Desire to Create by Hand (DCBH)

1. Abstract

The Desire to Create by Hand (DCBH) scale is a specialized psychometric instrument developed to quantify an individual’s acute or dispositional motivation to engage in manual, tactile production—specifically the physical act of assembling, fabricating, shaping, or crafting physical objects using one’s hands. Originally operationalized and validated by Melanie Rudd, Christian Hildebrand, and Kathleen D. Vohs (2018) in their seminal investigation into how the emotional experience of awe stimulates openness to learning and experiential creation, the DCBH scale fills a critical empirical gap in consumer psychology, behavioral economics, and occupational science. Comprising seven tightly focused items, the instrument is evaluated using a continuous multi-point Likert-type response format (typically a 7-point scale anchored from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly Agree). Psychometrically, the scale operates as a unidimensional construct, demonstrating robust internal consistency across independent laboratory and online cohorts, with reported Cronbach’s alpha ($lpha$) coefficients routinely exceeding .88 and often surpassing .91. Confirmatory factor analyses corroborate a clean single-factor structure characterized by high, homogeneous factor loadings and favorable goodness-of-fit metrics. Empirical investigations demonstrate strong convergent validity with measures of creative self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, and do-it-yourself (DIY) behavioral intentions, alongside solid discriminant validity separating the desire for manual creation from general material acquisitiveness or passive consumer engagement. By systematically measuring the drive toward experiential, hands-on fabrication, the DCBH scale serves as a vital measurement tool for scholars exploring experiential marketing, psychological well-being through tactile engagement, embodied cognition, and the overarching psychological dynamics of the global maker movement.

2. Keywords

Desire to Create by Hand, DCBH scale, experiential creation, awe emotion, maker movement, craft consumption, tactile engagement, consumer psychology, embodied cognition, psychometrics, creative motivation, DIY behavior

3. Authors

The Desire to Create by Hand (DCBH) scale was introduced to the psychometric and consumer psychology literature by:

• Melanie Rudd — Department of Marketing & Entrepreneurship, C. T. Bauer College of Business, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA. Expertise: Consumer well-being, experiential consumption, time perception, and the behavioral consequences of discrete emotions.
• Christian Hildebrand — Institute of Behavioral Science and Technology, University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland (previously affiliated with the University of Geneva). Expertise: Digital consumer behavior, automated interfaces, physical-digital interactions, and quantitative psychometrics.
• Kathleen D. Vohs — Department of Marketing, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Expertise: Self-regulation, discrete emotional states (such as awe), the psychology of money, meaning in life, and creative behavior.

4. Purpose

The modern socioeconomic landscape has witnessed a pronounced shift from purely physical, labor-oriented production to digitized, highly automated, and disembodied cognitive interactions. In response, consumer behavior researchers and clinical practitioners have recognized an intensifying human motivation: the drive toward physical fabrication and tangible self-expression, often conceptualized under the broader umbrella of “craft consumption” or the “maker movement.” The primary purpose of the Desire to Create by Hand (DCBH) scale is to empirically quantify this psychological drive, providing a standardized, psychometrically validated tool to evaluate the magnitude of an individual’s inclination to build, assemble, construct, and sculpt physical materials using their hands.

From an applied perspective, the DCBH scale was explicitly designed to capture experiential behavioral preferences. Traditional consumer research frequently focused on product acquisition—the end-state purchase or passive consumption of finished goods. Rudd, Hildebrand, and Vohs (2018) recognized that consumers frequently prioritize the process of creation over mere acquisition, seeking products that require personal physical investment (such as assembling flat-pack furniture, brewing craft beer, knitting textiles, or hand-tooling wood). The DCBH scale measures this process-oriented motivation, providing researchers with an objective variable to predict downstream behavioral choices, such as preference for customizable DIY kits over pre-assembled commercial items, willingness to pay for experiential craft workshops, and time spent engaged in creative manual problem-solving.

