Differences in the influence of aesthetic experience on the innovative behaviors of Thai students and Chinese international students
差异在于审美体验对泰国学生和中国国际学生的创新行为的影响
Yuan-Cheng Chang and Napawan Jaisook
张元成和那帕万·贾素克
College of China-ASEAN International, Dhurakij Pundit University, Bangkok, Thailand
中国-东盟国际学院，杜拉克吉彭迪大学，曼谷，泰国
Abstract
摘要
Purpose – The purpose of this study aims to understand if there are any differences in the influence of aesthetic experience and creative self-efficacy on innovative behaviors of Thai students and Chinese international students and whether creative self-efficacy has a mediating effect between aesthetic experience and innovative behavior.
研究目的 - 本研究旨在了解审美体验和创造力自我效能感对泰国学生和中国国际学生的创新行为有何差异，以及创造力自我效能感是否在审美体验和创新行为之间起中介作用。
Design/methodology/approach – Three Thai universities with Chinese international students were selected through purposive sampling. There were 329 valid responses, consisting of responses from 170 Thai students and 159 Chinese students. The data were analyzed by employing multigroup structural equation modeling.
设计/方法/途径 - 通过目的抽样选择了三个具有 Chnee 意图的 Thauniveitiew。共有 329 个有效回复，包括 170 名泰国学生和 159 名中国学生。数据通过使用多组结构方程模型进行分析。
Findings – The analysis of the differences between the students of the two countries shows that the influence of aesthetic experience on creative self-efficacy, as well as the creative self-efficacy on innovative behavior of Chinese international students, is greater than that of Thai students, while the influence of aesthetic experience on innovative behavior of Thai students is greater than that of Chinese international students. Originality/value – There are some differences between Thai and Chinese students, which could be attributed to their differing environments, cultures and prior learning experiences
发现——对两国学生的差异分析表明，审美经验对创造性自我效能的影响，以及创造性自我效能对中国国际学生的创新行为的影响，均大于泰国学生，而审美经验对泰国学生的创新行为的影响大于对中国国际学生的影响。原创性/价值——泰国学生和中国学生在某些方面存在差异，这可以归因于他们不同的环境、文化和先前学习经验。.
Keywords Aesthetic, Aesthetic experience, Creative self-efficacy, Innovative behaviors, Multi-group structural equation modeling
关键词美学，美学体验，创造性自我效能，创新行为多组结构方程模型
Paper type Research paper
论文类型 研究论文
Motivation and objectives
动机与目标
Education is core to the development and cultivation of people’s innovative skills and abilities
教育是培养和发展人民创新技能和能力的关键
( anen et al., 2018), while innovative skills are skills that students must equip themselves with in the face of increasingly complex living and working environments. As such, it is vital for students to have the ability to innovate, and even more important for higher institutions to cultivate the innovative abilities of their students (Ovbiagbonhia et al., 2019). That said, according to Uhrmacher (2009) found that aesthetic learning experiences can enhance students’ perceptual knowledge, episodic memory retention, meaning-making, and the development of creativity and innovation. Webster and Wolfe (2013) also believe that classroom aesthetic experiences will affect students’ abilities to think, explore, create and innovate, among others. As such, aesthetics came to be viewed as increasingly important in education, and has a positive effect on students’ innovative and creative abilities (Carbon, 2011; Xenakis and Arnellos, 2014).
（Anen 等人，2018 年），而创新技能是学生在面对日益复杂的生活和工作环境时必须自我装备的技能。因此，学生具备创新能力至关重要，对于高等教育机构来说，培养学生的创新能力尤为重要（Ovbiagbonhia 等人，2019 年）。尽管如此，根据 Uhrmacher（2009 年）的研究发现，审美学习经历可以增强学生的感知知识、情景记忆保持、意义构建以及创造力和创新能力的发展。Webster 和 Wolfe（2013 年）也认为，课堂中的审美体验将影响学生的思维能力、探索能力、创造力和创新能力等方面。因此，审美在教育中变得越来越重要，并对学生的创新和创造力产生积极影响（Carbon，2011 年；Xenakis 和 Arnellos，2014 年）。
For Maquet (1986), aesthetic experience refers to the conscious and subconscious experiences of individuals when they appreciate art and beautiful objects (Dewey, 1981; Lin, 2009). The source of creativity lies in the potential of the combination of conscious and subconscious experiences derived from the individual’s appreciation of the arts (Richards, 2007). Edinger (1968) regards art as the expression of beauty; through the use of archetypal imagery, the psychological connections made by the subconscious mind in response function
对于马奎特（1986）来说，审美体验是指个体在欣赏艺术和美好事物时的有意识和无意识体验（杜威，1981；林，2009）。创造力的源泉在于个体从对艺术的欣赏中获得的意识和无意识体验的结合潜力（理查德，2007）。埃丁格（1968）认为艺术是美的表达；通过使用原型意象，潜意识在回应功能中建立的心理联系
Influence of aesthetic experience
审美体验的影响
Journal of Applied Research in
《应用研究杂志》
Higher Education
高等教育
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2050-7003 DOI 10.1108/JARHE-05-2020-0133
as a form of creative expression. In other words, when an individual wants to innovate, the aesthetic experiences will create psychological connections to integrate all past experiences of beauty and produce a subconscious reaction, which is creativity itself and the performance of innovation.
作为一种创意表达形式。换句话说，当一个人想要创新时，审美体验将创造心理联系，整合所有过去的美学经验，产生一种无意识的反应，这就是创造力本身和创新的体现。
Moreover, through the acquisition, accumulation and internalization of aesthetic experiences, individuals can increase their confidence and embrace challenges arising from their surroundings (Dewey, 1981). Aesthetic experience is also an important factor in unlocking one’s creativity. It can improve self-efficacy and develop one’s creativity and innovative behaviors (Lin, 2009; Maquet, 1986). ıaz (2015) believes that students’ creative self-efficacy has a positive influence on innovative behavior. According to the social cognitive theory proposed by Bandura (1986), self-efficacy plays a vital role in the ability to self-regulate, and also mediates between the perceived experience and the behavioral manifestation. As such, students’ creative self-efficacy can produce a mediating effect between aesthetic experiences and innovative behaviors.
此外，通过审美经验的获取、积累和内化，个人可以增强自信并接受来自周围环境出现的挑战（杜威，1981）。审美经验也是激发个人创造力的一个重要因素。它可以提高自我效能感，并发展个人的创造力和创新行为（林，2009；马凯特，1986）。Az（2015）认为，学生的创造性自我效能对创新行为有积极影响。根据班杜拉（1986）提出的社会认知理论，自我效能感在自我调节能力中起着至关重要的作用，并在感知经验和行为表现之间起中介作用。因此，学生的创造性自我效能可以在审美经验和创新行为之间产生中介效应。
That said, Woodrow (2001) highlighted that cultural traditions and beliefs will affect students’ way of learning and concepts of learning. Brown and Gao (2015) described China’s standard large classes and their focus on examination results (Yung, 2015); this is the case for Thailand too, and both countries also have the same culture of respect for teachers (Gunawan, 2016). However, Thai education, influenced by Buddhism, is more flexible in terms of learning and interaction (Yuenyong and Yuenyong, 2012). Humor and interesting teaching methods are often applied in lessons to relieve tension (Gunawan, 2016).
尽管如此，Woodrow（2001）指出，文化传统和信仰会影响学生的学习方式和学习观念。Brown 和 Gao（2015）描述了中国标准的大班教学及其对考试成绩的重视（Yung，2015）；泰国也是如此，这两个国家也有相同的尊重教师的文化（Gunawan，2016）。然而，受佛教影响，泰国的教育在学习与互动方面更为灵活（Yuenyong 和 Yuenyong，2012）。课堂上经常运用幽默和有趣的教学方法来缓解紧张气氛（Gunawan，2016）。
In recent years, the number of Chinese international students in Thailand has gradually grown. Would students from different countries better accept others’ cultures and would they have similar learning achievements after spending longer time learning together and sharing similar lifestyles? Thus, the purpose of this study is to address how universities foster the development of students’ innovative behavior, when they meet students who are from different cultures, grew up in dissimilar environments and share various social values. The result of this study could improve the system of universities and provide substantial advice regarding culture and social values. This study will examine if Thai and Chinese students’ different aesthetic experience and creative self-efficacy have an impact on their innovative behavior and whether Thai and Chinese students’ creative self-efficacy has a mediating effect between aesthetic experience and innovative behavior.
