A two-way mixed-design ANOVA was carried out to precisely assess these effects by looking at the impact of cheating possibility (cheating vs. no cheating) and task type (creativity vs. academic) on creativity scores. The study showed a statistically significant main effect of cheating opportunity, F(1,76) = 9.73, p = . 003, implying that participants with access to dishonest approaches showed better creativity results. A significant primary effect of task type was also discovered, F(1,76) = 12.48, p = . 001, showing that creative performance was better in the creativity-based task condition regardless of cheating condition. Importantly, a significant interaction effect between cheating opportunity and task type, F(1,76) = 5.21, p = . 025, revealed that the favorable effect of cheating was enhanced in the creativity task context, hence pointing dishonesty as a powerful promoter of creative problem-solving especially under conditions requiring divergent thinking. Building on this analysis, to disentangle their combined impact on creative production the interaction between cheating transparency (transparent vs. opaque circumstances) and social status cues (high versus. low) was evaluated. A two-way ANOVA then showed significant main effects for cheating condition, F(1,76) = 6.48, p = . 013, and social status, F(1,76) = 5.21, p = . 025, with higher scores for creativity obtained under transparent cheating and greater social status cues correspondingly. Critically, a notable interaction between cheating conditions and social status emerged, F(1,76) = 4.78, p = . 032, indicating that the increase of creativity by high social status depended on transparent cheating. Post hoc analyses with Bonferroni correction revealed that participants exposed to high-status cues in the transparent cheating condition obtained substantially better creativity scores (M = 16.30) than those exposed to low-status cues (M = 14.60), P<. 05; no noticeable difference were seen between social status conditions under opaque cheating (P<05). Collectively, these results highlight the complicated, multifactorial relationship among dishonest behavior, socio-environmental context, and creative cognition, therefore emphasizing that cheating and social status both have autonomous and interactive effects to improve creative performance. This complex dynamic calls for educational and organizational approaches to foster creativity while rigorously upholding ethical standards to lessen the potentially adverse effects of dishonest behavior. line graph factorial design