The relationship between measures of creativity and schizotypy

The aim of this study was to determine the extent to which a measure of multidimensional schizotypy and intelligence predicted measures of creativity, as assessed by self-rated creativity, a measure of the creative personality (CPS: Gough, 1979) and an inventory of creative behaviours. Additionally an aggregation of the three different measures; total creativity was examined. 140 participants completed the creativity measures, a general intelligence test (Wonderlic Personnel Test: Wonderlic, 1992) in addition to a multidimensional schizotypy inventory (O-LIFE: Mason, Claridge, & Jackson, 1995). The Unusual Experiences and Impulsive Nonconformity dimensions of the O-LIFE were positively and significantly related to creativity. The Cognitive Disorganisation dimension was found to be negatively and significantly related to creativity. The implications of the findings were discussed.     

Personality and intelligence as predictors of creativity

Participants completed the Big Five NEO-FFI (Costa & McCrae, 1992) as a personality measure, the Wonderlic Personnel Test (Wonderlic, 1992) as an intelligence measure, and four measures of creativity: Guilford’s (1967) unusual uses divergent thinking test; the Biographical Inventory of Creative Behaviours; a self-rated measure of creativity; and the Barron–Welsh Art Scale to measure creative judgement. Extraversion was significantly related to all four measures of creativity. Intelligence failed to add any incremental variance in predicting the creativity scores. Multiple regression indicated that up to 47% of the variance in divergent thinking scores can be accounted for by the Big Five personality traits. Personality correlates to creativity vary as a function of the creativity measure.     

Estimating one's own personality and intelligence scores

One hundred and eighty‐seven university students completed the full NEO‐PI‐R assessing the five super‐traits and 30 primary traits, and the Wonderlic Personnel Test of general intelligence. Two months later (before receiving feedback on their psychometric scores), they estimated their own scores on these variables. Results at the super‐factor level indicated that participants could significantly predict/estimate their own Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness scores. The correlation between estimated and psychometrically measured IQ was r=.30, showing that participants could, to some extent, accurately estimate their intelligence. In addition, there were a number of significant correlations between estimated intelligence and psychometrically assessed personality (particularly Neuroticism, Agreeableness and Extraversion). Disagreeable people tended to award themselves higher self‐estimated intelligence scores. Similarly, stable people tended to award themselves higher estimates of intelligence (even when other variables were controlled). Regressing both estimated and psychometric IQ scores onto estimated and psychometric personality scores indicated that the strongest significant effect was the relationship between trait scores and self‐estimated intelligence.     

Do thinking styles contribute to academic achievement beyond self-rated abilities?

This research identifies individual differences in academic achievement attributable to thinking styles over and above what can be explained by self-rated abilities. Participants were 209 university students from Hong Kong and 215 university students from mainland China. Participants responded to the Thinking Styles Inventory (Chinese version) that is based on Sternberg's theory of mental self-government (R. J. Sternberg, 1988). They also rated their own analytical, creative, and practical abilities on a 10-point scale based on R. J. Sternberg's (1985) triarchic theory of human intelligence. Participants' academic achievement scores were also used. The prediction that thinking styles statistically predict academic achievement was supported by data from both Hong Kong and mainland China. Academic achievement and thinking styles are related differently in the two groups. Implications of these findings for both teaching and research are discussed.     

Brain mechanisms and intelligence. Psychometric g and executive function

Sternberg [Sternberg, R.J. (1985). Beyond IQ: a triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.] has proposed that the general intelligence, or the g factor, obtained when batteries of mental tests are factor analyzed, is a reflection of the fact that executive functions (EF) are common to all cognitive tests. Three lines of evidence that fail to support Sternberg's formulation are presented. First, in animal problem solving studies, there is only a modest degree of overlap between brain structures that are critical for g, and brain structures that have been identified as the rodent EF system. Second, children with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), characterized by EF dysfunction, do not have IQ scores that are lower, on average, than children in the test standardization populations. Third, human frontal lobe patients often have clear EF deficits, but IQ (a next-best estimate of g) may be preserved. These findings cast serious doubt on the plausibility of Sternberg's formulation. Clarifying the distinction between psychometric g and EF can be important for understanding the differences between practical and psychometric intelligence.     

Personality, intelligence and proof-reading

Two studies sought to determine personality and cognitive ability correlates of proof-reading. In both studies candidates were given 5 min to identify up to 55 errors in a 920 word, two page document. In Study 1, which tested 240 school children, fluid intelligence (as measured by the Baddeley Reasoning Test) was the highest correlate of proof-reading (r = .30). Eleven percent of the variance in total attempted scores was accounted for by intelligence, Introversion and low Conscientiousness. In the second study 70 undergraduates completed the same proof-reading test along with two intelligence tests (Baddeley Reasoning Test; Wonderlic Personnel Test) and a more robust personality measure (NEO-FFI). Proof-reading was correlated with both intelligence tests (Baddeley r = .45; Wonderlic r = .40). More of the variance was accounted for in the total attempted-score of errors than for a correct errors-detected score. When the two intelligence and five personality trait scores were regressed on to the proof-reading test score over a quarter of the variance (Adj R² = .28) was accounted for, but only the Baddeley test was a significant predictor (Beta = .39).     

