF , Sun XJ , Tian Y , Fan CY , Zhou ZK . Resilience moderates the relationship between ostracism and depression among Chinese adolescents. Personal Individ Differ. 2016; 99: 77– 80. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
48. Dong F , Hwang Y , Hodgson NA . Relationships between racial discrimination, social isolation, and mental health among international Asian graduate students during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Am Coll Health. 2024; 72( 2): 606– 13. doi:10.1080/07448481.2022.2052076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
49. Chabrol H , Labeyrie N , Rodgers RF , Levenson MR . An exploratory study of the relations between psychopathic traits and depressive symptoms in a non-clinical sample of adolescents. Eur Rev Appl Psychol. 2010; 60( 3): 181– 7. doi:10.1016/j.erap.2009.10.002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
50. Fields SA , Schueler J , Arthur KM , Harris B . The role of impulsivity in major depression: a systematic review. Curr Behav Neurosci Rep. 2021; 8( 2): 38– 50. doi:10.1007/s40473-021-00231-y. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
51. Baumeister RF , Vohs KD , DeWall CN , Zhang L . How emotion shapes behavior: Feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation. Personal Soc Psychol Rev. 2007; 11( 2): 167– 203. doi:10.1177/1088868307301033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
52. Cook L , Mostazir M , Watkins E . Reducing stress and preventing depression (RESPOND): randomized controlled trial of web-based rumination-focused cognitive behavioral therapy for high-ruminating university students. J Med Internet Res. 2019; 21( 5): e11349. doi:10.2196/11349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
53. Zhao X , Liu Z , Zhao L , Zhang L . Exploring the relationship between distress rumination, resilience, depression, and self-injurious behaviors among chinese college athletes infected with COVID-19: a cross-sectional study. Front Psychiatry. 2023; 14: 1219867. doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1219867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
54. Patel A , Daros AR , Irwin SH , Lau P , Hope IM , Perkovic SJM , et al. Associations between rumination, depression, and distress tolerance during CBT treatment for depression in a tertiary care setting. J Affect Disord. 2023; 339: 74– 81. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2023.06.063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
55. McLaughlin KA , Nolen-Hoeksema S . Rumination as a transdiagnostic factor in depression and anxiety. Behav Res Ther. 2011; 49( 3): 186– 93. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2010.12.006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
56. Conway M , Csank PA , Holm SL , Blake CK . On assessing individual differences in rumination on sadness. J Personal Assess. 2000; 75( 3): 404– 25. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA7503_04. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
57. Espinosa F , Martin-Romero N , Sanchez-Lopez A . Repetitive Negative Thinking Processes Account for Gender Differences in Depression and Anxiety During Adolescence. Int J Cogn Ther. 2022; 15( 2): 115– 33. doi:10.1007/s41811-022-00133-1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
58. Scaini S , Palmieri S , Caselli G , Nobile M . Rumination thinking in childhood and adolescence: A brief review of candidate genes. J Affect Disord. 2021; 280: 197– 202. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2020.11.008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
59. Zou H , Ma X , Li X , Zhang W . Longitudinal Relationships Between Rumination and Depression Symptoms and the Influence of Lag Duration Among College Students. Int J Cogn Behav Ther. 2025; 18: 523– 44. doi:10.1007/s41811-025-00252-5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
60. Wood R , Bandura A . Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Acad Manag Rev. 1989; 14 (3): 361– 84. doi:10.2307/258173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
61. Kendall M . Multivariate analysis. London, UK: Charles Griffin & Company Limited; 1975. [Google Scholar]
62. Wu H , Zhang S , Zeng Y . Development and validation of the social exclusion questionnaire for undergraduate. China J Health Psychol. 2013; 21( 12): 1829– 31. (In Chinese). doi:10.13342/j.cnki.cjhp.2013.12.012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
63. Han X , Yang H . Chinese version of nolen-hoeksema ruminative responses scale (RRS) used in 912 college students: reliability and validity. Chin J Clin Psychol. 2009; 17( 5): 549– 51. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
64. Hao N , Tang M , Yang J , Wang Q , Runco MA . A New tool to measure malevolent creativity: the malevolent creativity behavior scale. Front Psychol. 2016; 7: 682. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
65. Dunstan DA , Scott N . Clarification of the cut-off score for Zung’s self-rating depression scale. BMC Psychiatry. 2019; 19 (1): 177. doi:10.1186/s12888-019-2161-0. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
66. Preacher KJ , Hayes AF . SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 2004; 36( 4): 717– 31. doi:10.3758/BF03206553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
67. Podsakoff PM , MacKenzie SB , Lee JY , Podsakoff NP . Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003; 88( 5): 879– 903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
68. Niu GF , Shi XH , Yao LS , Yang WC , Jin SY , Xu L . Social exclusion and depression among undergraduate students: the mediating roles of rejection sensitivity and social self-efficacy. Curr Psychol. 2023; 42( 28): 24198– 207. doi:10.1007/s12144-022-03318-1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
69. Zhang M , Yan K , Chen Y , Yu R . Anticipating interpersonal sensitivity: a predictive model for early intervention in psychological disorders in college students. Comput Biol Med. 2024; 172: 108134. doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2024.108134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
70. Wu J , Rao X , Liu J , You S , Cao Y , Jiao L . T he impact of social exclusion on malevolent creativity: the mediating role of prosocial motivation. Psychol Aesthet Creat Arts. 2024. doi:10.1037/aca0000687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
71. Alders GL , Davis AD , MacQueen G , Strother SC , Hassel S , Zamyadi M , et al. Reduced accuracy accompanied by reduced neural activity during the performance of an emotional conflict task by unmedicated patients with major depression: a Can-Bind Fmri study. J Affect Disord. 2019; 257: 765– 73. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2019.07.037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
72. Theiss JD , McHugo M , Zhao M , Zald DH , Olatunji BO . Neural correlates of resolving conflict from emotional and nonemotional distracters in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging. 2019; 284: 29– 36. doi:10.1016/j.pscychresns.2019.01.001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
73. Slavich GM , Irwin MR . From stress to inflammation and major depressive disorder: a social signal transduction theory of depression. Psychol Bull. 2014; 140( 3): 774– 815. doi:10.1037/a0035302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
74. Shields GS , Vinograd M , Bui T , Sichko S , Irwin MR , Slavich GM . Heightened neural activity and functional connectivity responses to social rejection in female adolescents at risk for depression: testing the social signal transduction theory of depression. J Affect Disord. 2024; 345: 467– 76. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2023.10.113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
75. Reiter-Palmon R . Are the outcomes of creativity always positive? Creat Theor Res Appl. 2018; 5( 2): 177– 81. doi:10.1515/ctra-2018-0016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
76. Kapoor H , Kaufman JC . The evil within: The AMORAL model of dark creativity. Theory Psychol. 2022; 32( 3): 467– 90. doi:10.1177/09593543221074326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cite This Article
Copyright © 2026 The Author(s). Published by Tech Science Press.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Downloads
Citation Tools