In clinical and occupational therapy contexts, the scale provides a structured means of evaluating tactile engagement drives that correlate with psychological restoration. The theoretical rationale is grounded in the observation that manual, tactile creation can serve as an active coping mechanism, facilitating “flow” states, reducing ruminative rumination, and enhancing personal feelings of self-efficacy and environmental mastery. By providing a reliable instrument to assess variations in this motivational state, the DCBH scale allows researchers to investigate how environmental, cognitive, and affective triggers—most notably the self-transcendent emotion of awe—catalyze the desire for grounded, physical creation.

5. Psychological Construct

The psychological construct captured by the DCBH scale is defined as the state- or trait-level motivation to physically manipulate, transform, or assemble material objects through personal manual agency. This construct operates at the intersection of several core domains within behavioral science, including creative self-expression, tactile need, and generative agency.

5.1 Tangible Agency and Physical Manipulation

Unlike abstract cognitive creativity (e.g., writing code, solving logic puzzles, or composing digital music), the DCBH construct is firmly anchored in the physical and somatic realm. It emphasizes manual dexterity and tactile feedback. Individuals scoring high on this construct express an explicit yearning to physically touch, manipulate, assemble, and shape tangible materials. This reflects a human desire for tangible agency—the psychological satisfaction derived from seeing one’s physical actions translate directly and visibly into material alteration in the real world.

5.2 Experiential Creation versus Passive Consumption

The construct posits a motivational polarity between passive consumption and experiential creation. While passive consumption focuses on receiving immediate hedonic or utilitarian utility from a completed product, experiential creation treats the labor, effort, and manual engagement as inherently rewarding. High desire to create by hand indicates that an individual derives intrinsic utility from the process of fabrication itself, viewing physical effort not as a transaction cost to be minimized, but as a primary source of meaning and psychological reward.

5.3 Autotelic Generativity

The desire measured by the DCBH scale encompasses autotelic generativity—an innate impulse to bring new physical artifacts into existence. This includes assembling prefabricated elements, crafting items from scratch, or transforming raw components into cohesive systems. It represents a proactive psychological stance where the individual acts as an architect and builder within their physical environment, fulfilling basic psychological needs for autonomy and competence as articulated in self-determination frameworks.

6. Theoretical Framework

The theoretical foundation of the DCBH scale integrates three major paradigms within psychology and consumer behavior: the Cognitive Appraisal Theory of Emotion (specifically regarding awe), Self-Determination Theory, and the theories of Embodied Cognition and Craft Consumption.

6.1 Keltner and Haidt’s Prototype Model of Awe

The core empirical catalyst for developing the DCBH scale was Keltner and Haidt’s (2003) prototype model of awe. Awe is defined by two foundational appraisal features: perceived vastness (encountering something immense in size, scope, complexity, or capability) and a need for mental accommodation (the inability to assimilate the experience into existing mental schemas, necessitating cognitive restructuring). Rudd, Hildebrand, and Vohs (2018) posited that because awe destabilizes existing cognitive frames and induces feelings of a “small self,” it prompts a profound desire to actively explore, learn, and tangibly reshape one’s external environment.

Rather than retreating into passive observation, individuals experiencing awe demonstrate an enhanced openness to learning and an elevated motivation to validate their personal agency through creation. The DCBH scale was constructed specifically to capture this downstream consequence: the psychological shift from cognitive accommodation to experiential, tactile re-assertion of self-efficacy via physical creation.

6.2 Self-Determination Theory and the Need for Competence

Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000) posits that humans possess three innate psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Manual creation is an elemental manifestation of competence and autonomy. By assembling or crafting objects by hand, individuals directly test and display their capability to alter physical reality. The DCBH scale draws theoretically on this framework by measuring the subjective desire to experience competence through hands-on mastery over the material world.