近年来，泰国中国留学生的数量逐渐增长。来自不同国家的学生会更好地接受其他文化吗？他们在共同学习和分享相似生活方式更长的时间后，是否会有相似的学习成绩？因此，本研究旨在探讨大学如何培养学生在遇到来自不同文化、成长环境不同、拥有各种社会价值观的学生时的创新行为发展。本研究的结果可以改善大学体系，并提供有关文化和社会价值观的实质性建议。本研究将检验泰国学生和中国学生的不同审美体验和创造性自我效能感是否会影响他们的创新行为，以及泰国学生和中国学生的创造性自我效能感是否在审美体验和创新行为之间具有中介作用。
Literature review
文献综述
2.1 The relationship between aesthetic experience and innovative behavior
2.1 美学体验与创新能力之间的关系
“Aesthetic” is not limited to the appearance, form or abstract notions of beauty. Rather, aesthetic experience is a complex cognitive phenomenon, composed of multiple processes that occur through interaction (Xenakis and Arnellos, 2014). Stolnitz (1978) posits that aesthetic experience is the experience that occurs when an individual takes an attitude of disinterested and sympathetic attention, as well as contemplation. Tatarkiewicz (1980) suggests that the aesthetic experience is only one form of observation or thought, an experience generated through mere appreciation without action. This experience may be applied in future creations. Maquet (1986) commented that when the observer interacts with the aesthetic object, the observer absorbs and internalizes aesthetic emotions through the cognitive process. In turn, these emotions are converted into his individual thoughts, which feed back into his experience to become aesthetic experiences and shape his perception of beauty (Lussier, 2010).
审美不仅限于外观、形式或美的抽象概念。相反，审美体验是一种复杂的认知现象，由多个通过互动发生的过程组成（Xenakis 和 Arnellos，2014）。Stolnitz（1978）认为，审美体验是个体采取无私和同情的关注态度以及沉思时所发生的体验。Tatarkiewicz（1980）提出，审美体验只是观察或思考的一种形式，是通过纯粹的欣赏而非行动产生的体验。这种体验可以应用于未来的创作中。Maquet（1986）评论说，当观察者与审美对象互动时，观察者通过认知过程吸收并内化审美情感。反过来，这些情感被转化为他个人的思想，这些思想反馈到他的体验中，成为审美体验并塑造他对美的感知（Lussier，2010）。
Averill et al. (1998) proposed that the aesthetic experience consists not only of pleasant experiences (Xenakis and Arnellos, 2014). For instance, in times of hardships, overcoming difficulties will bring about joy and satisfaction. Frijda (1986) noted that challenges and
Averill 等人（1998 年）提出，审美体验不仅包括愉悦的经历（Xenakis 和 Arnellos，2014 年）。例如，在困难时期，克服困难将带来快乐和满足。Frijda（1986 年）指出，挑战和
control (mastery) can play a role in aesthetic appreciation, and can also enhance the individual’s cognitive and assimilative abilities. They can also help one to process reality and emotional efforts via the security of aesthetics at a distance (Lin, 2009). As such, there are four attributes to the aesthetic experience: happiness, focus, motivation and challenges.
控制（掌握）在审美欣赏中可以发挥作用，也可以增强个体的认知和吸收能力。它们还可以帮助人们通过美学距离的安全感来处理现实和情感努力（林，2009）。因此，审美体验有四个属性：快乐、专注、动机和挑战。
From the perspective of aesthetic experience theory and creative cognition, aesthetic experience is a form of meditation, which absorbs and integrates the individual’s thoughts and the feedback experience (Lussier, 2010). These experiences, when combined with the conscious and the subconscious, have the potential to inspire creativity and may play a part in subsequent creative endeavors (Richards, 2007). Individuals like to appreciate beautiful objects and are easily attracted by them subconsciously. Taking joy in diversity and different ideas, as well as locating good aspects and values in unpleasant matters, can help develop one’s vision and thinking, and stimulate innovative performance (Runco, 2007). However, innovation is built on a foundations of creativity (Amabile, 1996), as creativity is related to the development of idiosyncratic cognitive processes that induce idea creation (Anderson et al., 2014). As such, students’ aesthetic experiences have a significant impact on cultivating and stimulating their creativity and innovative performance (Maquet, 1986; Carbon, 2011; Xenakis and Arnellos, 2014; Lin, 2009).
从审美体验理论和创造性认知的角度来看，审美体验是一种冥想，它吸收和整合个体的思想和反馈经验（Lussier，2010）。这些体验，当与意识和潜意识相结合时，有可能激发创造力，并在随后的创造性活动中发挥作用（Richards，2007）。人们喜欢欣赏美好的事物，并容易在潜意识中被它们吸引。享受多样性、不同的想法，以及在不愉快的事情中找到好的方面和价值，可以帮助发展个人的视野和思维，并刺激创新表现（Runco，2007）。然而，创新建立在创造力的基础上（Amabile，1996），因为创造力与诱导思想创造的独特认知过程的发展有关（Anderson 等人，2014）。因此，学生的审美体验对培养和激发他们的创造力和创新表现有重大影响（Maquet，1986Carbon，2011Xenakis 和 Arnellos，2014Lin，2009）。
2.2 The relationship between aesthetic experience, creative self-efficacy and innovative behaviors
2.2 美学体验、创造性自我效能与创新行为之间的关系
Bandura (1986) believed that under specific circumstances, individuals would develop a unique sense of self-efficacy and create an experience that enables the individual to be confident about facing surrounding challenges. In consolidating self-efficacy theories and creativity theories, Tierney and Farmer (2002) underlined the notion of creative self-efficacy and defined it as the belief that oneself has the capacity to produce creative outcomes when tasked. Beghetto (2009) set out creative self-efficacy as the self-judgment of one’s own ability to generate novel and appropriate ideas, solutions and behave accordingly. For Gong et al.
班杜拉（1986）认为，在特定情况下，个体会发展出独特的自我效能感，并创造出一种使个体在面对周围挑战时充满信心的经验。在整合自我效能感理论和创造力理论时，蒂尔尼和法默（2002）强调了创造性自我效能感的概念，并将其定义为当被赋予任务时相信自己有能力产生创造性成果的信念。贝格赫托（2009）将创造性自我效能感定义为对自己产生新颖和适当想法、解决方案的能力的自我判断，并据此行事。对于贡等。
(2009), creative self-efficacy refers to the belief that oneself has the knowledge and skills to engage in innovative behavior.
(2009) 创造性自我效能感是指相信自己拥有参与创新行为的知识和技能。
Kaufman and Sternberg (2010) emphasized that individuals can absorb particular domain knowledge and internalize it. During this process, the awareness, experience and motivation
考夫曼和斯特恩伯格（2010）强调，个人可以吸收特定领域的知识并将其内化。在这个过程中，意识、经验和动机
(among other experiences) generated will make individuals confident in their ability to innovate. As pinpointed by Bandura (1997), innovation requires a strong sense of self-belief and perseverance, which translates to creative self-efficacy. Past experiences of the visual arts, along with contemplative techniques that arise from other experiential memories and personal development, are core to connecting the individual’s current experience of beautiful objects with aesthetic experiences. The boundless potential of the object can thus be manifested; at the same time the individual gains confidence subconsciously (Maquet, 1986). Additionally, Girod et al. (2010) discovered that the benefits of aesthetic experience are not only seen in the learning outcomes but also in learners’ belief in self-efficacy as they explore further and deeper. Expanding students’ aesthetic experience will help stimulate their creative self-efficacy (Kinnebrew and Biswas, 2011).
（其他经历）产生的将使个人对自己的创新能力充满信心。正如 Bandura（1997）所指出的，创新需要强烈的自我信念和毅力，这转化为创造性自我效能感。视觉艺术的过往经历，以及源自其他经验记忆和个人发展的沉思技巧，是连接个人当前对美好物体的体验与审美体验的核心。因此，物体的无限潜能得以体现；同时，个人在潜意识中获得了信心（Maquet，1986）。此外，Girod 等人（2010）发现，审美体验的好处不仅体现在学习成果上，也体现在学习者探索得更深、更广时对自我效能感的信念上。扩展学生的审美体验将有助于激发他们的创造性自我效能感（Kinnebrew 和 Biswas，2011）。
According to Bandura (1986) social cognitive theory, human behavior is the result of the continuous interaction of the individual, actions and the environment. It also emphasized that the individual’s cognitive processes have a significant impact on his behavior; self-efficacy is crucial to the ability to self-regulate, and also mediates between perceived experience and behavioral manifestation. Davies et al. (2009) pointed out that taking art courses to broaden students’ aesthetic experiences can also enhance daily learning motivation. Aesthetic experiences can trigger students’ intrinsic motivation and creative self-efficacy, thus boosting their creativity (Dewey, 1981; Lin, 2009; Maquet, 1986). As such, individuals will absorb, accumulate and internalize the beautiful things they see into potential experiences. This can
根据班杜拉（1986）的社会认知理论，人类行为是个体、行为和环境持续互动的结果。它还强调，个体的认知过程对其行为有重大影响；自我效能感对自我调节能力至关重要，并在感知经验和行为表现之间起中介作用。戴维斯等人（2009）指出，通过艺术课程拓宽学生的审美体验也可以增强日常学习动机。审美体验可以激发学生的内在动机和创造性自我效能感，从而提高他们的创造力（杜威，1981；林，2009；马凯特，1986）。因此，个体会将他们所看到的美好事物吸收、积累并内化为潜在的经验。这可以
JARHE
enhance their confidence in creative thinking or their creations, giving them the courage to accept challenges, and thereby inspiring and spurring their innovative performances.
