The link between personality (Big Five and typical intellectual engagement) and intelligence (Wonderlic and Raven scores) with a measure of art judgment was examined in a sample of 102 university students. Participants' art interests were also assessed through a self-report inventory of art experience, art activities, and particular painting style recognition. Regression analyses revealed that Openness and typical intellectual engagement were significantly and positively related to art interests, but not to art judgment scores. Personality traits accounted for 22% of the variance in art interests (whereas intelligence accounted for 4%). On the other hand, art interests were significantly related to art judgment scores (people who reported higher interests in arts tended to score significantly higher on art judgment and vice-versa). Art judgment was significantly related to both personality (low Extraversion and Conscientiousness) and intelligence (high IQ). When combined, personality and intelligence accounted for almost 25% of the variance in art judgment scores. These findings replicate recent studies on art judgment, suggesting that the measure is related to both personality and intelligence.
References
1.
EysenckH. J., Personality and Intelligence: Psychometric and Experimental Approaches, in Personality and Intelligence, SternbergR.RuzgisP. (eds.), Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 3–31, 1994.
2.
FurnhamA.Chamorro-PremuzicT.MoutafiJ., Personality and Intelligence: Gender, the Big Five, Self-Estimated and Psychometric Intelligence, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 2005.
3.
GoffM.AckermanP., Personality-Intelligence Relations: Assessment of Typical Intellectual Engagement, Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, pp. 537–552, 1992.
4.
MatthewsG.DearyI., Personality Traits, Cambridge University Press, London, 1998.
5.
ZeidnerM.MatthewsG., Intelligence and Personality, in Handbook of Intelligence, SternbergR. (ed.), Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 581–610, 2000.
6.
BrandC., Open to Experience—Closed to Intelligence: Why the “Big Five” are Really the “Comprehensive Six,”European Journal of Personality, 8, pp. 299–310, 1994.
7.
HofsteeW. K. B., Personality and Intelligence: Do They Mix? in Intelligence and Personality—Bridging the Gap in Theory and Measurement, CollisJ. M.MessikS. (eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, New Jersey, 2001.
8.
BrebnerJ.StoughC., Theoretical and Empirical Relationships between Personality and Intelligence, in International Handbook of Personality and Intelligence: Perspectives on Individual Differences, SaklofskeD.ZeidnerM. (eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 321–347, 1995.
9.
MatthewsG., Personality and Skill: A Cognitive-Adaptive Framework, in Learning and Individual Differences: Process, Trait, and Content Determinants, AckermanP. L.KyllonenP. C.RobertsR. D. (eds.), American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., 1999.
10.
MacielA. G.HechausenJ.BaltesP. B., A Life-span Perspective on the Interface between Personality and Intelligence, in Personality and Intelligence, SternbergR. J.RuzgisP. (eds.), Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 61–103, 1994.
11.
BoyleG. J., Experimental Psychology Does Require a Multivariate Perspective, Contemporary Psychology, 36, pp. 350–351, 1991.
12.
AckermanP. L.HeggestadE. D., Intelligence, Personality, and Interests: Evidence for Overlapping Traits, Psychological Bulletin, 121, pp. 219–245, 1997.
GardnerH., Intelligence Re-framed, Basic Books, New York, 1999.
21.
MayerJ. D.SaloveyP., What Is Emotional Intelligence? in Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Educational Implications, SaloveyP.SluyterD. J. (eds.), Basic Books, New York, pp. 3–34, 1997.
22.
SternbergR., Successful Intelligence, Plume, New York, 1997.
23.
PetridesK. V.FurnhamA., Trait Emotional Intelligence: Psychometric Investigation with Reference to Established Trait Taxonomies, European Journal of Personality, 15, pp. 425–448, 2001.
24.
MayerJ., Spiritual Intelligence and Spiritual Consciousness, International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 10, pp. 47–56, 2000.
25.
DaviesM.StankovL.RobertsR., Emotional Intelligence: In Search of an Elusive Construct, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, pp. 989–1015, 1998.
26.
CronbachL. J., Essentials of Psychological Testing, Halpern, New York, 1949.
27.
FurnhamA., The Relationship of Personality and Intelligence to Cognitive Thinking Style and Achievement, in International Handbook of Personality and Intelligence: Perspectives on Individual Differences, SaklofskeD.ZeidnerM. (eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 397–413, 1995.
28.
MessickS., The Matter of Style: Manifestations of Personality in Cognition, Learning and Teaching, Educational Psychologist, 19, pp. 121–136, 1944.
29.
SternbergR. J.GrigorenkoE., Are Cognitive Styles Still in Style?American Psychologist, 52, pp. 700–712, 1997.
30.
DulewiczV.HerbertP., Predicting Advancement to Senior Management from Competencies and Personality Data: A Seven Year Follow-up Study, British Journal of Management, 10, pp. 13–22. 1999.
31.
McClellandD., Testing for Competency Rather than Intelligence, American Psychologist, 28, pp. 1–14, 1973.
32.
