What Really Makes Research Creative? A Look Behind a Seven-Study Paper

Written by Veronica Burbulea, Ph.D. candidate at the University of Groningen (The Netherlands)

What makes a research project truly creative? Is it the number of studies, the kind of data used, or the cleverness of the design? For many scholars, methodological creativity is often confused with methodological complexity. But the two are not the same. A new article that combines seven studies, namely an Implicit Association Test (IAT), a Facebook field study, a lab experiment, and four online experiments, offers a powerful example of how thoughtful method selection can elevate a research program far beyond a collection of experiments.

To learn more about how such an ambitious project came together, I spoke with Siyun Chen, one of the authors of the article entitled “Visual complexity, brand gender, and ad effectiveness”. Siyun shared not only the logic behind the design but also the challenges, surprises, and values that guided the process.

From Reviewer Feedback to a New Mindset

Siyun’s interest in multi-method research began with frustration. Early in her career, she often received reviewer comments questioning whether findings from a single online experiment were “robust enough.” This recurring critique pushed her to ask a bigger question: What if more studies are simply not enough to capture the complexity of the phenomenon?

Instead of treating reviewers’ concerns as obstacles, she saw an opportunity to rethink her entire approach to research.

“I realized that the best way to build a convincing argument wasn’t to add another online experiment—it was to ask which method could answer each part of the question most convincingly.”

-Siyun Chen

That shift, from accumulating studies to deliberately selecting them, became the foundation of her methodological philosophy.

Matching Methods to Hypotheses

The seven-study design didn’t start with a number in mind. Each method served a purpose. It wasn’t complexity for the sake of complexity. It was a systematic attempt to look at the same phenomenon from different angles, strengthening the depth of insight, not to mention evaluative criteria like internal and external validity along the way. Siyun explained that this mindset is what differentiates methodological creativity from methodological overload.

“For me, creativity means using diverse methods with clear intention. It’s not about piling on studies but about selecting the approach that best fits the question.”

-Siyun Chen

The image was generated using AI

The Human Side of a Seven-Study Project

Behind the polished article lies a messy reality many researchers will recognize: coordination challenges, logistical obstacles, and the constant fear of something slipping through the cracks. Running seven studies required weekly coordination calls with coauthors, a strict checklist for measures and manipulations, and time-zone gymnastics across teams.

The risks were real: missing an item, forgetting a manipulation check, or misaligning measures across studies could compromise the comparability of the datasets or even force the team to rerun an entire study. To minimize mistakes, the team implemented shared protocols and early-stage standardization of survey structure, variable naming conventions, and training materials.

And then there was the issue of resources. The complete project unfolded over nearly three years. Some studies ran in parallel to save time; others, like the field experiment, required more funding and specialized expertise in coordinating the study.

“We had to be strategic. Certain studies were expensive, so we planned them carefully. Others could run simultaneously to move things forward. It was a constant balancing act.”

-Siyun Chen

Not Everything Goes According to the Plan

No ambitious research project unfolds exactly as planned. This article was no exception. Siyun mentioned that methods evolved over time: lengthy pilot surveys were shortened to reduce participant dropout, visual stimuli were adjusted to strengthen manipulations, and early data analysis prompted design refinements.

There were also unexpected inconsistencies across studies. For example, a moderation variable didn’t behave as predicted. However, instead of discarding the finding, the team dug deeper and uncovered a theoretical explanation: when participants evaluate options side-by-side, they may engage in more holistic thinking, a surprising but insightful twist.

These moments, Siyun emphasized, are where creativity lives: in adapting thoughtfully while staying anchored in theory.

Are you overdoing it?

With so many moving parts, was the complexity criticized during peer review? Surprisingly, no.

Reviewers appreciated the clarity of purpose for each specific method. Complexity wasn’t a problem because it had structure and purpose. One reviewer even requested a comparative overview of the strengths and limitations of each approach, something the authors gladly included.

Looking Ahead: Creativity in an AI-Driven Research Landscape

We closed our conversation by discussing the future of methodological creativity in an era dominated by AI and big data. Siyun believes that AI can support research, but it should never drive the research question. Also, one should not forget that creativity comes from purpose, not from technology. Thus, real innovation happens when methods amplify the question, not when questions are shaped around shiny tools.

“Start with an interesting question. Methods should serve the question, not the other way around.” 

-Siyun Chen

Read the paper

Want to know more? Read the full paper here.

Want to cite the paper?

Chen, S., Ponomarenko, V., Lv, L., & Ahlstrom, D. (2025). Visual complexity, brand gender, and ad effectiveness. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 42(2), 365-390.

---

Meet Siyun Chen 

Associate Professor at Sun Yat-sen University, China

What is the number one question you hope to answer in your career?

“What can marketers do to increase consumer well-being? How can they bring people’s mental enjoyment? This is what fascinates and motivates me to do research.”

What is the best advice you have ever received, and how has it influenced your career or life?

“One of my co-authors, Vincent Mak, a professor at the University of Cambridge, once told me something I’ll never forget: people are not defined by their past; they are called to their future.

When I first started publishing, my papers were mostly in ABS 3–level journals. Vincent kept telling me, ‘You can do better. You can publish in top journals like IJRM.’ I chose to believe him. And he was right. This year, I’ve seen the quality of my work improve more and more.”

---

This article was written by

Veronica Burbulea

Ph.D. candidate at the University of Groningen (the Netherlands)