增强他们在创造性思维或创作方面的信心，给予他们接受挑战的勇气，从而激发并推动他们的创新表现。
Methods
方法
3.1 Research framework
3.1 研究框架
Based on Bandura (1986) social cognitive theory, this study explores the influence of aesthetic experience on the innovative behavior of Thai and Chinese students, with the focus on creative self-efficacy as a mediating factor. Comparisons are also made of the path relations between students of the two countries. This study is conducted using the method of multigroup structural equation modeling. The research framework can be seen in Figure 1
基于班杜拉（1986）的社会认知理论，本研究探讨了审美体验对泰国和中国学生创新行为的影响，重点关注创造性自我效能作为中介因素。同时，还比较了两国学生之间的路径关系。本研究采用多组结构方程模型法进行。研究框架可见图 1。.
3.2 Research subjects and sampling
3.2 研究对象和抽样
The subjects of this study are Thai students and Chinese students studying in Thailand. Students studying in the Department of Business Administration and the Department of Finance from three Thai universities were selected for this study. Both Thai and Chinese students can be found in these courses. A formal questionnaire was distributed to all three universities, surveying 35 Thai and 35 Chinese students in each of the departments. In total, 420 questionnaires were distributed, with 210 questionnaires distributed to Thai and Chinese students, respectively. A total of 397 responses were collected. After deducting partial and invalid responses, there were 329 valid responses, consisting of responses from 170 Thai students and 159 Chinese students, across 152 finance students and 177 business students. Of which, 142 were male and 187 female.
本研究的对象是泰国学生和在泰国学习的中国学生。从三所泰国大学的商业管理系和金融系选出了学生参与本研究。在这些课程中可以找到泰国学生和中国学生。向三所大学发放了正式问卷，调查了每个系 35 名泰国学生和 35 名中国学生。总共发放了 420 份问卷，其中分别向泰国学生和中国学生发放了 210 份。共收集到 397 份回复。扣除部分和无效回复后，共有 329 份有效回复，包括 170 名泰国学生和 159 名中国学生的回复，涉及 152 名金融系学生和 177 名商业系学生。其中，142 名是男性，187 名是女性。
3.3 Research tools
3.3 研究工具
Aesthetic experience scale. This study uses the Students’ Aesthetic Experience Scale proposed by Chang (2017), comprising 21 questions and four dimensions – “pleasure of beauty,”
审美体验量表本研究采用张（2017）提出的《学生审美体验量表》，包含 21 个问题和四个维度——“美的愉悦”、“
“aesthetic attitude,” “understanding of beauty,” and “full experience”. The scale was translated into Thai for the Thai students. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was carried out on data for both Thai and Chinese students. Pertaining to the CFA conducted for Chinese students, the factor loading of each dimension is between 0.481 and 0.804. The construct reliability (CR) assessment yielded scores of 0.835, 0.771, 0.870 and 0.766 respectively, exceeding the evaluative criterion score of 0.70. The average variances extracted (AVE) were
审美态度，“美感理解”，以及“全面体验”。量表被翻译成泰语供泰国学生使用。对泰国和中国学生的数据进行验证性因素分析（CFA）。关于对中国学生进行的 CFA，每个维度的因子负荷在 0.481 到 0.804 之间。结构可靠性（CR）评估得到了 0.835、0.771、0.870 和 0.766 的分数，均超过了 0.70 的评估标准分数。提取的平均方差（AVE）为
0.461, 0.430, 0.574 and 0.406, respectively, exceeding the evaluative criterion score of 0.40
0.461、0.430、0.574 和 0.406，分别超过评估标准分数 0.40
(Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The Thai edition of the aesthetic experience scale was translated by a Thai teacher teaching Chinese. Three Thai scholars were then invited to review and revise the translated questions. Pertaining to the CFA conducted, the factor loading of each dimension is between 0.508 and 0.814. The CR scores were 0.828, 0.790, 0.836 and 0.769. The AVE were 0.450, 0.433, 0.506 and 0.406.
(福内尔和拉尔克，1981)。审美体验量表泰语版由一位教授中文的泰国教师翻译。随后，三位泰国学者被邀请审查和修订翻译后的问题。关于进行的验证性因素分析，每个维度的因子负荷在 0.508 到 0.814 之间。CR 分数为 0.828、0.790、0.836 和 0.769。AVE 分别为 0.450、0.433、0.506 和 0.406。
Figure 1.
图 1
Research structure
研究结构
Creative self-efficacy scale. This study uses the Students’ Creative Self-Efficacy Scale created by Hung et al. (2008), comprising 12 questions and three dimensions – “creative thinking beliefs,” “creative product faith” and “the faith of against the negative evaluation”. Reliability analysis was first carried out. As Questions 8 and 11 did not meet the reliability criterion, they were removed. The Cronbach’s α values of the three dimensions were 0.809, 0.710 and 0.704. Pertaining to the CFA conducted for the Chinese students, the factor loading of each dimension is between 0.65 and 0.84. The CR scores were 0.824, 0.836 and 0.785, respectively. The AVE were 0.541, 0.631 and 0.552, respectively. Pertaining to the CFA conducted for the Thai students, the factor loading of each dimension is between 0.61 and 0.77. The CR scores were 0.817, 0.703 and 0.684, respectively, while the AVE were 0.528, 0.438 and 0.416, respectively.
创造性自我效能感量表本研究采用了 Hung 等人（2008 年）创建的“学生创造性自我效能感量表”，包含 12 个问题和三个维度——“创造性思维信念”、“创造性产品信仰”以及“对抗负面评价的信仰”。首先进行了可靠性分析。由于第 8 题和第 11 题未达到可靠性标准，因此被删除。三个维度的 Cronbach's α值分别为 0.809、0.710 和 0.704。关于对中国学生的验证性因素分析，每个维度的因子负荷在 0.65 到 0.84 之间。CR 得分分别为 0.824、0.836 和 0.785，AVE 值分别为 0.541、0.631 和 0.552。关于对泰国学生的验证性因素分析，每个维度的因子负荷在 0.61 到 0.77 之间。CR 得分分别为 0.817、0.703 和 0.684，AVE 值分别为 0.528、0.438 和 0.416。
Innovative behavior scale. This study uses the innovative behavior scale developed by Chang (2018), comprising 11 themes and three dimensions – “opportunity exploration,”
创新行为量表本研究采用张（2018）开发的创新行为量表，包括 11 个主题和三个维度——“机会探索”，
“generativity and formative investigation,” and “championing and application”. The Cronbach’s α values were 0.757, 0.808 and 0.703, respectively. Pertaining to the CFA conducted for the Chinese students, the factor loading is between 0.57 and 0.85. The CR scores were 0.818, 0.829 and 0.787, respectively, the AVE were 0.601, 0.496 and 0.486, respectively. Pertaining to the CFA conducted for the Thai students, the factor loading of each dimension is between 0.57 and 0.85. The CR scores were 0.746, 0.810 and 0.711, respectively, while the AVE were 0.497, 0.462 and 0.453, respectively.
生成性和形成性研究，以及倡导和应用。Cronbach's α值分别为 0.757、0.808 和 0.703。关于对中国学生的 CFA 分析，因子负荷在 0.57 到 0.85 之间。CR 得分分别为 0.818、0.829 和 0.787，AVE 分别为 0.601、0.496 和 0.486。关于对泰国学生的 CFA 分析，每个维度的因子负荷在 0.57 到 0.85 之间。CR 得分分别为 0.746、0.810 和 0.711，AVE 分别为 0.497、0.462 和 0.453。
4. Results
4. 结果
First, the differences in the variables between Thai and Chinese students were analyzed.
首先，分析了泰国学生和中国学生在变量上的差异。
Then, multiple group structural equation modeling was used for the analysis of the overall model of the students and gap analysis of path relations between variables relating to the Thai and Chinese students.