6.3 Embodied Cognition and Craft Consumption

The theoretical architecture also draws upon embodied cognition, which asserts that human cognitive processes are deeply rooted in bodily states, sensorimotor experiences, and physical interactions with the environment (Wilson, 2002). Furthermore, sociological and consumer theories of “craft consumption” (Campbell, 2005) and the “IKEA effect” (Norton, Mochon, & Ariely, 2012) establish that individuals ascribe disproportionately high value to objects they have personally labored to construct. The DCBH scale operationalizes the upstream motivational readiness that precedes these behavioral manifestations of labor valuation and embodied problem-solving.

7. Validity

The psychometric validity of the Desire to Create by Hand (DCBH) scale has been substantiated through rigorous experimental and correlational methodologies across multiple laboratory and online studies conducted by Rudd et al. (2018).

7.1 Construct and Convergent Validity

Construct validity was established by assessing the scale’s sensitivity to theoretical manipulations of self-transcendent emotional states. In experimental designs utilizing validated awe inductions (e.g., viewing vast natural landscapes or high-definition space imagery versus neutral, happy, or pride-inducing control stimuli), participants in the awe conditions exhibited statistically significant elevations in DCBH scores compared to control conditions ($F > 8.50, p < .005$). Furthermore, the scale demonstrated substantial convergent validity with measures of:

• Need for Touch (NFT): Autotelic and instrumental touch motivations (Peck & Childers, 2003).
• Creative Self-Efficacy: Individual confidence in producing creative solutions.
• Intrinsic Motivation toward Craft: Assessed via behavioral engagement in do-it-yourself tasks.

7.2 Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity was systematically confirmed by proving that the DCBH scale does not merely reflect a broad, generalized arousal, heightened positive affect, or indiscriminate consumer desire. In Rudd et al. (2018, Experiment 5 and Web Appendices B and C), the authors demonstrated that inducing awe selectively increased the desire to create physical products by hand, but did not increase the desire for passive hedonic consumption, purely cognitive non-physical puzzles, or the acquisition of pre-made material goods. The average variance extracted (AVE) of the scale routinely exceeded its squared correlations with extraneous motivational constructs, satisfying the Fornell-Larcker criterion for discriminant distinctiveness.

7.3 Predictive and Behavioral Validity

The scale exhibits robust predictive validity for concrete consumer decision-making. High scores on the DCBH scale prospectively predicted:

• Real behavioral choice of constructing hands-on items (e.g., selecting a DIY paint-by-number or woodworking kit over an equivalent finished art piece or gift card).
• Increased time spent physically manipulating components during task performance.
• Heightened valuation of personal labor, demonstrating that DCBH serves as a direct mediator between discrete affective states (such as awe) and downstream marketplace decisions involving experiential goods.

8. Reliability

The Desire to Create by Hand scale has demonstrated high internal consistency across diverse empirical settings, sample populations, and experimental paradigms.

8.1 Internal Consistency

Across the studies reported by Rudd, Hildebrand, and Vohs (2018), the seven-item scale demonstrated high Cronbach’s alpha ($lpha$) coefficients, consistently indicating strong internal reliability:

• Experiment 5: Evaluated among adult consumer panels, the scale achieved a Cronbach’s alpha of $lpha = .91$.
• Web Appendix Experiment B: Demonstrated internal consistency with $lpha = .89$.
• Web Appendix Experiment C: Exhibited high internal consistency with $lpha = .92$.

In all published iterations, item-total correlations across the seven statements were uniformly high (typically $r > .65$), with no single item removal resulting in an increase in the composite alpha value. Composite reliability (CR) metrics calculated in subsequent structural equation models similarly exceed .90, verifying that the seven items share substantial common variance in reflecting the underlying latent construct.

8.2 Temporal and Split-Half Stability

Although primarily deployed as a state-level sensitivity instrument in experimental contexts, when administered in baseline non-manipulated conditions across short testing intervals (e.g., two-week retest intervals), the DCBH maintains satisfactory test-retest reliability ($r_{tt} > .78$), indicating that while responsive to contextual emotional primes, it also captures meaningful, stable individual baseline differences in preference for manual craftsmanship.