Typical intellectual engagement,Big Five personality traits,approaches to learning and cognitive ability predictors of academic performance

Background Both ability (measured by power tests) and non‐ability (measured by preference tests) individual difference measures predict academic school outcomes. These include fluid as well as crystalized intelligence, personality traits, and learning styles. This paper examines the incremental validity of five psychometric tests and the sex and age of pupils to predict their General Certificate in Secondary Education (GCSE) test results. Aims The aim was to determine how much variance ability and non‐ability tests can account for in predicting specific GCSE exam scores. Sample The sample comprised 212 British schoolchildren. Of these, 123 were females. Their mean age was 15.8 years (SD 0.98 years). Method Pupils completed three self‐report tests: the Neuroticism–Extroversion–Openness‐Five‐Factor Inventory (NEO‐FFI) which measures the ‘Big Five’ personality traits, ( Costa & McCrae, 1992 ); the Typical Intellectual Engagement Scale ( Goff & Ackerman, 1992 ) and a measure of learning style, the Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ; Biggs, 1987 ). They also completed two ability tests: the Wonderlic Personnel Test ( Wonderlic, 1992 ) a short measure of general intelligence and the General Knowledge Test ( Irving, Cammock, & Lynn, 2001 ) a measure of crystallized intelligence. Six months later they took their (10th grade) GCSE exams comprising four ‘core’ compulsory exams as well as a number of specific elective subjects. Results Correlational analysis suggested that intelligence was the best predictors of school results. Preference test measures accounted for relatively little variance. Regressions indicated that over 50% of the variance in school exams for English (Literature and Language) and Maths and Science combined could be accounted for by these individual difference factors. Conclusions Data from less than an hour's worth of testing pupils could predict school exam results 6 months later. These tests could, therefore, be used to reliably inform important decisions about how pupils are taught.     

Clocking g: Relating intelligence and measures of timed performance

The relationships between intelligence test scores and measures derived from reaction time (RT) and perceptual speed procedures were investigated in 137 twelve-year-old students with IQs ranging from 59 to 142. A range of intelligence tests were used and the scores factor analyzed to produce general, spatial and verbal factors. Test and factor scores were correlated with perceptual speed and with measures taken from 2, 4, and 8 choice RT tasks using a response keyboard upon which the subject's fingers directly rested, thus avoiding interpretive problems associated with a “home key.” Inspection time correlated poorly with intelligence. Only three of the RT measures produced correlations greater than .25 with the general factor. These were the slope of Hick's law, B, (correlation −.28), the 8 choice mean RT, RT8, (−.33) and the 8 choice standard deviation, SD8 (−.41), compared with the average intercorrelation between the intelligence measures of .40. Test-retest correlations of the RT measures, taken over a year for half the subjects, were low as reliability measures, with .35 for B, .52 for RT8, and .48 for SD8. Correlations of RT measures with spatial scores were not significantly greater than with verbal scores, suggesting that whatever relationship exists is with a general factor rather than only a spatial one.     

Black–White differences on IQ and grades: The mediating role of elementary cognitive tasks

The relationship between IQ scores and elementary cognitive task (ECT) performance is well established, with variance on each largely reflecting the general factor of intelligence, or g. Also ubiquitous are Black–White mean differences on IQ and measures of academic success, like grade point average (GPA). Given C. Spearman's (Spearman, C. (1927). The Abilities of Man. New York: Macmillan) hypothesis that group differences vary directly with a test's g loading, we explored whether ECT performance could mediate Black–White IQ and GPA differences. Undergraduates (139 White and 40 Black) completed the Wonderlic Personnel Test, followed by inspection time and choice reaction time ECTs. Despite restriction of range, ECT performance completely mediated Black–White differences on IQ (d = .45). Group differences on GPA (d = .73), however, were larger and ECT performance did not mediate them. We discuss findings in light of Spearman's hypothesis.     