然后，使用多组结构方程模型分析了学生整体模型以及与泰国和中国学生相关的变量之间的路径关系差距分析。
The t-test was used to analyze the gap between Thai and Chinese students in terms of aesthetic experiences, creative self-efficacy and innovative behavior. Comparing their aesthetic experiences, the Chinese students (M 5 4.43) scored higher than the Thai students
该测试用于分析泰国学生和中国学生在审美体验、创造力自我效能和创新行为方面的差距。比较他们的审美体验，中国学生（M 5 4.43）的得分高于泰国学生。
(M 5 4.07), with the difference being significant (t 5 5.50, p 5 0.000). Regarding creative self- efficacy, the Chinese students (M 5 3.82) scored higher than the Thai students (M 5 3.59), with the difference being significant (t 5 3.64, p 5 0.000). As for innovative behaviors, the Thai students (M 5 2.88) scored higher than the Chinese students (M 5 2.69); with the difference being significant (t 5 0.32, p 5 0.001).
（M 5 4.07），差异显著（5 5.50，p 5 0.000）。关于创造性自我效能，中国学生（M 5 3.82）的得分高于泰国学生（M 5 3.59），差异显著（5 3.64，p 5 0.000）。至于创新行为，泰国学生（M 5 2.88）的得分高于中国学生（M 5 2.69）；差异显著（5 0.32，p 5 0.001）。
4.1 Cross-validity test
4.1 交叉验证测试
To avoid the structural model and theory falling into the danger of data-driven generalizations, this study adopted Hair et al. (2010) suggestion. The two sample groups of Thai and Chinese students were selected via multigroup multipattern matching in conjunction with the bootstrap technique. The parameters of the structural model were gradually limited and the settings used in the order from lax to strict – “unconstrained,”“measurement weights,” “structural weights,”
为避免结构模式与理论陷入数据驱动的泛化危险，本研究采用了 Har 等人（2010）的建议。通过 mugroup mulpaern machng 和 bootstrap 技术联合选择，选取了泰国和中国学生的两组样本。结构模型的参数逐渐减少，并按照从宽松到严格的顺序使用设置——“无约束”、“测量权重”、“结构权重”。
“structural covariances,” and “structural residuals”. The significance test was carried out by using the difference in χ2 between nested models under various constraints to determine whether the above parameters were reasonable when the two groups were set to be equivalent. The test results are shown in Table 1. The analysis results show that the χ2/df values of the structural models of each group are between 1.928 and 1.942. The RMSEA is between 0.053 and 0.054, while expected cross-validation index (ECVI) falls within the 90% confidence interval of each group. Comparing the results of the nested models in Table 1, other than the p-value in the increment of χ2 value for structural residuals reaching a significant level, the p-values in the
结构协方差，”和“结构缩减”显著性检验是通过使用嵌套模型在不同约束下的χ2 差异来进行的，以确定当两组被设定为等效时，上述参数是否合理。估计结果如表 1 所示。分析结果显示，每个组结构模型的χ2/df 值介于 1.928 和 1942 之间。RMSEA 值介于 0.053 和 0.054 之间，而预期交叉验证指数（ECVI）落在每个组的 90%置信区间内。比较表 1 中嵌套模型的結果，除了结构残差增量χ2 值的 p 值达到显著性水平外，其他 p 值未达到显著性水平。
increment of χ2 value for the other three models are all greater than 0.05. This indicates that this study model has good invariance between groups.The NFI increment between the models is also less than 0.05, which is in line with the standard recommended by Little (1997). Therefore, the structural model of Thai and Chinese students can be regarded as equivalent, and the proposed structural framework in this study has cross-sample stability, and is conducive to the subsequent use of this model in comparing the structural model parameters between Thai and Chinese students
χ²值增量对于其他三种模式来说更大，这表明本研究模型在组间具有良好的方差。NFI 在模式之间的增量也小于 0.05，这与 Lle（1997）推荐的标准一致。因此，泰国学生和中国学生的结构模式可以被视为等效的，本研究中提出的结构框架具有跨样本稳定性，有利于在比较泰国学生和中国学生的结构模式参数时使用该模式。.
4.2 SEM analysis of Thai students and Chinese international students
4.2 泰国学生和中国国际学生的 SEM 分析
4.2.1 Thai students. First, the overall adaptability test of the overall model for Thai students was carried out. Measures of absolute fit: χ2 5 1,578.549; χ2/df 5 1.958. RMSEA 5 0.075, it was acceptable as it was less than 0.80 (McDonald and Ho, 2002). GFI 5 0.705, as pointed out by Bollen (1990), the GFI and AGFI would be underestimated when the sample size is small. SRMR 5 0.055, which was close to the criterion value of 0.05 (Hu and Bentler, 1999). Incremental fit measures: the CFI, IFI, NNFI were 0.763, 0.767 and 0.747, respectively. Parsimonious fit measures: PNFI and PGFI were 0.578 and 0.629, respectively (Breivik and Olsson, 2001). As such, the fit between the theoretical model and observation data is
4.2.1 泰国学生。首先，对泰国学生的整体模型进行了整体适应性测试。绝对拟合度指标：χ2 = 5 1,578.549；χ2/df = 5 1.958。RMSEA = 5 0.075，因为它小于 0.80（McDonald 和 Ho，2002），所以是可以接受的。GFI = 5 0.705，正如 Bollen（1990）所指出的，当样本量较小时，GFI 和 AGFI 会被低估。SRMR = 5 0.055，接近标准值 0.05（Hu 和 Bentler，1999）。增量拟合度指标：CFI、IFI、NNFI 分别为 0.763、0.767 和 0.747。简约拟合度指标：PNFI 和 PGFI 分别为 0.578 和 0.629（Breivik 和 Olsson，2001）。因此，理论模型与观测数据之间的拟合度
acceptable.
可接受。
As seen from Table 2, the path coefficients between aesthetic experience and innovative behavior, and that between creative self-efficacy and innovative behavior of Thai students are 0.400 (p < 0.05) and 0.602 (p < 0.05). These show that the aesthetic experience and creative self-efficacy of Thai students had a significant positive impact on their innovative behavior
如表 2 所示，审美体验与创新行为之间的路径系数以及泰国学生的创造力自我效能与创新行为之间的路径系数分别为 0.400（p < 0.05）和 0.602（p < 0.05）。这表明泰国学生的审美体验和创造力自我效能对其创新行为有显著的正向影响。
(Runco, 2007; Lin, 2009; Carbon, 2011; Xenakis and Arnellos, 2014). Secondly, the structural coefficient between aesthetic experience and creative self-efficacy is 0.717 (p < 0.05), indicating that as students expand their aesthetic experiences, their sense of creative self- efficacy would also elevate (Girod et al., 2010; Kinnebrew and Biswas, 2011).
（Runco, 2007 林，2009 碳，2011Xenakis 和 Arnellos，2014）。其次，审美体验与创造力自我效能感之间的结构系数为 0.717（p < 0.05），表明随着学生审美体验的扩展，他们的创造力自我效能感也会提升（Girod 等人，2010Kinnebrew 和 Biswas，2011）。
When testing the mediation model, the bootstrapping method proposed by Shrout and Bolger (2002) was used to improve the accuracy of the estimate derived from the mediation effect test. The indirect effect of creative self-efficacy on aesthetic experience and innovative behavior shows a value of 0.432 (0.717 * 0.602). The confidence interval [0.247, 0.767] does not contain 0. It reached a significant level (p < 0.05), which indicates that creative self-efficacy has mediating effects. Its direct effect has a value of 0.400, and the confidence interval [0.071, 0.658] does contain 0. The overall effect is 0.832 (0.400 þ 0.432) and the confidence interval
在测试中介模型时，使用了 Shrout 和 Bolger（2002）提出的自举法来提高从中介效应测试中得出的估计值的准确性。创造性自我效能对审美体验和创新行为的影响的间接效应显示值为 0.432（0.717 * 0.602）。置信区间[0.247, 0.767]不包含 0，达到了显著性水平（p < 0.05），这表明创造性自我效能具有中介作用。其直接效应的值为 0.400，置信区间[0.071, 0.658]包含 0。整体效应为 0.832（0.400 + 0.432）和置信区间
[0.526, 0.860] does not contain 0. This indicates that creative self-efficacy has a partial mediating effect on aesthetic experience and innovative behavior (Table 2 and Figure 2). It shows that the aesthetic experience of the Thai students had a direct impact on innovative behavior and can also impact innovative behavior through creative self-efficacy.