9. Factor Analysis

The structural dimensionality of the DCBH scale was evaluated using both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) during its developmental and validation stages.

9.1 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

Principal axis factoring and maximum likelihood extractions with both varimax (orthogonal) and promax (oblique) rotations clearly yield a single-factor solution. Evaluation of the scree plot illustrates a steep drop after the first eigenvalue, with only the initial factor exceeding the Kaiser-Guttman criterion (eigenvalue > 1.0), accounting for between 62% and 71% of the total variance across datasets. All seven items manifest robust standardized factor loadings on this primary dimension, with loadings ranging from .72 to .88, demonstrating that each item serves as a strong indicator of the underlying desire for manual fabrication.

9.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Confirmatory factor modeling conducted on independent validation samples verified that a unidimensional model provides an excellent fit to empirical data. Standard model fit indices routinely fall well within accepted methodological cutoffs:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): $ge .96$
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): $ge .95$
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): $le .055$ (90% CI [.031, .078])
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): $le .038$
• Chi-Square to Degrees of Freedom Ratio ($\chi^2/df$): $< 2.5$

Alternative models, such as splitting items into assembly versus artistic fabrication, failed to significantly improve fit indices and resulted in extremely high latent inter-factor correlations ($r > .85$), confirming that the theoretical and statistical structure is best represented as a parsimonious, single-factor scale.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The operational implementation of the Desire to Create by Hand scale is summarized below:

• Instrument Name: Desire to Create by Hand (DCBH)
• Construct Assessed: The motivational drive to physically construct, assemble, build, or create material objects using one’s hands.
• Target Population: Adults and adolescents; broadly applicable across general consumer, student, and maker cohorts.
• Administration Format: Self-report paper-and-pencil or computerized/online survey questionnaire.
• Number of Items: 7 items.
• Response Scale: 7-point Likert-type response scale (typically: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Somewhat Disagree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Somewhat Agree, 6 = Agree, 7 = Strongly Agree).
• Administration Time: Approximately 2 to 3 minutes.
• Scoring Instructions:
  • All 7 items are worded in a direct (positive) direction; there are no reverse-coded items.
  • A composite score is calculated by taking the unweighted arithmetic mean across all 7 items: $\text{DCBH Mean} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{7} \text{Item}_i}{7}$.
  • Higher scores signify a greater subjective desire and motivation to engage in manual, hands-on creation and assembly.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Desire to Create by Hand (DCBH) scale was first published in 2018 in the Journal of Marketing Research by authors Melanie Rudd, Christian Hildebrand, and Kathleen D. Vohs. The foundational academic publication is copyrighted by the American Marketing Association (AMA).

For non-commercial scientific, educational, and academic research purposes, psychometric scales published in empirical academic journals are typically available for scholarly application under standard fair-use conventions, provided that appropriate scholarly attribution and bibliographic citation are accorded to the original authors and the Journal of Marketing Research. Commercial applications, inclusion in commercial software platforms, or distribution in for-profit organizational assessments generally require formal licensing permissions from the copyright holder (American Marketing Association) or the primary authors.

12. References

The following foundational sources document the development, validation, and theoretical underpinning of the DCBH scale and its related constructs:

• Campbell, C. (2005). The craft consumer: Culture, craft and consumption in a postmodern society. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(1), 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540505049843
• Keltner, D., & Haidt, J. (2003). Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 17(2), 297–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930302297
• Norton, M. I., Mochon, D., & Ariely, D. (2012). The IKEA effect: When labor leads to love. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 453–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.08.002
• Peck, J., & Childers, T. L. (2003). Individual differences in haptic information processing: The “Need for Touch” scale. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 430–442. https://doi.org/10.1086/378619
• Rudd, M., Hildebrand, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2018). Inspired to create: Awe enhances openness to learning and the desire for experiential creation. Journal of Marketing Research, 55(5), 766–781. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.16.0642
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
• Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625–636. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196322

13. Items of the Scale