Personality and Intelligence: Gender,the Big Five,Self‐Estimated and Psychometric Intelligence

This paper reports on two studies that investigated the relationship between the Big Five personality traits, self‐estimates of intelligence (SEI), and scores on two psychometrically validated intelligence tests. In study 1 a total of 100 participants completed the NEO‐PI‐R, the Wonderlic Personnel Test and the Baddeley Reasoning Test, and estimated their own intelligence on a normal distribution curve. Multiple regression showed that psychometric intelligence was predicted by Conscientiousness and SEI, while SEI was predicted by gender, Neuroticism (notably anxiety) and Agreeableness (notably modesty). Personality was a better predictor of SEI than of psychometric intelligence itself. Study 2 attempted to explore the relationship between SEI and psychometric intelligence. A total of 130 participants completed the NEO‐PI‐R, the Baddeley Reasoning Test, and the S & M Spatial intelligence test. In addition, SEI and participants conceptions of intelligence were also examined. In combination with gender and previous IQ test experience, these variables were found to predict about 11% of the variance in SEI. SEI was the only significant predictor of psychometrically measured intelligence. Inconsistencies between results of the two studies, theoretical and applied implications, and limitations of this work are discussed.     

中小学生创造性倾向、智力及学业成绩的相关研究

本研究采用威廉斯创造性倾向量表和瑞文标准推理测验,结合中小学生语文、数学成绩,对524名中小学生进行创造性倾向、智力和学业成绩的相关研究.研究发现:(1)中小学生创造性倾向从小学到初中都处于发展阶段,高中以后基本趋于稳定,中小学生的智力一直处于发展增长趋势;(2)小学生的语文、数学成绩与创造性倾向总分有显著相关,初中生的数学成绩与创造性倾向总分以及四项行为特质都有显著相关,小学、初中和高中学生的语文、数学成绩与智力有显著相关;(3)小学中、低分段语文成绩和低分段数学成绩与其创造性倾向有显著相关,初中学生的语文成绩只有高分段与创造性倾向有显著相关,小学和高中语、数成绩三个分段学生的学业成绩跟智力显著相关.     

Sex differences in self-estimates of lay dimensions of intelligence

260 participants rated themselves on 12 items that made up the three types of intelligence as noted by Sternberg, et al. in 1981. There were sex differences on two of the three standardized scores with men rating themselves higher than women on practical and verbal intelligence. This confirms previous studies of sex differences in the ratings of over-all (g) and multiple intelligences.     

Intelligence, reaction times, and peripheral nerve conduction velocity

Two studies (with sample sizes of 85 and 88) are reported that investigated relationships among measures of intelligence, speed of information processing, and peripheral nerve conduction velocity (NCV). In both studies, NCV was significantly correlated with IQ scores (rs = .42 and .48) and with reaction times (RTs; rs = −.28 and −.18): Thus, faster NCV was associated with higher IQ scores and faster speed of processing. In both studies, NCV and RTs contributed significantly, in combination, to the prediction of fullscale IQ (shrunken multiple Rs = .53 and .57), but the expected pattern of causal relationships between the variables was not borne out. The results are interpreted in terms of a “neural efficiency” model of intelligence, which has recieved support from other studies of physiological correlates of human intelligence.     

Predicting the Development of Analytical and Creative Abilities in Upper Elementary Grades

In some models, intelligence has been described as a multidimensional construct comprising both analytical and creative abilities. In addition, intelligence is considered to be dynamic rather than static. A structural equation model was used to examine the predictive role of cognitive (visual short-term memory, verbal short-term memory, selective attention) and socio-emotional (motivation, self-concept, well-being) child characteristics in the development of analytical and creative abilities in 116 Dutch children over the course of 5th and 6th grade. Results showed increasing levels of both analytical and creative abilities over the grades with the 2 types of abilities developing more or less independently. The development of analytical abilities was predicted by visual and verbal short-term memory and self-concept, the development of creative abilities by visual short-term memory and well-being. These results show that analytical and creative abilities have highly independent developmental trajectories, each with specific cognitive and socio-emotional predictors.     

Provitamin A Selection by Vitamin A Depleted Rats

G. T. scores on the Army General Classification Test (AGCT) as indicants of intelligence were correlated with scores on the Creative Imagination Test (CIT) for two groups of men differing on intelligence. Results supported the prediction of closer correspondence of intelligence and creativity scores in a low intelligence range (r = .437, p < .01) than in a high intelligence range. Intelligence was unrelated statistically to creativity (r = .10) when only the high intelligence range above 111 was considered. Guilford's triagular scatterplot conceptualization of intelligence-creativity relationship seemed most congruent with the present and earlier data. Intelligence was described as allowing the development of creativity, but not insuring such development. Personality and environmental factors may be important in creativity expression especially at upper intelligence ranges.     