[0.526, 0.860] 不包含 0。这表明创造性自我效能对审美体验和创新行为有部分中介作用（见表 2 和图 2）。这表明泰国学生的审美体验对创新行为有直接影响，也可以通过创造性自我效能影响创新行为。
Model
模型
χ2
df χ2/df p RMSEA NFI ECVI
df χ²/df p RMSEA NFI ECVI
0.9 CI
Unconstrained
无约束
Measurement weights
测量权重
Structural weights
结构权重
Structural covariances
结构协方差
Structural residuals 2-1
结构残余 21
3-1
4-1
5-1
3108.647 1,612
3186.011 1,644
3204.420 1,654
3204.436 1,655
3236.626 1,667
77.364 32
95.773 42
95.789 43
127.978 55
1.928 0.000
1.938 0.000
1.937 0.000
1.936 0.000
1.942 0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.053 0.636
0.054 0.627
0.054 0.625
0.054 0.625
0.054 0.621
0.009
0.011
0.011
0.015
10.693 [10.222~1.188]
10.734 [10.257~11.235]
10.729 [10.250~11.232]
10.723 [10.244~11.225]
10.748 [10.267~11.263]
Estimate p-value Confidence interval Estimate p-value Confidence interval
估计 p 值 置信区间 估计 p 值 置信区间
Influence of aesthetic experience
审美体验的影响
Direct effect | ||
AE → CS 0.717 0.000 [0.530, 0.864] 0.819 0.000 | [0.650, 0.912] | |
CS → IB 0.602 0.000 [0.320, 0.887] 0.815 0.000 | [0.351, 1.411] | |
AE → IB 0.400 0.001 [0.074, 0.661] 0.069 0.659 [ [0.540, 0.484] | ||
Indirect effect | ||
AE → CS → IB 0.432 0.000 [0.247, 0.767] 0.667 0.000 | [0.298, 1.311] | |
Table 2. | ||
Total effect | ||
AE → IB 0.832 0.000 [0.526, 0.860] 0.736 | [0.583, 0.850] | Bootstrap SEM analysis of total, direct |
Note(s): AE 5 Aesthetic experience; CS 5 Creative self-efficacy; IB 5 Innovative behavior | and indirect effects | |
4.2.2 Chinese international students. The overall fit measures values are as follows. Measures of absolute fit: χ2 5 1,530.087, χ2/df 5 1.898, RMSEA 5 0.075, GFI 5 0.694, AGFI 5 0.658, SRMR 5 0.47. Incremental fit measures: CFI 5 0.796, IFI 5 0.800, NNFI 5 0.783. Parsimonious fit measures: PNFI 5 0.612, PGFI 5 0.620 (Breivik and Olsson, 2001). The fit between the theoretical model and observation data is acceptable.
4.2.2 中国国际学生。整体拟合度测量值如下。绝对拟合度测量：χ2 5 1,530.087，χ2/df 5 1.898，RMSEA 5 0.075，GFI 5 0.694，AGFI 5 0.658，SRMR 5 0.47。增量拟合度测量：CFI 5 0.796，IFI 5 0.800，NNFI 5 0.783。简约拟合度测量：PNFI 5 0.612，PGFI 5 0.620（Breivik and Olsson，2001）。理论模型与观测数据之间的拟合度是可以接受的。
As seen from Table 2, the path coefficients between aesthetic experience and creative self- efficacy, and between creative self-efficacy and the innovative behavior of Chinese international students are 0.069 (p > 0.05) and 0.815 (p < 0.001), respectively. These show that while the aesthetic experiences of the Chinese international students had no impact on their innovative behavior, creative self-efficacy had a positive effect on their innovative behavior. Secondly, the path coefficient between aesthetic experience and creative self- efficacy is 0.819 (p < 0.001).
从表 2 中可以看出，审美体验与创造性自我效能感、创造性自我效能感与创新行为之间的路径系数分别为 0.069（p > 0.05）和 0.815（p < 0.001）。这表明，尽管中国留学生的审美体验对其创新行为没有影响，但创造性自我效能感对其创新行为有积极影响。其次，审美体验与创造性自我效能感之间的路径系数为 0.819（p < 0.001）。
In terms of mediating effect, the indirect effect of creative self-efficacy of Chinese students on aesthetic experience and innovative behavior shows a value of 0.667 (0.819 * 0.815), and the confidence interval [0.298, 1.311] does not contain 0, which indicates that creative self- efficacy has mediating effects. Its direct effect has a value of 0.07 and the confidence interval
关于中介效应，中国学生创造性自我效能对审美体验和创新行为的间接效应值为 0.667（0.819 * 0.815），置信区间[0.298, 1.311]不包含 0，这表明创造性自我效能具有中介效应。其直接效应值为 0.07，置信区间
interval [0.583, 0.850] does not contain 0. This indicates that creative self-efficacy fully mediates between aesthetic experience and innovative behavior (Table 2 and Figure 3). It shows that the aesthetic experience of Chinese international students has to be mediated through creative self-efficacy before it can spur innovative behavior.
间隔 [0.583, 0.850] 不包含 0。这表明创造性自我效能完全在审美体验和创新行为之间起中介作用（见表 2 和图 3）。这表明中国留学生的审美体验必须通过创造性自我效能来中介，才能激发创新行为。
4.3 Comparing the path relations between variables relating to Thai students and Chinese international students
4.3 比较与泰国学生和中国国际学生相关的变量之间的路径关系
Multigroup SEM was used to estimate the path relations between the variables. And the path coefficients were standardized to verify further whether there were any significant differences in the three-path relations between the structural model of Thai students and Chinese international students. Per the suggestion of Tsang (2002), a “joint t-test” is used to identify the significance of path relations between models.
多组结构方程模型（Multigroup SEM）被用于估计变量之间的路径关系。路径系数被标准化以进一步验证泰国学生和中国国际学生的结构模型之间是否存在三条路径关系的显著差异。根据 Tsang（2002）的建议，使用“联合检验”来识别模型之间路径关系的显著性。
The results are as shown in Table 3. Both “Aesthetic Experience → Creativity Self-
结果显示如表 3 所示。两者“审美体验→创造力自我”
international students, the influence of aesthetic experience on creative self-efficacy, and the influence of creative self-efficacy on innovative behavior, is greater than that of Thai students. Meanwhile, “Creativity Self-Efficacy → Innovation Behavior” (t 5 2.041, p < 0.01) shows a positive significant difference, indicating that for Thai students, the influence of
国际学生，审美体验对创造力自我效能的影响，以及创造力自我效能对创新行为的影响，大于泰国学生。同时，“创造力自我效能 → 创新行为”（5 2.041，p < 0.01）显示出显著的正面差异，表明对于泰国学生来说，创造力自我效能对
JARHE
Figure 2.
图 2
SEM path coefficient diagram (Thailand students)
沉浸式翻译路径系数图（泰国学生）
Influence of aesthetic experience
审美体验的影响
Figure 3.
图 3
SEM path coefficient diagram (China
沉浸式路径系数图（中国）
students)
学生）
aesthetic experience on innovative behavior is greater than that of Chinese international
审美体验在创新行为上大于中国国际化
students.
学生。
Discussion and conclusion
讨论和结论
From the study findings, it can be noted that as Thai students encounter more aesthetic experiences, they receive more boosts to their creative self-efficacy and innovative behavior. Creative self-efficacy also contributes to innovative behavior, and students’ aesthetic experiences can spur innovative behavior through creative self-efficacy. This entails that as students take joy in the beauty they discover in their daily lives, they are able to share and analyze these pleasant experiences. These processes may become part of their experiences and potential source of strength, in turn boosting their confidence toward creativity and the creation process. As such, students will have more innovative thoughts and actions (Carbon, 2011; Webster and Wolfe, 2013; Xenakis and Arnellos, 2014).
从研究结果中可以看出，随着泰国学生遇到更多的审美体验，他们的创造性自我效能感和创新行为得到更多提升。创造性自我效能感也促进了创新行为，学生的审美体验可以通过创造性自我效能感激发创新行为。这意味着，当学生们在日常生活中发现美时，他们能够分享和分析这些愉快的体验。这些过程可能成为他们经验的一部分，并成为潜在的力量来源，从而增强他们对创造力和创作过程的信心。因此，学生们将拥有更多创新思想和行动（Carbon，2011；Webster 和 Wolfe，2013；Xenakis 和 Arnellos，2014）。
For Chinese international students, their aesthetic experiences contribute to the elevation of creative self-efficacy. Their creative self-efficacy can also contribute to the development of their innovative behaviors. However, aesthetic experiences do not directly impact innovative behavior. It is also observed that the aesthetic experiences of Chinese students only contribute to the development of students’ innovative behaviors via creative self-efficacy
对于中国留学生来说，他们的审美体验有助于提升创造性自我效能感。他们的创造性自我效能感也可以促进他们创新行为的开发。然而，审美体验并不直接影响创新行为。同时观察到，中国学生的审美体验仅通过创造性自我效能感促进学生的创新行为发展。
(Davies et al., 2009; Lin, 2009; Maquet, 1986). As such, it can be concluded that the creative self-efficacy of Chinese students is essential to spurring innovative behavior; it can impact the students’ innovative behavior both directly and indirectly.