CattellR. B., Abilities: Their Structure, Growth, and Action, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1971.
33.
CattellR. B., Intelligence: Its Structure, Growth and Action, Springer, New York, 1987.
34.
AckermanL., Intelligence as Process and Knowledge: An Integration for Adult Development and Application, in Aging and Skilled Performance: Advances in Theory and Applications, RogersW.FiskA. (eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 139–156, 1995.
35.
AckermanP. L.GoffM., Typical Intellectual Engagement and Personality: Reply to Rocklin (1994), Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, pp. 150–153, 1994.
36.
RocklinT., Relation between Typical Intellectual Engagement and Openness: Comment on Goff and Ackerman, Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, pp. 145–149, 1994.
37.
BurtC., The Psychology of Art, in How the Mind Works, Allen and Unwin, London, Chapter 15, 1933.
38.
BurkhartR., The Relation of Intelligence to Art Ability, Journal of Aesthetic and Art Criticism, 14, pp. 230–241, 1958.
39.
ChildI., Personality Correlates of Esthetic Judgment in College Students, Journal of Personality, 33, pp. 476–511, 1965.
40.
FurnhamA.Chamorro-PremuzicT., Personality, Intelligence, and Art, Personality and Individual Differences, 36, pp. 705–715, 2004.
41.
FurnhamA.WalkerJ., Personality and Judgment of Abstract, Pop Art, and Representational Paintings, European Journal of Personality, 15, pp. 57–72, 2001.
42.
MeierN. C.SeashoreC. E., The Meier-Seashore Art Judgment Test, Bureau of Educational Research, University of Iowa, Iowa City, 1929.
43.
SeashoreC. E., Meier-Seashore Art Judgment Test, Science, 69, p. 380, 1929.
44.
EurichA. C.CarrollH. A., Group Differences in Art Judgment, School and Society, 34, pp. 204–206, 1931.
45.
StolzA.ManuelH. T., The Art Ability of Mexican Children, School and Society, 34, pp. 379–380, 1931.
46.
FarnsworthP. R.MisumiI., Notes on the Meier-Seashore Art Judgment Test, Journal of Applied Psychology, 15, pp. 418–420, 1931.
47.
CarrollH. A., A Preliminary Report on a Study of the Relationship between Ability in Art and Certain Personality Traits, School and Society, 36, pp. 285–288, 1932.
48.
CarrollH. A., What Do the Meier-Seashore and McAdory Art Tests Measure?Journal of Educational Research, 26, pp. 661–665, 1933.
49.
FurnhamA.RaoS., Personality and Aesthetics of Composition: A Study of Mondrian & Hirst, North American Journal of Psychology, 4, pp. 233–242, 2002.
50.
HillK. A.JunusF., Individual Differences in Concept Learning of Painting Styles, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 49, pp. 255–261, 1979.
51.
KaraengG.SandstroemC. I., Advaendbarheten av Estetiska Bedoemningstest [The Applicability of Aesthetic Judgment Tests], Pedagogisk Forkning: Nordisk Tidsskrift for Pedagogikk, 1, pp. 44–56, 1959.
52.
GravesM., Design Judgment Test, Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, 1948.
53.
EysenckH. J., Factor Analytic Study of the Maitland Graves Design Judgment Test, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 24, pp. 13–14, 1967.
54.
EysenckH. J., An Application of the Maitland Graves Design Judgment Test to Professional Artists, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 30, pp. 584–590, 1970.
55.
EysenckH. J., Preference Judgments for Polygons, Designs, and drawings, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 34, pp. 395–398, 1972.
56.
UduehiJ., A Cross-Cultural Assessment of the Maitland Graves Design Judgment Test Using IS and Nigerian Subjects, Visual Arts Research, 21, pp. 11–18, 1996.
57.
GotzK.GotzK., The Maitland Graves Design Judgment Test Judged By 22, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 39, pp. 261–262, 1974.
MeierN. C., The Meier Art Judgment Test, Bureau of Educational Research and Service, University of Iowa, Iowa City, 1942.
60.
McCraeR.CostaP. T.Jr., Conceptions and Correlates of Openness to Experience, in Handbook of Personality Psychology, HoganR.JohnsonJ. A.BiggsS. (eds.), Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 825–847, 1997.
61.
FurnhamA., Personality and Creativity, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88, pp. 407–408, 1999.
62.
EysenckH. J., The Definition and Measurement of Psychoticism, Personality and Individual Differences, 13, pp. 757–785, 1992.
63.
EysenckH. J., Creativity and Personality: A Theoretical Perspective, Psychological Inquiry, 4, pp. 147–246, 1993.
64.
HevnerK., The Mood Effects of the Major and Minor Modes in Music, Psychological Bulletin, 30, p. 584, 1933.
65.
MatthewsG., Personality and Skill: A Cognitive-Adaptive Framework. In Learning and Individual Differences: Process, Trait, and Content Determinants, AckermanP. L.KyllonenP. C.RobertsR. D. (eds.), American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., 1999.