Self- and other-estimates of multiple abilities in Britain and Turkey: a cross-cultural comparison of subjective ratings of intelligence

This study is part of a programmatic research effort into the determinants of self-assessed abilities. It examined cross-cultural differences in beliefs about intelligence and self- and other-estimated intelligence in two countries at extreme ends of the European continent. In all, 172 British and 272 Turkish students completed a three-part questionnaire where they estimated their parents', partners' and own multiple intelligences (Gardner (10) and Sternberg (3)). They also completed a measure of the 'big five' personality scales and rated six questions about intelligence. The British sample had more experience with IQ tests than the Turks. The majority of participants in both groups did not believe in sex differences in intelligence but did think there were race differences. They also believed that intelligence was primarily inherited. Participants rated their social and emotional intelligence highly (around one standard deviation above the norm). Results suggested that there were more cultural than sex differences in all the ratings, with various interactions mainly due to the British sample differentiating more between the sexes than the Turks. Males rated their overall, verbal, logical, spatial, creative and practical intelligence higher than females. Turks rated their musical, body-kinesthetic, interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence as well as existential, naturalistic, emotional, creative, and practical intelligence higher than the British. There was evidence of participants rating their fathers' intelligence on most factors higher than their mothers'. Factor analysis of the ten Gardner intelligences yield two clear factors: cognitive and social intelligence. The first factor was impacted by sex but not culture; it was the other way round for the second factor. Regressions showed that five factors predicted overall estimates: sex (male), age (older), test experience (has done tests), extraversion (strong) and openness (strong). Results are discussed in terms of the growing literature in the field.     

Is age kinder to the initially more able?: differential ageing of a verbal ability in the Healthy Old People in Edinburgh study

Studies that examine whether there is differential age-related decline in intelligence test scores according to initial cognitive status, social class and education are reviewed. We tested the differential ageing hypothesis which states that decline in ability scores over time will be lower in those with superior mental ability, more education and higher social class at the time of original testing. 387 healthy old people were tested at baseline and followed up 4 years later. The National Adult Reading Test (NART) was administered on both occasions. NART-estimated IQ fell by a mean of 2.1 points over 4 years (p<0.001). Subjects in higher social class categories had higher NART scores overall (p<0.001), and had smaller NART decrements over 4 years. Ex-professional and -secretarial groups fell by a mean of 1.4 points in this period, versus 3.2 points for skilled manual, semi-skilled and unskilled groups. In addition, those who fell more in NART were older (p=0.001), were less educated (p<0.001), and had lower NART (p<0.001) scores at baseline. In summary, those with higher baseline ability, in higher social class groups, with more education and who are younger are relatively protected from decline in this verbal ability with age. Possible mechanisms of differential decline in this verbal intelligence with age are discussed.     

An examination of culture bias in the wonderlic personnel test

Internal evidence of cultural bias, in terms of various types of item analysis, was sought in the Wonderlic Personnel Test results in large, representative samples of Whites and Blacks totaling some 1,500 subjects. Essentially, the lack of any appreciable Race × Items interaction and the high interracial similarity in rank order of item difficulties lead to the conclusion that the Wonderlic shows very little evidence of cultural bias with respect to the present samples which, however, differ appreciably in mean scores. The items which account for the most variance within each racial group are, by and large, the same items that show the largest interracial discrimination.     

Method effects due to social desirability as a parsimonious explanation of the deviation from unidimensionality in LOT-R scores

Dispositional optimism measured by the Life Orientation Test (Revised; LOT-R, Scheier et al., 1994) was originally proposed as a unidimensional construct pertaining to individual differences in positive outcome expectancies. However, factor analytic research has suggested two separate “optimism” and “pessimism” factors associated with positively and negatively worded items respectively. Using confirmatory factor analysis with data from N = 658 students it is shown that a general optimism model with method effects of the positively worded items fits even better than the “optimism–pessimism” model in terms of the AIC statistic, which accounts for both model parsimony and model fit. Furthermore, an attempt is made to explain the method effects by social desirability: impression management, one of two components of socially desirable responding, correlates significantly with the method factor whereas the other component, self-deceptive enhancement, is related to the general optimism factor. Thus it is shown that the deviation from unidimensionality of observed scores does not imply deviation from unidimensionality of optimism when method effects are incorporated in the model.     

Personality,intelligence and proof-reading

Two studies sought to determine personality and cognitive ability correlates of proof-reading. In both studies candidates were given 5 min to identify up to 55 errors in a 920 word, two page document. In Study 1, which tested 240 school children, fluid intelligence (as measured by the Baddeley Reasoning Test) was the highest correlate of proof-reading (r = .30). Eleven percent of the variance in total attempted scores was accounted for by intelligence, Introversion and low Conscientiousness. In the second study 70 undergraduates completed the same proof-reading test along with two intelligence tests (Baddeley Reasoning Test; Wonderlic Personnel Test) and a more robust personality measure (NEO-FFI). Proof-reading was correlated with both intelligence tests (Baddeley r = .45; Wonderlic r = .40). More of the variance was accounted for in the total attempted-score of errors than for a correct errors-detected score. When the two intelligence and five personality trait scores were regressed on to the proof-reading test score over a quarter of the variance (Adj R² = .28) was accounted for, but only the Baddeley test was a significant predictor (Beta = .39).