(戴维斯等人，2009 年；林，2009 年；马凯特，1986 年)。因此，可以得出结论，中国学生的创造性自我效能对于激发创新行为至关重要；它可以直接和间接地影响学生的创新行为。
With regard to the differences in paths relations between the various variables relating to the Thai students and Chinese international students, the influence of Chinese students’ aesthetic experiences on creative self-efficacy, and that of creative self-efficacy on innovative behavior, was stronger than that of Thai students. However, the impact of the aesthetic experience of Thai students on innovative behaviors was greater than that of Chinese students. This indicates that by harnessing the love for things of beauty, understanding how beauty is created, being accepting of diverse cultures and ideas, and recalling pleasant experiences, Thai students can develop a potential source of energy created by the combination of the conscious and the subconscious, and which will inspire innovation. The aesthetic experiences gained need to be accompanied with a boost in Chinese students’ confidence and faith in creativity, before they can contribute to the innovative behavior.
关于泰国学生和中国国际学生在路径关系上的差异，中国学生的审美体验对创造性自我效能的影响，以及创造性自我效能对创新行为的影响，均强于泰国学生。然而，泰国学生的审美体验对创新行为的影响大于中国学生。这表明，通过利用对美好事物的热爱，理解美是如何创造的，接受不同的文化和思想，以及回忆愉快的经历，泰国学生可以发展出由意识和潜意识结合产生的潜在能量源，这将激发创新。在审美体验获得的同时，需要提高中国学生对创造力的信心和信念，他们才能对创新行为做出贡献。
Chinese students (4.431) are more exposed to aesthetic experiences than Thai students
中国学生（4.431）比泰国学生更易接触审美体验
(4.068). This may be because their schools in China had offered fine arts and art-related courses and also had a stronger focus on grades. On the other hand, Thai students may have also studied courses related to the aesthetics, but are not as obsessed with grades. Their learning journey and (learning) environment is laxer as well (Gunawan, 2016; Yuenyong and Yuenyong, 2012). The processes Thai students engage in – appreciating beauty in their daily lives, being accepting of different cultures and ideas, or sharing these experiences with others – can be translated into personal experiences (Lussier, 2010). These may play a role in the future when innovation is needed.
(4.068). 这可能是因为他们在中国的学校提供了美术和艺术相关课程，并且对成绩的重视程度更高。另一方面，泰国学生可能也学习了与美学相关的课程，但并不像中国学生那样对成绩如此着迷。他们的学习旅程和学习环境也更加宽松（Gunawan，2016Yuenyong 和 Yuenyong，2012）。泰国学生参与的过程——欣赏日常生活中的美，接受不同的文化和思想，或与他人分享这些经历——可以转化为个人体验（Lussier，2010）。这些可能在需要创新的未来发挥作用。
Thailand
泰国
Path comparisons Estimate p-value Estimate p-value z-score
路径比较 估计 p 值 估计 p 值 z 分数
Table 3.
表 3
Path comparisons between Thai students and Chinese international students
泰中留学生之间的路径比较
Aesthetic Experience → Creativity Self-Efficacy Aesthetic Experience → Innovation Behavior Creativity Self-Efficacy → Innovation Behavior Note(s): ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05
审美体验 → 创造力 自我效能感 审美体验 → 创新行为 创造力 自我效能感 → 创新行为 注释(s)***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05
1.933 0.000
1.140 0.000
1.164 0.000
0.531 0.001
0.491 0.000
2.041**
Conversely, Chinese schools are more grades-oriented (Yung, 2015) and more conservative. Students with different ideas may be scolded or teased. It is necessary for them to establish confidence and faith in creativity in order to translate aesthetic experiences into innovative behavior. Therefore, students should not only attend art classes but also understand the sense of beauty. They could obtain aesthetic experience if universities apply the four elements of aesthetic experience to their learning environments such as encouraging them to appreciate beauty, accept various ideas, understand the meaning of beauty from negative things and so on. Additionally, students could increase their self-efficacy and further advance the development of their innovative behavior by acquiring aesthetic experience.
相反，中国的学校更注重年级（杨，2015）且更为保守。持有不同观点的学生可能会受到责骂或嘲笑。他们有必要建立对创造力的信心和信念，以便将审美体验转化为创新行为。因此，学生不仅应该参加艺术课，还应该理解美的感觉。如果大学将审美体验的四个要素应用于他们的学习环境，例如鼓励他们欣赏美、接受各种观点、从负面事物中理解美的意义等，他们就可以获得审美体验。此外，通过获得审美体验，学生可以增强他们的自我效能感，并进一步推进他们创新行为的发展。
From the gap analysis, it can also be seen that there are statistically significant differences in the path relations between the various variables relating to Thai and Chinese students. This signifies that although the Chinese students are presently studying in Thai universities, and may even be in the same university and department as their Thai peers and immersed in the same learning environment, there remain differences between Thai and Chinese students. The differences could be attributed to the differing environments, cultures and prior learning experiences they were exposed to growing up. As such, schools should pay attention to the differences in learning experiences of students from different countries.
从差距分析中，也可以看出泰国学生和中国学生在各种相关变量之间的路径关系存在统计学上的显著差异。这表明，尽管中国学生目前正在泰国大学学习，甚至可能与泰国同学在同一所大学和系别，并沉浸在相同的学习环境中，但泰国学生和中国学生之间仍然存在差异。这些差异可能归因于他们在成长过程中所接触到的不同环境、文化和先前学习经验。因此，学校应关注来自不同国家的学生在学习经验上的差异。
6. Recommendation
6. 建议
The aesthetic experiences and creative self-efficacy of Thai students can promote the innovative behavior. As Thai students scored lower than Chinese students in these two
泰国学生的审美体验和创造力自我效能感可以促进创新行为。由于泰国学生在这些方面得分低于中国学生。
aspects, schools should encourage and help students increase their aesthetic experiences and creative self-efficacy. Schools can offer courses related to the aesthetics; Thai students who are already living in a beautiful country and multicultural society can then better understand the meaning of beauty. Schools should also encourage and support students to boost their confidence toward innovation as well enhance their innovative behavior.
方面，学校应鼓励并帮助学生增加他们的审美体验和创造力自我效能感。学校可以提供与美学相关的课程；生活在美丽国家和多文化社会的泰国学生可以更好地理解美的意义。学校还应鼓励并支持学生增强他们对创新的信心，并提升他们的创新行为。
The creative self-efficacy of Chinese students contributes to the development of innovative behavior, but aesthetic experience can only affect innovative behavior indirectly through creative self-efficacy. Therefore, it is necessary to enhance creative-self. This will be the most direct avenue to boost Chinese students’ innovative behavior.
中国学生的创造性自我效能感有助于创新行为的培养，但审美体验只能通过创造性自我效能感间接影响创新行为。因此，有必要增强创造性自我效能。这将是最直接提升中国学生创新行为的途径。
Chinese schools should strengthen efforts in fostering an open-minded learning environment andculture. Theyshouldpay more attentionnot only to students’ achievements but also to their learning processes and the significance of learning. The aim should be to allow students more freedom in learning and also accept ideas that may be differen
中国学校应加强培养开放的学习环境和氛围。他们应更加关注学生的成就以及他们的学习过程和学习的重要性。目标应该是允许学生在学习上拥有更多自由，并接受可能不同的观点t.
Thai students and Chinese students study together, there are still significant differences between them. Therefore, schools and teachers should take note of students from different countries and cultures. They should be concerned about their learning progress, and timely adjust teaching methods (Zhu et al., 2008) to make it easier for international students to adapt to the local learning environment. The learning culture in Thai schools is relatively diverse, lively and open-minded (Yuenyong and Yuenyong, 2012). That said, learning and interaction will be enhanced only if non-Thai students are also able to understand and appreciate Thai culture (Gunawan, 2016).
泰国学生和中国学生一起学习，他们之间仍然存在显著差异。因此，学校和教师应该注意来自不同国家和文化背景的学生。他们应该关注学生的学习进度，并及时调整教学方法（朱等，2008），以便国际学生更容易适应当地的学习环境。泰国学校的学风相对多样、活泼、开放（尤勇和尤勇，2012）。然而，只有非泰国学生也能理解和欣赏泰国文化，学习和互动才会得到加强（古纳万，2016）。
Innovation and economic growth cause each other in the development process (Agenor and Neanidis, 2015; Maradana et al., 2017). The aesthetic experiences of Thai students contribute to the development of creative self-efficacy and innovative behavior. The aesthetic experiences of Chinese students can also help to enhance creative self-efficacy. As a result, universities should advance students’ aesthetic experience by applying the four elements of aesthetic experience including “pleasure of beauty,” “aesthetic attitude,” “understanding of beauty,” and “full experience” to their learning environments and lessons, which could improve students’ creative self-efficacy and innovative behavior. In this study, the main
创新与经济增长在发展过程中相互促进（Agenor 和 Neanidis，2015；Maradana 等人，2017）。泰国学生的审美体验有助于提高创造力和创新行为。中国学生的审美体验同样有助于增强创造力自我效能。因此，大学应通过将审美体验的四个要素——包括“美的愉悦”、“审美态度”、“美的理解”和“全面体验”——应用于学习环境和课程中，以提升学生的创造力自我效能和创新行为。在本研究中，主要
subjects are Thai and Chinese international business students who have several differences. Nevertheless, aesthetic experience has a significantly positive effect on the development of innovative behavior. In conclusion, the sense of beauty is essentially useful for students. If other nations would like to improve their students’ innovative development, they might address and investigate factors regarding the sense of beauty.
主题是泰国和中国国际商务学生，他们之间存在一些差异。然而，审美体验对创新行为的培养有显著的正向影响。总之，美感对于学生来说本质上是有益的。如果其他国家想要提高学生的创新开发能力，他们可能需要关注和研究与美感相关的因素。
References
参考
Agenor, P. and Neanidis, K.C. (2015), “Innovation, public capital, and growth”, Journal of Macroeconomics, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 252-275.
Ageno P. 和 Neanidis K.C. (2015), 公共资本创新与增长，《宏观经济学》杂志，第 44 卷第 3 期，第 252-275 页。
cnik, K. and Zhou, J. (2014), “Innovation and creativity in organizations: a state-of- the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework”, Journal of Management
cnik，K.和周，J.（2014），组织中的创新与创造力：科学综述、前瞻性评论和指导框架，《管理杂志》,
Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 1297-1333.
第 40 卷第 5 期，第 1297-1333 页。
Amabile, T.M. (1996), Creativity in Context: Update to ‘The Social Psychology of Creativity’, Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
阿马比尔，T.M. (1996)，情境中的创造力：对《创造力的社会心理学》的更新，西观出版社，科罗拉多州博尔德
Averill, J.R., Stanat, P. and More, T.A. (1998), “Aesthetics and the environment”, Review of General Psychology, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 153-174.
Averill, J.R.，Stanat, P. 和 More, T.A. (1998)，美学与环境——普通心理学评论第 2 卷第 2 期，第 153-174 页。
Bandura, A. (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice
班杜拉，A.（1986），思维与行动的社会基础：一种社会认知理论，普伦蒂斯-
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
霍尔，恩格尔伍德 cliffs，新泽西州
Bandura, A. (1997), Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control, W. H. Freeman and Company, New York.
班杜拉，A.（1997），自我效能：控制之实践 WHFreeman and Company，纽约。
Beghetto, R.A. (2009), “Correlates of intellectual risk taking in elementary school science”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 210-223.
贝格托，R.A.（2009），小学科学中智力风险承担的相关因素，《科学教学研究杂志》第 46 卷第 2 期，第 210-223 页。
Breivik, E. and Olsson, U.H. (2001), “Adding variables to improve fit: the effect of model size on fit
布赖维克，E. 和 奥尔松，U.H. (2001)，添加变量以提高拟合度：模型大小对拟合度的影响
oreskog
oreskog
奥雷斯科格,
Scientific Software, Chicago, IL.
科学软件，芝加哥，伊利诺伊州。
Brown, G.T.L. and Gao, L. (2015), “Chinese teachers’ conceptions of assessment for and of learning: six competing and complementary purposes”, Cogent Education, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 1-19.
布朗，G.T.L. 和 高，L. (2015)，中国教师对学习评估的见解：六个相互竞争和补充的目的 Cogent Education 第 2 卷 第 1 期，第 119 页。
Bollen, K.A. (1990), “Overall fit in covariance structure models: two types of sample size effects”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 107 No. 2, pp. 256-259.
Bollen, K.A. (1990)，协方差结构模型中的整体拟合：两种样本大小效应类型心理通报第 107 卷第 2 期，第 256-259 页。
Carbon, C.C. (2011), “Cognitive mechanisms for explaining dynamics of aesthetic appreciation”, I- Perception, Vol. 2, pp. 708-719.
碳，C.C.（2011），解释审美欣赏动态的认知机制感知第 2 卷，第 7087-19 页。
Chang, Y.C. (2017), “Construction on students’ aesthetics experience scale”, The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 110-130.
长，Y.C.（2017），构建学生审美体验量表，《国际组织创新杂志》第 10 卷第 1 期，第 110-130 页。
Chang, Y.C. (2018), “Analyzing the moderating effect of knowledge innovation of tourism and hospitality department teachers on student creative self-efficacy and innovation behaviors by using hierarchical linear modeling”, Cogent Education, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
长，Y.C.（2018），通过层次线性模型分析旅游与酒店管理系教师知识创新对学生创造性自我效能和创新行为调节作用的研究，《Cogent Education》第 5 卷第 1 期，第 117 页。
Davies, S., Higgins, K., Hopkins, R., Stecker, R. and Cooper, D. (2009), A Companion to Aesthetics, Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, MA.
戴维斯，S.，希金斯，K.，霍普金斯，R.，斯特克，R.和库珀，D.（2009 年），《美学手册》威利-布莱克韦尔，马萨诸塞州，梅德登。
Dewey, J. (1981), “Experience and nature”, in Dewey, J. (Ed.), John Dewey: The Later Works, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, IL, Vol. 1, pp. 1925-1953.
杜威，J. (1981)，经验与自然杜威，J. (编)，约翰·杜威：后期作品南方伊利诺伊大学出版社，卡本代尔，伊利诺伊州，第 1 卷，第 1925-1953 页。
Edinger, E. (1968), “An outline of analytical psychology”, Quadrant, Vol. 1, pp. 1-12.
埃德 inger, E. (1968)，分析心理学概要《象限》杂志第 1 卷，第 112 页。
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Fornell, C. 和 Larcker, D.F. (1981)，评估具有不可观测变量和测量误差的结构方程模型，《市场研究杂志》第 18 卷第 1 期，第 3950 页。
Frijda, N. (1986), The Emotions, Cambridge University Press, New York.
弗里达，N.（1986），《情绪》剑桥大学出版社，纽约。
Girod, M., Twyman, T. and Wojcikiewicz, S. (2010), “Teaching and learning science for
Girod, M.，Twyman, T. 和 WojcikiewiczS（2010），教授并赚取科学知识
transformative, aesthetic experience”, Journal of Science Teacher Education, Vol. 21 No. 7,
颠覆性的审美体验 科学教师教育杂志 第 21 卷 第 7 期
pp. 14-28.
第 1428 页。
Gong, Y., Huang, J.C. and Farh, J.L. (2009), “Employee learning orientation, transformational
员工学习导向、转型领导与组织绩效
leadership, and employee creativity: the mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 765-778.
领导力、员工创造力：员工创造力自我效能感的调节作用《管理学报》第 52 卷第 4 期，第 765-778 页。
Gunawan, J. (2016), “Understanding culture in higher education in Thailand”, Education for Health
关万，J.（2016），泰国高等教育中的文化理解——健康教育,
Vol. 29 No. 2, p. 160.
第 29 卷 第 2 期，第 160 页。
Hair, J.F. Jr, Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
头发，J.F. 小，布莱克，W.C.，巴宾，B.J. 和 安德森，R.E. (2010)，多元数据分析第 7 版，普伦蒂斯·霍尔，新泽西州上萨德尔河。
Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling, Vol. 6
胡，L.T. 和 Bentler，P.M. (1999)，协方差结构分析中拟合指数的截断标准：传统标准与新的替代方案结构方程模型 Vol6
No. 1, pp. 1-55.
第 1 号，第 155 页。
Hung, S.P., Huang, H.Y. and Lin, S.J. (2008), “Do significant others’ feedback influenceone’s creative behavior? Using structural equation modeling to examine creativityself-efficacy and creativity motivation mediation effect”, Bulletin of Educational Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 303-322.
黄 S.P.，黄 H.Y.和林 S.J.（2008），重要他人反馈是否影响个体的创造性行为？利用结构方程模型检验创造力自我效能感和创造力动机中介效应《教育心理学通报》第 40 卷第 2 期，第 303-322 页。
Kaufman, J.C. and Sternberg, R.J. (2010), Cambridge Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge University
考夫曼，J.C. 和 斯特恩伯格，R.J. (2010)，剑桥创造力手册
Press, New York.
纽约，纽约州。
anen, M., Ursin, J. and Nissinen, K. (2018), “How to measure students’ innovation competences in higher education: evaluation of an assessment tool in authentic learning environments”, Studies in Educational Evaluation, Vol. 58, pp. 30-36.
安恩，M.，乌尔辛，J.和尼西宁，K.（2018 年），如何在高等教育中衡量学生的创新能力：在真实学习环境中评估评估工具的研究教育评估研究第 58 卷，第 3036 页。
Kinnebrew, J.S. and Biswas, G. (2011), “Modeling and measuring self-regulated learning in teachable agent environments”, Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 19-35.
金内布鲁，J.S. 和比斯瓦斯，G. (2011)，在可教智能体环境中建模和测量自我调节学习《电子学习和知识社会杂志》第 7 卷第 2 期，第 1935 页。
Lin, S.C. (2009), “The inquiry of aesthetic experiences and the implication for the construction of curriculum aesthetics”, Tunghai Educational Review, Vol. 3, pp. 43-70.
林，S.C.（2009），审美体验的探究及其对课程美学构建的启示《东海教育评论》第 3 卷，第 437-470 页。
Lussier, C. (2010), “Aesthetic literacy: the gold medal standard of learning excellence in dance”, Physical and Health Education, Vol. 76 No. 1, pp. 40-44.
卢西耶，C.（2010），舞蹈美学素养：舞蹈学习卓越的金标准，《体育与健康教育》第 76 卷第 1 期，第 4044 页。
Maquet, J. (1986), The Aesthetic Experience: An Anthropologist Looks at the Visual Arts, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
马奎特，J.（1986），审美体验：一位人类学家对视觉艺术的观察耶鲁大学出版社，康涅狄格州纽黑文
Maradana, R.P., Pradhan, R.P., Dash, S., Gaurav, K., Jayakumar, M. and Chatterjee, D. (2017), “Does innovation promote economic growth? Evidence from European countries”, Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 2-23.
马杜纳，R.P.，普拉丹，R.P.，达什，S.，高拉夫，K.，贾亚库马尔，M.和查特吉，D.（2017），创新是否促进经济增长？来自欧洲国家的证据，《创新与创业杂志》第 6 卷第 1 期，第 223 页。
McDonald, R.P. and Ho, M. H.R. (2002), “Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses”, Psychological Methods, Vol. 7, pp. 64-82.
麦当劳，R.P. 和 何，M. H.R. (2002)，结构方程分析报告的原则与实践 心理方法 第 7 卷，第 6482 页。
offel, B. and Brok, P. (2019), “Educating for innovation: students’ perceptions of the learning environment and of their own innovation competence”, Learning Environments Research, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 387-407.
offel, B. 和 Brok, P. (2019)，培养创新：学生对学习环境和自身创新能力的看法，《学习环境研究》第 22 卷第 3 期，第 387-407 页。
ıaz, R. (2015), “Creative self-efficacy: an exploration of its antecedents, consequences, and applied implications”, Journal of Psychology, Vol. 150 No. 2, pp. 175-195.
az, R. (2015), 创造性自我效能感：对其前因、后果和应用启示的探索《心理学杂志》第. 150 卷 第. 2 期，第. 175-195 页。
Richards, R. (2007), Everyday Creativity and New Views of Human Nature: Psychological, Social, and Spiritual Perspectives, American, Washington, DC.
理查兹，R.（2007），日常创造力与对人性的新看法：心理、社会和精神视角美国，华盛顿特区。
Runco, M.A. (2007), Creativity: Theories and Themes: Research, Development, and Practice, Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam.
Runco, M.A. (2007), 创造力：理论与主题：研究、开发与实践，Elsevier 学术出版社，阿姆斯特丹。
Shrout, P.E. and Bolger, N. (2002), “Mediation in experimental and non experimental studies: new procedures and recommendations”, Psychological Methods, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 422-445.
舒尔特，P.E. 和 博尔格，N. (2002)，实验性和非实验性研究中的调解：新程序和建议《心理方法》第 7 卷 第 4 期，第 422-445 页。
Stolnitz, J. (1978), “‘The aesthetic attitude’ in the rise of modern aesthetics”, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 409-422.
斯托尔尼茨，J. (1978)，“现代美学兴起中的审美态度，《美学与艺术批评杂志》第 36 卷第 4 期，第 409-422 页。”
Tatarkiewicz, W. (1980), A History of Six Ideas: An Essay in Aesthetics, Polish Scientific Publishers, The Hague, Boston and London.
塔塔雷维奇，W.（1980 年），六种观念的历史：美学论文，波兰科学出版社，海牙、波士顿和伦敦。
Tierney, P. and Farmer, S.M. (2002), “Creative self-efficacy: its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 1137-1148.
Tierney, P. 和 Farmer, S.M. (2002)，创造性自我效能：其潜在的前因与创造性表现的关系《管理学报》第 45 卷第 6 期，第 1137-1148 页。
Tsang, E.W.K. (2002), “Acquiring knowledge by foreign partners from international joint ventures in a transition economy: learning-by-doing and learning myopia”, Strategic Management Journal
桑，E.W.K.（2002），转型经济中外资合作伙伴从国际合资企业获取知识：边做边学与学习短视战略管理杂志,
Vol. 23, pp. 835-854.
第 23 卷，第 835-854 页。
Uhrmacher, P.B. (2009), “Toward a theory of aesthetic learning experiences”, Curriculum Inquiry
钟表匠，P.B. (2009)，迈向审美学习体验的理论——课程探究,
Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 613-636.
第 39 卷 第 5 期，第 613-636 页。
Webster, R.S. and Wolfe, M. (2013), “Incorporating the aesthetic dimension into pedagogy”, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 38 No. 10, pp. 21-33.
韦伯斯特，R.S. 和 狼，M. (2013)，将审美维度融入教学法澳大利亚教师教育杂志第 38 卷第 10 期，第 2133 页。
Woodrow, D. (2001), “Cultural determination of curricula, theories and practices”, Pedagogy, Culture and Society, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 5-27.
伍德罗，D.（2001），课程、理论与实践的文化决定，教学、文化与社会，第 9 卷第 1 期，第 527 页。
Xenakis, I. and Arnellos, A. (2014), “Aesthetic perception and its minimal content: a naturalistic perspective”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 5 No. 1038, pp. 1-15.
谢纳基斯，I. 和阿尼尔洛斯，A.（2014），审美感知及其最小内容：一种自然主义视角《心理学前沿》第 5 卷第 1038 期，第 115 页。
Yuenyong, J. and Yuenyong, C. (2012), “Connecting between culture of learning in Thai contexts and developing students’ science learning in the formal setting”, Social and Behavioral Sciences
Yuenyong, J. 和 Yuenyong, C. (2012)，在泰国背景下连接学习文化与正式环境中的学生科学学习——社会与行为科学,
Vol. 46, pp. 5371-5378.
第 46 卷，第 537-15378 页。
Yung, K.W. (2015), “Learning English in the shadows: understanding Chinese learners experiences of private tutoring”, Tesol Quarterly, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 707-732.
杨，K.W.（2015），在阴影中学习英语：理解中国学生在私人辅导中的学习体验《英语教师季刊》第 49 卷第 4 期，第 707-732 页。
Zhu, C., Valcke, M. and Schellens, T. (2008), “A cross-cultural study of Chinese and Flemish university students: do they differ in learning conceptions and approaches to learning?”, Learning and Individual Differences, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 120-127.
朱，C.，瓦尔克，M.和谢伦斯，T.（2008），中国和佛兰德大学生跨文化研究：他们在学习观念和学习方法上是否存在差异？学习与个体差异杂志第 18 卷第 1 期，第 120-127 页。
Corresponding author
相应作者
Yuan-Cheng Chang can be contacted at: yuan-cheg.cha@dpu.ac.th
袁成长可联系邮箱：yuancheg.cha@dpu.ac.th
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
关于如何订购本文的印刷版，请访问我们的网站：
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm 或联系我们获取更多详情：permissions@emeraldinsight.com